Did Noah find favor or grace?

armothe said:

What Jesus expected Nicodemus to understand was regarding the upcoming release of the Spirit. Rather, if Jesus expected him to understand what it meant to be 'born again' He would have retorted in verse 5 instead of 10.

Click to expand...

First of all, Jesus did expect Nicodemus to understand about being born from above and He does retort in verse 7 "marvel not".

Second, the "these things" that Jesus is referring to in verse 10 are the operation of the Spirit in being born from above that Jesus expected he should know being a spiritual leader of Israel.

Third, you can not take what Jesus said starting in verse 13 and supper impose that back onto Nicodemus's question in verse 9 as if Jesus didn't say anything in between: as if he understood and that he was inquiring as to how Jesus was going to make these things possible for the future.

Lets take a look at what Jesus says in response to verse 9 and I will quote from YLT 1898 since you seem to think the literal helps your case.

John 3:10-12
"Jesus answered and said to him, `Thou art the teacher of Israel--and these things thou dost not know!`Verily, verily, I say to thee--What we have known we speak, and what we have seen we testify, and our testimony ye do not receive; if the earthly things I said to you, and ye do not believe, how, if I shall say to you the heavenly things, will ye believe?"

This clearly indicates that Nicodemus has not understood anything that Jesus has been saying.

Lets look at some more from the YLT regarding the operation of the Spirit in regeneration or being born from above.

John 3:8
"the Spirit where he willeth doth blow, and his voice thou dost hear, but thou hast not known whence he cometh, and whither he goeth; thus is every one who hath been born of the Spirit.' "

Why does Jesus speak of being born of the Spirit in the past tense? Clearly this is Jesus describing the current state of affairs regarding regeneration during the time of the old covenant.

This is the reason that Jesus expected Nicodemus, being a teacher of Israel, to understand what it meant to be born from above; because there is no other way for mankind to be saved. If Old Testament saints are saved it is because the were born from above.

I will not ask the question again because if you were going to answer you would have done so by now. So, I'll give you the last word and thank you for a cordial exchange.

In peace
Eric_C

One explanation is that Elijah was simply taken up into the sky and transported elsewhere to continue his prophesying, leaving Elisha and his men in Judah to continue God's work in that particular region.
And because he was taken up by horses, he went first to witness to Mr Ed.

He went to heaven. It was the end of his life. That is why he stood with Christ at the transfiguration. But don't tell me, he just dropped in from the holding pen for those who will undergo the investigative judgement of Ellen White.


Goodness me you people are silly. You think in terms of time.
We look back at the cross, they looked forward. Moreover, the Lamb was slain from the foundation of the world anyway. There is no use being slain at the beginning, if no-one gets to go to heaven until you turn up 5 thousand years later.


John the Baptist was born again, and filled with the Spirit in the womb. He then gave his life for Christ, after having baptised Him.


The reason you people are so against the idea that the OT saints were in fact saints, is that you recognise that if they were born again, then they had the Holy Spirit, which means that Pentecost was about something other than being born again, which means that it is about what the Charismatics and Pentecostals say it is about, which means you feel deficient.

So your idiotic ideas are born of resistance to the charisma of the Holy Spirit in the specific experience of being baptised with the Holy Spirit as distinct from being born again. I've seen it a thousand times: mainline Christianity trying to keep the Holy Spirit contained to doctrine rather than power.

If you persist with this resistance to the Spirit, the Lord may well cut you off altogether. You really have no idea of the danger you are in when you quench the Spirit.

RTE (Road to Emmaus) said:

One explanation is that Elijah was simply taken up into the sky and transported elsewhere to continue his prophesying, leaving Elisha and his men in Judah to continue God's work in that particular region.
And because he was taken up by horses, he went first to witness to Mr Ed.

He went to heaven. It was the end of his life. That is why he stood with Christ at the transfiguration. But don't tell me, he just dropped in from the holding pen for those who will undergo the investigative judgement of Ellen White.


Goodness me you people are silly. You think in terms of time.
We look back at the cross, they looked forward. Moreover, the Lamb was slain from the foundation of the world anyway. There is no use being slain at the beginning, if no-one gets to go to heaven until you turn up 5 thousand years later.


