PDA

View Full Version : Is "easy-believism" really wrong?



Pages : [1] 2

sanderson1769
Mar 28th 2006, 09:39 PM
Is "easy-believism" really wrong? This essay deals with "easy-believism" vs. repentance.

http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org/easybelievism.html

Sincerely,

Pastor Steven L Anderson
Faithful Word Baptist Church
www.faithfulwordbaptist.org (http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org)

ProjectPeter
Mar 28th 2006, 10:01 PM
Just a reminder folks... you can post your opinion on this and what Scripture you would use for that opinion. But no debate in here.

Bandit
Mar 28th 2006, 10:03 PM
Is "easy-believism" really wrong? This essay deals with "easy-believism" vs. repentance.

http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org/easybelievism.html

Sincerely,

Pastor Steven L Anderson
Faithful Word Baptist Church
www.faithfulwordbaptist.org (http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org)



Yes, "easy-believism" is really wrong. We can discuss this civilly if you want, but realize that I think it is ultimately of Satanic origin. Those who teach it have been duped into thinking that by defending it, they are defending truth. This does not mean that they themselves are not saved, but it does mean that they are promoting a distortion of the gospel - a deceptive "gospel".

Now we would first have to define terms, etc. For I too believe that salvation is found through faith in Jesus Christ, but how one defines "faith" is the real question. Does faith mean I only have to believe certain things about Jesus, or does faith mean I must act (react) in some way to those things. As a note, I left the Southern Baptist Church and my ministry there because of this nonsense.

Sincerely,
Bandit

RobertBest
Mar 29th 2006, 03:14 AM
I believe "Easy-Believism" is wrong. :bible:

moonglow
Mar 29th 2006, 03:32 AM
I preach against watching television – do you?:o

I preach against birth control – do you?:o

I preach against alcohol – do you?

I preach against women wearing pants – do you?:o

I preach against mixed swimming – do you?:o

I preach against women working – do you? :o

I preach against any secular music – do you?:o



I don't know...my brain is still stuck on this!!

:eek: :eek: :eek:

egads...never saw these in the bible!!!

(what was the question?)

Faith-Hope-Love
Mar 29th 2006, 04:17 AM
Oops, never mind, take it back, forgive me if I said to much. I guess since I don't understand what can be said, without it seeming like a debate, I'll just say nothing instead. Besides I guess I don't "get" how it all works here anyway.

just reminding myself - Slow to speak, quick to listen James 1:19-20

Blessings
Faith

ProjectPeter
Mar 29th 2006, 04:59 AM
You guys have done well to this point but I don't see how this can be kept from going into some pretty heavy discussion. So I will move it to a more applicable forum.

Ninna
Mar 29th 2006, 02:16 PM
Wow, I'm not really sure I am getting your point here other than if we don't believe and preach what you do, that we have it all wrong.


I preach against watching television – do you?

I preach against birth control – do you?

I preach against alcohol – do you?

I preach against women wearing pants – do you?

I preach against mixed swimming – do you?

I preach against women working – do you?

I preach against any secular music – do you?

I preach against fornication – do you?

Other than preaching against fornication, which the Bible addresses, what is the point of the other things? Sounds kind of legalistic to me.

moonglow
Mar 29th 2006, 03:18 PM
Oh Momof5...I sidetracked the orginal topic...sorry!! I was reading that website where this preacher says ALL we have to do to be saved is believe on the Lord..and his arguement is there is nothing about turning from our sins ...as said in the sinners prayers. The sinners prayer including confessing we are sinners, repenting of our sin and accepting Jesus as our Savior and he is saying there is no scriptures saying this. That the turning from our sins is for AFTER we become Christians....then he goes on to say he isn't condoning sin and gives that list of an example of what he preaches in church to prove that he does preach against these 'sins'...and that was the list (part of it), that really caused my jaw to drop...

Anyway back to the topic! :lol: quotes from the site:


The biggest problem with modern-day soul-winning is the lack of emphasis on eternal security. A soul-winner will quickly go through the gospel with someone and lead them in a prayer, but many times the person still has in the back of their mind that if they don’t live right they will lose it. Every false Christian religion seems to have one common denominator: they don’t believe in eternal security. Catholics, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, Methodists, Pentecostals, Nazarenes, etc. all believe you can lose your salvation and therefore are not saved because they do not believe the record that God gave of his Son.

“He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.

And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.” – I John 5:10-11

A person who believes you can lose your salvation is not saved because they are calling God a liar and trusting their good life to maintain their salvation.

Being thorough in soul-winning is necessary. However, a person must put their faith 100% in Jesus Christ in order to be saved and go to Heaven, not in turning from any sin. If you believe a person must be willing to turn from their sins to go to Heaven, you have added to the gospel and are one step closer to the Southern Baptists and Roman Catholics.

gag another osas...maybe this should be moved, again, to bible chat...:lol:

This guy is saying we are adding to the bible but yet it IS in the bible:

Hebrews 6

4 For it is impossible to restore to repentance those who were once enlightened--those who have experienced the good things of heaven and shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the power of the age to come-- 6and who then turn away from God. It is impossible to bring such people to repentance again because they are nailing the Son of God to the cross again by rejecting him, holding him up to public shame.

The thing I don't get is he carries on about us adding to the bible when he obviously has! There is nothing in the bible about it being a sin to watch TV, nor it being a sin that women work or wear pants...

Anyway he is basically just word playing here...saying you can accept Jesus into your heart and be saved (which is true) THEN after you are saved you are told to turn from your sins...

So you tell someone here is this free gift from God, and then show them the fine print after they accept it..."oh yea I forgot to mention you now have to give up all those sins you have...including no watching TV, no wearing pants...etc, etc...)

:B

mosey
Mar 29th 2006, 03:30 PM
Repenting of sin is something God commands those who are already saved to do.

I agree with this, unsaved people's actions are a reflection of exactly what is in their heart, sinfulness and unrepentance. However, I dissagree with the listing of supposed sins listed that you teach firmly against..


I preach against watching television – do you?

I preach against birth control – do you?

I preach against alcohol – do you?

I preach against women wearing pants – do you?

I preach against mixed swimming – do you?

I preach against women working – do you?

I preach against any secular music – do you?

I preach against fornication – do you?

This is a very legalistic point of view, while you say you don't believe that people following these guidelines saves them.. I know from experiance that any church that teaches these things looks on those who do them as sinners and deals harshly with them, thus driving them further from the truth and causing bitterness and anger in their hearts.

One or two of the things you list here are sins, and should be taught as being such, however, to lump those in with others listed above, is simply wrong.


“Easy-Believism” is not giving people license to sin, it is giving people license to be saved without jumping through a bunch of hoops. People should repent of their sins after they are saved, but whether they do or don’t, they are still saved.

I have never heard the term easy-believism, I think slightly flawed.. we can have The complete grace and forgiveness the moment we ask for it. I do however believe that at the moment of reciving the Lord into your heart, because of your love for Him, you should repent of and throw off some of your sins, things you cannot continue if you truly love him, I don't see this as works based salvation, but a reflection of the change in the heart.

ASoldiersWife
Mar 29th 2006, 03:35 PM
I have never heard the term easy-believism, I think slightly flawed.. we can have The complete grace and forgiveness the moment we ask for it. I do however believe that at the moment of reciving the Lord into your heart, because of your love for Him, you should repent of and throw off some of your sins, things you cannot continue if you truly love him, I don't see this as works based salvation, but a reflection of the change in the heart.

I agree with you Mosey. Once you truly get saved you cant lose it and salvation isnt something that you can work to obtain or keep but the bible says that you become a new creature. All the old things are put away. Your life should changed. Your want to live a holy and righteous life before God should be your top priority.

theabaud
Mar 29th 2006, 04:25 PM
well to explain it, easy believism is a derogatory term used to describe a certain doctrine, which I for one subscribe to.

Getting saved is not an ordeal, it is there for anyone to recieve 100% on faith. That in itself is a thing that is extremely difficult to comprehend for many, so even "easy Believism" is not easy.

Many people are saying now that you must Repent of all sin and get your life right to be saved. This is not the case. changing your life is not even your business. Once you get saved, you get the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit and he changes your life. If 1-2-3 repeat after me soul winning is producing professions, but NOT always salvation. The Belief that won't change you won't save you.

theabaud
Mar 29th 2006, 04:29 PM
There is criticism here for the points made in the article about some controversial issues. I believe that if you step back and look at that again, he is simply pointing out that while people who have labeled us as easy believest claim we lack standards, you actually will find that we tend to be a little bit tougher on such issues than those who feel that you must change your life to be saved.

I know that our standards offend, and even I don't agree with all of those points, but I think that you guys may be majoring in a minor on this one. Reexamine the text and see that the point and what you took from it do not neccessarily match.

Below is the context which has been left out.



Repenting of sin is something God commands those who are already saved to do. In Revelation chapters 2-3, for example, God repeatedly commands his people to repent of their sins; never does God say a person must repent of their sins in order to become saved. Lest you think I am giving people a “license” to sin, I will match my preaching against sin to yours any day of the week:

I preach against watching television – do you?
I preach against birth control – do you?
I preach against alcohol – do you?
I preach against women wearing pants – do you?
I preach against mixed swimming – do you?
I preach against women working – do you?
I preach against any secular music – do you?
I preach against fornication – do you?

“Easy-Believism” is not giving people license to sin, it is giving people license to be saved without jumping through a bunch of hoops. People should repent of their sins after they are saved, but whether they do or don’t, they are still saved.

moonglow
Mar 29th 2006, 04:29 PM
well to explain it, easy believism is a derogatory term used to describe a certain doctrine, which I for one subscribe to.

Getting saved is not an ordeal, it is there for anyone to recieve 100% on faith. That in itself is a thing that is extremely difficult to comprehend for many, so even "easy Believism" is not easy.

Many people are saying now that you must Repent of all sin and get your life right to be saved. This is not the case. changing your life is not even your business. Once you get saved, you get the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit and he changes your life. If 1-2-3 repeat after me soul winning is producing professions, but NOT always salvation. The Belief that won't change you won't save you.

That is true...I heard Adrain Rodges and others saying how people will put off being saved saying they have to get their life in order first...or stop this sin or that one first...they seem to think they have to be perfect before they can be saved and that isn't the case. The theabaud explains it much better then that site does actually...the pastor posting that site does a very 'in your face' defensive and attacking approach...its a real turn off that is for sure!

You should redo the site for him theabaud..:lol: you explain it much better!

disiple56
Mar 29th 2006, 07:06 PM
The Bible is clear that we must repent and live a Holy life to go to heaven.
Yes, John 3:16 says "whosoever believes in him....", but if you believe in him you will believe that what he said was true.

Luke 13:5.
I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish."

Luke 13:8-9.
8 " ‘Sir,’ the man replied, ‘leave it alone for one more year, and I’ll dig around it and fertilize it. 9 If it bears fruit next year, fine! If not, then cut it down.’ "

Matthew 7:19-21.
19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
21 "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
.................................................. .................................................. .

It seems to me that if someone preaches against women wearing pants they should preach against men wearing pants. People did not wear pants in bible times. If you are talking about the cross-dressing thing in the bible. The "pants" that women wear are made for women. They are womens clothes. It is not cross dressing.

If you preach against women working you should read Proverbs 31 over and over until it sinks in. The "Proverbs 31 woman" had a job.

Proverbs 31:16-18.
She considers a field and buys it; out of her earnings she plants a vineyard. 17 She sets about her work vigorously; her arms are strong for her tasks. 18 She sees that her trading is profitable, and her lamp does not go out at night.


Proverbs 31:24.
She makes linen garments and sells them, and supplies the merchants with sashes.

Studyin'2Show
Mar 29th 2006, 08:16 PM
I agree with disiple56 and moonglow. Yes, salvation is simple and not by works but by faith, however God will not be mocked. He knows the heart. I do not believe there is any sin that would cause Jesus to turn His back on you if you're truly saved but as moonglow pointed out with the Hebrews 6:4 reference, you can choose to turn your back on Him. I consider myself a Proverbs 31 woman as it states in my profile. Right now I am completely stay at home, though I sell on eBay, preach, and am in the process of finishing my first novel. I have worked outside the home and make no judgements on those who do. I agree with many of the scriptural points on the webpage but I'm not really comfortable with how the writer ties everything together. Nor am I comfortable with the term 'easy-believism'.:hmm:

The Parson
Mar 31st 2006, 03:33 AM
I preach against watching television – do you?
I preach against birth control – do you?
I preach against alcohol – do you?
I preach against women wearing pants – do you?
I preach against mixed swimming – do you?
I preach against women working – do you?
I preach against any secular music – do you?
I preach against fornication – do you? Folks, are you familiar with hyper fundamentalism? This is a sect that broke off from the Baptist brethren in the late 1920's with certain ideals that were quite radical. Names like Jack Hyles and Amsi Dixon are just a few that started this school of thought. This is also the same school of thought that pushed the Dispinsationalims expounded on by Schofield at the end of the 19th century. Within the dispensational framework is also the idea that if you are not a pre-tribulational believer, you salvation may be in question. Believe it or not.


I admire their tenasity and even a few of my close friends are hyper fundies, but quite frankly, it is one of many new sects that have shown up over the past two centuries.


By the way, I didn't post this as a critisism, but for meerly FYI purposes... No offence meant to any Pre-trib believers here...

The Parson
Mar 31st 2006, 04:19 AM
Correction, Jack Hyles didn't start actively promoting Hyper Fundamentalism til the late 50's but you get the idea...

theabaud
Mar 31st 2006, 04:35 AM
Folks, are you familiar with hyper fundamentalism? This is a sect that broke off from the Baptist brethren in the late 1920's with certain ideals that were quite radical. Names like Jack Hyles and Amsi Dixon are just a few that started this school of thought. This is also the same school of thought that pushed the Dispinsationalims expounded on by Schofield at the end of the 19th century. Within the dispensational framework is also the idea that if you are not a pre-tribulational believer, you salvation may be in question. Believe it or not.


I admire their tenasity and even a few of my close friends are hyper fundies, but quite frankly, it is one of many new sects that have shown up over the past two centuries.


By the way, I didn't post this as a critisism, but for meerly FYI purposes... No offence meant to any Pre-trib believers here...
Hey parson, i trust you and admire you, I just must say that Fundamentalist and hyper-dispensationalism do not mix. John R Rice, one of our fore runners wrote an entire chapter in his book denouncing such ideas, and even distanced himself from Scofield on that very matter. Hyles held the same view point.

I have never, ever heard anyone in our movement make such a claim about post tribbers. Salvation is by grace through faith, that not of works. Requiring a belief beyond that in the risen Christ is adding to the gospel. Fundamental Baptists tend to be pretribbers, but never have I heard anyone suggest such a thing.

The Parson
Mar 31st 2006, 04:51 AM
Hey parson, i trust you and admire you, I just must say that Fundamentalist and hyper-dispensationalism do not mix. John R Rice, one of our fore runners wrote an entire chapter in his book renouncing such ideas, and even distanced himself from Scofield on that very matter. Hyles held the same view point.

I have never, ever heard anyone in our movement make such a claim about post tribbers. Salvation is by grace through faith, that not of works. Requiring a belief beyond that in the risen Christ is adding to the gospel. Fundamental Baptists tend to be pretribbers, but never have I heard anyone suggest such a thing.That actually is more common a quote from some of our local hard liners here. Was I too general, if so, please forgive that. One of my friends here who is a major hyper himself, even shook his head in disbelief when he heard some of that quote while we were at a Bible conference together. When we asked two of these brethren why such a statement, their reply was "it's so clear a teaching, only a lost man would say he doesn't believe it". Ouch... Go figure...

I've seen quite a bit on Pre, Mid, Post, & Am but I wonder why I haven't seen a thread here on dispensationalism? That, I thought was a hot subject...

theabaud
Mar 31st 2006, 12:22 PM
That actually is more common a quote from some of our local hard liners here. Was I too general, if so, please forgive that. One of my friends here who is a major hyper himself, even shook his head in disbelief when he heard some of that quote while we were at a Bible conference together. When we asked two of these brethren why such a statement, their reply was "it's so clear a teaching, only a lost man would say he doesn't believe it". Ouch... Go figure...

I've seen quite a bit on Pre, Mid, Post, & Am but I wonder why I haven't seen a thread here on dispensationalism? That, I thought was a hot subject...Well I certainly don't doubt it. There is an unfortunate arrogance amongst many in our movement. So many men get so sure of them selves that they will step out and say such things with unkindness in their hearts. I even heard of one man saying that if a woman didn't wear Panty hose she was probably lost. Don't ask me where that comes from cause I don't have a clue, but in fundamental churches that emphasize turning from all sin for salvation may in fact be the source of such things.

Its kinda funny that they would say it is so clear that it is not to be denied. I don't think it is that clear. Only thing clear about it is the immenent return of our Lord. That is why I used teh term arrogance earlier. Just cause we can see it does not mean that it will be easy for everyone else to.

StarscreamX-2
Apr 1st 2006, 02:48 AM
I have a Scofeild Study Bible...I love it....although I disagree on its points of Dispensationalism and pre-destination...

I am a Fundie...LOL....although I sometimes struggle with that...Theabaud knows this...

As far as the Article....I agree with it......

Although I would like some of you to explain how the Article is "Legalist".

RobertBest
Apr 1st 2006, 08:12 PM
Jack Hyles - now that's a name I haven't heard in a while. :)

The Parson
Apr 1st 2006, 10:28 PM
The principle is quite simple. Easy believism is setting aside all the nonsense and believeing the Savior will do what he said he will do. John 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

No hoops to jump through, no hail Mary's to say, no works that have to be completed, no forgive me father Micheals, no ya gotta speak in tongues, no you have to wear the right color, etc., etc., etc...

Easy believism seems a misnomer to me. I just call it pure unconditional salvation... Call me simple but if the process is too complicated for a child to understand, then it isn't the salvation my Lord was speaking about!!! Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of God.

That's what Hyles preached by the way. I admired him although he has directly butted heads with my own family. Grandpa was in Hammond Indiana establishing the "Way of the Cross Baptist Church" which was the first Southern Missionary Baptist Church ever extablished in the Indiana/Illonis area.

Hyles was on visitation and came across some Way of the Cross members homes. The discussion came up that he doubted Way of the Cross was really a new testament church because he had drove by and noticed some of the men smoking in the parking lot.

Grandpa, who had the same disposition I have, met Hyles at a gas station one day, greeted him, asked him if that was what he really said. His reply was most certainly and even made the remark that he wouldn't of recognized grandpa as a proper pastor because of the way he was dressed. (he worked at General Mills and was on his way home from work) Grandpa, being the man of God he was simply smiled at brother Hyles and quoted Philippians 2:12-13.
Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.He then bid him good day and got back in the car to head home. This had to have been around 1962 or so.

Ya know, I never once heard grandpa speak bad of him and when "I did" grandpa corrected me telling me to touch not God's annointed. I loved that man of God.

SandyL
May 8th 2007, 04:45 PM
Hmmm....what if we consider what the early church faced in their "easy-believism"? Peter was crucified upside down for stating he trusted in Christ for his salvation. Paul was beheaded.

Because current circumstances are relatively free for us to believe, the choice to follow Christ and the choice to ask forgiveness have blurred together. Many people all around the world give up everything they've ever valued because they confess Jesus as Lord and trust in Him for salvation.

theabaud
May 8th 2007, 08:10 PM
I don't know if I stated my case very well. I would hold that the doctrine of easy believism is correct, while the practice may not be.

SOmething that happens is that we tend to emphasize prayer over faith. One must trust christ, acknowledging a need for a saviour. Many have trusted him for comfort, for wisdom and for safety, but often never trust them with their souls. It is easy in that Jesus did all that needed to be done, we only need to trust him. It is difficult in that it requires a certain laying aside of self, and realizing your own condemnation turning to a saviour for help. It is not saying a prayer, it is not in talking to a preacher, it is in coming to him. NOt figuratively but personally.

The paradox of easy believism is that instead of turning a person to a saviour, it turns them to a prayer. A prayer never saved anyone, it is the person the prayer is said to.

I am still technically an easy believest doctrinally, but warn against the practice as described above known as 1-2-3 repeat after me soul winning.

SandyL
May 9th 2007, 02:10 PM
That does make sense. Yes, you've hit on the crux of the issue.

Jemma Ash
May 9th 2007, 04:33 PM
didn't John the Baptist say repent and be baptised? Repent first...

theabaud
May 9th 2007, 04:42 PM
didn't John the Baptist say repent and be baptised? Repent first...
Absolutely, but in john 3:18 you see quite clearly that the standard of being lost or saved is believe. What must we repent of? Wicked unbelief. This is a turning (Repentance) to Christ and new life with him.

Jemma Ash
May 9th 2007, 04:51 PM
but we must also repent of sin...not just the sin of unbelief...

Frances
May 9th 2007, 05:17 PM
Is "easy-believism" really wrong?

Yes, I believe it is definately wrong - because many folk embrace it and think they are Saved when they are not, and thnking they are already Saved do not take any notice of the Truth of their lost state and become Saved. (eg. there are many in CofE churches who were 'baptised' as children, have been through 'confirmation' (with no change of heart or mind) in their teens just because their friends did, consider themselves Christians and get very offended when anyone suggests there is more to becoming a Christian than a couple of ceremonies.

Jemma Ash
May 9th 2007, 05:24 PM
one of my friends says she a christian but she doesn't want to go to church...i have talked to her about it and she became very angry with me...oh well now she says she's getting comfirmed...that doesn't mean anything! its really erritating...i just wish and pray that she would understand...:pray:

theabaud
May 9th 2007, 05:30 PM
but we must also repent of sin...not just the sin of unbelief...
but that is to committ ourselves to sinlessness, which is an impossible task and a works theology. It is based on what you do, not what Christ did and does. I would say that a genuine conviction of sin is required and no one who is truly convicted wants to remain in that state. One can do nothing to overcome this of themselves so they must turn from their works to Christ. This normally ends up with the net result being the same as you have said, but if we focus on the change and not the one who changes, we may create false professions, just as one who says, hey wanna go to heaven, say this prayer.

With both systems of evangelism the puported convert is pointed to the works of their flesh. In the one case it is our works or righteousness, in the other it is a prayer. What I strongly believe the Bible teaches is that we should focus on individual sin (as opposed to generic sin) and condemnation under sin, the inability to reconcile ourselves to Christ, and his perfect work of redemption.

I have found that in baptist circles this argument becomes one of semantics, and folks trying to prove other wrong fight and bicker when in the end they are drawing from the same doctrinal well.

Jemma Ash
May 9th 2007, 05:42 PM
okay i didn't understand half of that...partly coz i was not concentrating...;)
um...Jesus forgives all our sins if we repent...but not just once...its an ongoing thing...not like a confession box...but just an ongoing prayer to the Lord, "Lord forgive me for..." or something like that...

Uncle Bud
May 16th 2011, 04:53 PM
I believe it's wrong because it leads to loose living. Romans 6:15 goes againgst it.

-SEEKING-
May 16th 2011, 04:55 PM
Wow. And now after 4 years of no action.........................

The Mighty Sword
May 16th 2011, 04:57 PM
Only if you believe it.

episkopos
May 16th 2011, 06:08 PM
Easy-believism creates easy-believers. There are no short-cuts around the cross that leads to life.

RabbiKnife
May 16th 2011, 06:10 PM
I'm into various shades of "impossible believism," "Difficult believism," "Easier than that but not as hard as this believism," and "my believism is better than your believism".

Liquid Tension
May 16th 2011, 07:16 PM
Wow. And now after 4 years of no action.........................


Seems we've had a few oooooooooooold threads resurrected as of late...........

notuptome
May 16th 2011, 08:53 PM
I'm into various shades of "impossible believism," "Difficult believism," "Easier than that but not as hard as this believism," and "my believism is better than your believism".
If its so easy why doesn't everybody believe?

Easy believism vs legalism.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Slug1
May 17th 2011, 12:30 AM
Easy believism vs legalism.

For the cause of Christ
RogerI'm honestly asking you this question Roger... can you please explain what you mean?

I've never heard the term "easy-believism". I've heard of legalism, just not the other till this thread got raised from the dead.

edit... after glancing through the thread, never mind. Based on what I did read, I can understand the association of legalism to believism.

Amos_with_goats
May 17th 2011, 12:48 AM
Seems we've had a few oooooooooooold threads resurrected as of late...........

Nuttin wrong with old threads...

... look at my signature. ;)


The discussion is a good one.

BadDog
May 18th 2011, 02:22 PM
Is "easy-believism" really wrong? This essay deals with "easy-believism" vs. repentance.

http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org/easybelievism.html

Sincerely,

Pastor Steven L Anderson
Faithful Word Baptist Church
www.faithfulwordbaptist.org (http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org)sanderson1769,

I strongly agree with "easy believism." IMO other views simply add works, to one degree or another, whether intended or not, to the gospel. Some of this confusion comes down to a misunderstanding of the term translated as "repentance" or "repent." Paul clearly contrasts works and faith. Easy believism is simply "faith alone in Christ alone." "Lordship salvation," as the other side is called, is essentially legalistic in nature. Easy believism (better "free grace" or "faith alone") is the most grace-oriented and least legalistic system.

I don't have much time to post now, but I'll try to make a few comments and explanation later. BTW, this would have been nice as a poll. If you don't create one, I'll try to find time in the next 10 days or so to make one.

BD

Slug1
May 18th 2011, 02:52 PM
sanderson1769,

I strongly agree with "easy believism." IMO other views simply add works, to one degree or another, whether intended or not, to the gospel. Some of this confusion comes down to a misunderstanding of the term translated as "repentance" or "repent." Paul clearly contrasts works and faith. Easy believism is simply "faith alone in Christ alone." "Lordship salvation," as the other side is referred, is essentially legalistic in nature. Easy believism (better "free grace" or "faith alone") is the most grace-oriented and least legalistic system.

I don't have much time to post now, but I'll try to make a few comments and explanation later. BTW, this would have been nice as a poll. If you don't create one, I'll try to find time in the next 10 days or so to make one.

BDI've been thinking about this thread since I posted my question to Roger and then browsed through the thread.

Seems that "man" has turned something that God has made easy into something... oh, what is a good word?

Man has turned believing in God into something... "else"

The reason I say this is because I did a whole thread concerning an example we read in the Bible where Phillip was told by God to go to a specific location and he ends up talking to that eunuch.

In reading through this example we understand just how easy it is to believe in Christ.

While it seems that "easy-believeISM" is not correct... BELIEVING in Jesus is VERY easy.

Seems "easy-believeISM" as per the topic MAKES believing in God extremely difficult and done through a checklist of DOs and DON'TS, which is why it sure seems more associated with legalism.

BadDog
May 18th 2011, 04:33 PM
I've been thinking about this thread since I posted my question to Roger and then browsed through the thread.

Seems that "man" has turned something that God has made easy into something... oh, what is a good word?

Man has turned believing in God into something... "else"
Could not agree more! The gospel is simple - faith alone in Christ alone by grace alone.


The reason I say this is because I did a whole thread concerning an example we read in the Bible where Phillip was told by God to go to a specific location and he ends up talking to that eunuch.

In reading through this example we understand just how easy it is to believe in Christ.

While it seems that "easy-believeISM" is not correct... BELIEVING in Jesus is VERY easy.

Seems "easy-believeISM" as per the topic MAKES believing in God extremely difficult and done through a checklist of DOs and DON'TS, which is why it sure seems more associated with legalism.
:P Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree... about "free grace" being in error, that is. But so many have complicated the gospel. That's why I hate it when people use words like "repentance," "redemption," and even the expression "invite Jesus into your heart" as part of the gospel message. For they are misunderstood by the hearers. They add works to the gospel message - something we have to "do."

When I get a chance, I'll share some thoughts about "repentance" and its part in the gospel. I think most will agree with my thoughts - it simply makes sense. But I rarely hear someone use "repent" as it means in the Greek, and as the authors of the Bible text intended.

Later,

BD

Slug1
May 18th 2011, 04:40 PM
:P Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree... about "free grace" being in error, that is. But so many have complicated the gospel. That's why I hate it when people use words like "repentance," "redemption," and even the expression "invite Jesus into your heart" as part of the gospel message. For they are misunderstood by the hearers. They add works to the gospel message - something we have to "do."
BDHooah... in that other thread, I was saying about how it's simply as "declaring" belief in Jesus. Just as the eunuch did. No prayer, no inviting (although I have and do still use this analogy as needed based on who I'm talking to), no prayer being said OVER them, no repeat after me prayer, etc.

Hear about Jesus, believe the witness by accepting that Jesus is their Lord/Savior and declare that belief... all DONE!

BadDog
May 18th 2011, 07:02 PM
Hooah... in that other thread, I was saying about how it's simply as "declaring" belief in Jesus. Just as the eunuch did. No prayer, no inviting (although I have and do still use this analogy as needed based on who I'm talking to), no prayer being said OVER them, no repeat after me prayer, etc.

Hear about Jesus, believe the witness by accepting that Jesus is their Lord/Savior and declare that belief... all DONE!
Amen. The moment the person actually believes the gospel, walla - they're a child of God. Not that it's a wrong idea to have them pray, come forward, etc.. But it can be confusing. Agree 100%

BD

Slug1
May 18th 2011, 07:12 PM
Amen. The moment the person actually believes the gospel, walla - they're a child of God. Not that it's a wrong idea to have them pray, come forward, etc.. But it can be confusing. Agree 100%

BD

Yeah... my usage of saying no prayer is: as in the "work" of the Sinner's Prayer... SAY this prayer and you're saved! Or let me say this prayer OVER you and you're saved.

Ummmmmmm, NOT!

Nothing wrong in "actually" praying though.

And people wonder why if all they did was do the work in saying the sinner's prayer... they may do this prayer several times over the course of their time left on earth... sad!

BadDog
May 18th 2011, 07:13 PM
Quickly, some thoughts on the Greek words METANOIA ("repentance"-noun) and METANOEŌ ("repent"-verb):

The root idea is to "change the mind/thinking." Now words are not simply the root concept in meaning, but it is helpful to see what it essentially means. So when we talk about repenting (biblically - Greek) we are not focusing on the actions, but on the heart... the mind. Repentance has to do with the internal, not the external. So when I hear people say "to repent is to change the mind/attitude which must be followed up (intent) with actions," or "repentance is to turn around 180 degrees-that's the Greek meaning" [it certainly is NOT!], I think, "They've just redefined the word, and missed the whole point."

So as I see it, best not to even use the word, for we have the seeker thinking that they need to turn over a new leaf... not good. But among Christians I share that repentance has a part in sharing the gospel message in that a person must recognize that they are a sinner - they must have a change of thinking about that. A person who doesn't recognize that he's a sinner is not ready to get saved. Also, they may have a change of mind about who Jesus is - they may have come to believe that He is the Son of God, who died in their place for their sins.

Hence, "repentance" is sometimes used as a sort of synonym for "faith." When we say the person must turn around 180 degrees (How many of you have heard that?) we are completely changing the most basic meaning of the word.

Take care,

BD

BadDog
May 18th 2011, 07:15 PM
Yeah... my usage of saying no prayer is: as in the "work" of the Sinner's Prayer... SAY this prayer and you're saved! Or let me say this prayer OVER you and you're saved.

Ummmmmmm, NOT!

Nothing wrong in "actually" praying though.

And people wonder why if all they did was do the work in saying the sinner's prayer... they may do this prayer several times over the course of their time left on earth... sad!

Exactly, which is why it is so important to follow them up. They may be very close, and during the follow-up process may genuinely come to a point of faith.

BD

Slug1
May 18th 2011, 07:17 PM
Exactly, which is why it is so important to follow them up. They may be very close, and during the follow-up process may genuinely come to a point of faith.

BDAll a part of discipling the Body of Christ... even those who are LOOKING in the door!!! They all need proper discipleship.

shepherdsword
May 18th 2011, 09:30 PM
I have been looking for that place in the NT where is tells us to "invite Jesus into our heart"
The closest thing I can find is:

"If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him"

quiet dove
May 18th 2011, 09:51 PM
Well, I just scanned back to the 2011-2007 mark....lol. Nothing like confusing the mods with a resurrected thread...lol

But, I am not sure why repentance is such an issue, I mean without one first hearing the Gospel, one coming to the realization that one is a sinner, why would one even consider themselves in need of a Savior? Seems like repentance and getting saved kinda go hand in hand.
Back in the OT, the sacrifices meant nothing to God if the one offering was not of the right heart, and without first realizing there was the need, repentance, the heart would not be right for approaching God for forgiveness.

I mean if a person is convicted of sin, desiring to come to Christ accepting Him as their Lord and Savior, wouldnt repentance just be the natural course? Very few come to Christ thinking they have nothing to repent of.

Acts 3:19 Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord,

How does repentance make the Gospel more difficult, I don't get that anyway.

The Gospel is simple, we are sinners, we need Christ... why, we are sinners in need of repentance and cleansing. How can a person approach Christ for cleansing when they are not in a repentance frame of heart.

Repentance starts with realizing one is a sinner and continues when one sins.

