The third dimension of soteriology .....

[sawdust]

[now , how many men has God knocked off their horse , spoken to and then blinded ......... which would be sure to get a right result .


why is Paul given so much in the way of proof , evidence and undeniable experience when millions have never heared God speak ? favouritism ?

and where was Satan when God was saving Paul ?

what happened to the enemy of Paul's soul ?

Would it get the right result? I'm not so sure. Paul was given a whole lot well before the Damascas road.

And I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries in my own nation, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers. Gal.1:14

Paul could not have learnt these things apart from the grace of God. A person can sit under the best teacher there is (in what ever field they are learning) and still come away with a fail mark. It has nothing to do with the teacher or one's capacity to learn but everything to do with one's attitude.
I think what Paul had and retained all his life was the one thing necessary for all of us so that the Lord can get through our thick skulls and that is natural curiosity which proceeds from innocence. That innocence is integral to all souls when they first come from the hand of God and when I say innocence I essentially mean without knowledge. It is the lack of knowledge that becomes the impetus for knowledge. This is what I mean by natural curiosity. Under original conditions (ie the Garden), the constant presence of the Lord was the obvious source of knowledge and it is He alone who can be. For the knowledge that comes from God and is God, when digested and taken into the soul, becomes the Truth of Him to be depended upon. In a sense, I see the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil as a "fast food' or a "quick fix" alternative. One that was never truly food or a fix for the innocence of man. This is why I think Christ said the following because unless we are willing to acknowledge we have no knowledge (of Him) we cannot learn from God and therefore remain devoid of Truth.

Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it.” Lk.18:17

We are in receipt of the truth at all times if only by virtue of the natural creation that surrounds us. (ie. Rom.1:20) It is my contention that if there is one thing common to all souls God creates, it is with this sense of curiosity and Paul utilised that curiosity more than most. It didn't make Paul better it just made him what he was designed as and the same as we are all designed.
Yet we are not born into the "original" creation and sin has its way of marring things including our own perfectly innocent souls that God created. We are indeed blind and live in darkness no matter how curious we may be or willing to believe that which is taught us by those whom have authority over us, without the grace of God revealing the truth to us? We will forever remain ignorant. The problem as I see it, is that when God does reveal the truth? We erroneously believe it is something we have discovered, whereas the reality is it is something given to us. For example. I'm sure there are many if not most, who at some point in their life, laid under the stars and looking up thought.."Wow! There must be a God". That thought is the result of God's revelation not something we have worked out in our own minds.

The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit. Jn.3:8

We know the wind is blowing by the results of what we see and hear. But as for the wind itself? It is invisible and it's own workings are unknown to us. It is the same when the Holy Spirit works in our lives. We do not feel Him or see Him but we enjoy the fruit of His labour. That is, the results He produces from His work like the thought above.."there must be a God". We could not come to that thought in and of ourselves, it is a work of grace. But it does not guarantee one will continue in that thought for we must choose to agree with it from our own free will or not.
It seems to me there are four foundational truths one must come to know before the Father can begin to present Christ.
1. God is.
2. God is Sovereign.
3. God is Holy. (right and just)
4. We are sinners.

I believe those four truths are presented to every man. At least to the degree they receive them. If they adamantly deny the first they cannot be given the next until they reconsider the first. If however they point blank refuse to even consider the possibilty that God is? .... even if Christ came down and did a "song and dance" under their noses? They would more than likely put it down to the pickles they had for tea last night. It is not a question of "proof" but a matter of will.

Paul was not given more than anyone else it's just that when he was given something, he received it. But here is the rub. Paul had no idea what he was being given or how he was getting it. He has to be the classic of "doing the right thing in a wrong way". He had the right motivation, his need for knowledge (truth). He had the right priority, the Law of God and he had the right attitude, the willingness to learn. But he worked it all out in the energy of his flesh and therefore remained ignorant of the Truth until.....

But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb and called me through His grace, to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles,.. Gal.1:15&16a

When it pleased God .... all that knowledge of the Law that Paul had learnt courtesy of God's grace? Suddenly appeared to him on the Damascus road, for Christ is the fullfilment of the Law.

I can almost here the Lord chuckle.. "you never expected all I had given you would amount to my Son did you Paul?"

Paul received nothing more than any one of us could receive if we are willing.

not returning evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary blessing, knowing that you were called to this, that you may inherit a blessing. 1Pet.3:9

We were called to be given blessings from the Lord. These blessings are in Christ and they are immeasurable.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, Eph.1:3

Now Cygnus, tell me. You have been baptised into Christ? Yes? Paul was baptised into Christ? Yes? What has he been given that you haven't? Nothing, not one, single, solitary thing.