John the Baptist was born again, and filled with the Spirit in the womb. He then gave his life for Christ, after having baptised Him.


The reason you people are so against the idea that the OT saints were in fact saints, is that you recognise that if they were born again, then they had the Holy Spirit, which means that Pentecost was about something other than being born again, which means that it is about what the Charismatics and Pentecostals say it is about, which means you feel deficient.

So your idiotic ideas are born of resistance to the charisma of the Holy Spirit in the specific experience of being baptised with the Holy Spirit as distinct from being born again. I've seen it a thousand times: mainline Christianity trying to keep the Holy Spirit contained to doctrine rather than power.

If you persist with this resistance to the Spirit, the Lord may well cut you off altogether. You really have no idea of the danger you are in when you quench the Spirit.

Click to expand...

Well said.

Eric_C said:

I will not ask the question again because if you were going to answer you would have done so by now. So, I'll give you the last word and thank you for a cordial exchange.

Click to expand...

The answer is that no Jew ever heard of the term 'born again'. It is a new term used by Jesus to describe a concept the Israelites were familiar with but had not yet undergone or experienced.

Nicodemus's confusion towards the term (not the concept) prompted Jesus to clarify what he meant by 'born again' by explaining that anyone who wanted to be with God had to be born of the Spirit.

Jesus is in essence saying, "don't act so surprised, here is what I meant by that".

Nicodemus, now having a better understanding of what Jesus meant by 'born again' and its relation to the OT prophecy of being made a new creation via the Spirit goes on to ask "How will being born of the Spirit come about?"

It is here where Jesus is either surprised or audacious (we can't be sure) that Nicodemus does not know such things. Jesus recounts the testimonies and miracles demonstrated by Him, John and the disciples, which were a fulfillment of OT prophecy yet rejected (the working word here is accepted, not understood) by the Pharisees and other members of the Sanhedrin.

This is what Jesus meant when He said, "If you've (plural form) witnessed our physical powers and testimony and do not accept, then how can I expect you to believe how the Spirit will come about?"

Of course, Jesus then proceeds to explain how the Spirit will come about in verses 13-21 which encompasses the sequence of 1) Jesus the Christ being lifted up, 2) those believing in Him 3) receiving the Spirit of eternal life.

John 7:39 - But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

This is about the best I can do to explain how I view the conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus.

Eric_C said:

John 3:8 "the Spirit where he willeth doth blow, and his voice thou dost hear, but thou hast not known whence he cometh, and whither he goeth; thus is every one who hath been born of the Spirit.' " Why does Jesus speak of being born of the Spirit in the past tense?

Click to expand...

He doesn't....it's present tense; perfect, passive, nomitive singular. People use this tense when they talk about future events having already occurred.

"And when that time comes you will have been cleared (infinitive) of any wrong-doing. And having been cleared (participle) you will be released from jail."

The KJV is responsible for many misunderstandings as I expect is the case here. Another common misunderstanding is that Nicodemus is a buffoon. This is hardly the case! The claim that Nicodemus failed to understand anything Jesus spoke of is very naive. He was one of the most benevolent and learned Jewish men in the first century. At one point he saved Jesus's life and later brought gifts to His grave.

I really don't know much of what else to say other than I can agree that God's Spirit was given to a select few in the OT but not for the sake of eternal life, rather for miracles and prophecy (testimony) so that God's will may be accomplished as a shadow of things to come.

-A

J. Ligon Duncan, III Adjunct Professor of Theology RTS Jackson.
Furman University, B.A.
Covenant Theological Seminary, M.Div., M.A.
University of Edinburgh, Ph.D.

God’s grace is man’s only hope.
​

Full sermon http://www.fpcjackson.org/resources/sermons/genesis/genesis_vols%201and2/09aGenesis.htm

O. Palmer Robertson (Th.D., Union Theological Seminary) principal and director of African Bible College in Uganda and adjunct professor of Old Testament at Knox Theological Seminary.