Vhayes
May 18th 2011, 11:43 PM
I have been looking for that place in the NT where is tells us to "invite Jesus into our heart"
The closest thing I can find is:

"If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him"

I would think it would be Revelation 3:20
20 - 'Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he with Me.

mailmandan
May 19th 2011, 12:17 PM
The Greek word for "repent" is "metanoia" (noun) and "matanoeo" (verb) you see as defined in the Strongs #3340, 3341: to think differently or afterwards, reconsider. After thought, change of mind. Repentance basically means a "change of mind" and the context must determine what is involved in this "change of mind." Repentance in salvation involves a change of mind about our sinful position and need for Christ to save us and the new direction of this change of mind is faith in Christ alone for salvation (Matthew 21:32; Acts 20:21; 2 Timothy 2:25). The Bible also tells us that true repentance will result in a change of actions. Acts 26:20 declares, “I preached that they should repent and turn to God and prove their repentance by their deeds. This is the fruit of repentance (Matthew 3:8), not the essence of repentance. I have heard some well-known preachers say, "If you want to be saved, repent of your sins, turn from your sins." If turning from your sins means to stop sinning, then people can only be saved if they stop sinning. And it is unlikely that anyone has ever been saved, since we don't know anyone who has ever completely stopped sinning.

The Bible sometimes only mentions repentance as a condition for salvation. One example of this would be Luke 13:3, “I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.” See also Luke 3:19 and Acts 17:30. Other times both repentance and faith are mentioned in the same verse (Matthew 21:32; Mark 1:15; Acts 20:21). There are many, many verses which only mention faith as the condition for salvation (John 1:12; 3:16; 5:24; Acts 10:43; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; Ephesians 2:8,9 etc...). Repentance is a "change of mind" and the new direction of this change of mind is faith in Christ for salvation. Two sides to the same experience. In regards to salvation, when only repentance is mentioned, faith is implied or assumed. When only faith is mentioned, repentance is implied or assumed. Where you have one you must have the other. Repentance and faith are inseparable in salvation. If you believe the gospel, then you already repented in the process of coming to believe and are saved. Repentance does not make the gospel difficult. People make the gospel difficult with their misunderstanding of repentance and faith.

Usually the phrase "easy-believism" is a slam against those who teach that salvation is not by human works, but by faith in Jesus Christ alone. It is clear from the Scriptures that salvation is received by faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ. "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works lest any man should boast (Ephesians 2:8,9)." "Easy Believism" is a way of saying that salvation by faith in Jesus Christ alone is just too easy. "It's too simple." Those who use the phrase "easy believism" are saying that we must accomplish more to receive salvation, but Jesus needs no supplements. One of the most common objections to the true gospel message is that "it is too simple". The gospel of Christ is a message of grace to be received through faith. It's not a code of laws to be obeyed or a check list of good works to accomplish. It simply sets forth Christ crucified and risen as the Savior of all who believe (trust) in Him alone for salvation (Romans 1:16). It's easy to understand, just not easy to accept. Prideful man wants to help save himself and take credit.

Athanasius
May 19th 2011, 12:38 PM
Those who use the phrase "easy believism" are saying that we must accomplish more to receive salvation...

Actually, I use the phrase 'easy believism' to denote the idea that once one has 'received salvation,' they need not be required to live as if they're 'in Christ'. The sin can stay: the bad habits, the immoral behavior, the hate for one's neighbors and enemies, etc. Or it can go, it doesn't matter - once you're 'saved,' you can do whatever you want. I bring this up only to give you an example of someone who uses the phrase 'easy believism' but doesn't advocate a work's based gospel.

notuptome
May 19th 2011, 06:08 PM
Easy believism has become the repository of much of new evangelical theology. Biblical doctrine is not important just a relationship with Christ. Christ wants you just like you are. All the broad and very general appeal of the TV evangelists. Go to church any church and just praise the Lord.

Is it easy to believe in Jesus Christ? Does it require more than a simple knowledge that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, born of a virgin, that Jesus died on the cross of Calvary, and rose again on the third day? Many people know these things but are not saved. They even know that the bible is Gods word but that does not save one's soul.

We often get lost in the fog of baptisms, repentance and Lordship only to lose sight of the eternal differences that leads one soul to be saved and another to be lost. John 6:44 clearly tells us that a man must be drawn to Christ by God the Father. There must be a point where knowledge of bible facts becomes saving belief in Christ. This is the work of the Holy Spirit. John 16:8 The Holy Spirit reproves the world of sin, of righteousness and judgment. Before one can believe unto salvation one must believe unto condemnation. The man who has not found himself to be lost and on his way to the lake of fire for eternity with no hope within himself has not yet been reproved of sin. The man who has not yet seen Jesus Christ and the only perfectly obedient man completely fulfilling the law has not be reproved of righteousness. The man who has not yet seen himself as rightly deserving of his condemnation has not been reproved of judgment. An old preacher once wisely said that a man cannot get saved untill he gets lost.

It is easy to believe the Jesus in the manger at Christmas and even to be in awe of the Jesus on the cross at Easter. It is another matter to believe that my sin was the cause for all His suffering. It is another matter to conclude that if He had not died I would have no hope of eternal life. It is one thing to know the facts it is another altogether to believe them unto eternal life.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

RollTide21
May 19th 2011, 06:38 PM
Is it easy to believe in Jesus Christ? Does it require more than a simple knowledge that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, born of a virgin, that Jesus died on the cross of Calvary, and rose again on the third day? Many people know these things but are not saved. They even know that the bible is Gods word but that does not save one's soul.

We often get lost in the fog of baptisms, repentance and Lordship only to lose sight of the eternal differences that leads one soul to be saved and another to be lost. John 6:44 clearly tells us that a man must be drawn to Christ by God the Father. There must be a point where knowledge of bible facts becomes saving belief in Christ. This is the work of the Holy Spirit. John 16:8 The Holy Spirit reproves the world of sin, of righteousness and judgment. Before one can believe unto salvation one must believe unto condemnation. The man who has not found himself to be lost and on his way to the lake of fire for eternity with no hope within himself has not yet been reproved of sin. The man who has not yet seen Jesus Christ and the only perfectly obedient man completely fulfilling the law has not be reproved of righteousness. The man who has not yet seen himself as rightly deserving of his condemnation has not been reproved of judgment. An old preacher once wisely said that a man cannot get saved untill he gets lost.

It is easy to believe the Jesus in the manger at Christmas and even to be in awe of the Jesus on the cross at Easter. It is another matter to believe that my sin was the cause for all His suffering. It is another matter to conclude that if He had not died I would have no hope of eternal life. It is one thing to know the facts it is another altogether to believe them unto eternal life.

For the cause of Christ
RogerWell put, Roger.

shepherdsword
May 19th 2011, 09:53 PM
I would think it would be Revelation 3:20
20 - 'Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he with Me.

He was speaking to the church of Laodicea. Like so many churches today,they had Jesus on the outside looking in.But let's assume it can be taken out of context and used in a gospel message. All they had to do was hear his voice and open the door.Like the Ethiopian eunuch,they wouldn't even have to pray.

mailmandan
May 19th 2011, 10:54 PM
Actually, I use the phrase 'easy believism' to denote the idea that once one has 'received salvation,' they need not be required to live as if they're 'in Christ'. The sin can stay: the bad habits, the immoral behavior, the hate for one's neighbors and enemies, etc. Or it can go, it doesn't matter - once you're 'saved,' you can do whatever you want. I bring this up only to give you an example of someone who uses the phrase 'easy believism' but doesn't advocate a work's based gospel.

I see. I guess people seem to either define "easy believism" as believing the gospel is too easy and we must also help work for our salvation or else once we're saved we can just do whatever we want and it doesn't matter how we live. I certainly would not advocate living just however we want after we're saved. We are saved through faith, not works, but we are created in Christ Jesus unto or for good works that we should walk in them (Ephesians 2:8-10). We are saved to serve, not saved to sit.

mailmandan
May 20th 2011, 11:21 AM
Easy believism has become the repository of much of new evangelical theology. Biblical doctrine is not important just a relationship with Christ. Christ wants you just like you are. All the broad and very general appeal of the TV evangelists. Go to church any church and just praise the Lord.

Is it easy to believe in Jesus Christ? Does it require more than a simple knowledge that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, born of a virgin, that Jesus died on the cross of Calvary, and rose again on the third day? Many people know these things but are not saved. They even know that the bible is Gods word but that does not save one's soul.

We often get lost in the fog of baptisms, repentance and Lordship only to lose sight of the eternal differences that leads one soul to be saved and another to be lost. John 6:44 clearly tells us that a man must be drawn to Christ by God the Father. There must be a point where knowledge of bible facts becomes saving belief in Christ. This is the work of the Holy Spirit. John 16:8 The Holy Spirit reproves the world of sin, of righteousness and judgment. Before one can believe unto salvation one must believe unto condemnation. The man who has not found himself to be lost and on his way to the lake of fire for eternity with no hope within himself has not yet been reproved of sin. The man who has not yet seen Jesus Christ and the only perfectly obedient man completely fulfilling the law has not be reproved of righteousness. The man who has not yet seen himself as rightly deserving of his condemnation has not been reproved of judgment. An old preacher once wisely said that a man cannot get saved untill he gets lost.

It is easy to believe the Jesus in the manger at Christmas and even to be in awe of the Jesus on the cross at Easter. It is another matter to believe that my sin was the cause for all His suffering. It is another matter to conclude that if He had not died I would have no hope of eternal life. It is one thing to know the facts it is another altogether to believe them unto eternal life.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Amen Roger. Saving belief is more than simply acknowledging the existence and historical facts about Christ. Saving belief is completely trusting in Christ's finished work of redemption as the only means of our salvation. It's not enough to believe that the death, burial and resurrection of Christ "happened." We must also trust solely in what happened to receive eternal life. That is what it means to believe the gospel. For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. Romans 1:16

BadDog
May 20th 2011, 01:26 PM
I have been looking for that place in the NT where is tells us to "invite Jesus into our heart"
The closest thing I can find is:

"If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him"
Shepherd'sWord,

Usually people quote Revelation 3:20 ("Behold I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come into them, and sup with them and they with me.") It was written to a church, and hence is an illustration of the intimate fellowship we can have with Christ. If someone unsaved is desiring a genuine relationship with God, then such an illustration certainly works. But we are not saved by "inviting Christ into our heart." The appeal is for us to believe, to trust in Him.

Take care,

BD

BadDog
May 20th 2011, 01:32 PM
Well, I just scanned back to the 2011-2007 mark....lol. Nothing like confusing the mods with a resurrected thread...lol

But, I am not sure why repentance is such an issue, I mean without one first hearing the Gospel, one coming to the realization that one is a sinner, why would one even consider themselves in need of a Savior? Seems like repentance and getting saved kinda go hand in hand.
Back in the OT, the sacrifices meant nothing to God if the one offering was not of the right heart, and without first realizing there was the need, repentance, the heart would not be right for approaching God for forgiveness.

I mean if a person is convicted of sin, desiring to come to Christ accepting Him as their Lord and Savior, wouldnt repentance just be the natural course? Very few come to Christ thinking they have nothing to repent of.

Acts 3:19 Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord,

How does repentance make the Gospel more difficult, I don't get that anyway.

The Gospel is simple, we are sinners, we need Christ... why, we are sinners in need of repentance and cleansing. How can a person approach Christ for cleansing when they are not in a repentance frame of heart.

Repentance starts with realizing one is a sinner and continues when one sins.
Repentance makes the gospel confusing because we understand it to mean "turning 180-deg." That is NOT what it means. It refers to a change in heart. Repentance relating to the gospel does not follow salvation (though it certainly could be the natural response - one would expect that), but it refers to the necessary preparation by the Spirit so that we are ready to trust in Him.

As it's used today, repentance when included in the gospel message unfortunately refers to saying essentially, "OK, are you ready to turn from sin?" That is simply NOT part of the gospel message. We are not saved by turning from sin and turning to Christ. We are saved by trusting! Otherwise, we make salvation works. Christ did it all. He died in our place on the cross. We simply trust in Him.

Thx,

BD

BadDog
May 20th 2011, 01:43 PM
The Greek word for "repent" is "metanoia" (noun) and "matanoeo" (verb) you see as defined in the Strongs #3340, 3341: to think differently or afterwards, reconsider. After thought, change of mind. Repentance basically means a "change of mind" and the context must determine what is involved in this "change of mind." Repentance in salvation involves a change of mind about our sinful position and need for Christ to save us and the new direction of this change of mind is faith in Christ alone for salvation (Matthew 21:32; Acts 20:21; 2 Timothy 2:25). The Bible also tells us that true repentance will result in a change of actions. Acts 26:20 declares, “I preached that they should repent and turn to God and prove their repentance by their deeds. This is the fruit of repentance (Matthew 3:8), not the essence of repentance. I have heard some well-known preachers say, "If you want to be saved, repent of your sins, turn from your sins." If turning from your sins means to stop sinning, then people can only be saved if they stop sinning. And it is unlikely that anyone has ever been saved, since we don't know anyone who has ever completely stopped sinning.

The Bible sometimes only mentions repentance as a condition for salvation. One example of this would be Luke 13:3, “I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.” See also Luke 3:19 and Acts 17:30. Other times both repentance and faith are mentioned in the same verse (Matthew 21:32; Mark 1:15; Acts 20:21). There are many, many verses which only mention faith as the condition for salvation (John 1:12; 3:16; 5:24; Acts 10:43; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; Ephesians 2:8,9 etc...). Repentance is a "change of mind" and the new direction of this change of mind is faith in Christ for salvation. Two sides to the same experience. In regards to salvation, when only repentance is mentioned, faith is implied or assumed. When only faith is mentioned, repentance is implied or assumed. Where you have one you must have the other. Repentance and faith are inseparable in salvation. If you believe the gospel, then you already repented in the process of coming to believe and are saved. Repentance does not make the gospel difficult. People make the gospel difficult with their misunderstanding of repentance and faith.

Usually the phrase "easy-believism" is a slam against those who teach that salvation is not by human works, but by faith in Jesus Christ alone. It is clear from the Scriptures that salvation is received by faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ. "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works lest any man should boast (Ephesians 2:8,9)." "Easy Believism" is a way of saying that salvation by faith in Jesus Christ alone is just too easy. "It's too simple." Those who use the phrase "easy believism" are saying that we must accomplish more to receive salvation, but Jesus needs no supplements. One of the most common objections to the true gospel message is that "it is too simple". The gospel of Christ is a message of grace to be received through faith. It's not a code of laws to be obeyed or a check list of good works to accomplish. It simply sets forth Christ crucified and risen as the Savior of all who believe (trust) in Him alone for salvation (Romans 1:16). It's easy to understand, just not easy to accept. Prideful man wants to help save himself and take credit.
Excellent post! I agree with this, though I would express a couple things a little differently perhaps. Don't have much time, so I'll be short n sweet. :P

You said: "The Bible also tells us that true repentance will result in a change of actions."

Yes, in the sense of Ephesians 2:8-10

Ephesians 2:8-10 For by grace you are saved through faith, and this [salvation] is not from yourselves; it is God's gift -- not from works, so that no one can boast. For we are His creation -- created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared ahead of time so that we should walk in them.

The purpose of salvation is to walk in good works... but we are not saved BY those good works by any stretch of the imagination. I think you'll agree with this.

Acts 26:20 Instead, I preached to those in Damascus first, and to those in Jerusalem and in all the region of Judea, and to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works worthy of repentance.

The repentance referenced is sort of a synonym for faith, as I see it.

My concern is threefold:

Many pastors say we need to turn from our sin, then trust in Christ and promise to follow Him as Lord. All of the latter is discipleship, not how we are saved.
We see repentance as "turning from sin"-hence turning salvation into works.
We try to give the seeker something to "do" instead of Someone to believe in.


Take care,

BD

BadDog
May 20th 2011, 01:47 PM
Actually, I use the phrase 'easy believism' to denote the idea that once one has 'received salvation,' they need not be required to live as if they're 'in Christ'. The sin can stay: the bad habits, the immoral behavior, the hate for one's neighbors and enemies, etc. Or it can go, it doesn't matter - once you're 'saved,' you can do whatever you want. I bring this up only to give you an example of someone who uses the phrase 'easy believism' but doesn't advocate a work's based gospel.
I can assure you that no one I am aware of who holds to "easy believism" ("free grace") thinks or has expressed anything even remotely close to such. That is an unfounded concern of those who hold to Lordship Salvation.

Out of concern for antinomianism, you can turn salvation to salvation by faith PLUS works, if you're not careful.

Thx,
BD

BadDog
May 20th 2011, 02:55 PM
It is easy to believe the Jesus in the manger at Christmas and even to be in awe of the Jesus on the cross at Easter. It is another matter to believe that my sin was the cause for all His suffering. It is another matter to conclude that if He had not died I would have no hope of eternal life. It is one thing to know the facts it is another altogether to believe them unto eternal life.

Thx Roger,

When a free-grace person refers to just believing in Christ, he is not talking about just understanding the claims of the gospel, and who Christ is. He is talking about genuine faith in Christ and relying upon the work of Christ in our behalf to save us. The key is not relying upon anything or anyone else but Christ alone. Too many evangelists in trying to be able to see a clear distinction between those who have trusted in Christ and those who have not add distinctions which are not biblical.

Thx,

BD

mailmandan
May 20th 2011, 04:37 PM
Excellent post! I agree with this, though I would express a couple things a little differently perhaps. Don't have much time, so I'll be short n sweet. :P

You said: "The Bible also tells us that true repentance will result in a change of actions."

Yes, in the sense of Ephesians 2:8-10

Ephesians 2:8-10 For by grace you are saved through faith, and this [salvation] is not from yourselves; it is God's gift -- not from works, so that no one can boast. For we are His creation -- created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared ahead of time so that we should walk in them.

The purpose of salvation is to walk in good works... but we are not saved BY those good works by any stretch of the imagination. I think you'll agree with this.

Acts 26:20 Instead, I preached to those in Damascus first, and to those in Jerusalem and in all the region of Judea, and to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works worthy of repentance.

The repentance referenced is sort of a synonym for faith, as I see it.

My concern is threefold:

Many pastors say we need to turn from our sin, then trust in Christ and promise to follow Him as Lord. All of the latter is discipleship, not how we are saved.
We see repentance as "turning from sin"-hence turning salvation into works.
We try to give the seeker something to "do" instead of Someone to believe in.


Take care,

BD

I agree with you BD. We are saved FOR good works, not by good works (Ephesians 2:8-10). The change of actions which result from repentance/faith would be the fruit, by product and demonstrative evidence of our repentance/faith, but not the essence of our repentance/faith and not the means of our salvation. Good works are the fruit, not the root of our salvation. Your threefold concern about repentance is my concern. Well said.

BadDog
May 20th 2011, 07:10 PM
MailmanDan,

Well expressed.

BD

BroRog
May 20th 2011, 07:52 PM
In the movies when a man falls off of a roof, the man doesn't actually die because he is simply an actor who jumps onto an airbag. My friend told me that when he was a little kid, he thought that the movie studio used condemned prisoners to fall off the roof. They were going to die anyway right?

When I was a kid, I watch a lot of Superman and I thought that if I jumped off the roof I could fly. And so I went outside one day and jumped.

What my friend believed as a kid was wrong; and what I believed as a kid was wrong. The difference between me and my friend is the fact that I acted on what I believed. When my friend believed a falsehood, it didn't cost him anything because he didn't act on it. But when I believed a falsehood it could have cost me dearly and fortunately I didn't break a leg or worse.

It's easy to believe that Jesus is God, or that Jesus is the messiah, or that Jesus is the savior, if it doesn't cost you anything. If you don't act on that belief, what difference does it make whether you believe it or not?

If the authorities ask everyone to evacuate the town because a flood is coming, then a person who believes the authorities will leave town. Leaving town is a "work", if you will. What good does it say that you believe the authorities if you don't leave town? Either you truly believe what the authorities say and you don't care; or you don't really believe.

shepherdsword
May 20th 2011, 08:26 PM
Shepherd'sWord,

Usually people quote Revelation 3:20 ("Behold I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come into them, and sup with them and they with me.") It was written to a church, and hence is an illustration of the intimate fellowship we can have with Christ. If someone unsaved is desiring a genuine relationship with God, then such an illustration certainly works. But we are not saved by "inviting Christ into our heart." The appeal is for us to believe, to trust in Him.

Take care,

BD

I agree that if a seeker is looking for a relationship with Jesus then the verse applies. He did say "If any man..." The thing is this is the almost the only time you see the verse used. In it's real context it shows the degree to which we can fall corporately.We can leave Jesus on the outside knocking to get in. We`speak much of the individual indwelling of God and almost nothing of the corporate indwelling. We as individuals are only single stones for the habitation of the Spirit.The temple of living stones. I marvel that Peter talked about the corporate indwelling to new babes in Christ as if was a foundational doctrine. If it is expressed now it is almost like it's some profound revelation. In reality it was something the early church understood well because of their close knit relationships. Today it's all about my "personal relationship" with Jesus Christ. That's only a half truth. The other half is that God will indwell the corporate gathering of believers in such a way as to fill the whole earth with his glory. I posted an article I did on this a few years back. It goes into a bit more detail about what I am talking about.

http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/159686-The-Eternal-Purpose%28part-one%29?highlight=shepherdsword+eternal+purpose

This issue is relevant to "easy believing" is a number of ways. Read it through and give me your thoughts.

Athanasius
May 20th 2011, 11:00 PM
I can assure you that no one I am aware of who holds to "easy believism" ("free grace") thinks or has expressed anything even remotely close to such. That is an unfounded concern of those who hold to Lordship Salvation.

Out of concern for antinomianism, you can turn salvation to salvation by faith PLUS works, if you're not careful.

Thx,
BD

It must be then, that I know especially troubling people...
...Otherwise I do tend to conflate 'easy believism' and 'cheap grace'.

Bandit
May 20th 2011, 11:45 PM
Wow. And now after 4 years of no action.........................

And I thought you believed in resurrection from the dead!

Bandit
May 20th 2011, 11:51 PM
... I hate it when people use words like "repentance," "redemption," and even the expression "invite Jesus into your heart" as part of the gospel message. For they are misunderstood by the hearers. They add works to the gospel message - something we have to "do."

...


So, when Jesus said, "Follow Me", He had no intention that those He spoke to should actually follow?

david
May 21st 2011, 12:07 AM
The gospel message is not hard to understand. There are three steps to salvation.
1. repent, that is, turn from yourself, your own ways, and look at God's ways (realize that you cannot save yourself from death)
2. believe in the gospel
3. do good works out of faith that you're justified already through Christ (James 2:24), instead of out of trying to justify yourself. justifying yourself means you're trying to save yourself. you can't save yourself. only God can.

If you're still trying to justify yourself through works of the law, you are on the wrong track. Get on the right one. believe that you're already justified. Is this difficult to believe? That's because you do not trust God.

Well, you ask, what if there are people who believed and were saved and then turned from God and did evil? Are they saved? This case does not exist because "whoever does evil has not seen God. 3 John 1:11 " Hence it is impossible that one who does evil has ever seen God or truly believed in him. Is there a murderer among us? you can be sure he is not saved (1 John 3:15).

Bandit
May 21st 2011, 12:27 AM
Repentance makes the gospel confusing ...

The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent and believe the gospel! [Mark 1:15]

Yea, I agree. Jesus was confusing as heck... and John the Baptist with Him. Thank God for Paul. Isn't easy believism (cheap grace) great!

Slug1
May 21st 2011, 12:32 AM
The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent and believe the gospel! [Mark 1:15]

Yea, I agree. Jesus was confusing as heck... and John the Baptist with Him. Thank God for Paul. Isn't easy believism (cheap grace) great!The phrase should be instead...

The Gospel makes repentance easy :idea:

Bandit
May 21st 2011, 12:32 AM
...
Out of concern for antinomianism, you can turn salvation to salvation by faith PLUS works, if you're not careful.


Perhaps the question is: what does 'faith' really mean? For example, if one agrees that one and only one path leads to eternal life, but yet they walk another, is that 'faith'? (You are trying to disconnect how one lives with where they end up. But does that jive with what the word of God says?)

Amos_with_goats
May 21st 2011, 12:34 AM
Perhaps the question is: what does 'faith' really mean? For example, if one agrees that one and only one path leads to eternal life, but yet they walk another, is that 'faith'? (You are trying to disconnect how one lives with where they end up. But does that jive with what the word of God says?)

That is an excellent post. :thumbsup:

James 2:14-18


Faith Without Works Is Dead


14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
18 But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.

Slug1
May 21st 2011, 12:52 AM
That is an excellent post. :thumbsup:

James 2:14-18


Faith Without Works Is Dead


14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
18 But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.Amen... when a faithful Christian gives testimony of the work that God is doing through them and then other Christians says that works don't save you. Any Christians who keep saying that "works" don't save you have no concept that unless you are saved... you can't be used by God to do any work anyway.

notuptome
May 21st 2011, 11:43 AM
Amen... when a faithful Christian gives testimony of the work that God is doing through them and then other Christians says that works don't save you. Any Christians who keep saying that "works" don't save you have no concept that unless you are saved... you can't be used by God to do any work anyway.
Luke 10:38-42 should make an interesting paradox for you. Which one Mary or Martha was working the works which demonstrated their love for the Lord Jesus?

Perhaps the concept you claim to have is incorrect.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

mailmandan
May 21st 2011, 12:50 PM
That is an excellent post. :thumbsup:

James 2:14-18


Faith Without Works Is Dead


14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
18 But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.

In James 2:14, we read of one who says he has faith but has no works. This is not genuine saving faith, but a bare profession of faith. So when James asks, "Can that faith save him?" he is saying nothing against genuine saving faith, but only against an empty profession of faith. The faith that James is condemning is not the faith that Paul is commending. Works are the demonstrative evidence of genuine saving faith, not the means of our salvation. So when James says that faith without works is dead (James 2:17) he does not mean that we are saved by works. His concern is to show the reality of the faith professed by the individual (James 2:18) and demonstrate that the faith claimed (James 2:14) by the individual is genuine. Show me your (alledged) faith without your works and I will show you my (genuine) faith by my works (James 2:18). SHOW, not establish.

Slug1
May 21st 2011, 01:30 PM
Luke 10:38-42 should make an interesting paradox for you. Which one Mary or Martha was working the works which demonstrated their love for the Lord Jesus?

Perhaps the concept you claim to have is incorrect.

For the cause of Christ
RogerNope no paradox at all for me... what Martha was doing was all of herself and God wasn't desiring for her to do all that. Jesus even used that situation as an example of the type of work that we need not do... what's not of Him and only of ourselves.

Luke 10:38 Now it happened as they went that He entered a certain village; and a certain woman named Martha welcomed Him into her house. 39 And she had a sister called Mary, who also sat at Jesus’[a] feet and heard His word. 40 But Martha was distracted with much serving, and she approached Him and said, “Lord, do You not care that my sister has left me to serve alone? Therefore tell her to help me.”
41 And Jesus[B] answered and said to her, “Martha, Martha, you are worried and troubled about many things. 42 But one thing is needed, and Mary has chosen that good part, which will not be taken away from her.”

This is a good example of what "work" of our own, even if it's in the name of God but not OF God causes... it distracts us from His desires for us and away from His purpose for us.

This shows us that a disciple of God should be at Jesus feet, not running around stressed that THEY are preparing for God.

HE DOES THE PREPARING and the only way to receive what He's prepared for us is to be at His feet listening to Him. Only those who do this will He be able to do His work through. The example Martha set's are those who do work in Jesus' name but it's all THEM and NOT OF Him. Mary is the example of those who Jesus will use because they listen to Him FIRST and then they will go out and do the work... OF Jesus.

No paradox at all actually... this scripture is what I'd use to SUPPORT the statement you quoted and questioned.

God Bless you Roger for enabling light to be shed upon this thread through the understanding of the Luke 10:38-42 scriptures.

notuptome
May 21st 2011, 03:00 PM
Nope no paradox at all for me... what Martha was doing was all of herself and God wasn't desiring for her to do all that. Jesus even used that situation as an example of the type of work that we need not do... what's not of Him and only of ourselves.

Luke 10:38 Now it happened as they went that He entered a certain village; and a certain woman named Martha welcomed Him into her house. 39 And she had a sister called Mary, who also sat at Jesus’[a] feet and heard His word. 40 But Martha was distracted with much serving, and she approached Him and said, “Lord, do You not care that my sister has left me to serve alone? Therefore tell her to help me.”
41 And Jesus[B] answered and said to her, “Martha, Martha, you are worried and troubled about many things. 42 But one thing is needed, and Mary has chosen that good part, which will not be taken away from her.”

This is a good example of what "work" of our own, even if it's in the name of God but not OF God causes... it distracts us from His desires for us and away from His purpose for us.

This shows us that a disciple of God should be at Jesus feet, not running around stressed that THEY are preparing for God.

HE DOES THE PREPARING and the only way to receive what He's prepared for us is to be at His feet listening to Him. Only those who do this will He be able to do His work through. The example Martha set's are those who do work in Jesus' name but it's all THEM and NOT OF Him. Mary is the example of those who Jesus will use because they listen to Him FIRST and then they will go out and do the work... OF Jesus.

No paradox at all actually... this scripture is what I'd use to SUPPORT the statement you quoted and questioned.

God Bless you Roger for enabling light to be shed upon this thread through the understanding of the Luke 10:38-42 scriptures.
Do you think that Jesus was saying that man does not live by bread only but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord? Mat 4:4 I find it interesting that it is not recorded whether Mary stopped being troubled and joined Martha at the feet of Jesus.

Man was created to have fellowship and communion with God. Sin severed the relationship. Christ restored the relationship. Personal one on one communion with God is what God desires. When God came in the cool of the day to seek Adam it was not to check on how he had done in tending the garden but to seek fellowship.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Slug1
May 21st 2011, 04:21 PM
Do you think that Jesus was saying that man does not live by bread only but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord? Mat 4:4 I find it interesting that it is not recorded whether Mary stopped being troubled and joined Martha at the feet of Jesus.

Man was created to have fellowship and communion with God. Sin severed the relationship. Christ restored the relationship. Personal one on one communion with God is what God desires. When God came in the cool of the day to seek Adam it was not to check on how he had done in tending the garden but to seek fellowship.

For the cause of Christ
RogerHooah... however, the scripture supports my post that you said was incorrect.

It's truly interesting to see those who are doing God's work and have no fear to give the testimony that God has given to them for their obedience.

You have a good day Roger.

notuptome
May 21st 2011, 08:37 PM
Hooah... however, the scripture supports my post that you said was incorrect.

It's truly interesting to see those who are doing God's work and have no fear to give the testimony that God has given to them for their obedience.

You have a good day Roger.
So without your works you are not a Christian? Is that what your doctrine teaches? How do you determine you are doing the right works? What if Marthas works are the ones we are to do and Marys works profit nothing?

In the garden God gave Adam work to do ie tend the garden but that was not the reason God created Adam. I know that your doctrine does not have the ability to encompass the whole of scripture but while works have a purpose they are not the purpose. I would rather give a testimony of the saving grace of God than any testimony of what I have done. What does the sinner need to hear? That Jesus saves or the great works of men?

Jesus grows still sweeter every day.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

david
May 21st 2011, 08:57 PM
Faith is completed by works; otherwise it is not true faith because faith is always active with works (James 2:22). Faith needs works to live (James 2:26). In this way we are justified by faith plus works, not just faith by itself (James 2:24). Everyone who has faith has works, and no one who has faith does not have good works. We were appointed to go and bear good fruit, not just have faith alone (John 15:16). It is true that "every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Matthew 7:19 "

BroRog
May 21st 2011, 08:58 PM
Faith is completed by works; otherwise it is not true faith because faith is always active with works (James 2:22). Faith needs works to live (James 2:26). In this way we are justified by faith plus works, not just faith by itself (James 2:24). Everyone who has faith has works, and no one who has faith does not have good works. We were appointed to go and bear good fruit, not just have faith alone (John 15:16). It is true that "every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Matthew 7:19 "Just so we know exactly what you are talking about, can you list two or three examples of a "work"?

Slug1
May 21st 2011, 09:04 PM
So without your works you are not a Christian? I'm talking about what God does through a person.They are not "my" works... they are what God does through us as His children.



Is that what your doctrine teaches? This is of the Bible, no doctrine.


How do you determine you are doing the right works? Because I can't heal a person, I can't do anything without God and when not in His will. When He wants to do something, we... as Christians will be used and the WORK that He DOES... IS always right and He's glorified.


What if Marthas works are the ones we are to do and Marys works profit nothing? Don't know... Martha seems to be the one who was chastened by Jesus.


In the garden God gave Adam work to do ie tend the garden but that was not the reason God created Adam. I know that your doctrine does not have the ability to encompass the whole of scripture but while works have a purpose they are not the purpose. I would rather give a testimony of the saving grace of God than any testimony of what I have done. What does the sinner need to hear? That Jesus saves or the great works of men?Here is the problem with what you wrote... MANY are out there in the Body of Christ saying that they are saved and they tell EVERYONE. God saved me... Hooah, now what IS God DOING through you to show the WORLD that what you testify as saving Grace is really REAL... IN and THROUGH your life?