The Father has already willed the absolute best of what He has to give even before the creation of the world. It is His desire that all men have His best. If a man does not have God's best? It is not God's will, but man's.

The Lord "rings His bell" within the emptiness of our souls, showing us all our need for His Truth. If we do not hear the clanging it is because we refuse to listen, preferring instead, to replace it with our own brand of music. But if we are willing we, by God's grace, can be taken from innocence into Truth. Filled with the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ which becomes an even greater motivator to press on into all the Lord has given.



Oh.. and what was happening with Satan? (heehee) Moot question when one recognises the sufficiency of God's grace.

peace

 

[GenemZ]

The reason I do not wish to speak about my "conversion experience" here is because this is not the place for it.

I thought it was because you did not want it undermined. Now, its not the right place.....

I wish to pursue the topic at hand, not submit my conversion experience to be examined and compared to the posts that I am making on this particular thread (and no, it is not that I worry about discrepencies or have something to hide).

Just for you, Genez, I will post it in my profile. Perhaps now we can get back on topic.

Then PM, me when its done. At this point I really want nothing to do with your imaginings and attacks on truth. And, BTW. These things you say are not new to me. It just gets to be a drag after a while. And, it also breaks my heart to see such thinking. Because no matter how logically refuted, it will just not sink in. At this point in your life you have no capacity for the truth that matters. That's why.

I am very curious to know if you grew up with people who are saved. Is that what drew you in to this "culture?"

I am very curious to see how someone like you can have a conversion experience, yet end up acting like a pseudo agnostic. For that is precisely where I have heard you arguments come from in the past. That is fact. Curious to see what motivates such thinking in you. What made you ashamed of Christianity.

I know I had many things when I was young in the Lord that made me ashamed of how many certain Christians are. But, they never made me ashamed of Christianity, itself. Christianity is something you need spiritual radar in order to lock in on your target destination. Getting your eyes on people will be any Christian's downfall.

I do not doubt you being saved. But, I seriously doubt the path you have chosen after having been saved. I would like to know what it was that influenced you to choose the direction you have decided upon. I do realize that most seminaries today have become liberal in their theology. Maybe, you are just following what you think is supposed to be Christianity. I am clueless.

I was confronted by all sorts of absurdity, yet I was able by the grace of God to find truth. So, I know you can, too. Anyone can. But, you find it repulsive it seems...... I am not sure if its a knee jerk reaction, or not. .

But..... My destiny with being face to face with the Lord awaits me. You, too. I just hope that a mind like yours does not go to waste. For, I know its a very easy thing to do when we get caught up in the spiritual warfare that shows no mercy as it seduces with pseudo mercy.

In the mean time. Grace and peace, GeneZ

 

[cygnusx1]

Would it get the right result? I'm not so sure. Paul was given a whole lot well before the Damascas road.

And I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries in my own nation, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers. Gal.1:14

Paul could not have learnt these things apart from the grace of God. A person can sit under the best teacher there is (in what ever field they are learning) and still come away with a fail mark. It has nothing to do with the teacher or one's capacity to learn but everything to do with one's attitude.
I think what Paul had and retained all his life was the one thing necessary for all of us so that the Lord can get through our thick skulls and that is natural curiosity which proceeds from innocence. That innocence is integral to all souls when they first come from the hand of God and when I say innocence I essentially mean without knowledge. It is the lack of knowledge that becomes the impetus for knowledge. This is what I mean by natural curiosity. Under original conditions (ie the Garden), the constant presence of the Lord was the obvious source of knowledge and it is He alone who can be. For the knowledge that comes from God and is God, when digested and taken into the soul, becomes the Truth of Him to be depended upon. In a sense, I see the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil as a "fast food' or a "quick fix" alternative. One that was never truly food or a fix for the innocence of man. This is why I think Christ said the following because unless we are willing to acknowledge we have no knowledge (of Him) we cannot learn from God and therefore remain devoid of Truth.

Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it.” Lk.18:17

We are in receipt of the truth at all times if only by virtue of the natural creation that surrounds us. (ie. Rom.1:20) It is my contention that if there is one thing common to all souls God creates, it is with this sense of curiosity and Paul utilised that curiosity more than most. It didn't make Paul better it just made him what he was designed as and the same as we are all designed.
Yet we are not born into the "original" creation and sin has its way of marring things including our own perfectly innocent souls that God created. We are indeed blind and live in darkness no matter how curious we may be or willing to believe that which is taught us by those whom have authority over us, without the grace of God revealing the truth to us? We will forever remain ignorant. The problem as I see it, is that when God does reveal the truth? We erroneously believe it is something we have discovered, whereas the reality is it is something given to us. For example. I'm sure there are many if not most, who at some point in their life, laid under the stars and looking up thought.."Wow! There must be a God". That thought is the result of God's revelation not something we have worked out in our own minds.