"Although Genesis 6:9 affirms that Noah was a "righteous man" , structural considerations characteristic of the book of Genesis forbid the conclusion that Noah received grace because of a previously existing righteousness. The phrase "these are the generations of....." which begins 6:9 occurs 10 times in Genesis. Each time the phrase indicates the beginning of another major section of the book.. This phrase decisively separates the statement that "Noah found grace" from the affirmation that Noah was a righteous man. God's grace to Noah did not appear because of the mans righteousness,but because of the particularity of God's program of redemption.

The principle of particularity as seen in God's favor toward Noah represents an early manifestation of a theme which continues throughout the covenant of redemption"

Armothe,


Nicodemus's confusion towards the term (not the concept) prompted Jesus to clarify what he meant by 'born again' by explaining that anyone who wanted to be with God had to be born of the Spirit.
Born of the Spirit before the end of their natural life. For it is written: "it is appointed once for man to live, and after that the judgement".





Nicodemus, … goes on to ask "How will being born of the Spirit come about?"
Rather, you are twisting the grammar. He asks "how do these things come about". That is why he asks: "how can these things be?"





This is what Jesus meant when He said, "If you've (plural form) witnessed our physical powers and testimony….,
Jesus is not referring to the evidences of his miracles, but to the fact that He and His disciples had seen things in the Spirit. Thus "We…testify that we have seen". This "seen" constituted the evidence that the disciples were born again, for it refers to seeing the kingdom in the Spirit.






then how can I expect you to believe how the Spirit will come about?"
You are reading your own agenda into v12. Eisegesis at its best.

The heavenly things that Christ said He had not spoken about, were not a reference to the coming of the Holy Spirit, but rather, the deeper things of the Spirit which cannot be uttered. They are akin to that which John saw in Revelation and which he could not describe, and which Paul saw when carried up to the third heaven, but dared not speak of.






Of course, Jesus then proceeds to explain how the Spirit will come about in verses 13-21 which encompasses the sequence of 1) Jesus the Christ being lifted up, 2) those believing in Him 3) receiving the Spirit of eternal life.
John 7:39 - But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.
Jesus was speaking of the solo ministry of the Holy Spirit, the Baptism in the Holy Ghost, as distinct from being born again.

The Holy Spirit was already present unto regeneration, for faith is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, being the only "evidence" that there can possibly be "of things unseen".

Thus we see elsewhere that Jesus declared to the disciples before His death: "Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you."

If the Spirit had not been given at all, then He would not have been declared to have been dwelling with the disciples. This "dwelleth with" is a result of being born of the Spirit, for Jesus also declared: "ye know Him".

The next declaration, "[He] shall be in you", speaks of being filled with the Spirit unto power of witness, which is the Baptism of Fire of which John the Baptist spoke, also known as the Baptism in the Holy Ghost. It is this baptism, and only this baptism, that ushers in the supernatural gifts.

Thus when Jesus left the earth, He did not tell the disciples to wait until they were born again, but to wait until power had come upon them. Such power was then evidenced in the supernatural gifts.

Moreover, the Baptism in the Holy Ghost is distinct from becoming born again in that it is often conferred by way of the laying on of hands, whereas being born again never entails any externality at all, being that which is synomymous with coming to faith in Christ.






This is about the best I can do to explain how I view the conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus.
If that is your best, I'd hate to see your worst.

But rather, you evidence an ignorance of the integration of scripture, and a desire to deceitfully alter the grammar of the word. Thus you lack both knowledge, and integrity.







THE LOGICAL STUPIDITY OF YOUR POSITION

You would have us believe that your expressing faith in Christ proves you are born again, but that the expression of faith in Christ by the disciples before Calvary, doesn’t mean they were born again. Are not two things equal to each other, equal to the same thing?

And you would have us believe that John the Baptist, who baptised the Son of God and who gave His life for Him, was not born again, but that you who sit on your keyboard in cyberspace, are born again. If that be the case, give me non-born again any day.

And you would have us believe that Apollos, who knew only the baptism of John, was not born again, when the scripture declares he was "fervent in the spirit", which man, when met by Aquila and Priscilla, was simply taught more perfectly by them the gospel he already was a partaker of, and not instructed to be born again. For those baptised under John, were born again.