We all hear of God's saving grace from all in the Body of Christ and when they have NO FRUIT to prove they are saved... this "fruit" or LACK there of... is the truth and this is what PEOPLE truly listen to.

Action speaks LOUDER than any spoken testimony. That is why we're commanded to go out into the world and witness about Christ and the signs/wonders WILL follow. God provides the evidence that the testimony of His saving grace is REAL.

david
May 21st 2011, 09:08 PM
Just so we know exactly what you are talking about, can you list two or three examples of a "work"?

1. while being persecuted for the faith, you do not deny Jesus (Matthew 13:21)
2. give alms as those things that are within (Luke 11:41) instead of announcing out of trying to gain man's glory
3. you pray truthfully, not acting for the sake of trying to gain man's glory
4. you get rid of evil possessions like obscene speech
5. you get rid of idols (you can't serve two masters)

BroRog
May 21st 2011, 09:12 PM
1. while being persecuted for the faith, you do not deny Jesus (Matthew 13:21)
2. receiving someone because he is a disciple by giving him a cup of cold water (Matthew 10:42)
3. give alms as those things that are within (Luke 11:41) instead of announcing out of trying to gain man's glory
4. you pray truthfully, not acting for the sake of trying to gain man's glory
5. you get rid of evil possessions like obscene speech
6. you get rid of idolsThanks, I like your examples.

david
May 21st 2011, 09:14 PM
We all hear of God's saving grace from all in the Body of Christ and when they have NO FRUIT to prove they are saved... this "fruit" or LACK there of... is the truth and this is what PEOPLE truly listen to.


Yes people may say they have faith but lie because they have no good work to prove it. Good work is the proof that faith exists. "Thus you will recognize them by their fruits. Matthew 7:20 "

Slug1
May 21st 2011, 09:20 PM
Yes people may say they have faith but lie because they have no good work to prove it. Good work is the proof that faith exists. "Thus you will recognize them by their fruits. Matthew 7:20 "Amen !

Slug1
May 21st 2011, 09:22 PM
4. you get rid of evil possessions like obscene speech
I was a Drill Sergeant in the Army when God began to work this in me... He will do a miracle in our heart, once we surrender!!

notuptome
May 21st 2011, 10:57 PM
I'm talking about what God does through a person.They are not "my" works... they are what God does through us as His children.
Judging like a man. Do you believe that all of Gods works are visible?

This is of the Bible, no doctrine.
Actually it is doctrine based on your understanding of the bible or at least parts of the bible.

Because I can't heal a person, I can't do anything without God and when not in His will. When He wants to do something, we... as Christians will be used and the WORK that He DOES... IS always right and He's glorified.
Doctors heal all the time are they Christians or children of God? Even the Muslim ones?

Don't know... Martha seems to be the one who was chastened by Jesus.
Really? You see that as chastening? Teaching perhaps but chastening?

Here is the problem with what you wrote... MANY are out there in the Body of Christ saying that they are saved and they tell EVERYONE. God saved me... Hooah, now what IS God DOING through you to show the WORLD that what you testify as saving Grace is really REAL... IN and THROUGH your life?
Why do you demand proof? Who are you to demand proof? Is this not something between them and the Saviour? Scripture says that we have the witness of the Holy Spirit with our spirit that we are saved. It says nothing that we must prove our salvation to other men. What then of the fruit that is only visible to God?

We all hear of God's saving grace from all in the Body of Christ and when they have NO FRUIT to prove they are saved... this "fruit" or LACK there of... is the truth and this is what PEOPLE truly listen to.
They must hear the word of God. Were you saved because of someone elses fruit or hearing the word of God? The Holy Spirit works through the word of God to bring men to a saving knowledge of Christ.

Action speaks LOUDER than any spoken testimony. That is why we're commanded to go out into the world and witness about Christ and the signs/wonders WILL follow. God provides the evidence that the testimony of His saving grace is REAL.
Again your pet doctrine is determining your understanding of the scriptures. Have you taken up snakes and drinking poison? That follows your pet verses in Mark 16 but it is never given the same value as the warm and fuzzy verse. Playing with snakes and drinking poison is not wise and doing so will not prove Gods saving grace.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

shepherdsword
May 21st 2011, 11:35 PM
Again your pet doctrine is determining your understanding of the scriptures. Have you taken up snakes and drinking poison? That follows your pet verses in Mark 16 but it is never given the same value as the warm and fuzzy verse. Playing with snakes and drinking poison is not wise and doing so will not prove Gods saving grace.Is that your understanding of the verse,that it means we handle snakes and drink poison to tempt God? That would be the same as Jesus jumping off the pinnacle of the temple at Satan's suggestion. You would have to go into deep field missionary work to appreciate this verse. We see a good example of the "taking up serpents' part in the book of acts when Paul was building a fire and got snake bit. The incident cause quite a stir among the natives who saw it. I have been to Haiti several times on field work. The area is full of Voodoo witch doctors. One of their favorite tactics is to poison missionaries. I have never been poisoned but my friend was several times. The witch doctors marveled that he did not die. Mark 16:17-18 is a litmus test for true faith and by whose authority we are ministering "These signs shall follow those that believe..." If I buy a radio kit and build it step by step by the instructions I expect it to power up when I turn it on. If I turn it on and it does nothing then I probably need to go back and reread the instructions. If there is no power to heal or cast out devils in Jesus's name maybe I don't have the kind of believing Jesus was talking about or perhaps I am not really moving in his name. The key thing there is "In his name" His name isn't some magical incantation that I can attach at the end of every prayer and expect results. It means I am his representative,that I am moving by his authority and according to his will. This is where many miss it.

david
May 21st 2011, 11:39 PM
Judging like a man. Do you believe that all of Gods works are visible?

Actually it is doctrine based on your understanding of the bible or at least parts of the bible.

Doctors heal all the time are they Christians or children of God? Even the Muslim ones?

Really? You see that as chastening? Teaching perhaps but chastening?

Why do you demand proof? Who are you to demand proof? Is this not something between them and the Saviour? Scripture says that we have the witness of the Holy Spirit with our spirit that we are saved. It says nothing that we must prove our salvation to other men. What then of the fruit that is only visible to God?

They must hear the word of God. Were you saved because of someone elses fruit or hearing the word of God? The Holy Spirit works through the word of God to bring men to a saving knowledge of Christ.

Again your pet doctrine is determining your understanding of the scriptures. Have you taken up snakes and drinking poison? That follows your pet verses in Mark 16 but it is never given the same value as the warm and fuzzy verse. Playing with snakes and drinking poison is not wise and doing so will not prove Gods saving grace.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Sometimes we have to test the spirits to see whether they are from God (1 John 4:1). This is to discern who is a false prophet and who is a true one. Jesus told us to be "beware of false prophets," and that we would be able to "recognize them by their fruits" (Matthew 7:15-16). If we do not need to beware of false prophets, why would Jesus warn us to do so? People may seem like they are judging one another, but we need to analyze what's up with certain types of trees and why they keep bearing bad fruit, so that we know who to stay away from.

shepherdsword
May 21st 2011, 11:53 PM
Sometimes we have to test the spirits to see whether they are from God (1 John 4:1). This is to discern who is a false prophet and who is a true one. Jesus told us to be "beware of false prophets," and that we would be able to "recognize them by their fruits" (Matthew 7:15-16). If we do not need to beware of false prophets, why would Jesus warn us to do so? People may seem like they are judging one another, but we need to analyze what's up with certain types of trees and why they keep bearing bad fruit, so that we know who to stay away from.

I agree with this 100%.However,this criteria seems limited to those who have assumed some position of authority over the body of Christ. Teachers,Pastors,Prophets and people of that nature. We sometimes apply it to some struggling brother who is a deep battle in his walk with God. It can be a destructive verse if we are not careful and selective in whom we apply it to. I may be mistaken about this and in error. However,I would rather err on the side on mercy than on the side of judgement ANY day!

david
May 22nd 2011, 12:16 AM
I agree with this 100%.However,this criteria seems limited to those who have assumed some position of authority over the body of Christ. Teachers,Pastors,Prophets and people of that nature. We sometimes apply it to some struggling brother who is a deep battle in his walk with God. It can be a destructive verse if we are not careful and selective in whom we apply it to. I may be mistaken about this and in error. However,I would rather err on the side on mercy than on the side of judgement ANY day!

Yes, we should be careful not to judge (Romans 2:1-5). Judging spirits is not testing spirits. Testing spirits allows you to see who is from God and who is not, whereas judging someone is different.

"Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things. We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who practice such things. Do you suppose, O man—you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself—that you will escape the judgment of God? Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God’s righteous judgment will be revealed. Romans 2:1-5 "

Slug1
May 22nd 2011, 12:41 AM
Again your pet doctrine is determining your understanding of the scriptures. Have you taken up snakes and drinking poison? That follows your pet verses in Mark 16 but it is never given the same value as the warm and fuzzy verse. Playing with snakes and drinking poison is not wise and doing so will not prove Gods saving grace.

For the cause of Christ
RogerScripture gives us an example of what the meaning of scripture means. I don't know why, but you feel it's a means to tempt God and handle snakes purposely because this is the only statement you ever state concerning the Holy Word of God and His scripture. NEVER have I ever said anything of what you are implying, nor will I ever.

Look, the Bible has told us that the devil will do false signs/wonders and the Bible also informs us that EVEN those in Christ WILL BE fooled and when you keep saying that this is what that scripture means based on the false signs/wonders done in the world by those handling snakes the way that they do... please don't allow us all to understand that you have been fooled Roger.

The entire Body of Christ knows what that scripture in Mark means according to God's truth... He will protect us as we see the example in Acts 28 when Paul gets bit by a viper while bringing the Gospel to others in the world.

This understanding of God's truth is accomplished by dividing scripture with scripture.

This is the example that God have given us so we understand HIS Word... far from any pet scripture... ALL scripture is of God.

What you call a pet scripture has an example given to us so God's truth is understood fully.

I'm disappointed in how you pick and choose what scripture is to be follow and which scriptures are to be ignored. Those you have designated not to be followed are pet scriptures :o

Did God waste His breath and did the Holy Spirit waste His time giving us God's Word because some in the Body of Christ can decide which scriptures are good and which ones are bad?

Roger, I love ya dude... so does God but if I were you... I'd take the entire Bible as His Word and follow Him 100%.

Oh yeah... not only is the scripture from Mark divided with the scripture from Acts so we understand God's truth but it's also supported here:

Luke 10:19 Behold, I give you the authority to trample on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall by any means hurt you.

Are you going to continue to say that the scripture from Mark is a pet scripture when it's supported with the one above and this one also?

Acts 28:3 But when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks and laid them on the fire, a viper came out because of the heat, and fastened on his hand. 4 So when the natives saw the creature hanging from his hand, they said to one another, “No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he has escaped the sea, yet justice does not allow to live.” 5 But he shook off the creature into the fire and suffered no harm.

mailmandan
May 22nd 2011, 11:37 AM
Faith is completed by works; otherwise it is not true faith because faith is always active with works (James 2:22). Faith needs works to live (James 2:26). In this way we are justified by faith plus works, not just faith by itself (James 2:24). Everyone who has faith has works, and no one who has faith does not have good works. We were appointed to go and bear good fruit, not just have faith alone (John 15:16). It is true that "every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Matthew 7:19 "

In James 2:26, the comparison of the human spirit and faith converges around their modes of operation. The spirit (Gr pneuma) may also be translated "breath." As a breathless body emits no indication of life, so fruitless faith exhibits no indication of life. The source of the life in the faith is not the works; rather, the life in the faith is the source of the works. We are created in Christ Jesus unto good works (Ephesians 2:10). We are justified by the kind of faith that produces works, not because the works are the means of our salvation, but because the works are the proof of our salvation. If someone claims to have faith but has no works, then their faith is bogus (James 2:14). If we have genuinely placed our faith in Christ alone for salvation and we're saved, then it will show by our actions/works (James 2:18). The absence of evidence could be construed as evidence of absense.

Slug1
May 22nd 2011, 11:43 AM
In James 2:26, the comparison of the human spirit and faith converges around their modes of operation. The spirit (Gr pneuma) may also be translated "breath." As a breathless body emits no indication of life, so fruitless faith exhibits no indication of life. The source of the life in the faith is not the works; rather, the life in the faith is the source of the works. We are created in Christ Jesus unto good works (Ephesians 2:10). We are justified by the kind of faith that produces works, not because the works are the means of our salvation, but because the works are the proof of our salvation. If someone claims to have faith but has no works, then their faith is bogus (James 2:14). If we have genuinely placed our faith in Christ alone for salvation and we're saved, then it will show by our actions/works (James 2:18). The absence of evidence could be construed as evidence of absense.Yet when a Christian mentions the word "works" and TRIES as he might to explain, NOT work for salvation but the work that is done DUE TO their salvation and the exercising of faith as God utilizes them for the work He's doing upon the Body of Christ for His glory... when other Christians keep tossing in your face that ANY work is nothing but those works that people do FOR salvation... what other "language" is there to use to help them understand the work's that God DOES through a saved Christian is the work that is the fruit OF their or DUE TO their salvation?

shepherdsword
May 22nd 2011, 12:04 PM
Yet when a Christian mentions the word "works" and TRIES as he might to explain, NOT work for salvation but the work that is done DUE TO their salvation and the exercising of faith as God utilizes them for the work He's doing upon the Body of Christ for His glory... when other Christians keep tossing in your face that ANY work is nothing but those works that people do FOR salvation... what other "language" is there to use to help them understand the work's that God DOES through a saved Christian is the work that is the fruit OF their or DUE TO their salvation?

That is exactly what James is talking about in this verse. He isn't saying we are saved by faith plus works . He is saying true faith will always produce works that validate it. I wonder how they get around this verse? Do they spin it to mean that the justification talked about here isn't relevant to salvation?

James 2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

david
May 22nd 2011, 05:13 PM
In James 2:26, the comparison of the human spirit and faith converges around their modes of operation. The spirit (Gr pneuma) may also be translated "breath." As a breathless body emits no indication of life, so fruitless faith exhibits no indication of life. The source of the life in the faith is not the works; rather, the life in the faith is the source of the works. We are created in Christ Jesus unto good works (Ephesians 2:10). We are justified by the kind of faith that produces works, not because the works are the means of our salvation, but because the works are the proof of our salvation. If someone claims to have faith but has no works, then their faith is bogus (James 2:14). If we have genuinely placed our faith in Christ alone for salvation and we're saved, then it will show by our actions/works (James 2:18). The absence of evidence could be construed as evidence of absense.

The reason why I say faith needs works to live is because of this verse: "For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead. James 2:26 ". The faith is definitely the base out of which fruit forms, not vice versa. Otherwise this would contradict this verse: "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. Ephesians 2:8-9 " Our being saved is not a result of works; rather it is a result of faith which is proved to be genuine by the works that come out of it.

david
May 22nd 2011, 05:16 PM
That is exactly what James is talking about in this verse. He isn't saying we are saved by faith plus works . He is saying true faith will always produce works that validate it. I wonder how they get around this verse? Do they spin it to mean that the justification talked about here isn't relevant to salvation?

James 2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.




Is James 2.24 relevant to the justification for salvation, or is it some other justification?

rom826
May 22nd 2011, 08:12 PM
The reason why I say faith needs works to live is because of this verse: "For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead. James 2:26 ". The faith is definitely the base out of which fruit forms, not vice versa. Otherwise this would contradict this verse: "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. Ephesians 2:8-9 " Our being saved is not a result of works; rather it is a result of faith which is proved to be genuine by the works that come out of it.

We are not saved by faith either. We are not save by faith or works. Read Ephesians 2:8-9 again.

david
May 22nd 2011, 08:44 PM
We are not saved by faith either. We are not save by faith or works. Read Ephesians 2:8-9 again.

We are saved through faith, but God is the one believing into himself to save us. This is why it says "You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide. John 15:16 " We never chose him, but he chose us to be saved before the foundation of the world. Indeed, it says "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. John 6:44 "

rom826
May 22nd 2011, 09:02 PM
We are saved through faith, but God is the one believing into himself to save us. This is why it says "You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide. John 15:16 " We never chose him, but he chose us to be saved before the foundation of the world. Indeed, it says "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. John 6:44 "

Yep. Our own faith is not sufficient to save us. Neither is our own works sufficient to save us. It is by God's grace that we get saved.

david
May 22nd 2011, 09:14 PM
Yep. Our own faith is not sufficient to save us. Neither is our own works sufficient to save us. It is by God's grace that we get saved.

Actually, our own faith is God himself. Faith is God. Without faith we can do nothing, with faith all things are possible (It is written, "All things are possible for one who believes.” Mark 9:23 )

mailmandan
May 23rd 2011, 11:00 AM
The reason why I say faith needs works to live is because of this verse: "For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead. James 2:26 ". The faith is definitely the base out of which fruit forms, not vice versa. Otherwise this would contradict this verse: "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. Ephesians 2:8-9 " Our being saved is not a result of works; rather it is a result of faith which is proved to be genuine by the works that come out of it.

I agree with you David. I was just adding some clarification.

BadDog
May 23rd 2011, 11:56 AM
It must be then, that I know especially troubling people...
...Otherwise I do tend to conflate 'easy believism' and 'cheap grace'.
Athanasius,

Why use such pejorative language? It's essentially name-calling, if you think about it. Instead of using disparaging language, why not just point out the issues you have with their position? Do you not recognize that to refer to "faith alone in Christ alone" as "cheap grace" is offensive to everyone who has trusted in Christ to save them from their sins? BTW, it wasn't cheap for Jesus, so such is actually a knock on His work in our behalf as well. I take offense at such belittling of our Savior's work.

Did Jesus do all of the work on the cross when He died for us, or do we need to supplement it with works of our own, because it wasn't quite enough? I'm sure you do not think that way, so why refer to a belief that Jesus Christ did all the work needed as "cheap grace?" Am I required to pay in some manner for the grace in which I stand? If so, please give me chapter-verse to support such a position. If I pay nothing, then what's your point? Why when someone says that the gospel is free do people refer to that as "cheap grace" or "easy believism?" And if they do not follow up their faith in Christ with a lifestyle which meets the approval of some, why do some then say that they either never really trusted in Christ in the first place or otherwise refer to real faith as one that at the same time involves works? Do you not see that as works soteriology, whether intended as such or not?

Either we were saved by Christ's death on the cross in our behalf alone, or we've got to do something in addition to Christ's work on that cross. You can't have it both ways. Was His death sufficient or wasn't it? And let's not redefine faith in a faith-plus-works manner. Faith is simply believing that Christ's death for our sins paid the penalty. It is simply trusting in Him. No works. Period. We were saved "for" good works, but not in any way "by" them.

We need to be careful. In our desire to protect the body from those whose lifestyle is not that of walking in discipleship we can become guilty of turning grace into works--a far more serious error, don't you think? Do you understand why I take offense at such egregious language? Why assume that those who have a passion for the purity of the gospel are really just looking for an excuse to live however they want? Perhaps if you investigated those whose "cheap grace" doctrine you oppose you might even discover that some of them, amazing as that would seem, are living for Christ in just as Christ-centered and faithful a manner as yourself.

Let's focus on the issue and arguments alone, and not disparage those whose position with which we are not in agreement. I suggest that you explain the error you see in what you believe those who hold to "free grace" (how "easy believists" refer to themselves) teach. I suspect that much of what you believe they teach I myself, as an ardent "free grace" adherent, would say "nay," we do not believe or teach such.


Edited-added: Actually, I challenge any who are opposed to "free grace" soteriology to list the tenets of free grace that they oppose. I suspect it will be fun demonstrating that many of such are simply not what is taught by free grace soteriology. Incidentally, if there is a preferred way to refer to those who hold to "Lordship salvation" (the basic idea that we must make Christ Lord of our lives when we trust in Him or we are not saved-those who oppose "free grace"), let me know... wouldn't want to be offensive unintentionally.

Thx,

BD

shepherdsword
May 23rd 2011, 12:30 PM
Either we were saved by Christ's death on the cross in our behalf alone, or we've got to do something in addition to Christ's work on that cross. You can't have it both ways. Was His death sufficient or wasn't it? And let's not redefine faith in a faith-plus-works manner. Faith is simply believing that Christ's death for our sins paid the penalty. It is simply trusting in Him. No works. Period. We were saved "for" good works, but not in any way "by" them.

There is truth in what you say here. However,if we are simply trusting and believing in the way the scripture defines it then it will always produce works(love)
It is "faith plus works" in the sense that faith will always produce works. Works are the only way faith is validated. Abraham had faith before he was circumcised.He didn't stop there. He got circumcised. Circumcision didn't save him his faith did. However,his faith produced circumcision. This is explained very clearly by James

James 2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

Why? Because faith will always produce works.

We must be careful to not fall into this:

Jude 4 4For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

This is as bad as trying to be saved by our own righteousness.

BadDog
May 23rd 2011, 12:54 PM
There is truth in what you say here. However,if we are simply trusting and believing in the way the scripture defines it then it will always produce works(love)
It is "faith plus works" in the sense that faith will always produce works. Works are the only way faith is validated. Abraham had faith before he was circumcised.He didn't stop there. He got circumcised. Circumcision didn't save him his faith did. However,his faith produced circumcision. This is explained very clearly by James

James 2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

Why? Because faith will always produce works.

We must be careful to not fall into this:

Jude 4 4For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

This is as bad as trying to be saved by our own righteousness.
Thx Shepherd's word,

It would take some time to go over that text in James. I have done that on this forum on more than one occasion, though well over 5000 of my older posts have been archived and not really available anymore. But those are good texts to bring up. They do not relate to the "free grace" soteriology though, since again either we are saved by grace alone through faith alone, or we are not. What you are referring to is works which should naturally follow grace.

As soon as we require them to accompany salvation, we turn it into works. I posted Ephesians 2:8-10 earlier to show that the natural result of faith is works, and that was why we were regenerated in Christ.

Now if Abraham had not gotten circumcised, would that mean that his original faith had been invalid? I don't see that. It would demonstrate that he was having difficulty in trusting God at the time he was refusing to be circumcised. It would not mean that when he originally believed God and God reckoned him as righteous (Genesis 15:6 and quoted in James 2) as a result that this moment of faith was invalid.

Like I said, I have posted on the James 2 text and how it is often misunderstood in great detail. This is a bad time (this week) for me to do so now. But when I get a chance, I'll post on it again. If my previous numerous posts on this were still online here, I could just point you to them. Too bad. I go into detail and apply Greek grammar rules as part of the explanation, for example, as to why the text in 2:24 ("You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.") is misunderstood. The Greek word translated "only" there does not and simply cannot modify "faith," a noun. It is an adverb and must modify a verbal. My position is that it clearly modifies "justified." James was referring to two justifications, not two kinds of faith (one with works, and one without it). The text should be translated, so that this is more clear, something like, "You see that a man is justified by works and not only [justified] by faith." The Greek word is MONON, not MONOS. Thwere are no exceptions to this Greek rule, BTW. You can look that up. I asked this question in BGreek - an email chat group - several years ago, and it was acknowledged by one an all, including the well known moderator.

But I'll have to wait on this.

Incidentally, I read those posts online at that link you gave. Very interesting.

take care,

BD

BadDog
May 23rd 2011, 01:25 PM
OK, I found this paper I had written here at work, so I'll post it:

James 2:24 Addressed:
There are a lot of misunderstandings and confusion about James 2. Why even Martin Luther, who was an outstanding translator, had his issues with it, referring to it as a "straw epistle" meaning not that it was not legitimate scripture--was not part of the canon, but that it didn't have the force of Paul's letters, by comparison, in his opinion.

James 2:24 is typically translated "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone." The word "alone" is understood to be an adjective, modifying "faith." We will see that this is simply not possible grammatically.

Now the Greek for "alone/only" is either μόνος (MONOS) or μόνον (MONON). Here's that clause in Greek:

ὁρᾶτε ὅτι ἐξ ἔργων δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος καὶ οὐκ ἐκ πίστεως μόνον.

As you can see, it is μόνον (MONON), not μόνος (MONOS). MONOS is an adjective, but MONON is an adverb, meaning "only/alone." Yet most Bibles translate it as if it has adjectival force (or at least allowing that improper impression), "faith alone" or "only faith," indicating that it modifies "faith" (πίστεως - accusative [direct object] of πίστις). But any Greek lexicon will tell you that it's an adverb. Now an adverb simply cannot modify a noun - that requires an adjective. I took this up with the BGreek forum more than 7 years ago, to get their thoughts on this. They agreed with my assessment here. So "only"/"alone" simply cannot be modifying "faith" here. The often perceived thought there that this is talking about a justification which is by works plus faith and not by faith-alone is simply not possible. IMO the clause should be translated something like:

"You see that a man is justified by works and not only [justified] by faith."

IOW, I see MONON as modifying δικαιοῦται (present passive indicative of δικαιοω - "justified") and not "faith." And that makes a big difference in how we handle this sentence. BTW, there is never any exception to this adjective/adverb rule in NT Greek. That was one particular question I made to the group. I specifically asked them if there were exceptions to this rule. There are not. There are a couple of other ways to handle MONON, but it simply cannot be considered an adjective modifying PISTIS ("faith").

So my argument is that James is not talking about being justified by faith PLUS works, but he's talking about two kinds of justifications - one before God and another before man perhaps - but two justifications, not two kinds of faith. He is not saying that we are justified before God for eternal life by faith PLUS works - which would be a contradiction of Paul, of course. There are different ways that this is handled, BTW, besides my view. Some say that this is referring to a justification before both God and men, but by works, and it is not regarding eternal life, as well as a justification before God by faith only - for eternal life.

BTW, by my count there are 9 English translations that do translate MONON adverbially - which is correct. Seems to me that an adjectival form (MONOS) would have been required for it to be translated as "alone." I prefer "only" since that allows for its adverbial force to be more easily seen.

Sorry about getting so grammatical here, but this is one of those rare occasions in which a little Greek does make a difference in our understanding.

"You see that a man is justified by works and not only [justified] by faith."

There is no justification before God by faith plus works. Justification before God is by faith alone. Salvation is either by grace or by works... we cannot mix them:

Romans 11:6 Now if it is by grace, then it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace ceases to be grace.

We are saved by grace, through faith. It (this salvation) is a gift of God. It is not on the basis at all of our works. If it were, even a little, then grace ceases to be grace. OK, I've got a bunch of grading to do... gotta go!

BD

Uncle Bud
May 23rd 2011, 01:31 PM
To me, easy believism equals sinning religion.

shepherdsword
May 23rd 2011, 01:40 PM
OK, I found this paper I had written here at work, so I'll post it:

James 2:24 Addressed:
There are a lot of misunderstandings and confusion about James 2. Why even Martin Luther, who was an outstanding translator, had his issues with it, referring to it as a "straw epistle" meaning not that it was not legitimate scripture--was not part of the canon, but that it didn't have the force of Paul's letters, by comparison, in his opinion.

James 2:24 is typically translated "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone." The word "alone" is understood to be an adjective, modifying "faith." We will see that this is simply not possible grammatically.

Now the Greek for "alone/only" is either μόνος (MONOS) or μόνον (MONON). Here's that clause in Greek:

ὁρᾶτε ὅτι ἐξ ἔργων δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος καὶ οὐκ ἐκ πίστεως μόνον.

As you can see, it is μόνον (MONON), not μόνος (MONOS). MONOS is an adjective, but MONON is an adverb, meaning "only/alone." Yet most Bibles translate it as if it has adjectival force (or at least allowing that improper impression), "faith alone" or "only faith," indicating that it modifies "faith" (πίστεως - accusative [direct object] of πίστις). But any Greek lexicon will tell you that it's an adverb. Now an adverb simply cannot modify a noun - that requires an adjective. I took this up with the BGreek forum more than 7 years ago, to get their thoughts on this. They agreed with my assessment here. So "only"/"alone" simply cannot be modifying "faith" here. The often perceived thought there that this is talking about a justification which is by works plus faith and not by faith-alone is simply not possible. IMO the clause should be translated something like:

"You see that a man is justified by works and not only [justified] by faith."

IOW, I see MONON as modifying δικαιοῦται (present passive indicative of δικαιοω - "justified") and not "faith." And that makes a big difference in how we handle this sentence. BTW, there is never any exception to this adjective/adverb rule in NT Greek. That was one particular question I made to the group. I specifically asked them if there were exceptions to this rule. There are not. There are a couple of other ways to handle MONON, but it simply cannot be considered an adjective modifying PISTIS ("faith").

So my argument is that James is not talking about being justified by faith PLUS works, but he's talking about two kinds of justifications - one before God and another before man perhaps - but two justifications, not two kinds of faith. He is not saying that we are justified before God for eternal life by faith PLUS works - which would be a contradiction of Paul, of course. There are different ways that this is handled, BTW, besides my view. Some say that this is referring to a justification before both God and men, but by works, and it is not regarding eternal life, as well as a justification before God by faith only - for eternal life.

BTW, by my count there are 9 English translations that do translate MONON adverbially - which is correct. Seems to me that an adjectival form (MONOS) would have been required for it to be translated as "alone." I prefer "only" since that allows for its adverbial force to be more easily seen.

Sorry about getting so grammatical here, but this is one of those rare occasions in which a little Greek does make a difference in our understanding.

"You see that a man is justified by works and not only [justified] by faith."

There is no justification before God by faith plus works. Justification before God is by faith alone. Salvation is either by grace or by works... we cannot mix them:

Romans 11:6 Now if it is by grace, then it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace ceases to be grace.

We are saved by grace, through faith. It (this salvation) is a gift of God. It is not on the basis at all of our works. If it were, even a little, then grace ceases to be grace. OK, I've got a bunch of grading to do... gotta go!

BD


So my argument is that James is not talking about being justified by faith PLUS works, but he's talking about two kinds of justifications - one before God and another before man perhaps - but two justifications, not two kinds of faith. Let's look at the context of verse 24:

17Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
18Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
19Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
20But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
21Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
23And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
24Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

The context fully agrees with what I am saying. Faith is made perfect by performing. It is the litmus test. If there isn't a fulfilling of the commandment I say I believe in then I have the same kind of believing the demons have. Grace and Mercy are not the same thing. Grace is the enabling power that gives us the ability to walk out what we say we believe. If I am not walking in it it's because I do not really have faith in it. I would like to see,when you have more time,how you deal with this though. I enjoy many of your posts and have been persuaded by some to change my mind. I loved the way you validated the NKJV in an old KJV only thread a few years ago. I still hold to the superiority of Erasmus's received text but I can read any translation now without worrying that they were corrupted by conspiracy.
:lol:

BadDog
May 23rd 2011, 03:15 PM
Shepherd's Word,

It will be fun interacting with you on this difficult text. I've enjoyed how you've interacted with me here so far, and your post deserves more time - when I am able to do so.

But I do have confidence also that many Bible translations are good and useful. We all have our preferences, but those translators really poured themselves into their work. No conspiracy. I used to be a NKJV and Byzantine text (not quite the same as the Textus Receptus) guy, and IMO the best study Bible out there is the old Nelson (Earl Radmacher-editor) Study Bible. I still use it from time to time. I use The Apologetics Study Bible (HCSB) now. I am not overly concerned about the Byzantine Greek text, though I do believe that the Alexandrian text is closer to the originals.

Take care,

BD

BD

BadDog
May 23rd 2011, 03:27 PM
To me, easy believism equals sinning religion.

Gilligan,

Is it possible that you feel this way because you misunderstand what "free grace" ("easy believism") teaches?

BD

awestruckchild
May 23rd 2011, 03:47 PM
okay i didn't understand half of that...partly coz i was not concentrating...;)
um...Jesus forgives all our sins if we repent...but not just once...its an ongoing thing...not like a confession box...but just an ongoing prayer to the Lord, "Lord forgive me for..." or something like that...

Yes! It is ongoing. He leads us from glory to glory. He works in us to lead us to more and more holiness. He illuminates our path and shows us what is inside of us that we plaster over with fig leaves and false justifications. He gets us to repent of murder in our heart and the outside of the cup just becomes clean as well. This is the work of the Spirit which avails what the work of the flesh cannot.

You guys have all helped me so much in this thread. It is hard to pull both ends of the spectrum together into the correct middle so we have both aspects instead of just one. Sometimes it is just a matter of the ORDER that all of this happens in us. First, turn from our sin of unbelief and lean wholly on Him. Then, He guides us to more and more truth as we are able to bear it and fashions us more and more to the likeness of Jesus.

I keep thinking some man will come along one day and be able to lay it down on paper that this is a huge elephant that you cannot just rip a chunk of flesh off of and say it is the whole elephant. But if he did, how would that be each man following the Spirit? Dunno...

david
May 23rd 2011, 05:04 PM
Let's look at the context of verse 24:

17Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
18Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
19Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
20But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
21Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
23And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
24Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

The context fully agrees with what I am saying. Faith is made perfect by performing. It is the litmus test. If there isn't a fulfilling of the commandment I say I believe in then I have the same kind of believing the demons have. Grace and Mercy are not the same thing. Grace is the enabling power that gives us the ability to walk out what we say we believe. If I am not walking in it it's because I do not really have faith in it. I would like to see,when you have more time,how you deal with this though. I enjoy many of your posts and have been persuaded by some to change my mind. I loved the way you validated the NKJV in an old KJV only thread a few years ago. I still hold to the superiority of Erasmus's received text but I can read any translation now without worrying that they were corrupted by conspiracy.
:lol:

We are indeed justified by faith with works, otherwise we would be going against this scripture:
"You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Matthew 7:16 "

If people were justified by faith alone apart from works, then we would have no way to recognize trees by their fruits. But God made it so that we can be able to tell good tree from bad tree.