The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit. Jn.3:8

We know the wind is blowing by the results of what we see and hear. But as for the wind itself? It is invisible and it's own workings are unknown to us. It is the same when the Holy Spirit works in our lives. We do not feel Him or see Him but we enjoy the fruit of His labour. That is, the results He produces from His work like the thought above.."there must be a God". We could not come to that thought in and of ourselves, it is a work of grace. But it does not guarantee one will continue in that thought for we must choose to agree with it from our own free will or not.
It seems to me there are four foundational truths one must come to know before the Father can begin to present Christ.
1. God is.
2. God is Sovereign.
3. God is Holy. (right and just)
4. We are sinners.

I believe those four truths are presented to every man. At least to the degree they receive them. If they adamantly deny the first they cannot be given the next until they reconsider the first. If however they point blank refuse to even consider the possibilty that God is? .... even if Christ came down and did a "song and dance" under their noses? They would more than likely put it down to the pickles they had for tea last night. It is not a question of "proof" but a matter of will.

Paul was not given more than anyone else it's just that when he was given something, he received it. But here is the rub. Paul had no idea what he was being given or how he was getting it. He has to be the classic of "doing the right thing in a wrong way". He had the right motivation, his need for knowledge (truth). He had the right priority, the Law of God and he had the right attitude, the willingness to learn. But he worked it all out in the energy of his flesh and therefore remained ignorant of the Truth until.....

But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb and called me through His grace, to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles,.. Gal.1:15&16a

When it pleased God .... all that knowledge of the Law that Paul had learnt courtesy of God's grace? Suddenly appeared to him on the Damascus road, for Christ is the fullfilment of the Law.

I can almost here the Lord chuckle.. "you never expected all I had given you would amount to my Son did you Paul?"

Paul received nothing more than any one of us could receive if we are willing.

not returning evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary blessing, knowing that you were called to this, that you may inherit a blessing. 1Pet.3:9

We were called to be given blessings from the Lord. These blessings are in Christ and they are immeasurable.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, Eph.1:3

Now Cygnus, tell me. You have been baptised into Christ? Yes? Paul was baptised into Christ? Yes? What has he been given that you haven't? Nothing, not one, single, solitary thing.

The Father has already willed the absolute best of what He has to give even before the creation of the world. It is His desire that all men have His best. If a man does not have God's best? It is not God's will, but man's.

The Lord "rings His bell" within the emptiness of our souls, showing us all our need for His Truth. If we do not hear the clanging it is because we refuse to listen, preferring instead, to replace it with our own brand of music. But if we are willing we, by God's grace, can be taken from innocence into Truth. Filled with the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ which becomes an even greater motivator to press on into all the Lord has given.



Oh.. and what was happening with Satan? (heehee) Moot question when one recognises the sufficiency of God's grace.

peace

that is a long post sawdust , the first thing that struck me was the usual seeking to place the ground of salvation somwhere at the sinners feet ........ instead of the Saviours.......... you see innocence as the ground of Paul's conversion !

let me just tell you , far , far from this man being innocent , he was a nasty piece of work , a real out and out fanatic , who hated Christians , who wanted them all dead !
Such a horrible and mean spirited person can only be avoided , and even after Paul's conversion it took over 14 YEARS before anyone of the Christians (except Barnabas) would come anywhere near him .......... they feared him that much.
Then we have the man's own testimony , several times he tells us how ruthless he was , and desribes himself as "The Chief Of Sinners" ....... so , I conclude ......... It was Grace , Sovereign , Predestinating , Selective , Powerful , Active , RICH Grace and nothing less that saved Paul ....... the same as it did me.

BtW , as another example see the saved thief on the cross ......... see his aweful sinnful , God hating Christ rejecting personality displayed (he too taunted Christ) then see the astounding , Glorious , unexpected transformation under Sovereign Grace !

 

[GenemZ]

that is a long post sawdust , the first thing that struck me was the usual seeking to place the ground of salvation somwhere at the sinners feet ........ instead of the Saviours.......... you see innocence as the ground of Paul's conversion !

let me just tell you , far , far from this man being innocent , he was a nasty piece of work , a real out and out fanatic , who hated Christians , who wanted them all dead !
Such a horrible and mean spirited person can only be avoided , and even after Paul's conversion it took over 14 YEARS before anyone of the Christians (except Barnabas) would come anywhere near him .......... they feared him that much.
Then we have the man's own testimony , several times he tells us how ruthless he was , and desribes himself as "The Chief Of Sinners" ....... so , I conclude ......... It was Grace , Sovereign , Predestinating , Selective , Powerful , Active , RICH Grace and nothing less that saved Paul ....... the same as it did me.