We therefore once again evidence the Arminian game of semantics in your attempts to distort the teaching of scripture, for your "born again" which you declare to be an act of God subsequent to one's coming to faith in Christ, has no affect additional to one’s coming to faith in Christ, and is therefore a mere ‘rubber stamp’ with no pragmatic, and therefore simply an attempt to legitimise your doctrine in the eyes of the church by not leaving out any common terms.

Your position is born of mainline resistance to the doctrine of the Baptism in the Holy Ghost as distinct from salvation. For you realise that to admit to the OT saints’ having been born again, entails the admission that Pentecost was about something other than being born again, and this makes you feel uncomfortable, for it exposes you to that which you cannot contain in your nice cosy pew-warming doctrine, wherein you are forever talking about the "fruits of the Spirit" in order to quench the supernatural gifts of the Spirit.

"Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me."
So cried King David who according to you was not born again. But it is good that you who are born again can read the Psalms and learn all about the benefits of being born again, from the man who wrote them, who was a man after God's own heart, who had the Holy Spirit, who loved God with all His heart, whose throne's name is ascribed to Christ, but who was not born again. Down right amazing.

How does one respond to such confusion?

Favor
You've effectively changed the definition to fit your theology. Forget that showing favoritism or choosing a favorite requires that you actually have a preference, or admire an attribute.

Christ Died at the Foundation
Again, you were proven wrong. It wasn't Christ that died from the foundation of the world, it was the names that were written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world. Easy passage to understand, yet you mince the translation to fit your doctrine.

Hebrew Promises
Then you go on to assert that the promises mentioned in Hebrews have nothing to do with salvic eternal life when the passage clearly states such!

Born Again
You insist that being born again was something that occurred regularly in the OT, yet the OT never speaks of such a concept.

You've been proved wrong over and over, yet you continue to struggle along in your arguments.

RTE (Road to Emmaus) said:

Thus we see elsewhere that Jesus declared to the disciples before His death: "Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you."

Click to expand...

Hmm...there is that pesky future tense to deal with isn't there?

RTE (Road to Emmaus) said:

Thus when Jesus left the earth, He did not tell the disciples to wait until they were born again, but to wait until power had come upon them. Such power was then evidenced in the supernatural gifts.

Click to expand...

Wait! According to you they already had the spirit before Jesus left he earth. Hmmmmm.

RTE (Road to Emmaus) said:

You would have us believe that your expressing faith in Christ proves you are born again, but that the expression of faith in Christ by the disciples before Calvary, doesn’t mean they were born again. Are not two things equal to each other, equal to the same thing?

Click to expand...

Do the math, they aren't equal brother. The latter is missing a variable. C-H-R-I-S-T R-E-D-E-E-M-E-D

RTE (Road to Emmaus) said:

And you would have us believe that Apollos, who knew only the baptism of John, was not born again, when the scripture declares he was "fervent in the spirit", which man, when met by Aquila and Priscilla, was simply taught more perfectly by them the gospel he already was a partaker of, and not instructed to be born again. For those baptised under John, were born again.

Click to expand...

Ya know that variable I talked about......its now in the equation.

RTE (Road to Emmaus) said:

Jesus is not referring to the evidences of his miracles, but to the fact that He and His disciples had seen things in the Spirit. Thus "We…testify that we have seen". This "seen" constituted the evidence that the disciples were born again, for it refers to seeing the kingdom in the Spirit.

Click to expand...

You say that Christ, John and the disciples saw the things of the Spirit, but miracles need not apply. Just what did they see, RTE? Oh yeah, perhaps the supernatural gifts you mentioned above. Uh, hello?!

RTE (Road to Emmaus) said:

"Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me." So cried King David who according to you was not born again. But it is good that you who are born again can read the Psalms and learn all about the benefits of being born again, from the man who wrote them, who was a man after God's own heart, who had the Holy Spirit, who loved God with all His heart, whose throne's name is ascribed to Christ, but who was not born again. Down right amazing.

Click to expand...

Funny, David speaks several times of going to Sheol when he dies. So do other notable OT 'saints'. But I guess their inspired words (via the HS) were wrong though, because RTE's theology demands they went to Heaven.