However, I still have hard time trying to understand this scripture:
"For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. Romans 10:10 "

This seems to mean that after just believing, you are justified. Or perhaps it means you are justified after confessing and believing? (We know that the confessing part is the "fruit of the lips (Hebrews 13:15).")

awestruckchild
May 23rd 2011, 06:13 PM
We are indeed justified by faith with works, otherwise we would be going against this scripture:
"You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Matthew 7:16 "

If people were justified by faith alone apart from works, then we would have no way to recognize trees by their fruits. But God made it so that we can be able to tell good tree from bad tree.

However, I still have hard time trying to understand this scripture:
"For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. Romans 10:10 "

This seems to mean that after just believing, you are justified. Or perhaps it means you are justified after confessing and believing? (We know that the confessing part is the "fruit of the lips (Hebrews 13:15).")

I always took it to mean this: We believe in our heart and are justified (because we believe in Jesus) and then with our mouth we agree and say, it is truth and so we are saved. We believe and agree is the way the Spirit seemed to explain it to me. Probably not the scholarship you were looking for, but that's me - unscholarly. :spin::spin:

david
May 23rd 2011, 06:18 PM
I always took it to mean this: We believe in our heart and are justified (because we believe in Jesus) and then with our mouth we agree and say, it is truth and so we are saved. We believe and agree is the way the Spirit seemed to explain it to me. Probably not the scholarship you were looking for, but that's me - unscholarly. :spin::spin:

Thanks, but I was trying to know why are we justified by faith alone according to Rom 10.10 if it says in a different place that we are justified by faith and works together in James 2.24.

You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. James 2:24
"For with the heart one believes and is justified... Romans 10.10"

I just can't reconcile these together.

Slug1
May 23rd 2011, 06:47 PM
Thanks, but I was trying to know why are we justified by faith alone according to Rom 10.10 if it says in a different place that we are justified by faith and works together in James 2.24.

You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. James 2:24
"For with the heart one believes and is justified... Romans 10.10"

I just can't reconcile these together.Seems that Romans is a step in understanding what faith is.

When you continue to read on in context of this message that Paul is bringing to us all, this becomes more clear.

As we get to verse 16-17 (Romans 10) we understand that the message of Christ, births "faith" in us as we hear the Gospel of Christ. Hearing is what births this faith and then "trusting" in Jesus as in "accepting" Him as their personal Savior, this is when we are saved.

Once this is complete (a step)... God will use them to do His work and this is when we get all this other scriptures to show us those who are saved in Christ... or those who say they are saved by a "belief" of Christ.

Seem there are many in the Body of Christ that believe of Christ and even serve God but it's by "their" way, and it's through their "churches" way, and through their "doctrine's" way, and through many other ways that is NOT through Jesus because they are not IN Christ.

That is why we are warned to test the spirits, that is why we will know a person who is IN Christ by the fruit.. ONLY God can produce HIS fruit through a Christian who is in Christ. All those other Christians out there doing what "they" want to do or all thos Christians out their defending their lack of fruit, the Bible is clear what they will hear at their judgment.

James explains what God is doing THROUGH those Christians IN Christ. He's doing MIGHTY works and these works can be silent (Prayer warriors) at one end and at the other end visibly miraculous. Much is done all in between and examples can go on forever but Jesus does a good job in summing it up about clothing, feeding, caring, for those who need this... but the work is of God and tests TRUE when the Spirit is tested and the fruit found good.

God does His work IN US and then or even WHILE He's doing this work in us, He's also doing work THROUGH us. James is all about the work He's doing THROUGH us. This can ONLY be done through Christians IN Christ and who's faith is true in Christ. Not some church, not any doctrine, not a religion, not any denomination in a religion... SIMPLY IN CHRIST ALONE!

I said "while" He's doing this work in us because we have John 15 that explains THAT He's constantly doing work in us as He's enabling us to accomplish MORE work that He'll do through us and by this work, He'll produce great amounts of fruit for His glory.

BroRog
May 23rd 2011, 07:21 PM
Thanks, but I was trying to know why are we justified by faith alone according to Rom 10.10 if it says in a different place that we are justified by faith and works together in James 2.24.

You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. James 2:24
"For with the heart one believes and is justified... Romans 10.10"

I just can't reconcile these together.Would it help to know that Paul and James are talking about different subjects to different groups of people? Paul is confronting those among the Jews who believe the only thing God wants is for the Jews to perform all of the prescribed rituals. In their mind, it doesn't matter if I love God or don't love God, have faith or don't have faith, all that matters is if I perform all the rituals, and keep all the holidays, which is what Paul means by "works". Paul is saying, "God is not granting justification on the basis of keeping the rules, he is granting justification on the basis that one has a broken and contrite heart; and for those folks who do, the premise that Jesus is the Christ, the one through whom God is granting reconciliation and forgiveness of sins makes sense and he or she believes it. This is why Paul says that Justification is by faith in Jesus Christ.

James on the other hand is dealing with some folks who merely claim to have faith. Anyone can claim to have faith, but whether that person actually has faith is the question. James says that unless he can see some evidence in a person's behavior that faith is present, he won't believe that person has faith. But the kind of evidence James is looking for is NOT a person's regular performance of rituals. He is looking for behaviors that demonstrate a person loves other believers. Does the one claiming to have faith help a brother or sister in need, giving them food and clothing when they need it? Or do they simply say, "be well, go in peace"?

Once we see that Paul and James are dealing with different problems in the church, we can draw conclusions from this broader perspective. Paul and James agree with each other. A person is not saved based on a routine keeping of rituals (what Paul calls "works") A person is saved based on his or her faith. But a claim to faith is not worth much if the faith isn't actually genuine. James wants to see some behavior that gives credence to a claim to faith. He wants to see those who claim to have faith act in loving ways toward other believers (what James calls "works".) The "works" James has in mind when he writes his letter are not the same "works" Paul has in mind when he writes his. James is talking about works of charity, and compassion; Paul is talking about religious rituals, which he calls "works of the law."

Slug1
May 23rd 2011, 07:25 PM
Question based on my last post.

Can a person who is a believer OF Christ and serves God, not through Christ but only through their church, religion, doctrine, by "their" knowledge etc... REALLY be able to "test" any fruit? How can they "test" the spirits IF, they are not in Christ?

Testing the spirits is spiritual in nature, the Holy Spirit GIVES illumination, He gives discernment to those IN Christ. He gives "understanding" of the Word of God.

So if a person in the Body of Christ is completely in the natural because they believe OF Christ and serve God the way MAN has told them to serve God... how do they NOW the FRUIT of God when it slaps them in the face?

RollTide21
May 23rd 2011, 07:32 PM
We are not saved by faith either. We are not save by faith or works. Read Ephesians 2:8-9 again.Grace through faith.

david
May 23rd 2011, 07:51 PM
Question based on my last post.

Can a person who is a believer OF Christ and serves God, not through Christ but only through their church, religion, doctrine, by "their" knowledge etc... REALLY be able to "test" any fruit? How can they "test" the spirits IF, they are not in Christ?

Testing the spirits is spiritual in nature, the Holy Spirit GIVES illumination, He gives discernment to those IN Christ. He gives "understanding" of the Word of God.

So if a person in the Body of Christ is completely in the natural because they believe OF Christ and serve God the way MAN has told them to serve God... how do they NOW the FRUIT of God when it slaps them in the face?

Well, we know that a good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and no bad tree can bear good fruit (Luke 6:43). We can tell the trees by their fruits (Matthew 7:20).

But here's where I get utterly confused as well. I don't know how we can discern between trees if even Paul kept doing evil (Romans 7:19).

awestruckchild
May 23rd 2011, 07:55 PM
Thanks, but I was trying to know why are we justified by faith alone according to Rom 10.10 if it says in a different place that we are justified by faith and works together in James 2.24.

You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. James 2:24
"For with the heart one believes and is justified... Romans 10.10"

I just can't reconcile these together.

oops. sorry. I took your post to mean you were having a problem with that verse you gave.

awestruckchild
May 23rd 2011, 08:02 PM
This falls under the experience part. I know the fruit of the Spirit in someone else by Holy Spirit attesting to me that they are speaking truth. It is the reaction (which admittedly may be given to me because I am weaker than some) that is the hair of my flesh standing up and it is more but that's the most...explainable part.
It's His voice for me/in me and it just speaks up when the truth is being spoken.

david
May 23rd 2011, 08:30 PM
Seems that Romans is a step in understanding what faith is.

When you continue to read on in context of this message that Paul is bringing to us all, this becomes more clear.

As we get to verse 16-17 (Romans 10) we understand that the message of Christ, births "faith" in us as we hear the Gospel of Christ. Hearing is what births this faith and then "trusting" in Jesus as in "accepting" Him as their personal Savior, this is when we are saved.

Once this is complete (a step)... God will use them to do His work and this is when we get all this other scriptures to show us those who are saved in Christ... or those who say they are saved by a "belief" of Christ.

Seem there are many in the Body of Christ that believe of Christ and even serve God but it's by "their" way, and it's through their "churches" way, and through their "doctrine's" way, and through many other ways that is NOT through Jesus because they are not IN Christ.

That is why we are warned to test the spirits, that is why we will know a person who is IN Christ by the fruit.. ONLY God can produce HIS fruit through a Christian who is in Christ. All those other Christians out there doing what "they" want to do or all thos Christians out their defending their lack of fruit, the Bible is clear what they will hear at their judgment.

James explains what God is doing THROUGH those Christians IN Christ. He's doing MIGHTY works and these works can be silent (Prayer warriors) at one end and at the other end visibly miraculous. Much is done all in between and examples can go on forever but Jesus does a good job in summing it up about clothing, feeding, caring, for those who need this... but the work is of God and tests TRUE when the Spirit is tested and the fruit found good.

God does His work IN US and then or even WHILE He's doing this work in us, He's also doing work THROUGH us. James is all about the work He's doing THROUGH us. This can ONLY be done through Christians IN Christ and who's faith is true in Christ. Not some church, not any doctrine, not a religion, not any denomination in a religion... SIMPLY IN CHRIST ALONE!

I said "while" He's doing this work in us because we have John 15 that explains THAT He's constantly doing work in us as He's enabling us to accomplish MORE work that He'll do through us and by this work, He'll produce great amounts of fruit for His glory.

So the hearing part is the having faith part and the trusting is the work part? Perhaps Rom 10.10 means that when one truly believes in their heart and puts their whole heart into faith in God, then that justifies the person.

david
May 23rd 2011, 08:33 PM
Would it help to know that Paul and James are talking about different subjects to different groups of people? Paul is confronting those among the Jews who believe the only thing God wants is for the Jews to perform all of the prescribed rituals. In their mind, it doesn't matter if I love God or don't love God, have faith or don't have faith, all that matters is if I perform all the rituals, and keep all the holidays, which is what Paul means by "works". Paul is saying, "God is not granting justification on the basis of keeping the rules, he is granting justification on the basis that one has a broken and contrite heart; and for those folks who do, the premise that Jesus is the Christ, the one through whom God is granting reconciliation and forgiveness of sins makes sense and he or she believes it. This is why Paul says that Justification is by faith in Jesus Christ.

James on the other hand is dealing with some folks who merely claim to have faith. Anyone can claim to have faith, but whether that person actually has faith is the question. James says that unless he can see some evidence in a person's behavior that faith is present, he won't believe that person has faith. But the kind of evidence James is looking for is NOT a person's regular performance of rituals. He is looking for behaviors that demonstrate a person loves other believers. Does the one claiming to have faith help a brother or sister in need, giving them food and clothing when they need it? Or do they simply say, "be well, go in peace"?

Once we see that Paul and James are dealing with different problems in the church, we can draw conclusions from this broader perspective. Paul and James agree with each other. A person is not saved based on a routine keeping of rituals (what Paul calls "works") A person is saved based on his or her faith. But a claim to faith is not worth much if the faith isn't actually genuine. James wants to see some behavior that gives credence to a claim to faith. He wants to see those who claim to have faith act in loving ways toward other believers (what James calls "works".) The "works" James has in mind when he writes his letter are not the same "works" Paul has in mind when he writes his. James is talking about works of charity, and compassion; Paul is talking about religious rituals, which he calls "works of the law."

Thanks, but would you say that Ephesians 2:9 is talking about works of the law or is it just any work? : "not a result of works, so that no one may boast. Ephesians 2:9 "

I would agree that works is the proof that faith exists. no work that demonstrates love for the believers, no proof that faith exists. just like how you can tell a tree by its fruit (Matthew 12:33).

I'm not quite sure what broken and contrite heart means. Does this mean that you must be broken in heart and contrite before believing into God as a requirement?

Slug1
May 23rd 2011, 08:42 PM
So the hearing part is the having faith part and the trusting is the work part? Perhaps Rom 10.10 means that when one truly believes in their heart and puts their whole heart into faith in God, then that justifies the person.Well, faith is not about an intellectual understanding but more an internal "trust" in Christ. There are many who KNOW more about Christ and they refuse to trust Jesus and will not accept Him as their Savior... so does their "superior" intellectual knowledge of the Bible and even their acknowledgment "OF" Christ... save them?

NO, it doesn't.

Yet a person who hears the Gospel, believes the Gospel and chooses to "trust" Jesus and then accepts Him as "their" Savior... this saves them. Their actual knowledge of scripture and even of God may be ZIP, ZILTCH, NADA... yet, by their faith and trust in God, He can use them to do a mighty WORK and glorify Himself through them. Guided by the Holy Spirit as they read and learn... their knowledge WILL increase and this knowledge will be augmented with experience.

Knowing all about scripture and all about God and all about Jesus... isn't always KNOWING Jesus. SPECIALLY if this knowledge is guided by their church, religion, doctrine and not by the Holy Spirit.

Then that person with all the knowledge will hem and haw that the WORK that God just did or has done or WILL do through them (that babe newly saved and fully trusting in God), won't save them and that works don't lead to salvation :rolleyes:

Sad thing is... some of these people are "amongst" the Body of Christ and wouldn't know a Good work of God if it slapped them in the face.

They don't realize that it's BECAUSE of that babe IN Christ, the salvation and because of that faith put into ACTION through the trust they have IN Christ... that God is doing WORK at all through them.

NO, the works don't LEAD to salvation... the work is a RESULT of salvation.

Then, when a testimony of the work that God is doing through any Christian is given... the hemming and hawing begins from those getting slapped in the face :lol:

notuptome
May 23rd 2011, 08:56 PM
Seems that Romans is a step in understanding what faith is.

When you continue to read on in context of this message that Paul is bringing to us all, this becomes more clear.

As we get to verse 16-17 (Romans 10) we understand that the message of Christ, births "faith" in us as we hear the Gospel of Christ. Hearing is what births this faith and then "trusting" in Jesus as in "accepting" Him as their personal Savior, this is when we are saved.

Once this is complete (a step)... God will use them to do His work and this is when we get all this other scriptures to show us those who are saved in Christ... or those who say they are saved by a "belief" of Christ.

Seem there are many in the Body of Christ that believe of Christ and even serve God but it's by "their" way, and it's through their "churches" way, and through their "doctrine's" way, and through many other ways that is NOT through Jesus because they are not IN Christ.

That is why we are warned to test the spirits, that is why we will know a person who is IN Christ by the fruit.. ONLY God can produce HIS fruit through a Christian who is in Christ. All those other Christians out there doing what "they" want to do or all thos Christians out their defending their lack of fruit, the Bible is clear what they will hear at their judgment.

James explains what God is doing THROUGH those Christians IN Christ. He's doing MIGHTY works and these works can be silent (Prayer warriors) at one end and at the other end visibly miraculous. Much is done all in between and examples can go on forever but Jesus does a good job in summing it up about clothing, feeding, caring, for those who need this... but the work is of God and tests TRUE when the Spirit is tested and the fruit found good.

God does His work IN US and then or even WHILE He's doing this work in us, He's also doing work THROUGH us. James is all about the work He's doing THROUGH us. This can ONLY be done through Christians IN Christ and who's faith is true in Christ. Not some church, not any doctrine, not a religion, not any denomination in a religion... SIMPLY IN CHRIST ALONE!

I said "while" He's doing this work in us because we have John 15 that explains THAT He's constantly doing work in us as He's enabling us to accomplish MORE work that He'll do through us and by this work, He'll produce great amounts of fruit for His glory.
In your understanding is there a difference between "fruit" and "works"? I ask because you seem to use them interchangably.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Bandit
May 23rd 2011, 08:57 PM
It must be then, that I know especially troubling people...
...Otherwise I do tend to conflate 'easy believism' and 'cheap grace'.


Athanasius,

Why use such pejorative language? It's essentially name-calling, if you think about it. Instead of using disparaging language, why not just point out the issues you have with their position? Do you not recognize that to refer to "faith alone in Christ alone" as "cheap grace" is offensive to everyone who has trusted in Christ to save them from their sins? ...

Hello BD,

I do not think Athanasius has used disparaging language: I think he is saying that 'easy believism' and 'cheap grace' are essentially equivalent terms. (They are interchangable as commonly used.) And I don't think Athanasius has said that "faith alone in Christ alone" and "cheap grace" are equivalent. I think this is more your position than his. I rather suspect that Athanasius does not see "faith alone in Christ alone" and "cheap grace" as idendical. I suspect he agrees with one and not the other, but his definitions of each may not be the same as yours. Please give him the chance to explain himself without attributing things to him which I do not believe he said.

awestruckchild
May 23rd 2011, 08:58 PM
I'm starting to think there are just some who struggle through a lot more before any internal part comes. They maybe stay a long time in the spot of knowing ABOUT God but not having met Him. Look at Job's struggles - with men AND with God - but in the end, he said: Before I had only heard about God but now I have seen Him with my own eyes! It seems like it was the struggle that helped to lead Him there. He had to kind of have two simultaneous battles going on : one with men who were giving him all the information he already knew but without giving him what his deep need was for, and another with God, struggling to get answers from HIM, not from men.
Kind of sad that there was no human - no spiritual mentor, other than men without the Spirit themselves.

Slug1
May 23rd 2011, 09:09 PM
In your understanding is there a difference between "fruit" and "works"? I ask because you seem to use them interchangably.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

The works that God does "through" a person MUST result in fruit. The purpose of this work is to produce fruit that GLORIFIES God. He is Glorifying Himself through the work HE has us do and in the fruit that is produced. Whether this fruit is "known" to man or not isn't what matters. Some will have spiritual results that man will never know or only LATER know... but God was still accomplishing something and fruit will BE a result of any work He does through us.

Take the thief on the cross... the work that God did through that man's faith and trust in accepting Jesus has been a mighty production of fruit... that man, those standing observing his death, nor many today, still don't see the fruit God produced through the work He did through that thief. Yet God still glorified Himself through that thief.

Is the work and the fruit as a result of that work that God does through any person who is saved... NOT interchangeable?

Are you implying that God will do a work and there is NO fruit? Will God produce fruit through a person having never done any "work" through them?

david
May 23rd 2011, 09:14 PM
The works that God does "through" a person MUST result in fruit. The purpose of this work is to produce fruit that GLORIFIES God. He is Glorifying Himself through the work HE has us do and in the fruit that is produced. Whether this fruit is "known" to man or not isn't what matters. Some will have spiritual results that man will never know but God was still accomplishing something and fruit will result of this.

Take the thief on the cross... the work that God did through that man's faith and trust in accepting Jesus has been a mighty production of fruit... that man, those standing observing his death, nor many today, still don't see the fruit God produced through the work He did through that thief.

Is the work and the fruit as a result of that work that God does through any person who is saved... NOT interchangeable?

I think work and fruit are both visible; there is no such thing as invisible fruit. Are you saying there are invisible fruits, and that only God can see those invisible ones? I doubt this is true; the Bible says we can "recognize them by their fruits (Matthew 7:20)."

Slug1
May 23rd 2011, 09:23 PM
I think work and fruit are both visible; there is no such thing as invisible fruit. Are you saying there are invisible fruits, and that only God can see those invisible ones? I doubt this is true; the Bible says we can "recognize them by their fruits (Matthew 7:20)."Correct. My example is of something not visible such as what God did through the thief, which may not be a good example of what I want to say. Anyway, we can recognize the fruit today because of our faith in God. Even today however, those not in Christ won't see this fruit that was produced by the work God did through that thief.

However, the scripture you bring forth is something to really talk about as well.

Which is why I asked in this thread or the other thread, if a work/fruit slapped them in the face... what recognition is there for a person who knows OF Christ and/or anyone IN Christ but their knowledge of God is guided by or led by their church, religion or doctrine?

Yes... for God to glorify Himself, the work/fruit MUST be visible and known.

RollTide21
May 23rd 2011, 09:27 PM
Well, we know that a good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and no bad tree can bear good fruit (Luke 6:43). We can tell the trees by their fruits (Matthew 7:20).

But here's where I get utterly confused as well. I don't know how we can discern between trees if even Paul kept doing evil (Romans 7:19).An interesting question.

First off, Matthew 7 and Romans 7 represent two different situations. The "tree" metaphor works in context with Matthew 7 because Jesus is talking specifically about false prophets. These are people who do not know Christ and are characterized as inwardly being "as ferocious wolves". These are contrasted with true disciples of Christ spreading the pure Gospel of Christ. Those who spread a false gospel cannot bear good fruit just as those who spread the pure gospel of Christ cannot bear bad fruit. The fruit, here, is perhaps not actions in or out of the flesh, but the results of their labors either spreading the false or the pure gospel.

Romans 7 is Paul's depiction of the struggle of flesh and Spirit that goes on in the life of the Believer in Christ. The battle between the New Nature in Christ and the old nature of the flesh is contextually different than the scenario presented in Matthew 7.

RollTide21
May 23rd 2011, 09:40 PM
I'm starting to think there are just some who struggle through a lot more before any internal part comes. They maybe stay a long time in the spot of knowing ABOUT God but not having met Him. Look at Job's struggles - with men AND with God - but in the end, he said: Before I had only heard about God but now I have seen Him with my own eyes! It seems like it was the struggle that helped to lead Him there. He had to kind of have two simultaneous battles going on : one with men who were giving him all the information he already knew but without giving him what his deep need was for, and another with God, struggling to get answers from HIM, not from men.
Kind of sad that there was no human - no spiritual mentor, other than men without the Spirit themselves.It's not that people don't know Him. Anyone who has received the Spirit of God through Faith in Christ knows God. The problem is that people don't know how to simply surrender to Him and walk by the Spirit. People don't understand the significance of the Spirit. They pay Him lip service, but don't understand that it is the very FOUNDATION of our Walk, and the New Testament writings base EVERYTHING on the power of the Spirit. It's a very simple concept, but so few Believers get it...including myself for many, many years.

I noticed this in Sunday School this past Sunday. We are doing a study on John's epistles and I noticed that we had a room full of true-hearted Believers that were filled with all these different philosophies on how WE are supposed to act, think, and respond and missed the entire BASIS on which we stand: the Power of God. We aren't saved by the Blood of Jesus just to fend for ourselves in this World. Christ sent His Spirit so that we would be empowered in Faith and led into His righteousness. That doesn't come from trying to "do the right thing". That comes from being led daily by the Spirit of God Himself. I'm not talking about Sunday morning "Spirit filled" theatrics (not detracting from that worship style...just emphasizing that this is not the only or even primary purpose of the Spirit). I'm talking about allowing the Spirit to transform our minds and hearts so that our every day life (decisions, thoughts, desires, etc.) is a reflection of Christ in us.

david
May 23rd 2011, 09:40 PM
Correct. My example is of something not visible such as what God did through the thief, which may not be a good example of what I want to say. Anyway, we can recognize the fruit today because of our faith in God. Even today however, those not in Christ won't see this fruit that was produced by the work God did through that thief.

However, the scripture you bring forth is something to really talk about as well.

Which is why I asked in this thread or the other thread, if a work/fruit slapped them in the face... what recognition is there for a person who knows OF Christ and/or anyone IN Christ but their knowledge of God is guided by or led by their church, religion or doctrine?

Yes... for God to glorify Himself, the work/fruit MUST be visible and known.

Well, I think everyone, either believer or nonbeliever, has the ability to recognize trees by their fruits. We're all given the sense that allows us to experience love through visible fruits. It says if you feed your enemy while they are hungry, you create an effect on them (Romans 12:20).

If Jesus prophesied that he would die, and then later on he didn't die, except to die in his Spirit, who would be able to witness his death? His death had to be a visible thing to see. But then again I don't know; we may have that 6th sense to sense certain fruits that are not sensed physically.

RollTide21
May 23rd 2011, 09:41 PM
I think work and fruit are both visible; there is no such thing as invisible fruit. Are you saying there are invisible fruits, and that only God can see those invisible ones? I doubt this is true; the Bible says we can "recognize them by their fruits (Matthew 7:20)."But that is in the context of true disciples and false prophets.

david
May 23rd 2011, 09:42 PM
An interesting question.

First off, Matthew 7 and Romans 7 represent two different situations. The "tree" metaphor works in context with Matthew 7 because Jesus is talking specifically about false prophets. These are people who do not know Christ and are characterized as inwardly being "as ferocious wolves". These are contrasted with true disciples of Christ spreading the pure Gospel of Christ. Those who spread a false gospel cannot bear good fruit just as those who spread the pure gospel of Christ cannot bear bad fruit. The fruit, here, is perhaps not actions in or out of the flesh, but the results of their labors either spreading the false or the pure gospel.

Romans 7 is Paul's depiction of the struggle of flesh and Spirit that goes on in the life of the Believer in Christ. The battle between the New Nature in Christ and the old nature of the flesh is contextually different than the scenario presented in Matthew 7.

So everyone who is not a false prophet is a good tree and everyone who is a false prophet is a bad tree? That is, every person whose religion that is not Christianity is a bad tree?

notuptome
May 23rd 2011, 09:47 PM
The works that God does "through" a person MUST result in fruit. The purpose of this work is to produce fruit that GLORIFIES God. He is Glorifying Himself through the work HE has us do and in the fruit that is produced. Whether this fruit is "known" to man or not isn't what matters. Some will have spiritual results that man will never know or only LATER know... but God was still accomplishing something and fruit will BE a result of any work He does through us.

Take the thief on the cross... the work that God did through that man's faith and trust in accepting Jesus has been a mighty production of fruit... that man, those standing observing his death, nor many today, still don't see the fruit God produced through the work He did through that thief. Yet God still glorified Himself through that thief.

Is the work and the fruit as a result of that work that God does through any person who is saved... NOT interchangeable?

Are you implying that God will do a work and there is NO fruit? Will God produce fruit through a person having never done any "work" through them?
Well it is still not clear. The scripture says that the "fruit" of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, meekness, self-control. I do not see any works here at all. Gal 5:22-23

The work that Jesus came to do was to declare the word of God to Israel. To preach the kingdom of God.

Martha was producing "fruit" or maybe more accurately having fruit produced in her and Mary was doing "works"?

Man was created to love God and God made man the object of His love. Fruit or works?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

RollTide21
May 23rd 2011, 09:50 PM
So everyone who is not a false prophet is a good tree and everyone who is a false prophet is a bad tree?No. I think that false prophets spewing heresy bear bad fruit and true disciples of Christ spreading the pure gospel bear good fruit.

My point was that the bad fruit Jesus is talking about here is the bad fruit being produced by charlatans. I don't know that we necessarily can use this verse to demonstrate Jesus's instruction on a Believer in Him's actions. I think Galatians chapter 5 addresses that perfectly, though. Jesus no doubt understood the Fruits of the Spirit, but I just think he may not have been referring to that, specifically, in that passage in Matthew.

david
May 23rd 2011, 09:59 PM
Well it is still not clear. The scripture says that the "fruit" of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, meekness, self-control. I do not see any works here at all. Gal 5:22-23

The work that Jesus came to do was to declare the word of God to Israel. To preach the kingdom of God.

Martha was producing "fruit" or maybe more accurately having fruit produced in her and Mary was doing "works"?

Man was created to love God and God made man the object of His love. Fruit or works?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

I don't know, but what do you think of this verse: "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.” John 6:29

This verse seems to say that our faith is God's work. So faith is a work?

Slug1
May 23rd 2011, 10:00 PM
Well it is still not clear. The scripture says that the "fruit" of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, meekness, self-control. I do not see any works here at all. Gal 5:22-23

The work that Jesus came to do was to declare the word of God to Israel. To preach the kingdom of God.

Martha was producing "fruit" or maybe more accurately having fruit produced in her and Mary was doing "works"?

Man was created to love God and God made man the object of His love. Fruit or works?

For the cause of Christ
RogerWell... the discussion revolved around the scriptures from James and what James was talking about as "work" which is the result of faith.

I know that "fruit" of the Holy Spirit is as you stated from the Gal 5:22-23. Again, we're discussing WORK as in, God will use our faith and DO His work through us. So, to divide this we have to use the proper scriptures about work and that is in John 15. God can't produce this fruit through people who won't work.

So, sure... the fruit of the Holy Spirit is what you brought forth. This is about the WORK that God does IN a person and the fruit of this is all the examples of that scripture.

The works we're talking about is those that God does THROUGH a person and the fruit of this type of work, not the work He does IN a person and the fruit of this internal changes we experience as we become more Christ like.

notuptome
May 23rd 2011, 10:43 PM
Well... the discussion revolved around the scriptures from James and what James was talking about as "work" which is the result of faith.
Yes well James is certainly arguing for justification before men through works of righteousness while Paul argues justification before God through grace. Faith is given us by God. We live by the faith of Christ. Men are faithless, Christ is faithful.

I know that "fruit" of the Holy Spirit is as you stated from the Gal 5:22-23. Again, we're discussing WORK as in, God will use our faith and DO His work through us. So, to divide this we have to use the proper scriptures about work and that is in John 15. God can't produce this fruit through people who won't work.
These works which you stress are of limited benefit. God produces fruit in the heart before men work in the body. If men place the efforts of the earthy tabernacle above the ministering of the Spirit in the heart they are out of order. BBQing a burger can be a work of righteousness in the heart of the doer is working heartily as unto the Lord. A "faith healer" can be working in the strength of his flesh and familiar spirits not God. Yet men will judge one better than the other and incorrectly judge.

So, sure... the fruit of the Holy Spirit is what you brought forth. This is about the WORK that God does IN a person and the fruit of this is all the examples of that scripture.
OK now don't lose that in your thinking. God produces fruit of the Spirit in the heart of the believer.

The works we're talking about is those that God does THROUGH a person and the fruit of this type of work, not the work He does IN a person and the fruit of this internal changes we experience as we become more Christ like.
Believers are commanded to work. The first work is to love one another as we love Christ. This we do because of the fruit of the Spirit in our heart. From this goes forth all the other works. We witness of the saving grace of Christ because we love Him and want to see others saved. We care for the poor and needy because we love Christ. We walk in paths of righteousness because we love Christ and He is pure, holy and righteous. We do heartily all that we do because we love the Lord Jesus Christ.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

BroRog
May 23rd 2011, 10:46 PM
This falls under the experience part. I know the fruit of the Spirit in someone else by Holy Spirit attesting to me that they are speaking truth. It is the reaction (which admittedly may be given to me because I am weaker than some) that is the hair of my flesh standing up and it is more but that's the most...explainable part.
It's His voice for me/in me and it just speaks up when the truth is being spoken.So you recognize the truth when you get goose bumbs? And you think goose bumps is the Holy Spirit speaking to you?

Slug1
May 23rd 2011, 10:49 PM
These works which you stress are of limited benefit. When a person reads the Bible they will see that James SURE did as He was led by the Holy Spirit to stress it.

It's not works that "I" stress that you always say. God says and we understand this as He used James to give us this understanding.

The only reason I say what I say is because God already said it.

notuptome
May 23rd 2011, 10:50 PM
I don't know, but what do you think of this verse: "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.” John 6:29

This verse seems to say that our faith is God's work. So faith is a work?
Our faith certainly is given us by God. His Spirit working throught His word produces the faith we need to receive His grace. God gives faith to all men. John 1:9 Now not all men will respond in the positive to God. John 3:19

Faith is not our work.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Slug1
May 23rd 2011, 10:52 PM
Believers are commanded to work. The first work is to love one another as we love Christ. This we do because of the fruit of the Spirit in our heart. From this goes forth all the other works. We witness of the saving grace of Christ because we love Him and want to see others saved. We care for the poor and needy because we love Christ. We walk in paths of righteousness because we love Christ and He is pure, holy and righteous. We do heartily all that we do because we love the Lord Jesus Christ.

For the cause of Christ
RogerYes... "WE" do all that as God leads us, Hooah!