BtW , as another example see the saved thief on the cross ......... see his aweful sinnful , God hating Christ rejecting personality displayed (he too taunted Christ) then see the astounding , Glorious , unexpected transformation under Sovereign Grace !

If man did not have a sin nature? Could he seek God?

Grace and peace, GeneZ

 

[cygnusx1]

If man did not have a sin nature? Could he seek God?

Grace and peace, GeneZ

there would be no need ............ for man without a sin nature would be in deep fellowship with God , there would be no seperation , as in the case of Adam pre-fall .

All the commands to seek God , even with promises are only actually effectual to the regenerate , they can seek God because they have light , inward illumination. The rest are in darkness , and love darkness.


Often what is not taken into consideration is God's demands are not cut and tailored to our abilities , God can and God does demand from men what He is Just to demand , if He cut his demands down to suit our differing abilities (some men are wiser , better educated and milder in personality than others) there would be no real standard , and earth and heaven would be full of boasters.

 

[depthdeception]

I thought it was because you did not want it undermined. Now, its not the right place.....

Look at #135...

Then PM, me when its done.

Will do.

At this point I really want nothing to do with your imaginings and attacks on truth. And, BTW. These things you say are not new to me.

BTW, I am not trying to attack the truth. I am only trying to clarify the way we speak about the truth--eliminating misleading language and concepts. Moreover, I am not attempting (nor claiming) to offer anything "new." I am merely attempting to be forthcoming about the language, concepts, and ideas which we utilize to speak about the truth.

I am very curious to know if you grew up with people who are saved. Is that what drew you in to this "culture?"

Yeah, believe it or not I am a preacher's kid.

I am very curious to see how someone like you can have a conversion experience, yet end up acting like a pseudo agnostic. For that is precisely where I have heard you arguments come from in the past. That is fact. Curious to see what motivates such thinking in you. What made you ashamed of Christianity.

What, exactly, is a "false agnostic?" Anyway, I have spoken, on numerous occassions, of my motivations and purposes--you just do not care to listen to what I say.

I am not ashamed of Christianity. I am only concerned about elements within the Christian community which discredit the validity and truth of it.

I do not doubt you being saved. But, I seriously doubt the path you have chosen after having been saved. I would like to know what it was that influenced you to choose the direction you have decided upon. I do realize that most seminaries today have become liberal in their theology. Maybe, you are just following what you think is supposed to be Christianity. I am clueless.

Obviously, my thinking is influenced by everything in my life, from the schools I attend, to the parents who raised me, to the books I read, to the friends I spend time with, etc., etc., etc. You are no different. You are the product of the schools you have attended, the parents who raised you, the books you have read, the friends you spend time with, etc. If I am following what you think is supposed to be Christianity, then you are doing exactly the same thing.

 

[LukeBritt]

"If I am following what you think is supposed to be Christianity, then you are doing exactly the same thing."

- great quote

 

[GenemZ]

What, exactly, is a "false agnostic?" Anyway, I have spoken, on numerous occassions, of my motivations and purposes--you just do not care to listen to what I say.

To speak more plainly, I know you are not an agnostic. But, the arguments you present is from the same playbook I have seen agnostics use for years. So, I coined the phrase, "pseudo agnostic."

I am not ashamed of Christianity. I am only concerned about elements within the Christian community which discredit the validity and truth of it.

You think you are alone? Problem is, you are one who is out to discredit elements of Christianity that they abuse not by refuting their misinterpretation, but by trying to refute the valididy of what it is they misinterpret. Its a wrong approach.

You can not pull the carpet out from under the feet of legalists by showing them that what they use to bully others with is not valid to begin with, by showing them Scripture is fallible and misleading. That makes no sense. It will only make them see you as being from the devil. You are in a lose-lose situation with your approach. You end up changing no one. Only alienating them further.

And, from what I have witnessed from your interpretive capacity of how we do not have a our soul leave the body at death? Makes me doubt you had one iota of sound treaching presented to you as you grew up. What denomination are you from? Universalists? For, you were distorting basic doctrine, not even advanced stuff. It made me feel you were just faking it. Yet, you come here pretending to have an expertise perspective, when any seminary student in his first month would wonder what it was you were trying to pull off.

Obviously, my thinking is influenced by everything in my life, from the schools I attend, to the parents who raised me, to the books I read, to the friends I spend time with, etc., etc., etc. You are no different.

What makes me different than you, is what you neglected to mention.

John 16:13a niv
"But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth."

Because of that, I have broken away from the influence of my parents (Jewish) and many of the books I read were thrown out as trash after I saw what I was to be about doing. I dropped almost all my friends after I entered into a conscious walk of salvation. But, I did not understand why when it first happened.