I guess if all that is needed to go to Heaven is the presence of God then all of Israel went to Heaven because God's presence dwelled with the entire nation of Israel. But wait, His presence left at the destruction of the first temple, so I guess only some of the nation of Israel were 'born again'. Congratulations on removing Jesus the Christ from the whole eternal salvation thing.

RTE (Road to Emmaus) said:

If that is your best, I'd hate to see your worst. But rather, you evidence an ignorance of the integration of scripture, and a desire to deceitfully alter the grammar of the word. Thus you lack both knowledge, and integrity.

Click to expand...

This coming from someone who claims: "Firstly understand that I am expert in scripture, Eh.....don't refer me to scripture: I know more than you could poke a stick at."

Wow, and I thought Calvinists were all about not being puffed up and giving all the glory to God. What a stellar example you set. I've had the opportunity to study Hebrew, Greek and am learning a bit of Aramaic from a local Rabbi and you're stuck on the KJV. If there is any scriptural shenanigans its coming from your side.

RTE (Road to Emmaus) said:

You are reading your own agenda into v12. Eisegesis at its best. The heavenly things that Christ said He had not spoken about, were not a reference to the coming of the Holy Spirit, but rather, the deeper things of the Spirit which cannot be uttered. They are akin to that which John saw in Revelation and which he could not describe, and which Paul saw when carried up to the third heaven, but dared not speak of.

Click to expand...

What?!? I can't even in good conscience provide a response to such made-up interpretation. I guess the KJV has verse 12.5 where it explains what those heavenly things Jesus was referencing actually were.

If you insist on continuing to make things up to avoid admitting you are wrong, then I will no longer be able to dialogue with you.

This forum is about discussing the truth of scripture, not spamming the threads with someone's sermon or writing fairy tales to save face.

-A

Van said:

Let me touch on one of your points where I think we disagree. I believe names are written in as God spiritually places them into Christ. We had no faith until we came to faith during our physical lives, so "from the beginning or after creation, not before. Where have I gone wrong?

Click to expand...

I don't disagree. I use 'from' in my explanation as well, because that is what scripture states. The heading which includes 'at' is a title/summary of the opposing view.

Revelation 20 shows Hades giving up its dead - both great and small - to be judged at the Great White Throne. Those who had their names in the Book of Life would go onto everlasting life. Those whose names had been blotted out would go onto everlasting death. The Book of Life contained the names of those who were righteous (Psalm 69) as evidenced by their faith (Phill 4, Rev 3) and works (Rev 20).

So it is quite evident that there were righteous souls in Hades/Sheol awaiting judgment - despite the opposing view which states there are no righteous souls in Hades/Sheol. It's truly confounding and no doubt stems from the early reformists anti-purgatory view.

-A

Armothe,



It wasn't Christ that died from the foundation of the world, it was the names that were written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world.
It was Christ slain from the foundation of the world, just like it says. The KJV is correct.

What do you think the first Sabbath was all about? God taking a break?

When God created physicality, He did so in order to deliberately speak as a fool, just as Paul on occassion deliberately spoke as a fool, for physicality is under the law. He did this in order to contrast such foolishness with the real power of the Spirit, which is in contrast with the law. And He fooled you.

His finishing of creation was therefore demonstration of His death to self, in which he effectively said "enough of this vanity, now I will really show you the power of God", for it is written "Jesus Christ the power of God".

And so He dispensed with the wiz-bang magic show, and rested in His Son, which was the first Sabbath. And that is why He hallowed it: God doesn't hallow vacations or get sentimental about fluffy bunny rabbits and rocks and trees.

And therefore that is when the Lamb was slain, for the Lamb's being slain was God's dying to self, just as the Christian dies to self. And thus it is written: "He that hath entered into His rest has ceased from His own works as God did from His".

God only hallows Christ. Never days of the week. For God does not care for things which are not permanent.







Thus we see elsewhere that Jesus declared to the disciples before His death: "Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you."
Hmm...there is that pesky future tense to deal with isn't there?
Eh....just a little hypocritical from one who distorted the present tense of Nichodemus' "how can these things be?" to mean "when will this happen?", don't you think?

The "He shall be in you", was, as I said and which you deceitfully omit, a reference to the solo ministry of the Holy Spirit, and not His involvement in regeneration which comes with His being part of the Trinity.