Why is it when God leads us to do work that you are not led to do... you have such a problem with this work of God that you actually speak against the work that God is doing through others?

bob
May 23rd 2011, 10:53 PM
Our faith certainly is given us by God. His Spirit working throught His word produces the faith we need to receive His grace. God gives faith to all men. John 1:9 Now not all men will respond in the positive to God. John 3:19

Faith is not our work.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

In light of 2nd Thes 3:2 "And that we may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked men: for all men have not faith." I don't understand how all men have faith.

BroRog
May 23rd 2011, 11:02 PM
Thanks, but would you say that Ephesians 2:9 is talking about works of the law or is it just any work? : "not a result of works, so that no one may boast. Ephesians 2:9 "

I would agree that works is the proof that faith exists. no work that demonstrates love for the believers, no proof that faith exists. just like how you can tell a tree by its fruit (Matthew 12:33).

I'm not quite sure what broken and contrite heart means. Does this mean that you must be broken in heart and contrite before believing into God as a requirement?Yes, even here in Ephesians 2:9, I believe Paul is taking about religious ritual. God is not really favorable to religion. We tend to think that if we do a bunch of religious practices that we will gain God's favor. Even Christians fall into this trap. The Jews had their religious rituals such as the animal sacrifices, wearing special clothes, wearing special prayer boxes, regular prayers, special festivals, etc. All of these things fall under "works of the law" and Paul is saying, "look, doing that stuff doesn't impress God. He is looking at the heart." The Christians have different rituals but the point remains the same. We think God is impressed if we faithfully go to church three times a week, read our Bible regularly, pray for an hour each morning (the more the better), tithe, wash each others feet, take communion or the eucharist, sing hymns, watch Christian movies, listen to Christian music, smoke Christian smokes, have Christian experiences, etc. We think, "God must be pretty impressed with me because I do all the Christian stuff Christians do." But Paul would say, "No, God is not impressed with your religion. He could care less if you tithe, pray, read your Bible, or have "experiences". We are not saved by doing all that stuff. Christian rituals are no more effective than Jewish rituals.

notuptome
May 23rd 2011, 11:08 PM
When a person reads the Bible they will see that James SURE did as He was led by the Holy Spirit to stress it.
James is teaching practical Christian living. James takes the teachings of Paul on justification and makes them practical for the everyday application of the believer. James assumes that the reader knows that before God they are justified by grace. James teaches that the conduct of the believer underscores his belief in Gods grace. If one professes to believe in Christ but does not love his brother or does not tell others of their need to be saved then men will question what he believes.

It's not works that "I" stress that you always say. God says and we understand this as He used James to give us this understanding.

The only reason I say what I say is because God already said it.
Jesus Himself said that even though men had seen Him do miracles (works, yea mighty works) they still did not believe. The twelve disciples saw Christ and said they loved Him but when He was arrested they deserted Him.

Rom 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deed of the law.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

notuptome
May 23rd 2011, 11:21 PM
Yes... "WE" do all that as God leads us, Hooah!

Why is it when God leads us to do work that you are not led to do... you have such a problem with this work of God that you actually speak against the work that God is doing through others?
I'm trying to get you to establish a biblical basis for what you claim to do. You appear to be focused on doing things that detract from what God commanded us to do. Mary was very busy and she was not doing anything wrong but what she was doing was taking away her time from Christ.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

notuptome
May 23rd 2011, 11:30 PM
In light of 2nd Thes 3:2 "And that we may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked men: for all men have not faith." I don't understand how all men have faith.
Read John 3:19-21 These did not come to the light but turned back to the darkness because they chose their sin over Gods righteousness.

The verse does not say that they never had faith only that now they are unreasonable and wicked. In verse one Paul is asking that the word of God may have free course. He is asking that God will bless the proclaimation of His word and men will respond to it unto eternal life as it had in the Thessalonians.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Slug1
May 23rd 2011, 11:34 PM
I'm trying to get you to establish a biblical basis for what you claim to do. You appear to be focused on doing things that detract from what God commanded us to do. Mary was very busy and she was not doing anything wrong but what she was doing was taking away her time from Christ.

For the cause of Christ
RogerIf the point you are making concerns the work that Christ must do IN us... ok.

Martha was the one distracted, not Mary ;)

Slug1
May 23rd 2011, 11:37 PM
James is teaching practical Christian living. James takes the teachings of Paul on justification and makes them practical for the everyday application of the believer. James assumes that the reader knows that before God they are justified by grace. James teaches that the conduct of the believer underscores his belief in Gods grace. If one professes to believe in Christ but does not love his brother or does not tell others of their need to be saved then men will question what he believes.

Jesus Himself said that even though men had seen Him do miracles (works, yea mighty works) they still did not believe. The twelve disciples saw Christ and said they loved Him but when He was arrested they deserted Him.

Rom 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deed of the law.

For the cause of Christ
RogerOK... but we're talking about the works that God will do through us. You always attempt to turn this around as if God will never do work through us. It's as if the work God does through us is unimportant to you.

Anyway... concerning this work that God will do through us, some of this will be greater than what He did through His Son: John 14:12 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father.

shepherdsword
May 24th 2011, 12:05 AM
Quote Originally Posted by notuptome View Post
Believers are commanded to work. The first work is to love one another as we love Christ. This we do because of the fruit of the Spirit in our heart. From this goes forth all the other works. We witness of the saving grace of Christ because we love Him and want to see others saved. We care for the poor and needy because we love Christ. We walk in paths of righteousness because we love Christ and He is pure, holy and righteous. We do heartily all that we do because we love the Lord Jesus Christ.

For the cause of Christ
RogerAmen. You see for me just being forgiven isn't enough. I want to have a good testimony. I want to be a light in a darkened world. I want the love of God flow from me into those who feel unworthy of ever being loved.I know my works cannot save me. I am corrupt and vile. BUT I am trusting in Jesus to transform me,to make me a loving and sensitive person.Someone who can offer wise advice from the Spirit and not just blurt out a bunch of cliche knowledge. A person who can have compassion on those in bondage to evil and are therefore evil.I have faith that the Holy Spirit will produce this love in me because I am covered by the blood of Jesus. When I say "works" I am only talking about love. All the rest of the fruits of the spirit derive from that.The fruit of love seems to me like an orange. The whole fruit is love but there are many sections that give different delights. Jesus IS my personal savior but I long for a corporate salvation as well.Think about the power we would have if we all walked in sacrificial love. Didn't he say "all men will know you are my disciples by your love for one another"
Brothers,we are living stones being built together for a habitation of his Spirit. When this living temple is completed the Glory will be unparallelled. If the priests could not stand to minister because of the glory that fell when Solomon's temple was completed then what will be the result of the Glory that falls when the REAL temple is completed? This is why I say our faith must produce something,something the world can see. We are told in Ephesians that it is God's eternal purpose to demonstrate his manifold wisdom through the church to the angelic ruling powers. Simple forgiveness without any real transformation cannot produce this.

notuptome
May 24th 2011, 12:32 AM
OK... but we're talking about the works that God will do through us. You always attempt to turn this around as if God will never do work through us. It's as if the work God does through us is unimportant to you.

Anyway... concerning this work that God will do through us, some of this will be greater than what He did through His Son: John 14:12 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father.
How do you purpose to define "greater works than I do"?

How do you rank the importance of the "work God does through us"? Which "works" are most important and which are least important?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

notuptome
May 24th 2011, 12:35 AM
Amen. You see for me just being forgiven isn't enough. I want to have a good testimony. I want to be a light in a darkened world. I want the love of God flow from me into those who feel unworthy of ever being loved.I know my works cannot save me. I am corrupt and vile. BUT I am trusting in Jesus to transform me,to make me a loving and sensitive person.Someone who can offer wise advice from the Spirit and not just blurt out a bunch of cliche knowledge. A person who can have compassion on those in bondage to evil and are therefore evil.I have faith that the Holy Spirit will produce this love in me because I am covered by the blood of Jesus. When I say "works" I am only talking about love. All the rest of the fruits of the spirit derive from that.The fruit of love seems to me like an orange. The whole fruit is love but there are many sections that give different delights. Jesus IS my personal savior but I long for a corporate salvation as well.Think about the power we would have if we all walked in sacrificial love. Didn't he say "all men will know you are my disciples by your love for one another"
Brothers,we are living stones being built together for a habitation of his Spirit. When this living temple is completed the Glory will be unparallelled. If the priests could not stand to minister because of the glory that fell when Solomon's temple was completed then what will be the result of the Glory that falls when the REAL temple is completed? This is why I say our faith must produce something,something the world can see. We are told in Ephesians that it is God's eternal purpose to demonstrate his manifold wisdom through the church to the angelic ruling powers. Simple forgiveness without any real transformation cannot produce this.
Where do you find corporate salvation in the bible?

How does one obtain real transformation?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

david
May 24th 2011, 12:38 AM
Amen. You see for me just being forgiven isn't enough. I want to have a good testimony. I want to be a light in a darkened world. I want the love of God flow from me into those who feel unworthy of ever being loved.I know my works cannot save me. I am corrupt and vile. BUT I am trusting in Jesus to transform me,to make me a loving and sensitive person.Someone who can offer wise advice from the Spirit and not just blurt out a bunch of cliche knowledge. A person who can have compassion on those in bondage to evil and are therefore evil.I have faith that the Holy Spirit will produce this love in me because I am covered by the blood of Jesus. When I say "works" I am only talking about love. All the rest of the fruits of the spirit derive from that.The fruit of love seems to me like an orange. The whole fruit is love but there are many sections that give different delights. Jesus IS my personal savior but I long for a corporate salvation as well.Think about the power we would have if we all walked in sacrificial love. Didn't he say "all men will know you are my disciples by your love for one another"
Brothers,we are living stones being built together for a habitation of his Spirit. When this living temple is completed the Glory will be unparallelled. If the priests could not stand to minister because of the glory that fell when Solomon's temple was completed then what will be the result of the Glory that falls when the REAL temple is completed? This is why I say our faith must produce something,something the world can see. We are told in Ephesians that it is God's eternal purpose to demonstrate his manifold wisdom through the church to the angelic ruling powers. Simple forgiveness without any real transformation cannot produce this.

Amen. Someone said "if we are freed from the law why do we still uphold it?" It is because we love God.
Another said "Too many followers of religion get lost in the details of their particular belief. Maybe the constant is love and the rest of it you can let go of." The constant is indeed love, and the rest indeed we can let go.

Love is everything and love is God himself. The rest we can let go of.

notuptome
May 24th 2011, 12:43 AM
If the point you are making concerns the work that Christ must do IN us... ok.
Tell me what is this "work" Christ must do in us?

Martha was the one distracted, not Mary ;)
You are correct I got'em backwards. Now which one do you think was faithful? Which one was doing the right thing?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

shepherdsword
May 24th 2011, 12:53 AM
Where do you find corporate salvation in the bible?

How does one obtain real transformation?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

It is implied by it's opposite. The church at one time was in unity. One city,one church. Acts says they turned the whole world upside down.When is the last time you heard of a church turning the world upside down?This divided group of different sects we call the church is in desperate need of salvation. Salvation from what? From the mockery and the shame and the lack of love that is being demonstrated.Salvation so that the prayer of John 17 might be answered "Father may they be one as we are one"

I believe real transformation comes through the trying of our faith:

James 1 2My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;
3Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience.
4But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.

faith in the promises of God

2Peter 1
4Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

through dying to self:

Gal 2
20I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

and how about "the renewing of the mind"

notuptome
May 24th 2011, 12:58 AM
It is implied by it's opposite. The church at one time was in unity. One city,one church. Acts says they turned the whole world upside down.When is the last time you heard of a church turning the world upside down?This divided group of different sects we call the church is in desperate need of salvation. Salvation from what? From the mockery and the shame and the lack of love that is being demonstrated.Salvation so that the prayer of John 17 might be answered "Father may they be one as we are one"
Seems like any unity did not last long. By Acts 5 there were some that were not with the program in the fullest. Ananias and Sapphira.

I believe real transformation comes through the trying of our faith:

James 1 2My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;
3Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience.
4But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.

faith in the promises of God

2Peter 1
4Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

through dying to self:

Gal 2
20I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
Well I'm going to go with 2 Cor 5:17 That describes transformation what you are describing is sanctification.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

awestruckchild
May 24th 2011, 01:08 AM
Well... the discussion revolved around the scriptures from James and what James was talking about as "work" which is the result of faith.

I know that "fruit" of the Holy Spirit is as you stated from the Gal 5:22-23. Again, we're discussing WORK as in, God will use our faith and DO His work through us. So, to divide this we have to use the proper scriptures about work and that is in John 15. God can't produce this fruit through people who won't work.

So, sure... the fruit of the Holy Spirit is what you brought forth. This is about the WORK that God does IN a person and the fruit of this is all the examples of that scripture.

The works we're talking about is those that God does THROUGH a person and the fruit of this type of work, not the work He does IN a person and the fruit of this internal changes we experience as we become more Christ like.

Ah, I see. You are talking about the fruit that is us reflecting His character vs. the good works He has prepared for us to do.

awestruckchild
May 24th 2011, 01:16 AM
It's not that people don't know Him. Anyone who has received the Spirit of God through Faith in Christ knows God. The problem is that people don't know how to simply surrender to Him and walk by the Spirit. People don't understand the significance of the Spirit. They pay Him lip service, but don't understand that it is the very FOUNDATION of our Walk, and the New Testament writings base EVERYTHING on the power of the Spirit. It's a very simple concept, but so few Believers get it...including myself for many, many years.

I noticed this in Sunday School this past Sunday. We are doing a study on John's epistles and I noticed that we had a room full of true-hearted Believers that were filled with all these different philosophies on how WE are supposed to act, think, and respond and missed the entire BASIS on which we stand: the Power of God. We aren't saved by the Blood of Jesus just to fend for ourselves in this World. Christ sent His Spirit so that we would be empowered in Faith and led into His righteousness. That doesn't come from trying to "do the right thing". That comes from being led daily by the Spirit of God Himself. I'm not talking about Sunday morning "Spirit filled" theatrics (not detracting from that worship style...just emphasizing that this is not the only or even primary purpose of the Spirit). I'm talking about allowing the Spirit to transform our minds and hearts so that our every day life (decisions, thoughts, desires, etc.) is a reflection of Christ in us.

I agree!! Completely!!!
With all of the discussions and long drawn out picking apart of scripture (not that I haven't learned a LOT from you guys in here in this manner), it seems the FIRST question in my mind concerning anyone is not what's your theology, denomination, endtimes view, etc., but is instead, have you received the Holy Spirit? Do you know His voice? It is really the only important thing to me. Because if they have God's Spirit and learn to follow His voice in them, THEN they will be safe when they talk about and read differing views on theological differences. Even if they DO get a little sideways on something, He won't leave them long in the error.

david
May 24th 2011, 01:18 AM
I agree!! Completely!!!
With all of the discussions and long drawn out picking apart of scripture (not that I haven't learned a LOT from you guys in here in this manner), it seems the FIRST question in my mind concerning anyone is not what's your theology, denomination, endtimes view, etc., but is instead, have you received the Holy Spirit? Do you know His voice? It is really the only important thing to me. Because if they have God's Spirit and learn to follow His voice in them, THEN they will be safe when they talk about and read differing views on theological differences. Even if they DO get a little sideways on something, He won't leave them long in the error.

Well, when I smell evil, I know it's evil, and when I smell good, I know it's good. My conscience somewhat directs me in this way. It tells me what is right and what is wrong. But sometimes you may lack a feeling for right and wrong, and these cases you have be extra prudent and be faithful to the word of God and deny even yourself at times.

awestruckchild
May 24th 2011, 01:38 AM
Well, when I smell evil, I know it's evil, and when I smell good, I know it's good. My conscience somewhat directs me in this way. It tells me what is right and what is wrong. But sometimes you may lack a feeling for right and wrong, and these cases you have be extra prudent and be faithful to the word of God and deny even yourself at times.

Yes, our conscience somewhat does guide us in this, seeing evil or good.(It is the grey areas we most have the problems with. Not Hitler vs. Teresa but some example less pronounced) Though sometimes someone will seem to have almost no ability in conscience.
But truthfully, I'm not talking so much about what I see in others. I can usually pick up ANY little fault in them.
It is in myself that I seem to have a problem with this. I quite often DO lack a feeling of right or wrong in my own man. Or maybe what I mean to say is that I am capable of the most hideous amount of leeway and excuses for myself that I do not give to others.

I do not mean to imply that I don't closely and incessantly read my bible and am not at all guided by it. It is just that I have to rely on God's Spirit FIRST because I can be understanding a verse incorrectly and wouldn't even know it till He shows me it's meaning.

mailmandan
May 24th 2011, 11:20 AM
However, I still have hard time trying to understand this scripture:
"For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. Romans 10:10 "

This seems to mean that after just believing, you are justified. Or perhaps it means you are justified after confessing and believing? (We know that the confessing part is the "fruit of the lips (Hebrews 13:15).")

In Romans 10:9-10, the word "confess" means to acknowledge or agree. It often involves what is expressed with the mouth or at least with the mind (not everyone can speak). A belief that is genuine is marked by confession. A confession that is true reflects saving faith. Confession with the mouth and belief in the heart refer to the believer's outward and inward responses. Inward conviction finds outward expression, not as a work for salvation but as an expression of saving faith. Notice in 1 Corinthians 12:3, "...no one can say that Jesus is Lord except BY the Holy Spirit, not as an additional requirement to receive the Holy Spirit and become saved after we place our faith in Christ for salvation. The reason that we will be saved if we confess is because we have faith and we have the Holy Spirit. That is the whole point. What about someone who is unable to speak? How can they "confess with their mouth?" Such a person would remain lost if confessing with the mouth was an additional requirement to become saved after faith. It's not the confession "in of itself" that saves us as an additional requirement after faith, it's the faith behind the confession. Faith and confession are not two separate steps to salvation. They are chronologically together.

awestruckchild
May 24th 2011, 01:21 PM
In Romans 10:9-10, the word "confess" means to acknowledge or agree. It often involves what is expressed with the mouth or at least with the mind (not everyone can speak). A belief that is genuine is marked by confession. A confession that is true reflects saving faith. Confession with the mouth and belief in the heart refer to the believer's outward and inward responses. Inward conviction finds outward expression, not as a work for salvation but as an expression of saving faith. Notice in 1 Corinthians 12:3, "...no one can say that Jesus is Lord except BY the Holy Spirit, not as an additional requirement to receive the Holy Spirit and become saved after we place our faith in Christ for salvation. The reason that we will be saved if we confess is because we have faith and we have the Holy Spirit. That is the whole point. What about someone who is unable to speak? How can they "confess with their mouth?" Such a person would remain lost if confessing with the mouth was an additional requirement to become saved after faith. It's not the confession "in of itself" that saves us as an additional requirement after faith, it's the faith behind the confession. Faith and confession are not two separate steps to salvation. They are chronologically together.

Oh lol, mailman-
I posted that too that it means we "agree" and then david said he was NOT confused about that verse. I thought, like you , he was saying he didn't understand it but apparently he was not saying that. If you figure out what he was asking, let me in on it too! :hmm:

RollTide21
May 24th 2011, 01:56 PM
Well, when I smell evil, I know it's evil, and when I smell good, I know it's good. My conscience somewhat directs me in this way. It tells me what is right and what is wrong.Your conscience is in perfect harmony with the Holy Spirit if you are walking in Christ. The Spirit is the source of our convictions.
But sometimes you may lack a feeling for right and wrong, and these cases you have be extra prudent and be faithful to the word of God and deny even yourself at times.Here is where I think people misunderstand. Walking in the Spirit is not about having a "feeling". When we surrender ourselves to Him and seek Him daily, He leads us in our very thoughts. We don't have to have some miraculous "feeling" to determine right and wrong. When we are being led by the Spirit, what WE decide will be perfectly in step with what the Spirit leads.

That is the wonderful freedom we have in Christ. All the preaching that Paul and the Disciples did about freedom from the Law in Christ is about this Truth. The Spirit leads us into all righteousness without the rigid structure of a Law. The Law of Moses is for condemnation of those who live by the efforts of the flesh. The Law of Christ is kept by the Holy Spirit working within us.

Our job is to keep our eyes on Him and not let our flesh Nature...which is still there and constantly being exploited by the Enemy...interfere with our Walk in the Spirit.

***Edit to add***
You mentioned being in the word of God and I didn't address that. I don't want to give the impression that I think Scripture is not important. I think that one of the key components of seeking God daily is through Scripture. He certainly reveals Himself in mighty ways through Scripture.

awestruckchild
May 24th 2011, 02:46 PM
Your conscience is in perfect harmony with the Holy Spirit if you are walking in Christ. The Spirit is the source of our convictions. Here is where I think people misunderstand. Walking in the Spirit is not about having a "feeling". When we surrender ourselves to Him and seek Him daily, He leads us in our very thoughts. We don't have to have some miraculous "feeling" to determine right and wrong. When we are being led by the Spirit, what WE decide will be perfectly in step with what the Spirit leads.

That is the wonderful freedom we have in Christ. All the preaching that Paul and the Disciples did about freedom from the Law in Christ is about this Truth. The Spirit leads us into all righteousness without the rigid structure of a Law. The Law of Moses is for condemnation of those who live by the efforts of the flesh. The Law of Christ is kept by the Holy Spirit working within us.

Our job is to keep our eyes on Him and not let our flesh Nature...which is still there and constantly being exploited by the Enemy...interfere with our Walk in the Spirit.

***Edit to add***
You mentioned being in the word of God and I didn't address that. I don't want to give the impression that I think Scripture is not important. I think that one of the key components of seeking God daily is through Scripture. He certainly reveals Himself in mighty ways through Scripture.

I hear what you are saying RT-
But also, it is not as easy for some of us. There is a struggle because we do not trust ourselves and have seen how sneaky we can be. So we sometimes are very cautious because we have seen that we are capable of thinking some of our thoughts are His thoughts when they really aren't.
This is where His voice is CRUCIAL for me.
I heard you walking in the garden....
Were these literal footsteps? How is this if God is Spirit?

There is also the story of the young man in the bible who kept going and waking up his master to ask what it was he needed. He kept saying: I didn't call you. Go back to bed. After a while of this, they determined the young man was hearing the voice of God. Of course it couldn't have been a literal voice, could it? If some other voice called, why could he not recognize that it was a different voice than his masters voice? I posted more on this somewhere recently but I'll never find it.

Edit to add this - I DID find it! Here is the link and it is post#35 in the thread.http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/221217-Did-You-Receive-The-Holy-Spirit-When-You-Believed?p=2623481#post2623481

Edit again to add this: It's from Job.
A Spirit swept past my face and the hair of my flesh stood on end.

I understand what you said and have heard others say often that we cannot rely on our feelings. And I understand what they mean. They are speaking of emotions. I am not speaking of emotions when I talk about feeling His voice. It is just how it happens when I feel/hear Him speak that the hair of my flesh stands up.
However, I will also say this. When I was a young christian, before I knew how to follow that Voice, I made some crazy assumptions. I would say: Oh! He's saying this or that! And I would run out with reckless abandon when I did NOT understand exactly what He was saying. It is confusing to begin to hear and follow without making exuberant and childish leaps of zaniness. So scripture IS important. Both are important. But truly, Adam heard God's voice and he did not HAVE scripture. So to me, Adam is proof of the danger of not learning to listen to God's voice - to become convinced that we can reason out and understand the scripture without also listening to His voice. Isn't this what Adam and Eve DID? They ignored the Voice to go with THEIR OWN reasoning and thoughts.

Haha-edit AGAIN to add a thought!
If it appears that those of us who hear and have learned to follow do not have to go on faith, let me tell you, He makes SURE of it! He puts us on fasts, and by that I do not mean the fast of the flesh/ human working. I mean the fast in spirit and truth that HE does in us. It is a removal of our bread and water in SPIRIT. We cannot sense Him anymore and we mourn because the bridegroom is taken from us. In the beginning, until we mature, we panic unlike ANY panic we have ever felt. We begin to think we have done something to drive Him away and we go through horrors and wrestlings. It is such pain that someone who hasn't experienced it cannot possibly understand. He is purging us of weak faith by making us stick to His word that He will never abandon us no matter what it looks like or FEELS like to us. Once we understand this, the panic flees and is replaced by DEEP trust in His word.

BroRog
May 24th 2011, 03:59 PM
OK... but we're talking about the works that God will do through us. You always attempt to turn this around as if God will never do work through us. It's as if the work God does through us is unimportant to you.

Anyway... concerning this work that God will do through us, some of this will be greater than what He did through His Son: John 14:12 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father.Jesus wasn't talking to you and me in this chapter of John. He wasn't saying that you and I would do greater works. He was saying that the Apostles would do greater works.

awestruckchild
May 24th 2011, 04:03 PM
Once again, as in the other thread, there is not a single word Jesus spoke that is not for every single man coming into this world.

notuptome
May 24th 2011, 04:54 PM
Jesus wasn't talking to you and me in this chapter of John. He wasn't saying that you and I would do greater works. He was saying that the Apostles would do greater works.
What are or were the greater works?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

BroRog
May 25th 2011, 01:11 AM
What are or were the greater works?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Jesus is talking about what the Apostles would do in his absence. Their job was to make disciples in his name, preach the gospel, and grow the church. Their works were "greater" in that they had a larger impact on people in general; the scope of their mission was greater, i.e. worldwide rather than limited to Judea; they would be given help by the Holy Spirit, who could travel at night, didn't get tired, had access to the inner life of people etc.

Slug1
May 27th 2011, 01:51 AM
Jesus wasn't talking to you and me in this chapter of John. He wasn't saying that you and I would do greater works. He was saying that the Apostles would do greater works.Ya know... I have never understood this line of reasoning. If you use this line of reasoning then you have to follow through and Jesus was only talking to the Jews, or only a few Gentiles and all those scriptures don't apply to anyone today. Peter was only talking to Cornelius and that scripture doesn't apply to us today. Paul was talking only to the Corinthians, or people from Ephesus, or only Romans etc, etc, etc.

With the thought process reasoning out that only "who" Jesus was speaking to, or any of the Apostles were speaking to for that matter... they NEVER spoke to you or me or anyone today.

He was only speaking to the Apostles when He told them to go out into the world and make disciples... so, do we apply your reasoning to this scripture also and say... He was saying that the Apostles would go out into the world and make disciples!?

Mt 28:18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore[c] and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.[d]

BroRog... with your line of reasoning... not only is this command only for them but DO YOU also say that Christ is ONLY with them (in red) since He was talking ONLY to them at this moment?

Saying that we can't do greater works than Jesus with the line of reasoning you applied... this apply MUST be applied across the entire scriptures if what you say means anything.

BroRog
May 27th 2011, 04:59 AM
Ya know... I have never understood this line of reasoning. If you use this line of reasoning then you have to follow through and Jesus was only talking to the Jews, or only a few Gentiles and all those scriptures don't apply to anyone today. Peter was only talking to Cornelius and that scripture doesn't apply to us today. Paul was talking only to the Corinthians, or people from Ephesus, or only Romans etc, etc, etc.When I was a child, my mother told my brothers and sisters to stand over next to the wall and wait because she was going to give them a spanking. So I got in line with them. My mom turned to me and said, "NOT you, I wasn't talking to you."

Now, you can read the Bible as if it was written to you personally, or you can read it the way it was intended. Your call.


With the thought process reasoning out that only "who" Jesus was speaking to, or any of the Apostles were speaking to for that matter... they NEVER spoke to you or me or anyone today.That's right.


He was only speaking to the Apostles when He told them to go out into the world and make disciples... so, do we apply your reasoning to this scripture also and say... He was saying that the Apostles would go out into the world and make disciples!?What do you think? You can recognize that we have an interpretive choice to make, and attempt to find out whether a passage applies to us or not, or you can just pretend that it doesn't matter.


Mt 28:18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore[c] and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.[d]

BroRog... with your line of reasoning... not only is this command only for them but DO YOU also say that Christ is ONLY with them (in red) since He was talking ONLY to them at this moment?

Saying that we can't do greater works than Jesus with the line of reasoning you applied... this apply MUST be applied across the entire scriptures if what you say means anything.Really? Why must we apply this across the entire scriptures?

Slug1
May 27th 2011, 11:44 AM
When I was a child, my mother told my brothers and sisters to stand over next to the wall and wait because she was going to give them a spanking. So I got in line with them. My mom turned to me and said, "NOT you, I wasn't talking to you."

Now, you can read the Bible as if it was written to you personally, or you can read it the way it was intended. Your call.

That's right.

What do you think? You can recognize that we have an interpretive choice to make, and attempt to find out whether a passage applies to us or not, or you can just pretend that it doesn't matter.

Really? Why must we apply this across the entire scriptures?So what you are telling me is that when a pastor is led by God to speak a message during the sermon but the scriptures used re from 1 Cor for example, this pastor can look out into the congregation and tell some the message isn't for them but its for the rest of them?

shepherdsword
May 27th 2011, 12:02 PM
I think Slug1 pretty much destroyed your argument. Your "mammy" analogy is a fallacy of logic. It is false.The "greater things" promise was given to all believers.But I guess some people have to dissect it to maintain the illusion of a clergy/laity separation in the new testament. It's like the Pope's position that the statement of "whosoever sins you forgive they are forgiven" is reserved for some elitist group of priests. This justifies a hierarchical pyramid that keeps the body of Christ sitting in pews and not exhibiting their gifts."everyone hath psalm,every one has a teaching or prophecy" The manifold wisdom of God that is to be displayed to the ruling heavenly powers is made known by the CHURCH,not only it's leaders.Instead of leaders conducting a meeting like a symphony where everyone has a part,they put on a solo act that quenches participation by every member of the body. It's hogwash and one of the primary reasons the church will be judged. God's eternal purpose cannot be fulfilled.

BroRog
May 27th 2011, 03:28 PM
So what you are telling me is that when a pastor is led by God to speak a message during the sermon but the scriptures used re from 1 Cor for example, this pastor can look out into the congregation and tell some the message isn't for them but its for the rest of them?No, that is not what I am saying. The conversation Jesus has with his apostles takes place in the upper room. He is talking TO them concerning the mission he is giving to THEM. This conversation isn't a message as from a pastor. Jesus is about to be crucified; he knows this but at this point his apostles haven't accepted it as fact. This conversation is a personal dialog between Jesus and the apostles in which Jesus reassures the apostles that after he leaves, after he ascends to the Father, they will not be alone, left without help to do what job he gave them to do.

So then, when Jesus says, "greater works shall YOU do . . ." he is indicating the apostles, not us, not anyone else. The only reason why we know about this conversation is because John, one of the apostles, wrote it down for the rest of us to read. And as we read, we need to be aware that we are reading this from the third person perspective, which means the subject of the sentence is NOT the reader. You and I are not part of the conversation and so we are not being told that we shall do greater works.

But just because a passage of the Bible isn't being spoken directly TO us, doesn't mean that the message isn't FOR us. After all, John had a reason why he wanted to share this conversation with the church. In this case, rather than simply reading the conversation as if Jesus was talking to us, we ask ourselves why John has decided to tell us about the conversation. The message for US (from John to the church) is to reassure the church that Jesus did indeed pick a set of apostles and did indeed guarantee that these men would faithfully and with all fidelity relay the teachings of Jesus to the church.

If we want to make application of this passage, and we should want to apply it to our lives, we don't say, "Jesus promised that I would do greater works." No, we say, "Jesus promised to leave us with a set of men who would faithfully and accurately relay his message, and who would be given such wisdom and insight into the teachings of Jesus that these men could speak for Jesus and give us instructions that Jesus never spoke, but have the same weight and force, and wisdom as if Jesus spoke them himself. In other words, the bottom line message for US today is that we can trust our New Testament scriptures.

Edit to add: with respect to the pastor teaching a message from the pulpit, the pastor would do well to simply reiterate what Jesus and the apostles already taught us. To the degree that the pastor's message agrees with the teaching of Jesus and the apostles, to that degree that pastor is feeding his flock. The pastor's job is to elucidate and explicate and make clear what Jesus and the apostles have said and his attitude should be "Isn't this what Jesus and the apostles have said?"

BroRog
May 27th 2011, 03:48 PM
I think Slug1 pretty much destroyed your argument. Your "mammy" analogy is a fallacy of logic. It is false.Really? Studied formal logic have you?


The "greater things" promise was given to all believers.I disagree. As I pointed out to Slug1, the reader is in a third person perspective. Anyone reading the passage is NOT the subject of the sentence. John's purpose for writing down this conversation is so that the church will come to better understand the apostles role and to find greater confidence in the apostles as they perform their duties in their role to faithfully relay the teachings of Jesus.

Your conserns about the form and style of a church service seem to be beside the point here. I realize that some people prefer a more participitory, democratic style of church service, but I wouldn't say that a participitory style is any better or any worse with regard to allowing people to use their gifts. I personally don't get why some folks think that using the gifts should be restricted to an hour and a half window of time on Sunday morning each week.

Slug1
May 27th 2011, 04:05 PM
No, that is not what I am saying. The conversation Jesus has with his apostles takes place in the upper room. He is talking TO them concerning the mission he is giving to THEM. This conversation isn't a message as from a pastor. Jesus is about to be crucified; he knows this but at this point his apostles haven't accepted it as fact. This conversation is a personal dialog between Jesus and the apostles in which Jesus reassures the apostles that after he leaves, after he ascends to the Father, they will not be alone, left without help to do what job he gave them to do.