You are the product of the schools you have attended, the parents who raised you, the books you have read, the friends you spend time with, etc. If I am following what you think is supposed to be Christianity, then you are doing exactly the same thing.

Wrong. I had my life flash before me in a series of dreams and visions. I saw the Bible College I was to attend ten years before it existed. I also saw its demise.

We are to become transformed by truth! Not our friends, schools I have attended, etc. They had an impact on me, sure. But, it was an impact that showed me that I need to do my own thinking for myself. My parents wanted to hand me over to Jewish deprogrammers when they first found out I became a Christian. So, my parents influence on my Christianity was nil.

I walked into Christianity with an open mind. As a babe in the woods. I did not have any demoninational bias to cling to. I exposed myself to various aspects of different denominational beliefs in my search. I ended up finally finding my answer in a select few teachers who are able to teach from the original languages, and able to research the historical background to what was written.

And, guess what? I found out that this type of spiritual life simply cuts throught the bias and influence from any friends one can have. When you have friends that share in that kind of spiritual life? We make it a point to avoid influencing as the world does (and carnal believers, do). We would much rather share in the life it imparts, than influence the other. Of course, influence can not be avoided when someone helps clarify an issue. But, that is not the same as what parents, friends, schools, and our own minds can do. For, there is one variable that surpasses them all.

John 16:13a niv
"But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth."

The Spirit breaks us free (the truth will make you free) from past influences by exposing us to truth. If we are simply reacting to what we saw as stupidity and injustices of our past, then our choices will be one of being reactionary, rather than one of seeking the truth that was missed by those who wrongly influenced us. We are to break free of past influences that would mold our concept of Christianity. God wants to boil it down to being an issue of having it be between ourself, and Himself.

Romans 12:2 niv
"Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will."

Two believers can not be both led of the Spirit and always be opposed to one another. Either one is grieving the Spirit, or both are. When they disagree on almost everything? Both can not be in a state of being led of the Spirit.

The Spirit (if he has his way) will cause one to outgrow the false influence of all the things you mentioned which would effect our view of Christianity. And, I speak of the type of influence you spoke of. The one where these things form your concept of Christianity. When that happens we are not being led of the Spirit.

Those who are led of the Spirit will denounce past influences that we experience in everyday life. That is, if all those things were not imparting eternal truth. We see that when someone finally breaks free from a particular denomination when they did not resent truth that corrected them in what had influenced them in the past. That, only the Spirit and you can work out. He may bring communicators of truth our way, but they can not influence us if it is from God. The Spirit must influence us.

Someone may influence me in a hobby, or interest. That's temporal life. But, only the Holy Spirit can be a true influence concerning our outlook of Christianity. If he can not get through? Then parents, friends, schools, and books will form the prisim we look through as being Christianity.

When I hear a great teaching on the Word? I do not see it as a man influencing me. I take it as being from the Lord. The man is only a messenger if he is truly led of God. He will not desire to influence. (many do, though). He will only desire to present the truth as accurately as possible, and then leave you with that information to live your own life for yourself, as onto the Lord.

Grace and peace, GeneZ

 

[koban4max]

3d is cool...something I look at with the 3d glasses.

 

[GenemZ]

3d is cool...something I look at with the 3d glasses.

I am sorry. That is down the hall, to the left. This room is the "The third dimension of soteriology", room.

Please close the door behind you.

Next time. Please knock before you walk in and disrupt the flow of a thread.

Thanks!

Grace and peace, GeneZ

 

[koban4max]

oh sorry..hahah wrong thread.

 

[depthdeception]

You can not pull the carpet out from under the feet of legalists by showing them that what they use to bully others with is not valid to begin with, by showing them Scripture is fallible and misleading.

I am not trying to make anyone think the Scripture is "fallible and misleading." I am merely trying to show that utter dependence on modernistic textual categories for establishing the "inerrancy" of Scripture is a dangerous and compromised position.

And, from what I have witnessed from your interpretive capacity of how we do not have a our soul leave the body at death?

To which "interpretive capacity" are you referring? Anthropological dualism is not an obvious Scriptural view, and can only be substantiated upon the back of a sound dualistic presupposition. I agree that the same is true for monism, but the point remains is that both perspectives can be convincingly supported with Scripture (and I would assert monism can be more convincingly supported when approached from Scripture, philosophy, and science).

Makes me doubt you had one iota of sound treaching presented to you as you grew up. What denomination are you from?

I grew up in the Wesleyan Church, not the Universalist church (but thanks for assuming that anyway).

For, you were distorting basic doctrine, not even advanced stuff. It made me feel you were just faking it. Yet, you come here pretending to have an expertise perspective, when any seminary student in his first month would wonder what it was you were trying to pull off.

