Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Perhaps you could give an example of an incomplete understanding of the faith that is not resolved by the Scriptures understood in agreement with themselves.Anyone is free to distort Scripture, regardless of methodology used. Scripture has unity due to the unity, at least when it comes to those things pertaining to man's salvation, of God's plan. But to think that any one form of exegesis, or all of them combined, will necessarily lead to an ironclad, definitive, and full understanding of the faith is to refuse to open one's eyes to the obvious truth.
I stated what is the bad news since the fall of Adam; i.e., all mankind is condemned (Ro 5:18).Are you implying that the "bad news" is the "Mosaic Law" given to Moses
I stated what is the bad news since the fall of Adam; i.e., all mankind is condemned (Ro 5:18).
Are you implying that is not "bad news," to which the gospel is the "good news?
The Ten Commandments (and the law of God generally) are bad news in the sense that they teach us that we have all broken them, and they cannot save us:Romans 5:14Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.
You are mistaken if you consider the Ten Commabdments and the commandments of the Law given by the Lord to Moses to be "bad news". Did God consider the Ten Commndments and the Law to be "bad news" to His chosen ones? .
The good news regarding the law is that it serves as a tutor as it convicts us of sin, which causes us to turn to God in our need for the righteousness that the law cannot provide.The Ten Commandments (and the law of God generally) are bad news in the sense that they teach us that we have all broken them, and they cannot save us:
“Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law [is] the knowledge of sin.” (Ro 3:20 NKJV)
Based on Scripture alone, plausible arguments are given for and against baptismal regeneration, for and against the deity of Christ, for and against the real presence, for and against the concept that righteousness is a gift given rather than merely declared at justification.Perhaps you could give an example of an incomplete understanding of the faith that is not resolved by the Scriptures understood in agreement with themselves.
Get much exercise jumping to conclusions?Romans 5:14Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.
You are mistaken if you consider the Ten Commabdments and the commandments of the Law given by the Lord to Moses to be "bad news".
The better arguments being:Based on Scripture alone, plausible arguments are given for and against baptismal regeneration, for and against the deity of Christ, for and against the real presence, for and against the concept that righteousness is a gift given rather than merely declared at justification.
Yes, praise our wonderful God!The good news regarding the law is that it serves as a tutor as it convicts us of sin, which causes us to turn to God in our need for the righteousness that the law cannot provide.
The good news regarding the law is that it serves as a tutor as it convicts us of sin, which causes us to turn to God in our need for the righteousness that the law cannot provide.onstructi
Who would indicate that "God's commandments (Law) are 'bad news'"?AMEN
For man to imply that God's commandments (Law) are "bad news" implies that God's plan is a Work In Progress" and therefore open for critique by knowledgeable academic men (and even some Christians) as being a "bad idea"
1) Again, it can be argued either way by Scripture but the ancient churches and ECFs always included baptism as necessary for salvation as Jesus modeled and instructed.. That's simply the way they received the faith and therefore how they believed and practiced it.The better arguments being:
1) Baptismal regeneration -
a) any argument for baptismal regeneration must overcome regeneration by the sovereign choice of the Holy Spirit (Jn 3:3-5), whose choice is as unaccountable as the wind (Jn 3:6-8), and is not subject to the human performance of baptism.
b) baptism corresponds to circumcision (1 Col 2:11-12), not to regeneration by sovereign choice of the Holy Spirit, which circumcision was not a means of regeneration, but rather a sign that the individual was in the covenant.
2) Deity of Christ - There is no overcoming Jn 1:1, 14 regarding the deity of Christ.
3) The Lord's Supper is the real NT sacrificial meal on the sacrifice itself as in Lev 3:15, 7:25-18, 19:5-8, where the sacrifice was eaten, taking within oneself the benefits of the sacrifice - peace, fellowship with God and the priest (our High Priest) who offered it.
4) Righteousness - is both imputed (justification) by faith (Ro 4:1-4) and actual by obedience (Ro 6:19-22).
Romans 5:14I stated what is the bad news since the fall of Adam; i.e., all mankind is condemned (Ro 5:18).
None of which overcome Jn 1:1, 14, "the Word was God. . .the Word became flesh and dwelt among us."1) Again, it can be argued either way by Scripture but the ancient churches and ECFs always included baptism as necessary for salvation as Jesus modeled and instructed.. That's simply the way they received the faith and therefore how they believed and practiced it.
2) While Scripture, and especially John, perhaps, can seem cryptic at times I agree on John 1:1. But the reason there was so much controversy about it in the early church for centuries is because, for one thing, of such passages as:
Are you surprised at this human experience of God's wrath (Isa 51:22, Mt 20:22, 26:42, Mk 10:38, 14:36, Lk 22:42-44) which God the Son received in our place? Jesus was both man and God.“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27.46/Mark 15.34).
Jesus is telling the man that he is calling him God, which is correct.“‘Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?’ And Jesus said to him, ‘Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone’” (Mark 10.17-18/Luke 18.18-19)
Demonstration that Jesus was both man, as well as God. . .textual problem?“Do not let your hearts be troubled. You believe in God; believe also in me. “ (John 14:1)
“You heard me say, ‘I am going away and I am coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I. John 14:28
“This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent” (John 17.3)
“…Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst” (Acts 2.22).
“I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God” (John 20.17).
“so that with one mind and one voice you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (Rom 15.6: 2)
“There is no God but one…. yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him” (1 Corinthians 8.4, 6)
“Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” 2 Cor 1.3
“I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ…” Eph 1:17
“To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, 6 and has made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father—to him be glory and power for ever and ever! Amen.” Rev 1:6
“Wake up! Strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have found your deeds unfinished in the sight of my God.” Rev 3.2
“The one who is victorious I will make a pillar in the temple of my God.” Rev 3:12
It's not given to, but imputed to.3) All that but in any case and most importantly the ancient churches continuously believed and practiced that a miracle takes place each time the Eucharist is celebrated, Jesus becoming really and truly present with us in the bread and wine.
