More on Ben:
That isn’t what I said, Ben. That is not what my remark infers. Refusing to accept the spirit isn’t something I am alluding to. I am saying it isn’t given. Going back to our previous agreement about those saved who never hear of Christ, Paul says this: 7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. . . . . . .
Those who live by their convictions devoid of the knowledge of Christ, technically speaking, are not living by the flesh. In that regard they are God pleasers unto justification, per Rom. 5:1.
. . . . . But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” Romans 8:7-9 (KJV)
Paul is addressing folk who are seeking to know the Father after coming into the knowledge of Christ, His salvation, the born again and Pentecostal experiences, making the distinctions necessary between nominalism and intimacy.
Your scripture references don't relate inasmuch as one does do in Jesus Name and not be saved, . . . even born again. Now you have a problem on your hands,
“Jesus never KNEW them”= Jesus was never intimate with them as husband and wife. They presumed on his Name, using it “illegally, usurping for themselves for the glory.
Pretty serious, isn’t it? One certainly can know about God, can't one? Isn't that where theology falls short?
Then you must fathom that all out before saying someone isn't saved.
Believing is to be converted in the mind. Acting upon that belief is a result of desiring what you believe. Jesus is there for that one who takes action. His blood cleanses and makes whole, salvation happens. Now comes the part where one must count the cost if he is to continue per Jn 17. Know anyone who doesn’t continue, I do. Good church folk.
Better you said Jesus indwells the true believer; one who trusts in a nd relies upon Christ per Gal. 2:20.
Absolutely however, it implies more than nominal salvation, more than receiving Christ as if one is doing Him a favor by accepting Him. Better it be that one dismiss the sinner’s prayer but cries out to God for his salvation, having a more complete knowledge of what His salvation is for and signifies. Finney, in his meetings called it a mourning bench and God would direct him to those ready to receive. Some were there on their knees for a week.
I understand. Now, how can it be appropriated for practical life without a personal Pentecost? However, that is another subject desparately in need of understanding.
However, initially they were saved, weren’t they? If you say no what do you base upon?
That's strong. I won’t make that call. We must define what it means to have eternal life as I believe John sees something more than we see and I believe it is more than we are given by our theologies for us to grasp. I know you are making a valiant effort, but cigar.
Certainly he will perish from son-ship and Joint-heir-ship. . . . which is at the heart of all the Father is after by redeeming us, calling it "eternal life". All part of the theology of the cross, Ben.
All speaking of the born again for son-ship and Joint-heir-ship you don't wish to consider.
Bodily?? What sidetrack is this that one must consider His physical body indwelling him for salvation?
One who compromises his salvation; to be something less than what God has purposed. Indeed, what kind of belief is that?
To live by the very life of Christ? It wasn’t for Paul and when we see it as he did, it won’t be for us either. Seeing it is where we fall short. Note: in reading Gal 2.20, carefully make the comparison using the various translations with the KJV rendering. It will read differently, something less in most. Little preps can change much thinking.
Originally spoken to the children of Israel, children of God.
Spoken to children of God, already saved and born again. Your 3rd choice is a strawman.
No kidding. I would have thought we have made that clear by now. I have.
Distinctions, Ben. Make them better.
I am not going back over the same territory, Ben. Enough, think as you will.
That isn’t what I said, Ben. That is not what my remark infers. Refusing to accept the spirit isn’t something I am alluding to. I am saying it isn’t given. Going back to our previous agreement about those saved who never hear of Christ, Paul says this: 7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. . . . . . .
Those who live by their convictions devoid of the knowledge of Christ, technically speaking, are not living by the flesh. In that regard they are God pleasers unto justification, per Rom. 5:1.
. . . . . But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” Romans 8:7-9 (KJV)
Paul is addressing folk who are seeking to know the Father after coming into the knowledge of Christ, His salvation, the born again and Pentecostal experiences, making the distinctions necessary between nominalism and intimacy.
Amen. Who is too blame, Ben? Do we blame our 2000 yr old” orthodox” traditions? What is the error handed down to us that has corrupted the message of the cross?
Your scripture references don't relate inasmuch as one does do in Jesus Name and not be saved, . . . even born again. Now you have a problem on your hands,
“Jesus never KNEW them”= Jesus was never intimate with them as husband and wife. They presumed on his Name, using it “illegally, usurping for themselves for the glory.
.
Pretty serious, isn’t it? One certainly can know about God, can't one? Isn't that where theology falls short?
Then you must fathom that all out before saying someone isn't saved.
Believing is to be converted in the mind. Acting upon that belief is a result of desiring what you believe. Jesus is there for that one who takes action. His blood cleanses and makes whole, salvation happens. Now comes the part where one must count the cost if he is to continue per Jn 17. Know anyone who doesn’t continue, I do. Good church folk.
Better you said Jesus indwells the true believer; one who trusts in a nd relies upon Christ per Gal. 2:20.
Absolutely however, it implies more than nominal salvation, more than receiving Christ as if one is doing Him a favor by accepting Him. Better it be that one dismiss the sinner’s prayer but cries out to God for his salvation, having a more complete knowledge of what His salvation is for and signifies. Finney, in his meetings called it a mourning bench and God would direct him to those ready to receive. Some were there on their knees for a week.
I understand. Now, how can it be appropriated for practical life without a personal Pentecost? However, that is another subject desparately in need of understanding.
However, initially they were saved, weren’t they? If you say no what do you base upon?
That's strong. I won’t make that call. We must define what it means to have eternal life as I believe John sees something more than we see and I believe it is more than we are given by our theologies for us to grasp. I know you are making a valiant effort, but cigar.
Certainly he will perish from son-ship and Joint-heir-ship. . . . which is at the heart of all the Father is after by redeeming us, calling it "eternal life". All part of the theology of the cross, Ben.
All speaking of the born again for son-ship and Joint-heir-ship you don't wish to consider.
Bodily?? What sidetrack is this that one must consider His physical body indwelling him for salvation?
One who compromises his salvation; to be something less than what God has purposed. Indeed, what kind of belief is that?
To live by the very life of Christ? It wasn’t for Paul and when we see it as he did, it won’t be for us either. Seeing it is where we fall short. Note: in reading Gal 2.20, carefully make the comparison using the various translations with the KJV rendering. It will read differently, something less in most. Little preps can change much thinking.
Originally spoken to the children of Israel, children of God.
Spoken to children of God, already saved and born again. Your 3rd choice is a strawman.
No kidding. I would have thought we have made that clear by now. I have.
Distinctions, Ben. Make them better.
.
I am not going back over the same territory, Ben. Enough, think as you will.
Upvote
0