I do not see how anthropological dualism is "basic doctrine."http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=50&chapter=16&verse=13&version=31&context=verse

 

[Ben johnson]

They used to do those things because they were a slaves to sin before they were saved. That does not mean they will not fall at times into sin. It does not mean they will, either. Before we were saved we had no choice. We were slaves to sin. Once we are saved we are no longer having no choice. Yet, we still have with us the ability to sin. The moment I get arrogant when I see someone posting false doctrine, I sin. The moment I see a female who I have lust in my heart over, I sin. The moment I resent God's will for my life, I sin. The moment I "just think it" I have sinned!

David repented.

They used to do those things because they were a slaves to sin before they were saved. That does not mean they will not fall at times into sin. It does not mean they will, either. Before we were saved we had no choice. We were slaves to sin. Once we are saved we are no longer having no choice. Yet, we still have with us the ability to sin. The moment I get arrogant when I see someone posting false doctrine, I sin. The moment I see a female who I have lust in my heart over, I sin. The moment I resent God's will for my life, I sin. The moment I "just think it" I have sinned!

That we-saved sin, demonstrates that God is resistible. When we sin, we are then presented with the exact same choice as before --- to sin again, or to repent.

...it is the "sin again" instead of "repent" that gets us in trouble...

Believers still sin! But, their sin is not as one who is not saved. We have a means to overcome sin given us. The unbeliever does not.

1 John 1:8-10

If we confess our sin. If we repent.

We are not to be sinless. We are to "sin less."

Actually, righteousness is our goal. Because "Jesus is our righteousness in and through us". 2Cor5:21. We are to "be perfect, even as our heavenly Father is perfect". Matt5:48. While we have the flesh, we sometimes stumble; but by pursuing an always closer fellowship with Him, we seek for Him to perfect us and guide us in the paths of righteousness.

God wants us to overcome sin not be ceasing to give into sin. But by the renewing of our minds!

By becoming transformed by the Holy Spirit into the image of Christ!

Can't argue with that!

A believer can not remain alive as to continue in a life of sin. Why? God kills him, and puts an end to it!

With respect, I don't see Scriptural basis for this; nor do I see it born out in the world. Christians fall all the time (and stay alive); many of 'em post on this board...

Not everyone will receive rewards on that Day. But, all who come to Jesus will be saved. Jesus said he will lose none of all the Father gives him. The Father knows all things. So, why is the Father all of a sudden a fool? To give to his Son an imperfect gift that he will have to lose later on? There goes the Father's omniscience! Right?

Why would the Father want to give to his Son defective merchandise? The Father "guesses" who to give to his dearly beloved Son? Not a chance.

Have you read Jn17:6? The word "GIVE" in that context, means "they believe".

"Those Thou hast given Me out of the world; Thine they WERE, and Thou gavest them to Me." Thine they were, Gene; they belonged to (believed) God. THROUGH that belief they were given to Jesus.

As Jesus said, "If God were your Father, then you would love Me! For I preceed forth FROM the Father..." Jn8:42

All who see Jesus and believe, are saved; and we are charged to be diligent to continue IN that belief-that-saved-us-through-Christ...

 

[Scholar in training]

We are to become transformed by truth! Not our friends, schools I have attended, etc. They had an impact on me, sure. But, it was an impact that showed me that I need to do my own thinking for myself. My parents wanted to hand me over to Jewish deprogrammers when they first found out I became a Christian. So, my parents influence on my Christianity was nil.

Can I ask that you expound upon what you mean by "Jewish deprogrammers"?

 

[GenemZ]

I am not trying to make anyone think the Scripture is "fallible and misleading." I am merely trying to show that utter dependence on modernistic textual categories for establishing the "inerrancy" of Scripture is a dangerous and compromised position.

So, you are saying the means by which modernistic textual categories determine infallibility, is fallible.

Now... Do us all a favor? Not everyone here attends your seminary (or, reads your books) where you have already learned this technical vocabulary, and I do know a great deal of technical vocabulary, but you seem to have gone into a select area of study that requires one first learn what terms mean. Make believe you are introducing this class to the concept by beginning to define the terms you use. If you do not, you sound aloof and out to only impress yourself. Come down to our level, lord. You know? Like God did?

To which "interpretive capacity" are you referring? Anthropological dualism is not an obvious Scriptural view, and can only be substantiated upon the back of a sound dualistic presupposition. I agree that the same is true for monism, but the point remains is that both perspectives can be convincingly supported with Scripture (and I would assert monism can be more convincingly supported when approached from Scripture, philosophy, and science).

In other words, you do not view the soul as being a seperate entity from the body. That when the body dies, the soul is not a seperate creation which leaves the body. Correct?

I grew up in the Wesleyan Church, not the Universalist church (but thanks for assuming that anyway).