4) Some contest that no righteousness is given as part and parcel of justification .
Yes, right standing with God (sin forgiven, forensic righteousness) is not enough.And the full understanding is that it is also necessary, and continuously optional as we work out our salvation with that grace, with Him. We must pick our our cross daily and follow.
Doesn't that apply to church doctrine that believes in infant baptism (sprinkled with Holy Water = One's *SALVATION) synonymous with *"born gain". At least that's what my Catholic friend believes (born again) when he received his infant baptisim. I think even some Lutherans also believe that they received God's Salvation when baptized as an infant.If you don't understand that all Scripture agrees with itself, then you are free to distort the Scriptures (2 Tim 3:16).
Actual righteousness is through obedience in the Holy Spirit (Ro 6:16
The problem comes from a single predicate being applied to a double subject of the sentence when, as seen from the rest of the NT, the predicate applies only to one subject.Doesn't that apply to church doctrine that believes in infant baptism (sprinkled with Holy Water = One's *SALVATION) synonymous with *"born gain". At least that's what my Catholic friend believes (born again) when he received his infant baptisim. I think even some Lutherans also believe that they received God's Salvation when baptized as an infant.
The French Jesuit misssionary, Michael Gignas (SJ) stationed at the French fortification Fort Beauharnois (Sioux trading post) ... Fort Beauharnois - Wikipedia recorded in his journal (1727-29) that during his 2 year stay, feeling quite defeated, as he was only able to baptise three indian babies as most of the men and women were unwilling to believe that sprinked with water was the Great Spirit's plan for entry into heaven.
However these Sioux (eastern Dacotah) did believe in Wakan Tanka term for the Great Spirit: "the sacred" or "the divine". They also believed in the "trickster" (demons). It should have been relatively easy to convert these indigenous people to Christianity. However the zeal of these religious missionary was confusing to them as it is to us today (Catholic vs Protestant) with each thinking they have the best message/plan when it comes to one's SALVTION
We grow in actual righteousness of sanctification (as distinct from imputed righteousess of justification) through the life of obedience in the Holy Spirit.By faith Rahab the prostitute did not perish with those who were disobedient, because she had given a friendly welcome to the spies. 31 It was by faith that Rahab the prostitute was not destroyed with the people in her city who refused to obey God.
So by her act of "faith" would you consider her faithful action as righteousness being obedient to the prompting of the Holy Spirit or Triune Godhead.
Even so-called "born again" Christians can have slightly distinct differences of interpretation (opinion) with respect to your quote (due to denominational affiliation, church doctrine. Biblical teaching, religious dogma, etc) as it applies to their SALVATION understanding.We grow in actual righteousness of sanctification (as distinct from imputed righteousess of justification) through the life of obedience in the Holy Spirit.
If you want a detailed answer, some questions have to be answered first?Even so-called "born again" Christians can have slightly distinct differences of interpretation (opinion) with respect to your quote (due to denominational affiliation, church doctrine. Biblical teaching, religious dogma, etc) as it applies to their SALVATION understanding.
As example there are about 20 Baptist affiliations with differences when it comes to applying their interpretation of your quote to one's SALVATION. That's why it is no easy task for you to more specifically reply to my previous post than your above quote. And yet your reason for this SALVATION thread was to post your specific expertise as a "born again" Christian to other "born again" Christians that may actually have other insightful perspectives (e.g. thus [why] the need for 20 different Baptist affiliations) ...
Diverse from their beginning, those identifying as Baptists today can differ from one another in their church statement, how they worship, their attitudes toward other Christians, and their understanding of what is important in Christian discipleship.
Understanding that your quote could imply that Rahab's obedience to the Holy
Spirit wasn't just a one-time experience going forward. Also an example of God's "choosing" what would be considered by more than a few church goers as an unlikely candidate in the family ancestry of Christ Jesus (physical manifestation of God incarnate, John 1:14)).
Also possible justification (Rahab) for Calvinism's (TULIP) SALVATION theology?
If those understandings differ in any way from Eph 2:8-9, they are incorrect; i.e.,Even so-called "born again" Christians can have slightly distinct differences of interpretation (opinion) with respect to your quote (due to denominational affiliation, church doctrine. Biblical teaching, religious dogma, etc) as it applies to their SALVATION understanding.
Note the those differences do not include the meaning of salvation, for on that there can be no difference.As example there are about 20 Baptist affiliations with differences when it comes to applying their interpretation of your quote to one's SALVATION. That's why it is no easy task for you to more specifically reply to my previous post than your above quote. And yet your reason for this SALVATION thread was to post your specific expertise as a "born again" Christian to other "born again" Christians that may actually have other insightful perspectives (e.g. thus [why] the need for 20 different Baptist affiliations) ...
Diverse from their beginning, those identifying as Baptists today can differ from one another in their church statement, how they worship, their attitudes toward other Christians, and their understanding of what is important in Christian discipleship.
Belief in God and obedience do not save. . .the Jewish Orthodox believe in God and obey the OT and are not saved, because they deny Jesus Christ as the Messiah.Understanding that your quote could imply that Rahab's obedience to the Holy
Spirit wasn't just a one-time experience going forward.
Any more unlikely than the adulterous and murderous King David?Also an example of God's "choosing" what would be considered by more than a few church goers as
an unlikely candidate in the family ancestry of Christ Jesus (physical manifestation of God incarnate, John 1:14)).
Was Rahab saved?Also possible justification (Rahab) for Calvinism's (TULIP) SALVATION theology?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?