So then, when Jesus says, "greater works shall YOU do . . ." he is indicating the apostles, not us, not anyone else. The only reason why we know about this conversation is because John, one of the apostles, wrote it down for the rest of us to read. And as we read, we need to be aware that we are reading this from the third person perspective, which means the subject of the sentence is NOT the reader. You and I are not part of the conversation and so we are not being told that we shall do greater works.

But just because a passage of the Bible isn't being spoken directly TO us, doesn't mean that the message isn't FOR us. After all, John had a reason why he wanted to share this conversation with the church. In this case, rather than simply reading the conversation as if Jesus was talking to us, we ask ourselves why John has decided to tell us about the conversation. The message for US (from John to the church) is to reassure the church that Jesus did indeed pick a set of apostles and did indeed guarantee that these men would faithfully and with all fidelity relay the teachings of Jesus to the church.

If we want to make application of this passage, and we should want to apply it to our lives, we don't say, "Jesus promised that I would do greater works." No, we say, "Jesus promised to leave us with a set of men who would faithfully and accurately relay his message, and who would be given such wisdom and insight into the teachings of Jesus that these men could speak for Jesus and give us instructions that Jesus never spoke, but have the same weight and force, and wisdom as if Jesus spoke them himself. In other words, the bottom line message for US today is that we can trust our New Testament scriptures.

Edit to add: with respect to the pastor teaching a message from the pulpit, the pastor would do well to simply reiterate what Jesus and the apostles already taught us. To the degree that the pastor's message agrees with the teaching of Jesus and the apostles, to that degree that pastor is feeding his flock. The pastor's job is to elucidate and explicate and make clear what Jesus and the apostles have said and his attitude should be "Isn't this what Jesus and the apostles have said?"

I don't agree with you BroRog... the other scripture concerning the Great Commission is in the same perspective and I don't expect I'll ever hear you try to justify what you reason out through/by logic using your same line concerning the John scripture about great works, in relation to the Matthew scripture concerning what the Apostles were tasked to do.

IMO, this logical reasoning is what people do to justify what scripture they want to be obedient to and which one's they don't want to be obedient to.

We see it in so many churches, religions, and doctrines these days. Man can't wrap their limited minds around the scripture and due to this lack of belief and faith, they justify (justify WHY to themselves) the fact that nothing is miraculously done in their churches. So the leaders teach what can and can't be applied to them as a member of the Body of Christ and people believe what man says instead of believing what God says... THAT as a member of the Body of Christ, we will do greater works than Jesus.

Look around you BroRog... man is doing everything their way today and it's without the Holy Spirit involved. How do I know this and why can I say this... it's because many churches are without any power of God. Generations of serving God according to their religion, rules, rituals, traditions, and doctrine and not any power of God and they are so bound in this that when others in the Body of Christ are out there in the world doing God's work, where people are being healed, people are being freed of demons... those who apply "logic" to the scriptures so they can justify why NONE of this isn't happening in their church... I bet God is reaching a point where He's saying, enough is enough.

Sorry BroRog, I just don't agree with your reasoning based on what is happening in the Body of Christ today with those in the Body of Christ who submit to God and NEVER apply logic into the relationship God has WITH them. It's a matter of faith and belief and with this type of faith and this type of belief... God does mighty miracles.

shepherdsword
May 27th 2011, 04:55 PM
Really? Studied formal logic have you?

yes,enough to spot a major fallacy when I see one. this fits under the "false analogy" heading


I disagree. As I pointed out to Slug1, the reader is in a third person perspective. Anyone reading the passage is NOT the subject of the sentence. John's purpose for writing down this conversation is so that the church will come to better understand the apostles role and to find greater confidence in the apostles as they perform their duties in their role to faithfully relay the teachings of Jesus.The first person is often used in the Socratic second and third person for instruction purposes. That argument has no merit.


Your conserns about the form and style of a church service seem to be beside the point here. I realize that some people prefer a more participitory, democratic style of church service, but I wouldn't say that a participitory style is any better or any worse with regard to allowing people to use their gifts. I personally don't get why some folks think that using the gifts should be restricted to an hour and a half window of time on Sunday morning each week.You missed my point. The coming together of the living stones IS one of the greater works Jesus was talking about. While the Holy Spirit could manifest himself in Christ fully,the Temple of living stones will fill the whole earth with his glory. Do you remember what happened when Solomon's temple was finished? The glory of God fell on it in such a way that the priests could even stand to minister. It was just a shadow and type. Imagine what the glory will be when the REAL temple without hands comes together. The reason for concern about the manifestation of body function in the Sunday meeting is simple. That is when the saints are gathered in his name and he is in the midst of them and desiring to use EACH one. I have heard that argument many times before. Most of the time it's because the Pastor/teacher feels threatened about his position. Isn't the greatest of his supposed to be the servant of the least? If so why the need for exaltation and significance

*edit* Also I am not limiting group flow and function to the gifts of the Spirit in the charismatic sense. There is the "hath a revelation" statement as well.

notuptome
May 27th 2011, 05:33 PM
I just don't agree with your reasoning based on what is happening in the Body of Christ today with those in the Body of Christ who submit to God and NEVER apply logic into the relationship God has WITH them. It's a matter of faith and belief and with this type of faith and this type of belief... God does mighty miracles.
God does a great and mighty miracle every time a soul is saved. This is the greater works to which Jesus refered. All of heaven rejoices when a single soul comes to Christ. When Jesus spoke to Thomas He said because you see Me you believe but I tell you blessed are they who have not seen and believe.

All the mighty works that Jesus did were small compared to those who would proclaim the gospel message throughout the world and even unto this day. Those who would believe not because they saw but because they heard the word that indeed is how God works in the affairs of men. The foolishness of preaching.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Slug1
May 27th 2011, 06:58 PM
God does a great and mighty miracle every time a soul is saved. This is the greater works to which Jesus refered. All of heaven rejoices when a single soul comes to Christ. When Jesus spoke to Thomas He said because you see Me you believe but I tell you blessed are they who have not seen and believe.

All the mighty works that Jesus did were small compared to those who would proclaim the gospel message throughout the world and even unto this day. Those who would believe not because they saw but because they heard the word that indeed is how God works in the affairs of men. The foolishness of preaching.

For the cause of Christ
RogerAmen Roger !

We just can't say "NO!" to God when He wants to glorify Himself in any miraculous way either for if we do, then we're not being obedient to Him. That is ALL I've ever attempted to say. God is God... if He wants to use you (Roger) to do a miracle for anyone in the world... let God be God and He'll do the miracle through you.

He don't change and all those miracles He did through both the Apostles and others in the Body of Christ back during those times that we have consolidated in the many books of the Bible "after" Jesus ascended... He's still doing today through any and all who don't say... NO!

Just let God be God.

As a Body of Christ "we" need to stop being God and believing ONLY in what we CAN and CAN'T do today for God. Let God use us so He can do what He wants to do today.

If He wants to draw a person to Him when you are used to speak the Gospel to them... GOOD! When He wants to draw a person to Him when you are used to lay on of hands and heal them or another person in their presence... GOOD!

God is able to be Himself in either of these situations and if we are obedient to God's desire... His WORK will be done and people will accept Jesus as a result.

Romans 8:28 And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.

All things work together IF we do it God's way and only His way. Once we want to do it our way... God's work isn't being done, He's not receiving the glory, we are. We are only limited to doing to our limits as well. Saying YES to God and He does it His way... we experience NO limits and miracles may happen if God wants to work that way and/or miracle won't happen if He wants to work that way.

Either way... if anyone in the Body of Christ says NO to one of those ways... we're being disobedient to God.

Slug1
May 27th 2011, 07:01 PM
*edit* Also I am not limiting group flow and function to the gifts of the Spirit in the charismatic sense. There is the "hath a revelation" statement as well.Hooah... I've NEVER understood those who are able to turn the Holy Spirit ON when they walk into their church and then they are also able to turn the Holy Spirit OFF, when they leave their church.

That will NEVER make any sense.

notuptome
May 27th 2011, 08:45 PM
Amen Roger !

We just can't say "NO!" to God when He wants to glorify Himself in any miraculous way either for if we do, then we're not being obedient to Him. That is ALL I've ever attempted to say. God is God... if He wants to use you (Roger) to do a miracle for anyone in the world... let God be God and He'll do the miracle through you.

He don't change and all those miracles He did through both the Apostles and others in the Body of Christ back during those times that we have consolidated in the many books of the Bible "after" Jesus ascended... He's still doing today through any and all who don't say... NO!

Just let God be God.

As a Body of Christ "we" need to stop being God and believing ONLY in what we CAN and CAN'T do today for God. Let God use us so He can do what He wants to do today.

If He wants to draw a person to Him when you are used to speak the Gospel to them... GOOD! When He wants to draw a person to Him when you are used to lay on of hands and heal them or another person in their presence... GOOD!

God is able to be Himself in either of these situations and if we are obedient to God's desire... His WORK will be done and people will accept Jesus as a result.

Romans 8:28 And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.

All things work together IF we do it God's way and only His way. Once we want to do it our way... God's work isn't being done, He's not receiving the glory, we are. We are only limited to doing to our limits as well. Saying YES to God and He does it His way... we experience NO limits and miracles may happen if God wants to work that way and/or miracle won't happen if He wants to work that way.

Either way... if anyone in the Body of Christ says NO to one of those ways... we're being disobedient to God.
All what miracles? The apostles were about the Lords business of witnessing to the lost and seeing souls saved. The miracles were used sparingly to confirm their authority and the authority of the word of God they were preaching. You carry on like all they did was miracles and speak in tongues.

Do we believe because of what we see or what we have heard from Gods word? It is an evil and adulterous generation that seeks a sign.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

BroRog
May 27th 2011, 09:36 PM
I don't agree with you BroRog... the other scripture concerning the Great Commission is in the same perspective and I don't expect I'll ever hear you try to justify what you reason out through/by logic using your same line concerning the John scripture about great works, in relation to the Matthew scripture concerning what the Apostles were tasked to do.I would make the same case for the Great Commission as I did for the upper room discourse.


IMO, this logical reasoning is what people do to justify what scripture they want to be obedient to and which one's they don't want to be obedient to. On the contrary, there are two main ways to go wrong: 1) having a mistaken belief and 2) unbelief. Mistaken beliefs come about due to an innocent and sincere trust of someone or some teaching that is in error. The solution to solving this problem is education. All that one need to do is point a person to the correct view, or the correct understanding. The transfer of information from a writer to a reader or a teacher to a student is a rational process, which involves logical reasoning.

Unbelief, on the other hand, is not a mental function or activity; rather, its a volitional function or activity. Typically when a man refuses to believe the truth, he has decided that he simply doesn't want to accept what he already knows is true. Unbelief is a willful ignorance or loss of touch with the truth. What you describe is a cleaver person who uses his logic to convince himself and others to believe fallacious ideas. Those who practice such things are misusing logic, making spurious or specious arguments. The fault is not with reason, as the spurious argument is "apparently" but not actually valid. The fact that cleaver and smart men can misuse language to convince themselves of something they WANT to believe or refuse to believe something they don't want to believe is not the fault of reason. Reason is not the enemy of faith; fantasy is.


We see it in so many churches, religions, and doctrines these days. Man can't wrap their limited minds around the scripture and due to this lack of belief and faith, they justify (justify WHY to themselves) the fact that nothing is miraculously done in their churches. So the leaders teach what can and can't be applied to them as a member of the Body of Christ and people believe what man says instead of believing what God says... THAT as a member of the Body of Christ, we will do greater works than Jesus.I would agree that when it comes to God, there are aspects of God that we can't wrap our minds around. However, a lack of faith is not due to the fact that the church can't wrap their minds around the scriptures. On the contrary, God gave us a mind and the scriptures in order that we should be able to make contact with the truth. Reason isn't the malady that plagues the church. If anything plagues the churches, its a lack of training in how to properly read and understand the Bible, which is a subcategory under the fact that America hasn't been properly taught how to read a book. Every so often the church goes into a period of darkness, and each time the churches come out of darkness the reason is due to a return to reading and studying the Bible. The problem with the churches in America today, if I might speculate, is that people don't have the patience to sit down and put effort into reading the Bible the way it should be read.


Look around you BroRog... man is doing everything their way today and it's without the Holy Spirit involved. How do I know this and why can I say this... it's because many churches are without any power of God. Generations of serving God according to their religion, rules, rituals, traditions, and doctrine and not any power of God and they are so bound in this that when others in the Body of Christ are out there in the world doing God's work, where people are being healed, people are being freed of demons... those who apply "logic" to the scriptures so they can justify why NONE of this isn't happening in their church... I bet God is reaching a point where He's saying, enough is enough.I must say, if I am to be honest here, that I never hear the kinds of negativity about the Body of Christ coming from the so-called "churches without any power:, than I hear coming from you. Why is that? Why does a person who is supposed to be following the lead of the Holy Spirit constantly point out the faults in others and constantly place himself above others or constantly complain ad nauseum about how other people aren't like you or have your experiences? I think you should read and understand Romans 12.


Sorry BroRog, I just don't agree with your reasoning based on what is happening in the Body of Christ today with those in the Body of Christ who submit to God and NEVER apply logic into the relationship God has WITH them. It's a matter of faith and belief and with this type of faith and this type of belief... God does mighty miracles.Did you know that you use a redefined concept of "faith", one that is NOT found in the Bible. Did you know that when the Bible talks about faith and belief, the concept is primarily a mental activity in which one uses ordinary human reason and logic? I bet no one explained that to you. You seem to have accepted the modern, worldly definition of faith, which accepts that faith is "based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof." The concept of spiritual apprehension is foreign to the Bible, but many people accept this uncritically because we live in a postmodern world.

I think you should look it this more.

BroRog
May 27th 2011, 09:51 PM
yes,enough to spot a major fallacy when I see one. this fits under the "false analogy" heading.Saying so doesn't make it so. You have yet to use your logical reasoning to make a good argument for why Jesus was speaking to all those who read John's gospel, rather than the Apostles exclusively.


The first person is often used in the Socratic second and third person for instruction purposes. That argument has no merit. It wasn't an argument it was an observation, which anyone who reads should already know. Unless one has an agenda, as you and Slug1 seem to have, one naturally understands that when one reads a portion of scripture in which person A is talking to person B, the reader is neither person A or person B.


You missed my point. The coming together of the living stones IS one of the greater works Jesus was talking about.What point. This is the first time anyone has mentioned living stones.


While the Holy Spirit could manifest himself in Christ fully,the Temple of living stones will fill the whole earth with his glory.I don't see how your second clause follows from your first clause.


Do you remember what happened when Solomon's temple was finished? The glory of God fell on it in such a way that the priests could even stand to minister. It was just a shadow and type. Imagine what the glory will be when the REAL temple without hands comes together.What does any of this have to do with Jesus words to his Apostles? I don't see the connection.


The reason for concern about the manifestation of body function in the Sunday meeting is simple. That is when the saints are gathered in his name and he is in the midst of them and desiring to use EACH one. I have heard that argument many times before.What argument?!


Most of the time it's because the Pastor/teacher feels threatened about his position. Isn't the greatest of his supposed to be the servant of the least? If so why the need for exaltation and significance

*edit* Also I am not limiting group flow and function to the gifts of the Spirit in the charismatic sense. There is the "hath a revelation" statement as well.I really am not following you here. Can you maybe fill in some of the blank areas?

notuptome
May 27th 2011, 10:10 PM
I must say, if I am to be honest here, that I never hear the kinds of negativity about the Body of Christ coming from the so-called "churches without any power:, than I hear coming from you. Why is that? Why does a person who is supposed to be following the lead of the Holy Spirit constantly point out the faults in others and constantly place himself above others or constantly complain ad nauseum about how other people aren't like you or have your experiences? I think you should read and understand Romans 12.
Oh wow! Can't deal with that in the open forums. Dangerously personal.

Did you know that you use a redefined concept of "faith", one that is NOT found in the Bible. Did you know that when the Bible talks about faith and belief, the concept is primarily a mental activity in which one uses ordinary human reason and logic? I bet no one explained that to you. You seem to have accepted the modern, worldly definition of faith, which accepts that faith is "based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof." The concept of spiritual apprehension is foreign to the Bible, but many people accept this uncritically because we live in a postmodern world.

I think you should look it this more.
Very interesting topic.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

shepherdsword
May 27th 2011, 11:09 PM
Saying so doesn't make it so. You have yet to use your logical reasoning to make a good argument for why Jesus was speaking to all those who read John's gospel, rather than the Apostles exclusively.

It wasn't an argument it was an observation, which anyone who reads should already know. Unless one has an agenda, as you and Slug1 seem to have, one naturally understands that when one reads a portion of scripture in which person A is talking to person B, the reader is neither person A or person B.



What point. This is the first time anyone has mentioned living stones.

I don't see how your second clause follows from your first clause.

What does any of this have to do with Jesus words to his Apostles? I don't see the connection.

What argument?!

I really am not following you here. Can you maybe fill in some of the blank areas?

Maybe this will help

John 14:12Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

This is the Father's agenda,not Slug1's and not mine. The above scripture includes ALL who believe in him as being able to do greater works than him. Do you see the "He that beleiveth in me? It is the same as if I said to my whole family. "I am telling you this,he that believes in Jesus will be saved.My statement is not limited to my family only.It includes everyone. Just as Jesus was saying about the greater works. for the one believing into him
Let's here your argument for the exclusion of everyone except the apostles. The Holy Spirit was poured out on the whole upper room. Steven who was not an apostle had signs follow him.
As for the the argument I was talking about,it was this statement "I personally don't get why some folks think that using the gifts should be restricted to an hour and a half window of time on Sunday morning each week."( see my answer as to why)
How does my statements about the living temple relate to Jesus and his apostles? In the context of the 'greater works than these" statement?
Bringing together the living stones for a manifestation of God's glory IS one of the greater works. It was something Jesus could not do because he was going to the Father.


Question: Is the pattern of the Lord's prayer only for the apostles?

shepherdsword
May 27th 2011, 11:14 PM
Saying so doesn't make it so. You have yet to use your logical reasoning to make a good argument for why Jesus was speaking to all those who read John's gospel, rather than the Apostles exclusively.

It wasn't an argument it was an observation, which anyone who reads should already know. Unless one has an agenda, as you and Slug1 seem to have, one naturally understands that when one reads a portion of scripture in which person A is talking to person B, the reader is neither person A or person B.



What point. This is the first time anyone has mentioned living stones.

I don't see how your second clause follows from your first clause.

What does any of this have to do with Jesus words to his Apostles? I don't see the connection.

What argument?!

I really am not following you here. Can you maybe fill in some of the blank areas?

Maybe this will help

John 14:12Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

This is the Father's agenda,not Slug1's and not mine. The above scripture includes ALL who believe in him as being able to do greater works than him. Do you see the "He that beleiveth in me? It is the same as if I said to my whole family. "I am telling you this,he that believes in Jesus will be saved.My statement is not limited to my family only.It includes everyone. Just as Jesus was saying about the greater works. for the one believing into him
Let's here your argument for the exclusion of everyone except the apostles. The Holy Spirit was poured out on the whole upper room. Steven who was not an apostle had signs follow him.
As for the the argument I was talking about,it was this statement "I personally don't get why some folks think that using the gifts should be restricted to an hour and a half window of time on Sunday morning each week."( see my answer as to why)
How does my statements about the living temple relate to Jesus and his apostles? In the context of the 'greater works than these" statement?
Bringing together the living stones for a manifestation of God's glory IS one of the greater works. It was something Jesus could not do because he was going to the Father.


Question: Is the pattern of the Lord's prayer only for the apostles?


Did you know that you use a redefined concept of "faith", one that is NOT found in the Bible. Did you know that when the Bible talks about faith and belief, the concept is primarily a mental activity in which one uses ordinary human reason and logic? I bet no one explained that to you. You seem to have accepted the modern, worldly definition of faith, which accepts that faith is "based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof." The concept of spiritual apprehension is foreign to the Bible, but many people accept this uncritically because we live in a postmodern world.

Prove it

Slug1
May 27th 2011, 11:56 PM
Did you know that you use a redefined concept of "faith", one that is NOT found in the Bible. Did you know that when the Bible talks about faith and belief, the concept is primarily a mental activity in which one uses ordinary human reason and logic? I bet no one explained that to you. You seem to have accepted the modern, worldly definition of faith, which accepts that faith is "based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof." The concept of spiritual apprehension is foreign to the Bible, but many people accept this uncritically because we live in a postmodern world.

You need to prove this BroRog.

Here is a scripture for you to read and tell me how this "truth" of God is aligned with what you just stated?

Heb 11: 1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.


Did you know that when the Bible talks about faith and belief, the concept is primarily a mental activity in which one uses ordinary human reason and logic?Sorry BroRog, with God it's not any concept... it's either His truth, or it's the truth you want the Bible to be. When we want the scriptures to mean what WE want scriptures to mean, then we turn scripture into a CONCEPT. This is what you have done, so your concept has as much power of Christ as any powerless churches these days have... zip, nada, zilch, none... at all.

How many times do we hear Jesus tell a person that their faith "healed" them, or healed another? Does you're concept of faith as a "logical" concept which is primarily of mental activity empower you, me, or ANYONE in the Body of Christ to "heal" a person due to a "concept" of faith??? OR... OR, with their faith and not a concept OF faith, is what has and WILL heal another person?

You go right ahead and prove how a "concept" does the miracles!!!

It's your concept and any who hold to the same concept that you have are those who has the Body of Christ powerless. It starts at the individual level BroRog, those who say YES and those who say NO. This concept such as your's because it sure isn't God's... it's not mine and it's sure isn't anyone else's who are out there in the world obedient to God as He uses them for His glory.

If you don't agree with me, then say so as I have said I don't agree with you.

I will continue to serve God as He sees fit and you can continue to serve God as you see fit.

Slug1
May 28th 2011, 12:03 AM
Maybe this will help

John 14:12Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

This is the Father's agenda,not Slug1's and not mine. The above scripture includes ALL who believe in him as being able to do greater works than him. Do you see the "He that beleiveth in me? It is the same as if I said to my whole family. "I am telling you this,he that believes in Jesus will be saved.My statement is not limited to my family only.It includes everyone. Just as Jesus was saying about the greater works. for the one believing into him
Let's here your argument for the exclusion of everyone except the apostles. The Holy Spirit was poured out on the whole upper room. Steven who was not an apostle had signs follow him.
As for the the argument I was talking about,it was this statement "I personally don't get why some folks think that using the gifts should be restricted to an hour and a half window of time on Sunday morning each week."( see my answer as to why)
How does my statements about the living temple relate to Jesus and his apostles? In the context of the 'greater works than these" statement?
Bringing together the living stones for a manifestation of God's glory IS one of the greater works. It was something Jesus could not do because he was going to the Father.
As you said, what BroRog fails to understand of that scripture is that Jesus was talking to the Apostles ABOUT "us". Us as in, all in the Body of Christ. He's wasn't talking "about" the Apostles... Jesus was only talking TO the Apostles. So the people He's talking about as ANY who believe which does "include" the Apostles.

shepherdsword
May 28th 2011, 12:34 AM
As you said, what BroRog fails to understand of that scripture is that Jesus was talking to the Apostles ABOUT "us". Us as in, all in the Body of Christ. He's wasn't talking "about" the Apostles... Jesus was only talking TO the Apostles. So the people He's talking about as ANY who believe.

We sure are limited by what we believe aren't we? But then if we are only in mental agreement are we really believers? I wonder if BroRog has ever read James and seen what he has to say about faith.The verse you quoted from Heb 11 sure defines biblical faith doesn't it?

Slug1
May 28th 2011, 12:59 AM
I must say, if I am to be honest here, that I never hear the kinds of negativity about the Body of Christ coming from the so-called "churches without any power:, than I hear coming from you. Why is that? Why does a person who is supposed to be following the lead of the Holy Spirit constantly point out the faults in others and constantly place himself above others or constantly complain ad nauseum about how other people aren't like you or have your experiences? I think you should read and understand Romans 12.

Nothing negative said at all... just a point of fact is being pointed out. If a person wants to take this as negative, that is their choice.

God is God, we are the Body of Christ and God will glorify Himself THROUGH us. Does He do this daily, every Sunday, once a month, once a year, once a generation, once in an entire lifetime? YES and many more times over all over the world. So if a person in the Body of Christ is in a church that preaches He don't do any miracles any time that He wants too when He's to glorify Himself... they are IN ERROR.

I'm sure the Holy Spirit is pointing this fault out to them but they AREN'T listening with spiritual ears open because their religion, rules, rituals, and doctrine have their spiritual ears closed. Then when anyone in the Body of Christ points this out, they are offended and upset. So what makes you think they won't be offended and upset IF the Holy Spirit pointed it out to them directly? In other words... use a person to manifest any of the gifts of the Holy Spirit right there in the middle of their Sunday service? Since they can't hear the Holy Spirit, they can sure SEE when a person begins to lay on of hands and pray over a person and they are healed, or a few begin to speak in tongues and then one translates so the entire church can HEAR and be edified.

Heck, some on this board will say straight up that if the Holy Spirit manifested in their church so God can "attempt" to point their fault out to them... they'd not allow the manifestation to happen.

WHY do they do this?

Anyway, you want to know one of the products are of these "powerless" churches... it's people who trash (disbelieve) the testimony of others when God does a miracle IN the lives of or THROUGH those who can give testimony of such miracles that glorify God.

Slug1
May 28th 2011, 01:11 AM
We sure are limited by what we believe aren't we? But then if we are only in mental agreement are we really believers? I wonder if BroRog has ever read James and seen what he has to say about faith.The verse you quoted from Heb 11 sure defines biblical faith doesn't it?Yes, faith is defined by such scriptures and then understanding OF that scripture can begin by dividing the scriptures in James. Then with what Jesus said... the Body of Christ is fully capable to do what Jesus said they'd be doing. Not be ABLE to do... WILL DO.

Slug1
May 28th 2011, 01:28 AM
All what miracles? The apostles were about the Lords business of witnessing to the lost and seeing souls saved. The miracles were used sparingly to confirm their authority and the authority of the word of God they were preaching. You carry on like all they did was miracles and speak in tongues.

Do we believe because of what we see or what we have heard from Gods word? It is an evil and adulterous generation that seeks a sign.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
I said in a past thread that I have been led to only 4 people in my capacity as an elder and God used me to heal them. 4 in my entire life. Is that not sparing enough for you?

All I'm pointing out is that God WILL use people to do miracles while witnessing or just doing His will in obedience. You are against this, I am not. Many others are against this, many others are not.

So, instead of constantly wasting your time telling me that I'm wrong, can to please go out into threads and tell people that you are right... please.

Please go start a thread with your view of this and let all the board discuss if God can or can't do miracles today through the Body of Christ as they go out into the world and witness the Gospel.

Does God HAVE to do a miracle through any given servant in the Body of Christ? NO He does NOT! I've made that clear in these many threads so your line about me carrying on as if ALL they did was miracles and speak in tongues is not the truth. All I am saying is that God can do a miracles through anyone in the Body of Christ.

You don't believe this... fine, please put this fact that you don't believe this in the thread you start. In the mean time please stop telling those who God uses that they are wrong. It's not THEM doing any miracles today, it's only God so you are actually telling God that He's wrong.

The key to this is He will only do it through those with the faith and belief in HIM. Not faith and belief in any doctrine, religion, and a new word I can now use... in any concept. Religion is powerless, rituals are powerless, rules are powerless, doctrines are powerless, and anyone who's belief and/or faith in God is based on any of this... they are powerless and this adds up to entire churches.

Now... if someone in a church such as this takes offense to me pointing this out... this is a situation for them to seek God about. They just better be ready for His answer if He sends a prophet to them with THAT answer. He may just have to do that since they can't hear Him directly when He speaks to them and tries to answer them.

BroRog
May 28th 2011, 02:15 AM
Maybe this will help

John 14:12Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

This is the Father's agenda,not Slug1's and not mine. The above scripture includes ALL who believe in him as being able to do greater works than him. Do you see the "He that beleiveth in me? It is the same as if I said to my whole family. "I am telling you this,he that believes in Jesus will be saved.My statement is not limited to my family only.It includes everyone. Just as Jesus was saying about the greater works. for the one believing into himI disagree. The context dictates the meaning. When Jesus says, "He that believeth on me . . ." he is talking to the Apostles. The "he" refers to anyone among THEM.


Let's here your argument for the exclusion of everyone except the apostles. The Holy Spirit was poured out on the whole upper room. Steven who was not an apostle had signs follow him.What in the passage leads you to believe that the "works" are miracles and signs? I don't think they are. Show me from John 14 that when Jesus spoke of doing greater works he meant greater "miracles."


As for the the argument I was talking about,it was this statement "I personally don't get why some folks think that using the gifts should be restricted to an hour and a half window of time on Sunday morning each week."( see my answer as to why)
How does my statements about the living temple relate to Jesus and his apostles? In the context of the 'greater works than these" statement?
Bringing together the living stones for a manifestation of God's glory IS one of the greater works. It was something Jesus could not do because he was going to the Father.
I don't see anywhere in John 14 where Jesus talks about living stones.


Question: Is the pattern of the Lord's prayer only for the apostles?No, why do you ask?

Slug1
May 28th 2011, 02:21 AM
What in the passage leads you to believe that the "works" are miracles and signs? I don't think they are. Show me from John 14 that when Jesus spoke of doing greater works he meant greater "miracles."

This is actually a great question and point. I don't feel it's only miracles. What would be the point of doing greater miracles. Now, does this mean that God can't or won't do a miracle that is greater than what we see through Christ? Clearly not because men before and after Jesus, did what can be considered a greater miracle and greater work. Jesus did the final work concerning sin but God is still doing work today just as He was doing work before Jesus was in the flesh.

Besides... does God value a miracle greater then another miracle? I don't think so... when Moses parted the Red Sea, this miracle seems just as great as when that women reached out and touched the end of Jesus robe and she was healed. We, as humans with a limited understanding may put value to miracles but does God?

So, for greater works... can be anything. More of a worldwide IMPACT than what Jesus was able to do and only word of mouth testimonies of the work that God did through Him spread around in the local areas He was at.

A great point however, is that "WORK" will be done through us :P

notuptome
May 28th 2011, 12:59 PM
I said in a past thread that I have been led to only 4 people in my capacity as an elder and God used me to heal them. 4 in my entire life. Is that not sparing enough for you?
Have you ever led someone to the Lord?

All I'm pointing out is that God WILL use people to do miracles while witnessing or just doing His will in obedience. You are against this, I am not. Many others are against this, many others are not.
The prince of this world is more than willing to do "miracles" if it keeps souls away from Christ. Scripture tells us that God has chosen the foolishenss of preaching to save souls not miracles.

So, instead of constantly wasting your time telling me that I'm wrong, can to please go out into threads and tell people that you are right... please.
Let God be right.

Please go start a thread with your view of this and let all the board discuss if God can or can't do miracles today through the Body of Christ as they go out into the world and witness the Gospel.
When did the gospel include miracles? The good news is that atonement for sin has been made. Christ has died and risen from the tomb the Captian of our salvation.

Does God HAVE to do a miracle through any given servant in the Body of Christ? NO He does NOT! I've made that clear in these many threads so your line about me carrying on as if ALL they did was miracles and speak in tongues is not the truth. All I am saying is that God can do a miracles through anyone in the Body of Christ.
Seems like all you focus on is the "miracles". You never say anything about winning souls to Christ. You never talk about redemption only healings, miracles and the such. Perhaps I missed those testimonies.

You don't believe this... fine, please put this fact that you don't believe this in the thread you start. In the mean time please stop telling those who God uses that they are wrong. It's not THEM doing any miracles today, it's only God so you are actually telling God that He's wrong.
There is another possibility.

The key to this is He will only do it through those with the faith and belief in HIM. Not faith and belief in any doctrine, religion, and a new word I can now use... in any concept. Religion is powerless, rituals are powerless, rules are powerless, doctrines are powerless, and anyone who's belief and/or faith in God is based on any of this... they are powerless and this adds up to entire churches.
Jesus taught doctrine so Jesus was powerless? If your faith and or belief is not based on doctrine, the doctrine that Jesus taught, you cannot be a Christian. Your statement seems to demonstrate zeal overcoming wisdom.

Now... if someone in a church such as this takes offense to me pointing this out... this is a situation for them to seek God about. They just better be ready for His answer if He sends a prophet to them with THAT answer. He may just have to do that since they can't hear Him directly when He speaks to them and tries to answer them.
If one reads Gods word in Hebrews Chr 1 we see that God has spoken in His Son sso what can your "prophet" say that God has not already said?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

shepherdsword
May 28th 2011, 02:01 PM
I see no mention of living stones in John14

This is what I meant by my "living stones" statement. I have explained this repeatedly. You have failed to comprehend it. I was showing it as being one of the greater works Jesus was speaking of. THAT is why I said it was relevant to the passage.I never said there was a direct reference to it in John 14.However,this term is used throughout the NT as to what we as corporate believers are. A habitation for God through the Spirit.These passages clearly speak of a corporate indwelling as well as an individual one.