I did not assume anything. I threw that out so you would do precisely like you just did.

I do not see how anthropological dualism is "basic doctrine."

The fact that you do not see it, does not determine its not basic doctrine.

Human body = mortal

Soul = immortal.

Human body = elements of the earth. Dying.

Soul = invisible elements (like God) created directly by God. Created to exist forever. In his image. Genesis 1:27 = bara = created something out from nothing.

"So God created man in his own (bara) his own image,
in the image of God he created him; (bara)
male and female he created them."


God created [bara] out from nothing" man's soul. How? In God's image. Invisible.

Yet, not the same is said of Adam's body in Genesis 2:7.

The body was formed from pre-existing material [yatsar]. The soul is capable of Eternal life. The body as it now is, is in contrast, locked into time and space. The body is what locks our soul into time and space. The body is God's testing ground to see what the soul is worthy of receiving in Eternity. The body will be disgarded when God is through revealing (by testing) what he knows about our souls.

God is always working in men's hearts. Yet, God rested from the work of creating out from nothing ( "bara" ) as shown in Genesis 2:2.

"By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating {bara} that he had done."

God rested from "creating out from nothing" on the seventh day. At that point he had created all that was needed for this age. The soul of man in his image had been created.

The elements of the earth for Adam's body were already created. So, God did not need to create anything with Adam's body. He simply "yatsar" formed and molded his body from what had been "bara" - "created out from nothing," previously.

God does not rest. He only rested from "creating out from nothing."

John 5:17 niv
"Jesus said to them, "My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I, too, am working."


That is why Jesus healed on the sabbath day. The work that God rested from was one of creating out from nothing. The soul was created "out from nothing." In contrast, the body was formed from what had been already created.

The soul which had been created was then breathed into the nostrils that was formed. The soul and body are not the same creations. God created the soul seperate from the body. And, God formed the body seperate from the soul.

To think the concept that the soul leaves the body at death is not basic doctrine?

2 Corinthians 5:8 niv
"We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord."

If we never leave a body, then there would be no resurrection. OT saints died before any resurrection were possible. Jesus had not yet been glorified. They died. Their souls were seperated from the body. At the resurrection we will receive a new glorious body. A heavenly body. Not one made of the elements of the earth. Those doomed to the lake of fire will be resurrected into an undetermined type of body that will be tormented forever.

Jesus body lay dead three days. His soul and the Spirit at that time were busy doing God's work in Tartarus... and also Paradise.

1 Peter 3:18-20 (New International Version)
"For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water."


Where were those spirits kept that he preached to before he rose from the dead?

Jude 1:6 niv
"And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day."


Jesus had to preach something to those angels while yet out of the body..... But, I digress.


1 Corinthians 15:35

"But someone may ask, "How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?"

Will come? Why not say, what kind of body do the dead now have? That is, if we are to die and instantly receive a resurrection body (as you claimed).

2 Timothy 2:18 niv
"who have wandered away from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some."


If what you claimed were true? That once we die we receive a new body? The resurrection would be taking place right now, and would have been taking place back then! It has not yet taken place. When we now die, our body goes back to the dust, and our soul is in the presence of the Lord awaiting our resurrection body.

"They say that the resurrection has already taken place,"


Grace and peace, GeneZ

 

[GenemZ]

Can I ask that you expound upon what you mean by "Jewish deprogrammers"?

I was brought up a Jew. My father was one of the founders of a local synagogue. My mom's grandfather was a rabbi. I guess you could say I was Jewish before I got saved.

Well, right after I let my parents know I was a Christian they wanted me to see this group of Jewish specialists who were trained in deprogramming Jews who turned to Christ. This was the seventies, and there many such specialists around, especially for deprogramming people who were getting into cults.

I knew very little Bible at that time and I would have been like a lamb thrown to the wolves. Yet, in the courage my new found faith gave me, I was willing to see them and to talk with them.

I do not recall all the details, but after contacting them something went wrong with their scheduling and could not see me when the date was set for. I shortly after (days after) that left home and entered Bible College. I believe my parents were away living in a winter home at the time. I was living up north in the regular house. If they were still there most likely they would have forced me to to see that group.

So it was...... Grace and peace, GeneZ

 

[depthdeception]

So, you are saying the means by which modernistic textual categories determine infallibility, is fallible.

No. I merely said that these "means" are not validly applicable to the Scriptures (or, more appropriately, should not be validly applicable).

Now... Do us all a favor? Not everyone here attends your seminary (or, reads your books) where you have already learned this technical vocabulary, and I do know a great deal of technical vocabulary, but you seem to have gone into a select area of study that requires one first learn what terms mean. Make believe you are introducing this class to the concept by beginning to define the terms you use. If you do not, you sound aloof and out to only impress yourself. Come down to our level, lord. You know? Like God did?