And you are playing blind: for some reason you just can't see the clause "but ye know him". Saying "hmmm" does not deal with it I’m afraid. We can all say "hmmm".

The fact is, oh great selective one, the disciples knew the Holy Spirit, just like it says.








Thus when Jesus left the earth, He did not tell the disciples to wait until they were born again, but to wait until power had come upon them. Such power was then evidenced in the supernatural gifts.
Wait! According to you they already had the spirit before Jesus left he earth. Hmmmmm.
As I said, and which you didn’t read for the spiritual cataracts on your eyes, the Spirit was present unto regeneration, but not for His solo ministry unto power.

You are one of the ones whom Paul calls "unlearned", for you do not understand the baptism with the Spirit. Christianity is not just doctrine, but power. Power which you have no idea of in your comfy-cosy ecumenical pew-warming doctrine with which you quench the Spirit.








You would have us believe that your expressing faith in Christ proves you are born again, but that the expression of faith in Christ by the disciples before Calvary, doesn’t mean they were born again. Are not two things equal to each other, equal to the same thing?
Do the math, they aren't equal brother. The latter is missing a variable. C-H-R-I-S-T R-E-D-E-E-M-E-D
We don’t derive whether something is equal to another, by simply stating whether it is. That is question begging.

If the result is the same in two sets of people, then the cause is the same.

So your logic is something like your theology.








And you would have us believe that Apollos, who knew only the baptism of John, was not born again, when the scripture declares he was "fervent in the spirit", which man, when met by Aquila and Priscilla, was simply taught more perfectly by them the gospel he already was a partaker of, and not instructed to be born again. For those baptised under John, were born again.
Ya know that variable I talked about......its now in the equation.
Oh you mean the equation that begged the question rather than allowed the data to produce an outcome. Sort of like the evolutionist who says "we must have evolved ….we’re here!".

You have not dealt with Apollos, because you cannot. Apollos was an apostle by virtue of the baptism of John.








Jesus is not referring to the evidences of his miracles, but to the fact that He and His disciples had seen things in the Spirit. Thus "We…testify that we have seen". This "seen" constituted the evidence that the disciples were born again, for it refers to seeing the kingdom in the Spirit.
You say that Christ, John and the disciples saw the things of the Spirit, but miracles need not apply. Just what did they see, RTE? Oh yeah, perhaps the supernatural gifts you mentioned above. Uh, hello?!
There is only one thing more annoying than a dum person in a debate: a dum person who thinks he is intelligent. I have rarely seen a more unintelligent debater in a theology forum than you.

When Jesus declared that "We testify that we have seen", He was declaring that his miracles were a testimony to the power which resulted from what He saw of the Kingdom of God in the Spirit, and not stating a redundant "We tell you that we have seen what we have done", as your skrewy logic would have us believe.








Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me." So cried King David who according to you was not born again. But it is good that you who are born again can read the Psalms and learn all about the benefits of being born again, from the man who wrote them, who was a man after God's own heart, who had the Holy Spirit, who loved God with all His heart, whose throne's name is ascribed to Christ, but who was not born again. Down right amazing.
I guess if all that is needed to go to Heaven is the presence of God then all of Israel went to Heaven because God's presence dwelled with the entire nation of Israel.
As you well know, David was speaking of the personal presence of God, and not God's dwelling in the tabernacle or following in a pillar of fire. And thus his cry: take not thy holy Spirit from me.

The words of David constitute the template for the believer's cry to God on a personal basis.

So you once again choose to dismiss the more primary meaning with a remote meaning. You certainly are a twister of scripture. I wonder how you sleep in bed straight at night.







You are reading your own agenda into v12. Eisegesis at its best. The heavenly things that Christ said He had not spoken about, were not a reference to the coming of the Holy Spirit, but rather, the deeper things of the Spirit which cannot be uttered. They are akin to that which John saw in Revelation and which he could not describe, and which Paul saw when carried up to the third heaven, but dared not speak of.
What?!? I can't even in good conscience provide a response to such made-up interpretation. I guess the KJV has verse 12.5 where it explains what those heavenly things Jesus was referencing actually were.
Eh…..v12 tells us that there are heavenly things, not what those heavenly things are.