No, why do you ask? Because "when you pray" is addressed to the apostles in the second person just as Luke 14:12 is. 'Truly,Truly I say unto YOU("humin" dative,second person, plural)Speaking to ALL who hear or read. .There is nothing to limit this to the apostles only. Prove that it does. I think the works that have been done since Christ died proves he was talking to all. What about John 14:1? Is he telling only the apostles to believe in him so they will not be troubled?
You need to check out what Robertson says about this verse (John 14:12)in "Word Pictures of the New Testament" Maybe you might learn something. I realize people have to find an excuse for the lack of power in their gatherings. perhaps they should start at their understanding of what faith is. If they define it as some form of mental agreement based on "logic and reason" then that's the source of the problem.

I have yet to see "proof" for your definition of biblical faith

Slug1
May 28th 2011, 03:14 PM
Seems like all you focus on is the "miracles". You never say anything about winning souls to Christ. You never talk about redemption only healings, miracles and the such. Perhaps I missed those testimonies.
If you require these testimonies as well: http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/212910-Testimony-I-posted-in-another-thread?p=2465439#post2465439

I didn't relay all the personal witnessing about Jesus, just the open love and the fact this soldier accepted Christ. Many I have witnessed to are close friends and some from the streets who I have witnessed to that has led to their accepting of Christ. So, no... I don't testify of these all the time because I'm not led to because it's a fact that the world don't "care" that a soul was saved. To the world, a saved person is not glory to God and doesn't show the world that God is God. Can't show their is a TRUE God in heaven to the world through the words... I led a person to Jesus today and this person accepted Jesus.

However, if a Christian witnesses and with that witness God decided to prove His love for them and Christians are healing people, casting out demons or however God wants to SHOW He's real to them... then these miracles CANNOT be denied.

I do find it strange how God will use these testimonies to glorify Himself in the world as such testimony has led people to seek Christ but there are those already in the Body of Christ who SPEAK against such testimony.

I'm sure this doesn't sit well with Him either. We are His Body here on earth and some RESIST His ways to glorify Himself. The Apostles sure did not, those in Christ we read about in the Bible sure did not resist God and they all were used (sparingly) in power to glorify God while they witnessed.

It's the same today Roger... cept some resist God and say NO to Him and only want to witness the way they are told by man to witness. They are NOT led by the Holy Spirit so their witness is without power to glorify God.

Did the testimony I PMed to you meet your standards?

Slug1
May 28th 2011, 03:30 PM
If one reads Gods word in Hebrews Chr 1 we see that God has spoken in His Son sso what can your "prophet" say that God has not already said?
If a man or women is asking God a specific question... let's use this as an example: They silently pray to God for a few weeks asking God what job they are to take when they have two offers, or aligned with the topic I was talking about... they ask God if they should leave the church they are in or what needs to be done at the church they are in so the church is led in the direction that He wants them to go and they stop going in the direction that they want to go.

Then during that third week a person visits the church and goes right to the person who was praying and gives them a specific answer. The Lord says, you are to take this job and not the other, or a very specific direction is given to the person praying concerning the move or direction in which the church is to go.

This is how God can speak to the Body of Christ. You don't believe it and the reasons are clear but this does not mean that God doesn't speak this way to the Body of Christ... all that means is due to your belief, you don't ALLOW Him to speak to you that way, and if you are in church leadership, I will take a bet that you teach others that God can't speak this way to the Body of Christ.

Personally I also bet that this is angering God just as He was angered with the Hebrews when He sent prophets to speak God's message and answers to them and they wouldn't listen. He judged them and cleaned house before He allowed them to take their blessing(s) and since He's God and don't change, He'll do the same with His present house and all the Body of Christ.

Anyway, when a person in the Body of Christ is praying silently and a prophet visits the church and goes to the person that God is about the answer that prayer. Once the prophet relays the message/answer, they have a choice... DENY God's answer or ACCEPT God's answer.

Would you deny such a word from God in answer to your silent prayer?

Slug1
May 28th 2011, 03:34 PM
Jesus taught doctrine so Jesus was powerless? If your faith and or belief is not based on doctrine, the doctrine that Jesus taught, you cannot be a Christian. Your statement seems to demonstrate zeal overcoming wisdom.


RogerYou are NOT reading my words Roger and this shows you can care less. I have made it clear that the doctrine I am referring to is that of man. You know, the stuff man makes up so the Bible can be wrapped around their minds and thus they will use it to justify that, that is the reason their church is powerless.

Or are you just purposely twisting what the meaning is?

It is clear from day one that you don't think I am Christian due to the way I have spoken out against what you follow as a doctrine. Or the fact that you CAN'T accept any of the work that God has glorified Himself as I am used as an obedient servant and have also testified on the internet so that glory can continue to be lifted up to God as others can read how God is working in the Body of Christ today.

Since this type of work that God does seems counter to the doctrine you follow and since I am one that is so OPEN to give God the glory He's due through the work He does and I proclaim God by testifying... since this is against the doctrine you follow you feel led to speak out against this work that God is doing?

Anyway, I will NEVER rise to the standard of that doctrine and the more I speak out against it and the more I testify of God's work in the Body of Christ, the MORE you hint to the fact I'm not a Christian.

You can't even be honest with me... stop hinting and say it.

Besides... I don't have any zeal... God has given me BOLDNESS. I speak of what God can do, will do, and IS DOING as I speak about Christ. Even in my college Psychology class I am able to witness about Christ without being told to stop... God is leading the way and I am not stopping.

notuptome
May 28th 2011, 05:10 PM
You are NOT reading my words Roger and this shows you can care less. I have made it clear that the doctrine I am referring to is that of man. You know, the stuff man makes up so the Bible can be wrapped around their minds and thus they will use it to justify that, that is the reason their church is powerless.

Or are you just purposely twisting what the meaning is?
You are far from clear. Other than to say that what you claim the bible teaches is doctrine while all others teach the doctrine of men. Frankly that sounds just like the attitude of the rcc not the body of Christ. You know the I'm right and all others are wrong. This kind of thing leads to sounding like tinkling brass. Sounding judgmental and unloving which I doubt is your intent.

It is clear from day one that you don't think I am Christian due to the way I have spoken out against what you follow as a doctrine. Or the fact that you CAN'T accept any of the work that God has glorified Himself as I am used as an obedient servant and have also testified on the internet so that glory can continue to be lifted up to God as others can read how God is working in the Body of Christ today.
Have you ever given a testimony of how you got saved? I read your testimony of how you joined the rcc so you could marry your wife. Then something about how you met a fellow soldier in Germany and something about the Church of the Nazerene followed by the spanish speaking pentacostal church. None of these are bad things but where is the simple testimony of how you came to accept Christ as your personal Saviour? Perhaps you have a link you can send me. I really want to believe that you are saved but I am always concerned when a person has greater regard for anything other than the word of God in Spiritual matters. I agree with the general premise that the doctrines of men are flawed especially given your early church background. In that I feel for you.

Since this type of work that God does seems counter to the doctrine you follow and since I am one that is so OPEN to give God the glory He's due through the work He does and I proclaim God by testifying... since this is against the doctrine you follow you feel led to speak out against this work that God is doing?
The bible refers to this as testing the spirits.

Anyway, I will NEVER rise to the standard of that doctrine and the more I speak out against it and the more I testify of God's work in the Body of Christ, the MORE you hint to the fact I'm not a Christian.

You can't even be honest with me... stop hinting and say it.
It is not up to me to judge you in that respect. I only wish it wasn't like trying to pull teeth to get you to focus on the blood of Christ and not on the doctrines of men.

Besides... I don't have any zeal... God has given me BOLDNESS. I speak of what God can do, will do, and IS DOING as I speak about Christ. Even in my college Psychology class I am able to witness about Christ without being told to stop... God is leading the way and I am not stopping.
Here's the real reason I responded to this post. To what did you testify? The saving blood of Christ or something else? Perhaps you can give me another link with more details.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Slug1
May 28th 2011, 05:46 PM
Jesus taught doctrine so Jesus was powerless?
Roger, can you explain this please. What do you mean by "Jesus taught doctrine"?

Slug1
May 28th 2011, 05:48 PM
Have you ever given a testimony of how you got saved?
It won't meet the standard you expect so I don't know what else to say. It's all in that 9 page testimony you read through. I can't make anything up, God works in my life the way that He does and I testify of this and you won't even accept that because it don't meet your standard.

mattlad22
May 28th 2011, 05:58 PM
Roger, can you explain this please. What do you mean by "Jesus taught doctrine"?

I was actually wondering the same thing as i read through all of this.

Jesus didnt teach doctrine, He IS doctrine.

notuptome
May 28th 2011, 09:46 PM
Roger, can you explain this please. What do you mean by "Jesus taught doctrine"?
Mat 7:28, 23:33 Jesus taught from the OT scriptures and the hearers were astonished at His doctrine because He taught true doctrine not what the religious leaders taught. Jesus affirmed the teachings of the OT prophets and the OT patriarchs. Acts 2:42 the Apostles continued this practice in the NT after pentacost.

Now you gotta ask yourself what doctrine are you teaching?

By the way zeal is not a bad thing. Isa 9:7 speaks of the zeal of the Lord of Hosts.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

notuptome
May 28th 2011, 10:08 PM
If a man or women is asking God a specific question... let's use this as an example: They silently pray to God for a few weeks asking God what job they are to take when they have two offers, or aligned with the topic I was talking about... they ask God if they should leave the church they are in or what needs to be done at the church they are in so the church is led in the direction that He wants them to go and they stop going in the direction that they want to go.

Then during that third week a person visits the church and goes right to the person who was praying and gives them a specific answer. The Lord says, you are to take this job and not the other, or a very specific direction is given to the person praying concerning the move or direction in which the church is to go.

This is how God can speak to the Body of Christ. You don't believe it and the reasons are clear but this does not mean that God doesn't speak this way to the Body of Christ... all that means is due to your belief, you don't ALLOW Him to speak to you that way, and if you are in church leadership, I will take a bet that you teach others that God can't speak this way to the Body of Christ.

Personally I also bet that this is angering God just as He was angered with the Hebrews when He sent prophets to speak God's message and answers to them and they wouldn't listen. He judged them and cleaned house before He allowed them to take their blessing(s) and since He's God and don't change, He'll do the same with His present house and all the Body of Christ.

Anyway, when a person in the Body of Christ is praying silently and a prophet visits the church and goes to the person that God is about the answer that prayer. Once the prophet relays the message/answer, they have a choice... DENY God's answer or ACCEPT God's answer.

Would you deny such a word from God in answer to your silent prayer?
1 Tim 2:5 There is one mediator between God and men the man Christ Jesus. The bible does not teach that prophets are intermediaries between God and men.

We as Christians are to enter boldly into the presence of God. Heb 4:16

For the cause of Christ
Roger

BroRog
May 28th 2011, 11:09 PM
This is what I meant by my "living stones" statement. I have explained this repeatedly. You have failed to comprehend it.You may have explained it somewhere, I don't know. All I can say is that I never read it.


I was showing it as being one of the greater works Jesus was speaking of. THAT is why I said it was relevant to the passage. I never said there was a direct reference to it in John 14. However,this term is used throughout the NT as to what we as corporate believers are. A habitation for God through the Spirit.These passages clearly speak of a corporate indwelling as well as an individual one.You can't say Jesus was speaking of something when he didn't speak of it. Either it's in the passage or it isn't. I don't see it there. So how is it relevant to the discussion?


Because "when you pray" is addressed to the apostles in the second person just as Luke 14:12 is. 'Truly,Truly I say unto YOU("humin" dative,second person, plural)Speaking to ALL who hear or read. There is nothing to limit this to the apostles only. Prove that it does.What do you mean? Of course when Jesus is speaking to the Apostles the discussion is limited to them.


I think the works that have been done since Christ died proves he was talking to all.No it doesn't. The question regarding the hearers of Jesus' statement is decided from the text of John 14.


What about John 14:1? Is he telling only the apostles to believe in him so they will not be troubled?Yes. Jesus is talking to the Apostles. Jesus is trying to tell them that he isn't going to immediately become king and rule from Jerusalem; he must be put to death instead. That is why their hearts are troubled.


You need to check out what Robertson says about this verse (John 14:12)in "Word Pictures of the New Testament" Maybe you might learn something. I realize people have to find an excuse for the lack of power in their gatherings. perhaps they should start at their understanding of what faith is. If they define it as some form of mental agreement based on "logic and reason" then that's the source of the problem.Why should I believe what Robertson says?


I have yet to see "proof" for your definition of biblical faithI can show you, but since you don't accept rational arguments based on reason, I don't know what good it would do.

Slug1
May 28th 2011, 11:15 PM
1 Tim 2:5 There is one mediator between God and men the man Christ Jesus. The bible does not teach that prophets are intermediaries between God and men.

We as Christians are to enter boldly into the presence of God. Heb 4:16

For the cause of Christ
RogerI agree with you 100% Roger but please read what I wrote. I didn't SAY to silently pray to a prophet. I said God SENT a prophet with an answer as one placed themselves before Him with a question.

Very big difference, don't twist it around like you tend to always do.

If one approaches you with an answer from God, you have a choice to deny the answer God gives you via the Holy Spirit using that prophet as the messenger or you have the choice to accept the answer from God when He answers you this way.

Slug1
May 28th 2011, 11:18 PM
Mat 7:28, 23:33 Jesus taught from the OT scriptures and the hearers were astonished at His doctrine because He taught true doctrine not what the religious leaders taught. Jesus affirmed the teachings of the OT prophets and the OT patriarchs. Acts 2:42 the Apostles continued this practice in the NT after pentacost.

Now you gotta ask yourself what doctrine are you teaching?

By the way zeal is not a bad thing. Isa 9:7 speaks of the zeal of the Lord of Hosts.

For the cause of Christ
RogerI'm not teaching any doctrine, I'm just "using" scripture against doctrine that is man made. Hmmm, seems Jesus did the same so by His example, nothing wrong with any Christian doing the same as He did ;)

shepherdsword
May 29th 2011, 12:58 AM
You may have explained it somewhere, I don't know. All I can say is that I never read it.

You can't say Jesus was speaking of something when he didn't speak of it. Either it's in the passage or it isn't. I don't see it there. So how is it relevant to the discussion?
I have stated repeatedly that Jesus made no direct reference to it. I merely stated that it is one of the greater works he was referring to. Hence it is relevant.


What do you mean? Of course when Jesus is speaking to the Apostles the discussion is limited to them.

No it doesn't. The question regarding the hearers of Jesus' statement is decided from the text of John 14."Just because you say it's so doesn't make it so." You admitted that the Lord's prayer was for everyone and it was spoken in the second person just as John 14:12 was. However,I don't think you have a real grasp of the Greek "person"as it's applied to pronouns. The 'person" involved doesn't always limit or confine what is said to the person addressed. I have given you an excellent example of this but I guess you ignored it. You are applying the rules of English person to Greek and that doesn't always hold true. Any real Greek scholar would call your argument absurd.(Like A.T. Robertson)



Yes. Jesus is talking to the Apostles. Jesus is trying to tell them that he isn't going to immediately become king and rule from Jerusalem; he must be put to death instead. That is why their hearts are troubled.Oh,he is talking to the apostles alright. However,it is not limited to them. He is making some universal statements concerning who he is and who they need to believe in. The statement hold true for anyone whose heart is troubled. I suggest you get some Greek schooling. An interlinear and a concordance does not a scholar make.


Why should I believe what Robertson says?Why you ask? Because your interpretation and conclusions are based on your limited knowledge of Greek and they are sophomoric. A.T. Robertson was one of the most respected Greek scholars of his day. In the Attic as well as Koine. Melissa Scott holds to the same interpretation as mine. She speaks 48 languages and is one the foremost Greek scholars in the world. What Greek scholars back YOUR position? Your statement shows the lack of any real in depth study of Greek. I guess I have a different opinion about such matters. If I was challenged in a manner such as this I would do some investigation to see if my challenger's statement had any merit. But then I'm still open to learn...


I can show you, but since you don't accept rational arguments based on reason, I don't know what good it would do.You haven't presented any arguments based on reason. All you have done is posted some half thought out interpretation based on your misunderstanding of the Greek text. I would love to see your "logic" concerning this though. Can you structure a syllogism for me? Hold on while I go get some popcorn...


*edit* I'm still waiting for proof concerning your erroneous definition of biblical faith

BroRog
May 29th 2011, 01:33 AM
You need to prove this BroRog.You already said that you don't accept rational arguments based on reason and the scriptures. What good would it do for me to attempt a proof for you?


Here is a scripture for you to read and tell me how this "truth" of God is aligned with what you just stated?

Heb 11: 1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.This single verse, by itself, can mean anything you want it to mean. But do you see anything in that verse which would lead anyone to believe that "faith" is some kind of force or power that we appropriate to motivate God to get what we want? Anything in that verse which would lead someone to think that "faith" is the spiritual apprehension of a fact or a truth that can't otherwise be known through normal communication? I don't see either one of these definitions of faith in that verse.

But how many people, taking this verse out of context, make the mistake of thinking that Paul is defining faith here? Paul isnt defining faith here. In fact, the actual intent of this section of scripture is to draw our attention to the relationship between "faith" and "what is hoped for." What we are hoping for is first, God's justification, and second, the promise of eternal life. He teaches us that the relationship between faith and justification, or faith and eternal life is that faith, which is a thing we can see, provides adequate grounds for our justification, which is something we can't see. God's justification is intangible and unknowable directly. Those who believe God have been justified in some metaphysical court of justice where only God can know about it directly. But we can know indirectly whether God has granted his justification to a person if we see that the person has genuine faith.

After having asserted this fact, Paul then procedes to list Biblical examples, which serve to illustrate the point that the relationship between faith and justification is that in each case we find that God's justification was given to those who have faith. We see a one-for-one correspondance between declarations of faith by the men of old, and God's declaration of his approval or favor.


Sorry BroRog, with God it's not any concept... it's either His truth, or it's the truth you want the Bible to be. When we want the scriptures to mean what WE want scriptures to mean, then we turn scripture into a CONCEPT. This is what you have done, so your concept has as much power of Christ as any powerless churches these days have... zip, nada, zilch, none... at all.Your objection doesn't follow from what I said. Whether we are talking about God's truth or the truth we want to hear, it's still a concept. So your distinction has no validity as far as I can see. The Christian faith, as I understand it, is propositional truth -- statements we believe. It isn't primarily about the things we feel or the things we experience. The fact that you have converted into a sensual religion is a little disconcerting.


How many times do we hear Jesus tell a person that their faith "healed" them, or healed another? Does you're concept of faith as a "logical" concept which is primarily of mental activity empower you, me, or ANYONE in the Body of Christ to "heal" a person due to a "concept" of faith??? OR... OR, with their faith and not a concept OF faith, is what has and WILL heal another person?Let's understand what Jesus meant when he said "your faith has healed you." Yes, I believe that when Jesus was using the term "faith" he was talking about a propositional truth, which the person has affirmed. Typically, the propositional truth a person believed in order to get healed was that Jesus is the Son of God and that God is working through him. Jesus was not obligated to heal everyone. He was healing those who affirmed the proposition that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God. Faith is affirming the truth.


You go right ahead and prove how a "concept" does the miracles!!!Faith doesn't do miracles. People don't do miracles. Jesus doesn't do miralces. God does miracles and he does miracles when it suits his purpose to glorify himself and his son.


It's your concept and any who hold to the same concept that you have are those who has the Body of Christ powerless.Your view doesn't make the Body of Christ powerful. Again, God has the power and the will to do whatever he wants to do. If he heals anyone in coordination with a prayer request or a healer, it is God's power, not the church's power or the healer's power.


It starts at the individual level BroRog, those who say YES and those who say NO. This concept such as your's because it sure isn't God's... it's not mine and it's sure isn't anyone else's who are out there in the world obedient to God as He uses them for His glory.

If you don't agree with me, then say so as I have said I don't agree with you.

I will continue to serve God as He sees fit and you can continue to serve God as you see fit.I still have no idea what you are saying when you say stuff like this. I've been to a lot of churches in my life and it's never been a matter of whether those in the church say yes or no.

BroRog
May 29th 2011, 01:52 AM
I have stated repeatedly that Jesus made no direct reference to it. I merely stated that it is one of the greater works he was referring to. Hence it is relevant.Yes, I get the idea that YOU think Jesus was talking about stones, but you have yet to demonstrate this from the John 14. Where does John 14 talk about stones?


"Just because you say it's so doesn't make it so." You admitted that the Lord's prayer was for everyone and it was spoken in the second person just as John 14:12 was. However,I don't think you have a real grasp of the Greek "person"as it's applied to pronouns. The 'person" involved doesn't always limit or confine what is said to the person addressed. I have given you an excellent example of this but I guess you ignored it. You are applying the rules of English person to Greek and that doesn't always hold true. Any real Greek scholar would call your argument absurd.(Like A.T. Robertson)I think you misunderstood my point earlier. First off all, I wasn't making a case from the grammar. I was making a case from the context. Secondly, the difference between Jesus' conversation in Luke 11 and his conversation in John 14-17 is the difference between teaching a disciple how to pray, and instructing an apostle in his mission. The Lord's prayer applies to all followers of Jesus because Jesus was instructing his disicples at the time. What Jesus said in John 14 was not directed at disciples; it was directed at Apostles. As you may know from Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, not all are apostles.


Oh,he is talking to the apostles alright. However,it is not limited to them. He is making some universal statements concerning who he is and who they need to believe in. The statement hold true for anyone whose heart is troubled. I suggest you get some Greek schooling. An interlinear and a concordance does not a scholar make.You would do well to strengthen your argument rather than resort to personal attacks. In fact, why don't you get an argument. I haven't seen you argue for your position. You simply keep repeating your conclusions.


Why you ask? Because your interpretation and conclusions are based on your limited knowledge of Greek and they are sophomoric. A.T. Robertson was one of the most respected Greek scholars of his day. In the Attic as well as Koine. Melissa Scott holds to the same interpretation as mine. She speaks 48 languages and is one the foremost Greek scholars in the world. What Greek scholars back YOUR position? Your statement shows the lack of any real in depth study of Greek. I guess I have a different opinion about such matters. If I was challenged in a manner such as this I would do some investigation to see if my challenger's statement had any merit. But then I'm still open to learn...Why don't you have Melissa Scott come here and debate me then? Why did you get involved in the first place if you couldn't argue your point? Better yet, why don't you have the Holy Spirit argue your case for you?


I'm still waiting for proof concerning your erroneous definition of biblical faithyou're going to wait a long time because until you want to listen to my reasons without prejudice, the effort is pointless. Why don't you go and ask Melissa Scott.

Slug1
May 29th 2011, 03:00 AM
All what miracles? The apostles were about the Lords business of witnessing to the lost and seeing souls saved. The miracles were used sparingly to confirm their authority and the authority of the word of God they were preaching.

Roger, here is something that I'll toss in since I do not agree with your statement as you wrote it out. As is, what you said is not correct concerning witnessing and salvation. You see it's not "their" (the Apostles) authority that was being confirmed... it's was God's authority which you did say. BUT, the way you said the statement, you will have people believing it's only the Apostles and "them" proving what "they" say as a witness. Again, this is not true and it's quite a false statement as you wrote it out.

Let's look at this scripture:

Hebrews 2

Do Not Neglect Salvation

1 Therefore we must give the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we drift away. 2 For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward, 3 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him, 4 God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will?

You see, God authenticates Himself through signs/wonders/miracles!!! So that as Christians bring forth to the world the witness of Jesus Christ, God will also authenticate this witness. This isn't limited to ONLY the Apostles accomplishing this. Any who believe, have faith and have the Holy Spirit... CAN and WILL be used by God as He sees fit. If He wants to authenticate the witness people are listening to from a Christian as they (any Christian) witness, then He can and will do a miracle. You see, it's not the Apostles doing this and it was never ONLY the Apostles doing signs/wonders/miracles.

Now... man made doctrine says God can't do this today so that is why LIKE Jesus, many Christians are out there in the world countering this false doctrine with the Word of God. I am just one of those who are many and actively out there in the world doing what Jesus set the example by. Just like the Pharisee's, those who would rather hold to the doctrine instead of the Word of God, this light from all those who are followings Jesus' example are meeting the same resistance He did. But, as Jesus, those who are following His example of using the Word of God (scripture) to shed God's light upon such doctrine... Jesus never stopped nor are those who are led by the Holy Spirit today.

These signs/wonders/miracles are distributed according to Gods will but for those out in the world witnessing but they are also holding to man made doctrines that forbid the Holy Spirit from empowering them in witnessing to others... this makes them powerless concerning God being able to use them as He sees fit. What they believe due to a man made doctrine that says God don't do miracles today LITERALLY stops God from using them to do His will when He'd want to AUTHENTICATE the message and witness that they are speaking to others as they witness.

Do you understand what this is doing? That is why I say it makes a church powerless.

I just pray that this helps you.


Gal 3:5 Therefore He who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you, does He do it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?—

Something else to toss in for ya to think about.

shepherdsword
May 29th 2011, 03:42 AM
Yes, I get the idea that YOU think Jesus was talking about stones, but you have yet to demonstrate this from the John 14. Where does John 14 talk about stones?

You seem to lack the ability to make the logical connection between Jesus's statement and church building. I guess you think a church is wood and stone. Actually it's people.


I think you misunderstood my point earlier. First off all, I wasn't making a case from the grammar. I was making a case from the context. Secondly, the difference between Jesus' conversation in Luke 11 and his conversation in John 14-17 is the difference between teaching a disciple how to pray, and instructing an apostle in his mission. The Lord's prayer applies to all followers of Jesus because Jesus was instructing his disicples at the time. What Jesus said in John 14 was not directed at disciples; it was directed at Apostles. As you may know from Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, not all are apostles.
Oh,I understood you very clearly and the post is there for all to see. You said that since it was spoken in the first person it applied to the apostles only. You need to go google "context". You don't understand how to apply it. You seem to have the misconception that a statement is limited to whatever individual or group is being addressed.The context doesn't limit the statement to the apostles.


You would do well to strengthen your argument rather than resort to personal attacks. In fact, why don't you get an argument. I haven't seen you argue for your position. You simply keep repeating your conclusions.

Stop projecting your methods onto me. You keep repeating your position as if that will make it true. I simply pointed out your lack of knowledge in Greek. You made the mistake of appealing to person to limit audience. You said it was limited to the apostles because of "person". I proved this wrong.I can see now you have no real evidence for your false position other than personal bias.



Why don't you have Melissa Scott come here and debate me then?

You can't even deal with me,why would you want to debate her?


Why did you get involved in the first place if you couldn't argue your point?

I have proved my point.Apparently,from what you have shown me,you lack the capacity to grasp it.I thought that perhaps your issue was just with hearing this from psuedo name on a forum. I thought that maybe you would be more open-minded to a master scholar position on the matter. All you did was abandon your position that person limits audience without admitting you were wrong about that.You also make the same mistake about context. It does not limit the audience either.There is nothing in the passage that limits Jesus' words to the apostles. This point has been proven. I can see now you would probably debate the issue with Jesus himself.


Better yet, why don't you have the Holy Spirit argue your case for you?
That would require someone who would be open to the Spirit's leading as you are obviously not. In fact you have stated numerous times that you do not need the Spirit to interpret the word. What makes me think you would listen to him?


you're going to wait a long time because until you want to listen to my reasons without prejudice, the effort is pointless.

I didn't plan to hold my breath. I know when an opponent has been bested even when he doesn't ;)


Why don't you go and ask Melissa Scott.
It would be nice to be able to.Since I have heard her teaching on the passage I don't think it's necessary. However,it would be wise for you to consult various scholars on the subject.I think the only one who agrees with your limitation of Jesus' words in 14:12 to the apostles is that guy over at the watchtower...

I can see now that it is pointless to argue. The only reason I have even continued was to show that there are solid reasons why your interpretation is in error. I have gotten critical out of sheer frustration. You stubbornly refuse to acknowledge any evidence that disputes your position.
You reject such evidence without so much as dealing with it. I will not make the mistake of engaging you again. We both agree it is pointless.

Conversation ended

Slug1
May 30th 2011, 07:14 AM
Now... man made doctrine says God can't do this today so that is why LIKE Jesus, many Christians are out there in the world countering this false doctrine with the Word of God. I am just one of those who are many and actively out there in the world doing what Jesus set the example by. Just like the Pharisee's, those who would rather hold to the doctrine instead of the Word of God, this light from all those who are followings Jesus' example are meeting the same resistance He did. But, as Jesus, those who are following His example of using the Word of God (scripture) to shed God's light upon such doctrine... Jesus never stopped nor are those who are led by the Holy Spirit today.
Roger, I just realized something as I reread this... I understand your use of the word "zeal" now. Jesus never stopped and all who do the same today as led by the Holy Spirit won't stop either. I do understand what you're saying now.

notuptome
May 30th 2011, 12:18 PM
I agree with you 100% Roger but please read what I wrote. I didn't SAY to silently pray to a prophet. I said God SENT a prophet with an answer as one placed themselves before Him with a question.

Very big difference, don't twist it around like you tend to always do.

If one approaches you with an answer from God, you have a choice to deny the answer God gives you via the Holy Spirit using that prophet as the messenger or you have the choice to accept the answer from God when He answers you this way.
Actually the bible teaches that God deals directly with me. What you are teaching as doctrine is right from the rcc playbook. It is almost truth and very dangerous.

I do not know if you have ever sat under any biblical preaching but this is the methodology God has chosen to edify the church body. The messenger is the pastor and through preaching Gods word the Holy Spirit equips and prepares saints of God for service. Each one an epistle written by God as a witness for Him and His ability to save men from their sins.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

notuptome
May 30th 2011, 12:53 PM
I'm not teaching any doctrine, I'm just "using" scripture against doctrine that is man made. Hmmm, seems Jesus did the same so by His example, nothing wrong with any Christian doing the same as He did ;)
Yet when anyone else uses the same scripture to demonstrate their position you accuse them of creating man made doctrine.

I understand that you had a bad experience in the rcc. The problem is that you have grossly over compensated for that experience but condemning all doctrine. You accuse good well meaning people of promoting man made doctrines without cause. You are in fact promoting the very thing you claim to oppose. Actually you come off as very condescending and self righteous. I sincerely do not believe that it is your intent to appear unloving and arrogant but you are acting like a "ninety day wonder" fresh out of the military academy.

It does not help when you tell everyone that you are an elder and imply that your opinion carries more weight than theirs ever could by virtue of you official capacity in the church. Again I do not believe that it is your intent to come off this way. Scripture teaches us to esteem others better than self. Phil 2:3

Paul gave Timothy his marching orders in 2 Tim 4:2 Preach the word be instant in season, out of season, reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. By Gods grace may we all be faithful in making application to our lives.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Slug1
May 30th 2011, 04:02 PM
Actually the bible teaches that God deals directly with me. Amen Roger. Yet this isn't ALL the truth of God's Word. Here's why... God can and will send a prophet as is needed. We have plenty of this in the Bible both OLD and NEW Testament. Let me show you so you understand. I used an example of answering a prayer and God sending a prophet, which it's clear you disagree with and state that the ONLY reason is that the Bible teaches that God deals "directly" with you. That is fine, He deals Directly with me as well as I showed you in this testimony that I had PMed you. You never commented, so I will post the link here so we all can see that God DOES also deal with me in a very personal and direct manner: http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/223094-Dream-on-20-Feb-11?p=2669093#post2669093

Now, for this discussion and using the Word of God to show that God will ALSO deal with His Body of Christ through the use of a prophet that God will send as He's sees fit to, lets use these scriptures to show you this TRUTH of God's Word that is not limited to what some in the Body of Christ have chosen to believe due to doctrine that they hold to:

Acts 21:9 Now this man had four virgin daughters who prophesied. 10 And as we stayed many days, a certain prophet named Agabus came down from Judea. 11 When he had come to us, he took Paul’s belt, bound his own hands and feet, and said, “Thus says the Holy Spirit, ‘So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man who owns this belt, and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.’”

Once again, this is not an answer to a prayer or a question asked of God and He sends a prophet with the answer even though SUCH an example as seeking God for an answer is shown in the Bible several times and God don't change... He CAN send a prophet as He wills for whatever purpose He deems. However, these scriptures DO point out that God can and WILL use a prophet even during this New Covenant with Him.

God will even WORK through others in the Body of Christ Roger... we can't limit God. He will minister to any of us and that includes you, in anyway He wants. A simple disciple named Ananias was sent to Saul/Paul to do God's work upon him. Jesus did the main work, but God wanted to be gloried so we also have Him working through an obedient servant as well. All this is in Acts 9 so you can read it for yourself. We CANNOT disregard any scriptures that don't align with what we WANT to believe. God will SEND people to do His work and BRING a message from Him.

For GP, I will insert this scripture from Acts 9 to show this truth: 11 So the Lord said to him, “Arise and go to the street called Straight, and inquire at the house of Judas for one called Saul of Tarsus, for behold, he is praying. In context, God even informed Paul that He was sending a servant to him.

If the ONLY way that God has ever spoken to you so far in your life, is DIRECTLY to you as He did me in that testimony, that is GREAT. Just DON'T believe that this is the ONLY way... scripture SHOWS us such a belief is wrong and is not based on His truth. Clearly, He can send a person to you as we see He can and will do.