Heavenly things are things in heaven. (Funny about that.) They are therefore things akin to that which Paul saw when taken up into the 3rd heaven, of which he dared not speak.








If you insist on continuing to make things up to avoid admitting you are wrong, then I will no longer be able to dialogue with you.
You will have to stop bluffing. Your smoke-screening, and huffing and puffing in order to give the impression you have answered something, is telling evidence that you are a novice in debate. You have answered nothing. The only thing that makes your post look legitimate, is the fact that this site has a distinct quoting facility. You have avoided points, and have not dealt with any of the others, but have childishly strutted your stuff. Too bad you have no stuff to strut, for you are unlearned in the things of the Spirit.

I am far too experienced to let a novice like you dictate the terms. Your ‘threat’ here to cease discussion, is simply an out-clause for you because you know are about to get in over your head.

So here are two questions for you Mr bluffer and puffer:

1. "If the Holy Spirit had not been given, how come the disciples knew the Holy Spirit as per John 14:7?". Did they get a phone call from Him from heaven? Or a post card?

2. Tell us what your "born again" state does over and above what John the Baptist’s non-born again state did. That is, apart from being able to say "I’m born again", what value does it have over and above someone who was not born again but who baptised Christ and gave his life for Him?

We look forward to your evasive creativity.

J. Ligon Duncan, III Adjunct Professor of Theology RTS Jackson.
Furman University, B.A.
Covenant Theological Seminary, M.Div., M.A.
University of Edinburgh, Ph.D.

God’s grace is man’s only hope.

Click to expand...

One last thing we see in verse 8 before we close. The grace of God here towards one man becomes the salvation of humanity. Here we see God’s grace is the only hope. Genesis 6, verse 8, is the first occurrence of the word grace in the Bible. But Noah found favor. But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. What does grace mean? Unmerited, divine favor in spite of positive demerit.

Click to expand...

Full sermon http://www.fpcjackson.org/resources/sermons/genesis/genesis_vols%201and2/09aGenesis.htm

O. Palmer Robertson (Th.D., Union Theological Seminary) principal and director of African Bible College in Uganda and adjunct professor of Old Testament at Knox Theological Seminary.

"Although Genesis 6:9 affirms that Noah was a "righteous man" , structural considerations characteristic of the book of Genesis forbid the conclusion that Noah received grace because of a previously existing righteousness. The phrase "these are the generations of....." which begins 6:9 occurs 10 times in Genesis. Each time the phrase indicates the beginning of another major section of the book.. This phrase decisively separates the statement that "Noah found grace" from the affirmation that Noah was a righteous man. God's grace to Noah did not appear because of the mans righteousness,but because of the particularity of God's program of redemption.

The principle of particularity as seen in God's favor toward Noah represents an early manifestation of a theme which continues throughout the covenant of redemption"

RTE (Road to Emmaus) said:

I am far too experienced to let a novice like you dictate the terms. Your ‘threat’ here to cease discussion, is simply an out-clause for you because you know are about to get in over your head.

Click to expand...

Then I suppose I'll make good on my threat and cease to interact with you any further. It's pretty much futile to discuss scripture with someone who has such blatant disregard for the inspired word. Before I leave you allow me to prove you wrong once again:

RTE (Road to Emmaus) said:

"Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me." So cried King David who according to you was not born again. But it is good that you who are born again can read the Psalms and learn all about the benefits of being born again, from the man who wrote them, who was a man after God's own heart, who had the Holy Spirit, who loved God with all His heart, whose throne's name is ascribed to Christ, but who was not born again. Down right amazing.

Click to expand...

According to you king David looked backwards to the cross, was indeed born again and went straight to Heaven to be with God upon his physical death. But scripture says:

Acts 2:29-34 - "Brethren, I may confidently say to you regarding the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. And so, because he was a prophet and knew that GOD HAD SWORN TO HIM WITH AN OATH TO SEAT one OF HIS DESCENDANTS ON HIS THRONE, he looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that HE WAS NEITHER ABANDONED TO HADES, NOR DID His flesh SUFFER DECAY. This Jesus God raised up again, to which we are all witnesses. Therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear. For it was not David who ascended into heaven;"

So you see, its not me that is in resistance to the Holy Spirit - you are the one who would rather tear down the authenticity of the Holy spirit than admit these figments of yours could be in error.

Now I suppose since you are some sort of self-proclaimed expert on scripture you'll find some way to twist what Peter was saying so you can maintain the fable that David and other OT saints went to Heaven immediately upon death; but I'll allow others the chance to be denigrated by your foolishness as I will be placing you on ignore due to your continued personal insults.

The questions you asked have already been answered a few posts back, and I'm not surprised you didn't pick up on them. Your tactic to keep asking questions over and over is commonly used to trap someone into messing up. This tells me you are more interested in arguing than studying the truth of scripture, which seems to validate what many people already think of Calvinists on this forum.

-A

Armothe,


According to you king David looked backwards to the cross
No he looked forward to the cross. And the reason he looked forward to it, was that his heart was the result of it, in advance. For it is written: "before they call I will answer".

For the Lamb was slain at the beginning, for that was the first Sabbath. Time is irrelevant to the I AM.




As to your stated integrity, you have none. You twist the tenses of verbs, and omit to respond to statements.

The following have not been refuted:

1. The clear derivation of Jesus' discussion with Nichodemus was that Christ was implying Nichodemus could be born again right there and then.
2. John the Baptist was filled with the Spirit from the womb, baptised Christ, and gave his life for Christ. He was therefore born again.
3. Faith is the evidence of unseen things, and therefore the indwelling Holy Spirit. For the Holy Spirit is the only evidence possible of the unseen things of God.
4. The disciples knew the Holy Spirit, therefore He was present unto regeneration.
5. Your "born again" provides no difference relative to someone like John the Baptist, and therefore John the Baptist was as much born again as anyone in the current era.
6. Apollos was an apostle by virtue of his having been baptised by John. Thus he had the Holy Spirit through John's ministry.
7. Moses suffered for Christ, therefore he was born again.



Your position is internally inconsistent, and as I have said is born of a desire to render Pentecost as something not different to regeneration, for you do not like the idea of a Baptism which you cannot control with your mind. You prefer a form a godliness to power.

I was baptised in the Holy Ghost 30 years ago, via the laying on of hands, which was years after I was born again. I know what I am talking about experientially. You, on the other hand, have no idea. Another John MacArthur.

Van said:

Not sure, but you seem to concur that names are entered in the Lamb's book of life when the person is spiritually placed in Christ, into the body of believers.

Click to expand...

Sounds Good.

Van said:

I believe scripture says no names are blotted out of the Lamb's book of life. Jesus promises to not blot out our names, he does not suggest he will blot out names.

Click to expand...

I would disagree. The blotting out of names definitely occurred.

Psalm 69:28 - Add iniquity to their iniquity, And may they not come into Your righteousness. May they be blotted out of the book of life And may they not be recorded with the righteous.

Revelation 3:5 - He who overcomes will thus be clothed in white garments; and I will not erase his name from the book of life

Van said:

If the first resurrection is the resurrection to life, then all those whose names were in the Lamb's book of life had been bodily resurrected to eternal life. So it might be possible that those who were saved during the thousand year period, could have been pulled out of the great white throne judgment because their names had been added after the first resurrection.

Click to expand...

Great observation. The first resurrection, which happens after the binding of Satan and prior to the 1000 yrs consisted of people who were beheaded for the testimony of Christ. They reigned with Christ during the 1000 yrs and were exempt from judgment as the second death had no power over them.

However, Paul, Peter and John admit that they, as well as the first century church did not belong to the first resurrection and would face judgment.

2 Corinthians 5:10 - For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.

1 Peter 4:17 - For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God?

1 John 4:17 - By this, love is perfected with us, so that we may have confidence in the day of judgment; because as He is, so also are we in this world.

-A

Originally Posted by Van

Not sure, but you seem to concur that names are entered in the Lamb's book of life when the person is spiritually placed in Christ, into the body of believers.
​

Click to expand...

The elect names have been written in the book of life before the world began..