Question for you Roger... when God does deal with you directly and one day He tells you that He's sending a servant to you, so this person can layon of hands upon you... are you gonna believe doctrine and refuse this or are you gonna believe the Word of God and be obedient and wait for the servant/disciple/prophet to arrive?

Same happened in Acts 10 between Cornelius and Peter... you should really open your eyes to God's ways and His truth. Phillip was sent to that eunuch in Acts 8... there are MANY examples for you to read and know God's truth and stop believing that God will deal with you directly and NEVER use others in the Body of Christ to do the dealing THROUGH!!!!! He will use servants, disciples, men/women of God, prophets etc... whoever and HOWEVER He chooses.

99% of the time, He deals with me directly as He does you. It is rear that a prophet will be sent, it's happened only a couple times in my life. Many servants have been sent to help me but the reality is... it's usually me and Him, one on one just like I testified while on my face praying!!


What you are teaching as doctrine is right from the rcc playbook. It is almost truth and very dangerous.Until you pull out this playbook, all this statement is, is opinion. What I said is dangerous to you because you don't believe God will send a prophet as He wills even though I once again show you in scripture (God's Word and HIS truth) that He can and will. Since you don't believe He will during this New Covenant we have with Him through Jesus Christ... you continue to twist what I am trying to show you based on God's Word. I guess you can twist it all day long in any way you want and todays method is to call it doctrine from the RCC playbook :lol:. I love you Roger, we all do but your twisting of God's Word isn't working here, never has and never will.


I do not know if you have ever sat under any biblical preaching but this is the methodology God has chosen to edify the church body. Instead of hinting that I am not Christian.. say it Roger. I have asked you this once, and now I ask you again to be honest. If you are not gonna be straight up, please stop with the hints.

You use the word edify yet the Bible has VERY clearly explained to ALL the Body of Christ that prophecy is for the EDIFICATION of the Body of Christ. Again, you do not believe this, so you speak out AGAINST God's truth and His Holy Word.

Not gonna work here in this ministry Roger... you really need to stop.

If you read through 1 Cor 12-14 you will understand that the use of Prophecy and even the interpretation of the Gift of Tongues IS FOR the edification for the Body of Christ. Do I need to pull all these scriptures out again so God's truth can shine upon your unbelief of God's Word and His truth?

Anyway, with the examples I did provide you from several scriptures from the Book of Acts, you can see how God can edify us through the use of obedient servants such as prophets. Again, this is your choice to accept God's truth and believe the Word of God or continue to believe what a doctrine will have you believe. I am just helping you and any others who are reading through this thread.


The messenger is the pastor and through preaching Gods word the Holy Spirit equips and prepares saints of God for service. Each one an epistle written by God as a witness for Him and His ability to save men from their sins.Well, I will agree with this to a point. As stated, it's not FULLY the truth and is thus, wrong. So my agreement is to the fact that a pastor and his preaching DOES equip and prepare the saints of God for service. However, where you cut God's truth short and paint a false truth is by this scripture:

Eph 4:11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; 14 that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, 15 but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ— 16 from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.

Ya see, you only touched on 1/5 of what the Bible tells us... what you tell us is that ONLY pastors are given to us for the equipping... that's not true Roger. He's given us much more and it's your choice to accept and believe God's truth and His Holy Word... or not.

I know the reason why you don't believe God's truth as you have made this very clear and its all about a single scripture in the Bible:

1 Cor 13:10 But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away.

You believe that the "perfect" is the Bible. Well, we have to divide 1 Cor 13:10 with scripture to determine if this is accurate. Seems the reason I was led to post all that scripture from Ephesians 4 scripture is clear now... it is to point something else out. You see, the Bible has NOT done what we read about in the Ephesians scriptures. We, as a Body of Christ are NOT in unity. We ARE tossed about and carried about with EVERY wind of doctrine by the trickery of man. This is WHY, some are in the world led by the Holy Spirit using scripture to speak against these man made doctrines, JUST as Jesus did. Now, through love (as also divided by the 1 Cor 12-14 scripture) the Body of Christ can do what they can but until Jesus returns, it's not gonna be PERFECT. He is the "perfect", from the 1 Cor 13:10 scripture.

You don't believe ANYTHING that I ever bring forth even though the scriptures are used. You make statements that twist all the scriptures that are always brought forth to help you, I'm not the only one, many others have attempted to help you with God's truth as well.

If you won't accept God's truth based on what I have shown you through scripture that your statements are false... all I can do is continue to give you scripture and point it out. If you will not allow these scriptures to help you, these scriptures will help those reading through this thread. That is all I can do through writing, all else will be lifted in prayer for you to see and accept the Word of God according to the Bible and not according to what a doctrine has interpreted OF the Bible.

Slug1
May 30th 2011, 04:02 PM
Yet when anyone else uses the same scripture to demonstrate their position you accuse them of creating man made doctrine.

I understand that you had a bad experience in the rcc. The problem is that you have grossly over compensated for that experience but condemning all doctrine. You accuse good well meaning people of promoting man made doctrines without cause. You are in fact promoting the very thing you claim to oppose. Actually you come off as very condescending and self righteous. I sincerely do not believe that it is your intent to appear unloving and arrogant but you are acting like a "ninety day wonder" fresh out of the military academy.

It does not help when you tell everyone that you are an elder and imply that your opinion carries more weight than theirs ever could by virtue of you official capacity in the church. Again I do not believe that it is your intent to come off this way. Scripture teaches us to esteem others better than self. Phil 2:3

Paul gave Timothy his marching orders in 2 Tim 4:2 Preach the word be instant in season, out of season, reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. By Gods grace may we all be faithful in making application to our lives.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

See above post ^^^^



You accuse good well meaning people of promoting man made doctrines without cause. You are in fact promoting the very thing you claim to oppose. Actually you come off as very condescending and self righteous. Jesus was thought of and accused of the same.


I sincerely do not believe that it is your intent to appear unloving and arrogant but you are acting like a "ninety day wonder" fresh out of the military academy.I dealt with 2LT's like this and I had to set them straight too.

Bandit
May 30th 2011, 04:20 PM
Well, I just scanned back to the 2011-2007 mark....lol. Nothing like confusing the mods with a resurrected thread...lol

...

But I'm not confused... :confused. I was on the ground-floor of this thread, and I can pick it back up if need be. Just allow me a minute or two to :B and all will come back to me.

Slug1
May 30th 2011, 04:23 PM
But I'm not confused... :confused. I was on the ground-floor of this thread, and I can pick it back up if need be. Just allow me a minute or two to :B and all will come back to me.hahaha :rofl:

Bandit
May 30th 2011, 04:41 PM
...
But, I am not sure why repentance is such an issue, I mean without one first hearing the Gospel, one coming to the realization that one is a sinner, why would one even consider themselves in need of a Savior? Seems like repentance and getting saved kinda go hand in hand.
Back in the OT, the sacrifices meant nothing to God if the one offering was not of the right heart, and without first realizing there was the need, repentance, the heart would not be right for approaching God for forgiveness.

I mean if a person is convicted of sin, desiring to come to Christ accepting Him as their Lord and Savior, wouldnt repentance just be the natural course? Very few come to Christ thinking they have nothing to repent of.

Acts 3:19 Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord,

How does repentance make the Gospel more difficult, I don't get that anyway.

The Gospel is simple, we are sinners, we need Christ... why, we are sinners in need of repentance and cleansing. How can a person approach Christ for cleansing when they are not in a repentance frame of heart.

Repentance starts with realizing one is a sinner and continues when one sins.

Hello quiet dove,

The real argument over 'repentance' is whether it is a purely intellectual activity [one agrees mentally with certain facts: 1)I'm a sinner, 2)Christ died for my sins, 3)therefore I am forgiven because I accept facts 1 and 2], or does true repentance require action? Does one have to actually begin living as God commands (loving God and neighbor)?

Many want to define 'repentance' as a purely intellectual activity: you agree to a certain set of facts about Jesus (but not that Jesus has ever made any demands upon how one actually must live). But can one honestly read the scriptures and come away with such a concept? If Jesus were to say, "Follow Me," would we be saved based upon the mere intellectual understanding of His command, or would we ever have to get off our butt and actually follow Him? I suggest that we would have to put action to our words to be truely saved.

Bandit
May 30th 2011, 05:15 PM
The Greek word for "repent" is "metanoia" (noun) and "matanoeo" (verb) you see as defined in the Strongs #3340, 3341: to think differently or afterwards, reconsider. After thought, change of mind. Repentance basically means a "change of mind" and the context must determine what is involved in this "change of mind." Repentance in salvation involves a change of mind about our sinful position and need for Christ to save us and the new direction of this change of mind is faith in Christ alone for salvation (Matthew 21:32; Acts 20:21; 2 Timothy 2:25). The Bible also tells us that true repentance will result in a change of actions. Acts 26:20 declares, “I preached that they should repent and turn to God and prove their repentance by their deeds. This is the fruit of repentance (Matthew 3:8), not the essence of repentance. I have heard some well-known preachers say, "If you want to be saved, repent of your sins, turn from your sins." If turning from your sins means to stop sinning, then people can only be saved if they stop sinning. And it is unlikely that anyone has ever been saved, since we don't know anyone who has ever completely stopped sinning.

...

Hello mailmandan,

I'm going to have to disagree with the overall intention of your post - as good as that intention may be. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus speaks of two paths (two different ways of living before God). In that context, if one 'repents' then one agrees that they have been walking the wrong path (the one that leads to destruction). Are you really going to try to tell me that one could 'repent' without having to change the path they are walking? (Please say, "No," here.) If the thing God wants us to repent of (change our minds about) is the path we are on, how then can one 'repent' without changing paths?

It is like agreeing that a red traffic light means STOP, yet running every red light in town. Claiming salvation will not save you when you pull out in front of that fast-moving 18-wheeler. What would have saved you would have been to stop at the red light as you had supposedly 'intellectually' agreed to.

Bandit
May 30th 2011, 05:30 PM
..
As it's used today, repentance when included in the gospel message unfortunately refers to saying essentially, "OK, are you ready to turn from sin?" That is simply NOT part of the gospel message. We are not saved by turning from sin and turning to Christ. ...

Hello BD,

So, let's say I'm a pagan, and I sacrifice children to my pagan God. Are you saying I don't have to turn from such pagan practices? Please show me where Jesus (or any of the apostles) said I could be saved and still live as a pagan. Would not God require me to admit that such practices were wrong and to turn from them?

Bandit
May 30th 2011, 05:43 PM
Actually, I use the phrase 'easy believism' to denote the idea that once one has 'received salvation,' they need not be required to live as if they're 'in Christ'. The sin can stay: the bad habits, the immoral behavior, the hate for one's neighbors and enemies, etc. Or it can go, it doesn't matter - once you're 'saved,' you can do whatever you want. I bring this up only to give you an example of someone who uses the phrase 'easy believism' but doesn't advocate a work's based gospel.


I can assure you that no one I am aware of who holds to "easy believism" ("free grace") thinks or has expressed anything even remotely close to such. That is an unfounded concern of those who hold to Lordship Salvation.

Out of concern for antinomianism, you can turn salvation to salvation by faith PLUS works, if you're not careful.

Thx,
BD

Hello BD,

I think Athanasius has expressed a genuine concern. I happen to know many who have expressed support for the "cheap grace" concept, the popular Charles Stanley being one. He is quoted as saying something to the effect that once a person is saved, they can "live like the devil" and still not loose their salvation. (And I actually heard him say this on one of his television programs.) I am glad to know that you would object to such a statement, but believe me, there are many who do say such things.

Bandit
May 30th 2011, 06:09 PM
We are saved through faith, but God is the one believing into himself to save us. This is why it says "You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide. John 15:16 " We never chose him, but he chose us to be saved before the foundation of the world. Indeed, it says "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. John 6:44 "

Hello david,

I would say that you are mixing different verses with different contexts, but that leads us away from the purpose of this thread, so let's not follow up on that here.

watchinginawe
May 30th 2011, 06:26 PM
Hello mailmandan,

I'm going to have to disagree with the overall intention of your post - as good as that intention may be. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus speaks of two paths (two different ways of living before God). In that context, if one 'repents' then one agrees that they have been walking the wrong path (the one that leads to destruction). Are you really going to try to tell me that one could 'repent' without having to change the path they are walking? (Please say, "No," here.) If the thing God wants us to repent of (change our minds about) is the path we are on, how then can one 'repent' without changing paths?

It is like agreeing that a red traffic light means STOP, yet running every red light in town. Claiming salvation will not save you when you pull out in front of that fast-moving 18-wheeler. What would have saved you would have been to stop at the red light as you had supposedly 'intelectually' agreed to.

Bandit, I think mailmandan nailed it. I am not sure what you would be disagreeing with.

Repentance is what happens before what happens happens. It causes the what happens, or the actions. It seems that you are suggesting in the last few posts that you believe our actions will subsequently give us a change of our mind, kind of like forming a habit. Rather, our change of mind makes room for a new belief and subsequently results in a change in our actions.

Let's use a secular example.

Suppose we are raised in a home where both parents smoked. Suppose that we had only one room that had an air conditioner in the house and the whole family would use that room on very hot days for respite. Suppose also that the parents, being ignorant of any consequence, never gave a second thought to smoking like a stack while their children were also in the room.

Suppose that later the parents read about the potential of second hand smoke being harmful to those who didn't smoke but where exposed to such an environment, especially children. Here the parents are introduced to the subject for the first time and have an opportunity to form one of at least two potential beliefs. It is true, or it is not true. Either selection would be repentance at this point in my opinion. If they believed the potential threat was true, they probably would quit smoking in closed rooms with the children. If they believed the potential threat was not real, then they would probably continue smoking in closed rooms with the children. Either way, their actions now are based on something more than ignorance.

But that doesn't close the case. It could be that those who continued smoking hold the belief that there is no harm selfishly, perhaps as even a justification of their continued actions. Perhaps they continue in that stubborness until one of the children falls ill to some kind of respiratory ailment. Faced with such evidence, the parents might decide that they were wrong to ignore the threat, thus removing the previous stubborn belief and then forming a new belief that smoking in closed rooms with children is harmful even to those who don't smoke. Now do the parents continue to smoke in the closed room with children present? Most will cease to knowingly harm their children. Even though, some might continue, but they surely will be convicted of it in their mind if they do. Their repentance on the matter serves for the sure conviction of behavior in opposition to their repentance. They may even harden their heart and return to the previous belief. Note that this would be a willful belief in opposition to an exposed truth.

The same is true with the Christian. When they repent of their sin, continued sin is met with sure conviction of that acknowledgement and subsequent belief in Jesus Christ. That is the corrective rudder of the Holy Spirit within those that believe in Jesus Christ. That can't happen to "unbelievers", right? Why not?

But let's take another example. Suppose one goes to the altar determined to repent of their sin and be saved. In the process, they leave their makeup, lipstick, and jewelry down there. Suppose they felt convicted to "give these up" to accept Jesus, perhaps persuaded by a sermon, as their repentance. Well now we have a sacrifice, actions taken before and in anticipation of a subsequent "receiving" by God of the action. This isn't much differenct than penance in my opinion. I will not say that God will not honor the sincere person, but in their salvation they might be forming beliefs that might endanger their walk.

Bandit
May 30th 2011, 07:00 PM
... But Paul would say, "No, God is not impressed with your religion. He could care less if you tithe, pray, read your Bible, or have "experiences". We are not saved by doing all that stuff. Christian rituals are no more effective than Jewish rituals.

I'm at a loss as of what to say. So God cares (or requires) nothing of how I live?

BroRog
May 30th 2011, 09:44 PM
I'm at a loss as of what to say. So God cares (or requires) nothing of how I live?The Bible makes a distinction between our "religion" and our "way." Our "religion" is our praxis: a set of rituals and practices we perform habitually or regularly in order to seek God's favor. Our "way" is how we define ourselves in terms of what we do according to our personal set of beliefs and values, in which what is "right" or "ought" to be done is derived from what we believe about God and about ourselves in relation to God.

Many Christians have the wrong impression about what are known as "spiritual disciplines", or in modern times known as "spiritual formation." The belief is that regular and habitual prayer will lead to an increase in spirituality and subsequently lead to God's favor. God could care less, however, whether we regularly and habitually pray, tithe, study, worship, fellowship, confess, take communion, fast, attend church, celebrate holidays, baptize or any number of other things that fall into the category of religious praxis. God has no real interest or desire that we practice a religion. Instead, his concern is how closely our "way" aligns with the "way" of Jesus. Rather than practicing our religion, we are encouraged to be wise, and virtuous. And so the virtues we practice should be the virtues Jesus practiced. The wisdom Jesus taught is the wisdom we need to learn. What God requires is not our ritual giving, our ritual prayers, our ritual fasts, our ritual holidays, our ritual church attendance, our ritual communion, or anything associated with religion. Rather, what God requires is that we repent, change our mind, humble ourselves, put others first, love other believers, do good to our enemies, practice kindness and generosity, submit to authority, live a quiet life, mind ones own business, be content with where God has placed us, avoid strife and idolatry and pride. To the degree that our "way" aligns with the "way" of Christ, to that degree God is pleased with us.

Bandit
May 31st 2011, 12:39 AM
The Greek word for "repent" is "metanoia" (noun) and "matanoeo" (verb) you see as defined in the Strongs #3340, 3341: to think differently or afterwards, reconsider. After thought, change of mind. Repentance basically means a "change of mind" and the context must determine what is involved in this "change of mind." Repentance in salvation involves a change of mind about our sinful position and need for Christ to save us and the new direction of this change of mind is faith in Christ alone for salvation (Matthew 21:32; Acts 20:21; 2 Timothy 2:25). The Bible also tells us that true repentance will result in a change of actions. Acts 26:20 declares, “I preached that they should repent and turn to God and prove their repentance by their deeds. This is the fruit of repentance (Matthew 3:8), not the essence of repentance. I have heard some well-known preachers say, "If you want to be saved, repent of your sins, turn from your sins." If turning from your sins means to stop sinning, then people can only be saved if they stop sinning. And it is unlikely that anyone has ever been saved, since we don't know anyone who has ever completely stopped sinning.

...


Hello mailmandan,

I'm going to have to disagree with the overall intention of your post - as good as that intention may be. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus speaks of two paths (two different ways of living before God). In that context, if one 'repents' then one agrees that they have been walking the wrong path (the one that leads to destruction). Are you really going to try to tell me that one could 'repent' without having to change the path they are walking? (Please say, "No," here.) If the thing God wants us to repent of (change our minds about) is the path we are on, how then can one 'repent' without changing paths?

It is like agreeing that a red traffic light means STOP, yet running every red light in town. Claiming salvation will not save you when you pull out in front of that fast-moving 18-wheeler. What would have saved you would have been to stop at the red light as you had supposedly 'intellectually' agreed to.


Bandit, I think mailmandan nailed it. I am not sure what you would be disagreeing with.

Repentance is what happens before what happens happens. It causes the what happens, or the actions. It seems that you are suggesting in the last few posts that you believe our actions will subsequently give us a change of our mind, kind of like forming a habit. Rather, our change of mind makes room for a new belief and subsequently results in a change in our actions.

Let's use a secular example.

...


Hello watchinginawe,

I read your example, but I think a better example comes straight from the bible itself. In Matthew 12 (and Luke 11) Jesus says the men (people) of Ninevah repented at the preaching of Jonah. I think the Book of Jonah explains the details pretty well: the 'repentance' God requires is more than intellectual assent. True repentance includes right actions. And why is it that in Matthew 3 John the Baptist says, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand! ... Brood of vipers! Who has warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Therefore bear fruits worthy of repentance... therefore every tree which does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire"? I suggest that neither Jonah, nor John the Baptist, nor Jesus has mere intellectual assent in mind when they speak of repentance.

If 'repentance' does not include actions, then why does John the Baptist speak as he does? If by repentance one escapes God's wrath and is accepted into His kingdom, why then does he go on to mention those who will be cut down and burned for their lack of "good fruit"? It would seem that John reconizes that true repentance before God includes one's behavior.

Bandit
May 31st 2011, 01:07 AM
... But Paul would say, "No, God is not impressed with your religion. He could care less if you tithe, pray, read your Bible, or have "experiences". We are not saved by doing all that stuff. Christian rituals are no more effective than Jewish rituals.


I'm at a loss as of what to say. So God cares (or requires) nothing of how I live?


... God could care less, however, whether we regularly and habitually pray, tithe, study, worship, fellowship, confess, take communion, fast, attend church, celebrate holidays, baptize or any number of other things that fall into the category of religious praxis. God has no real interest or desire that we practice a religion. Instead, his concern is how closely our "way" aligns with the "way" of Jesus. Rather ... what God requires is that we repent, change our mind, humble ourselves, put others first, love other believers, do good to our enemies, practice kindness and generosity, submit to authority, live a quiet life, mind ones own business, be content with where God has placed us, avoid strife and idolatry and pride. ...

So, in other words, you are saying that God really does care that we live rightly (as opposed to empty religion). In fact, God cares so much that through Jesus and the prophets He has tried to show us the right way to do these things. For example, in the Sermon on the Mount Jesus illustrates the right and wrong way to pray, the right and wrong way to give alms, etc. So doing such things the right way really is important to God. I think we are in agreement here.

Slug1
May 31st 2011, 01:10 AM
Hello watchinginawe,

I read your example, but I think a better example comes straight from the bible itself. In Matthew 12 (and Luke 11) Jesus says the men (people) of Ninevah repented at the preaching of Jonah. I think the Book of Jonah explains the details pretty well: the 'repentance' God requires is more than intellectual assent. True repentance includes right actions. And why is it that in Matthew 3 John the Baptist says, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand! ... Brood of vipers! Who has warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Therefore bear fruits worthy of repentance... therefore every tree which does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire"? I suggest that neither Jonah, nor John the Baptist, nor Jesus has mere intellectual assent in mind when they speak of repentance.

If 'repentance' does not include actions, then why does John the Baptist speak as he does? If by repentance one escapes God's wrath and is accepted into His kingdom, why then does he go on to mention those who will be cut down and burned for their lack of "good fruit"? It would seem that John reconizes that true repentance before God includes one's behavior.Hooah, this can also be divided with John 15 in support that "action" or in other words, "fruit" will be the result of those who are "doing" during their walk in Christ and not simply "saying". Intellectually, anyone can "say" anything but it's by their action and what God does through that action that gives value to what they say.

Concerning repentance, we all can "say" I repent. We can even convince ourselves we've repented but then if our heart is not changed and this change has resulted in us doing the work of God as He would lead us... what was the actual value of "repenting" if nothing amounts from the repentance?

Repentance means a change WILL be in effect. If there is no change, then there was no repentance. Repentance is a matter of "surrender" to God and whatever needs to be surrendered, DON'T take it back.

BroRog
May 31st 2011, 02:12 AM
So, in other words, you are saying that God really does care that we live rightly (as opposed to empty religion). In fact, God cares so much that through Jesus and the prophets He has tried to show us the right way to do these things. For example, in the Sermon on the Mount Jesus illustrates the right and wrong way to pray, the right and wrong way to give alms, etc. So doing such things the right way really is important to God. I think we are in agreement here.We might agree. Let me flesh this out a bit more and we'll see.

I don't think Jesus came to teach us the right way to pray or the right way to give alms as if by "right way" we are talking about the technique of prayer, or the technique of giving alms. Again, I don't think God cares one way or the other whether we pray or give alms. Jesus' concern was whether or not a person was rightly related to God and had the right orientation of the heart. If one thinks that prayer or giving alms is the means to achieve this right relationship with God, that person hasn't understood Jesus' teaching. "Blessed are those who mourn", he says, which indicates an inner attitude of contrition. "Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness", he says, which also reflects an inner attitude of the heart. He teachs us that a man who lusts after a woman has committed adultery with her in his heart, directing the disciples to consider the inner reality of the man. Jesus taught us to consider that God is less interested that we DO certain things and more interested that we BE a certain kind of person.

watchinginawe
May 31st 2011, 02:51 AM
Hello watchinginawe,

I read your example, but I think a better example comes straight from the bible itself. In Matthew 12 (and Luke 11) Jesus says the men (people) of Ninevah repented at the preaching of Jonah. I think the Book of Jonah explains the details pretty well: the 'repentance' God requires is more than intellectual assent. True repentance includes right actions. And why is it that in Matthew 3 John the Baptist says, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand! ... Brood of vipers! Who has warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Therefore bear fruits worthy of repentance... therefore every tree which does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire"? I suggest that neither Jonah, nor John the Baptist, nor Jesus has mere intellectual assent in mind when they speak of repentance.

If 'repentance' does not include actions, then why does John the Baptist speak as he does? If by repentance one escapes God's wrath and is accepted into His kingdom, why then does he go on to mention those who will be cut down and burned for their lack of "good fruit"? It would seem that John reconizes that true repentance before God includes one's behavior.

Well you see, that is the problem with terms like "true" repentance and "easy" believism. If one repents, they repent. If one believes, they believe. Sure there is feigned repentance and false profession. But those are exactly what won't bring forth action.

I don't think I mentioned anything about intellectual assent. I don't see where mailmandan did either (at least in the excerpted portion you offered in response to him). That is something you add to his post in order to disagree with him. That is why I started my post with: "I am not sure what you would be disagreeing with." You distill a very good post by inserting a term of your own to disagree with. Right action is caused by right understanding.

If you want my opinion regarding intellectual assent, then I would term the kind of intellectual assent that doesn't pass the "true repentance" test as "acknowledgement". One might acknowledge certain things without really having a determined "change of mind" about the Gospel and what is inferred by the same. I put it like this. The Gospel is not informational as in "news", rather it is transformational, as in "good news for you".

One of my favorite verses is Jesus' "troubleshooting" of the Pharisee's problem:

Matthew 21:31 Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.

32 For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.

What is it Jesus is suggesting that the Pharisees should have done in order to believe John the Baptist? They needed to admit they were wrong first in order believe him.

What happened in Nineveh?

Jonah 3:4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.

5 So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.

They believed God, this caused the actions which God later saw:

10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

Regarding my example of the makeup, lipstick, and jewelry. Repentance? Pennance? or Sacrifice? Please comment.

watchinginawe
May 31st 2011, 03:06 AM
Concerning repentance, we all can "say" I repent. We can even convince ourselves we've repented but then if our heart is not changed and this change has resulted in us doing the work of God as He would lead us... what was the actual value of "repenting" if nothing amounts from the repentance? I would suggest that it is very possible that one can "say" I repent, and even "stop sinning", and have not repented. Right actions based on wrong understanding is not repentance. It might be actions based on fear, or peer pressure, justification, or desire for conformity, etc. For example, if we passed a law that sentenced adulterers to stoning, do you think we would have a lot of "repentance" among adulterers? Do you think their actions would change? Likely they would suspend their adultering ways while still being an adulterer at heart.

Slug1
May 31st 2011, 03:47 AM
I would suggest that it is very possible that one can "say" I repent, and even "stop sinning", and have not repented. Right actions based on wrong understanding is not repentance. It might be actions based on fear, or peer pressure, justification, or desire for conformity, etc. For example, if we passed a law that sentenced adulterers to stoning, do you think we would have a lot of "repentance" among adulterers? Do you think their actions would change? Likely they would suspend their adultering ways while still being an adulterer at heart.

Hooah, which is why I stated about the change of heart. Sure, people can fake it and many will be exposed by their fruit (good or bad) that shows the value of their heart. Those good enough to fake it and not be exposed, they will have their day saying... Lord Lord!

mailmandan
Jun 1st 2011, 12:17 PM
Hello mailmandan,

I'm going to have to disagree with the overall intention of your post - as good as that intention may be. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus speaks of two paths (two different ways of living before God). In that context, if one 'repents' then one agrees that they have been walking the wrong path (the one that leads to destruction). Are you really going to try to tell me that one could 'repent' without having to change the path they are walking? (Please say, "No," here.) If the thing God wants us to repent of (change our minds about) is the path we are on, how then can one 'repent' without changing paths?

It is like agreeing that a red traffic light means STOP, yet running every red light in town. Claiming salvation will not save you when you pull out in front of that fast-moving 18-wheeler. What would have saved you would have been to stop at the red light as you had supposedly 'intellectually' agreed to.

How can one change paths without first repenting? Proving our repentance by our deeds is not the same thing as saying that these deeds are the very essence of our repentance and the means of receiving salvation. We must not put the cart before the horse and teach salvation by works. These deeds are the fruit of repentance. We change the path that we are walking as a result of repentance.

RollTide21
Jun 1st 2011, 01:50 PM
No, that is not what I am saying. The conversation Jesus has with his apostles takes place in the upper room. He is talking TO them concerning the mission he is giving to THEM. This conversation isn't a message as from a pastor. Jesus is about to be crucified; he knows this but at this point his apostles haven't accepted it as fact. This conversation is a personal dialog between Jesus and the apostles in which Jesus reassures the apostles that after he leaves, after he ascends to the Father, they will not be alone, left without help to do what job he gave them to do.

So then, when Jesus says, "greater works shall YOU do . . ." he is indicating the apostles, not us, not anyone else. The only reason why we know about this conversation is because John, one of the apostles, wrote it down for the rest of us to read. And as we read, we need to be aware that we are reading this from the third person perspective, which means the subject of the sentence is NOT the reader. You and I are not part of the conversation and so we are not being told that we shall do greater works.

But just because a passage of the Bible isn't being spoken directly TO us, doesn't mean that the message isn't FOR us. After all, John had a reason why he wanted to share this conversation with the church. In this case, rather than simply reading the conversation as if Jesus was talking to us, we ask ourselves why John has decided to tell us about the conversation. The message for US (from John to the church) is to reassure the church that Jesus did indeed pick a set of apostles and did indeed guarantee that these men would faithfully and with all fidelity relay the teachings of Jesus to the church.

If we want to make application of this passage, and we should want to apply it to our lives, we don't say, "Jesus promised that I would do greater works." No, we say, "Jesus promised to leave us with a set of men who would faithfully and accurately relay his message, and who would be given such wisdom and insight into the teachings of Jesus that these men could speak for Jesus and give us instructions that Jesus never spoke, but have the same weight and force, and wisdom as if Jesus spoke them himself. In other words, the bottom line message for US today is that we can trust our New Testament scriptures.

Edit to add: with respect to the pastor teaching a message from the pulpit, the pastor would do well to simply reiterate what Jesus and the apostles already taught us. To the degree that the pastor's message agrees with the teaching of Jesus and the apostles, to that degree that pastor is feeding his flock. The pastor's job is to elucidate and explicate and make clear what Jesus and the apostles have said and his attitude should be "Isn't this what Jesus and the apostles have said?"Hmm. A very good take on that passage. I don't know if I agree or not, but...still.

RollTide21
Jun 1st 2011, 03:12 PM
delete post.................

Bandit
Jun 1st 2011, 11:02 PM
How can one change paths without first repenting? Proving our repentance by our deeds is not the same thing as saying that these deeds are the very essence of our repentance and the means of receiving salvation. We must not put the cart before the horse and teach salvation by works. These deeds are the fruit of repentance. We change the path that we are walking as a result of repentance.

The cart and the horse are connected. Look at the example I cited. How does the Book of Jonah describe the response of the Ninevites to the preaching of Jonah? As Jesus said, a tree is judged by its fruits. Changing paths is a part of repentance: no path change, no repentance.

mailmandan
Jun 2nd 2011, 02:52 AM
The cart and the horse are connected. Look at the example I cited. How does the Book of Jonah describe the response of the Ninevites to the preaching of Jonah? As Jesus said, a tree is judged by its fruits. Changing paths is a part of repentance: no path change, no repentance.

The cart still comes after the horse. What exactly was Jonah preaching to the Ninevites? Not Repent and believe the gospel (Mark 1:15). In Jonah 3:4, we see that Jonah told the people of Ninevah that the city of Ninevah would be overthrown in 40 days if they did not repent of their wickedness. The people of Ninevah repented "changed their minds" at the preaching of Jonah, believed God, and turned from their evil ways. When God saw by their deeds that they had turned from their evil ways, he relented and did not bring on them the punishment he had threatened. Unfortunately, the city of Ninevah reverted within one generation to it's old pagan ways (Nahum 3:7,8). Repentance unto salvation through faith in Jesus Christ is not what Jonah was preaching here.

Jesus said, "You will know them by their fruits." Every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Why? Not because we are saved based on the fruit that we produce, but because the lack of bearing good fruit demonstrates a bad tree. Therefore by their fruits you will know them (Matthew 7:15-20). Good fruit is the by product of a good tree. The tree must be good first (horse) and then the good fruit follows afterward (cart). If changing paths is part of repentance in receiving salvation, then where do you draw the line in the sand and say, I changed paths sufficiently enough and now based on that, I will be saved? Is salvation based on changing our mind and believing the gospel or on our best efforts to change paths afterwards?

Bandit
Jun 2nd 2011, 04:58 PM
... When God saw by their [Ninevite's] deeds that they had turned from their evil ways, he relented and did not bring on them the punishment he had threatened. ...

You have said a mouthful here. I just wish you fully understood it.