There is a reason these are called "theological" forums... Besides, given that this thread is entitled the "thid dimension of soteriology", I hardly think your criticism of my preference to utilize theologically technical language is just.

In other words, you do not view the soul as being a seperate entity from the body. That when the body dies, the soul is not a seperate creation which leaves the body. Correct?

More or less. When the person dies, the person dies. There is not a part that "naturally" persists into eternity by and unto itself (as anthropological dualism claims).

Human body = mortal

Agreed.

Soul = immortal.

Pure, unsubstantiated speculation.

Human body = elements of the earth. Dying.

Agreed. However, it would be more appropriate to substituted "human body" with "human person."

Soul = invisible elements (like God) created directly by God. Created to exist forever. In his image. Genesis 1:27 = bara = created something out from nothing.

Again, speculative that this is referring to an element of the person that can become "disembodied." Furthermore, your appeal to the "image of God" is hardly valid, as Genesis also says:

"Gen 9:6 "Whoever sheds the blood of man,
by man shall his blood be shed;
for in the image of God
has God made man. "

Wait a minute...This verse implies quite directly that the physical portion of the human is also the image of God. What!!! Can't be...

Yet, not the same is said of Adam's body in Genesis 2:7.

The body was formed from pre-existing material [yatsar]. The soul is capable of Eternal life. The body as it now is, is in contrast, locked into time and space. The body is what locks our soul into time and space. The body is God's testing ground to see what the soul is worthy of receiving in Eternity. The body will be disgarded when God is through revealing (by testing) what he knows about our souls.

???? More speculation.

To think the concept that the soul leaves the body at death is not basic doctrine?

2 Corinthians 5:8 niv
"We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord."

Apparently, you failed to read the verses prior to this one in which Paul describes being "home with the Lord" as being clothed with the "heavenly dwelling." Paul is not talking about an intermediate, disembodied experience. Rather, he is merely talking about mortal and immortal embodied existence.

If we never leave a body, then there would be no resurrection. OT saints died before any resurrection were possible. Jesus had not yet been glorified. They died.

You are making the resurrection (which occurs outside of the confines of space/time) subservient to a linear view of space/time. Just because we cannot help but speak of things in a linear manner does not mean that that is the way in which (or the "order" in which) they actually occur. The Scriptures speak of Christ being "slain from the foundations of the world." Does this mean that Christ was, in linear space/time, perpetually crucified, from the beginning of space/time until the end? Of course not. Rather, it is saying that the efficacy of Christ's atonement is an eternal reality that intersects every moment of space/time. THerefore, from a linear perspective, the OT saints could be resurrected "before" Jesus was crucified in space/time, for Christ's sacrifice has always been efficacious for the salvation of the faithful, even thought it had a particular manifestation in space/time.

Their souls were seperated from the body.

Rubbish. More unfounded, Platonically charged speculation.

Jesus body lay dead three days. His soul and the Spirit at that time were busy doing God's work in Tartarus... and also Paradise.

1 Peter 3:18-20 (New International Version)
"For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water."

More unfounded, linearly dependent speculation. If anything, this verse proves my point. 1.) It says Christ was put to death, but made alive by the Spirit. Therefore, it was after , not before, Christ's resurrection (which was the resurrection of the whole person) that Christ did these things. Furthermore, this verse says nothing of alleged fact that Christ did these things, and was then raised from the dead. Your interpretation is fueled by a dualistic anthropology, but is by no means the obvious, nor necessary rendering of the text.

Jude 1:6 niv
"And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day."


Jesus had to preach something to those angels while yet out of the body..... But, I digress.

You digress, and make huge assumptions. Nowhere does it say that Jesus did any of these things in a disembodied state. That is merely your anthropology fueling your interpretation.

Will come? Why not say, what kind of body do the dead now have? That is, if we are to die and instantly receive a resurrection body (as you claimed).

They have their resurrection body.

2 Timothy 2:18 niv
"who have wandered away from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some."

If what you claimed were true? That once we die we receive a new body? The resurrection would be taking place right now, and would have been taking place back then! It has not yet taken place. When we now die, our body goes back to the dust, and our soul is in the presence of the Lord awaiting our resurrection body.

Again, you have yet to show where the SCriptures say that this is what occurs. I suggest that when a person dies, they die completely, as a whole person. There is nothing of them that automatically persists into eternity. Only by the grace and power of God are the dead raised to the resurrection life. Furthermore, this resurrection life is not simply an animation of the the molecular structure of matter in space/time that is rejoined to the rogue, eternity wandering soul, but is rather something that occurs in the fulness of time in which God dwells where one can be fully resurrected even while one remains a rotting corpse in the ground. We must always be careful not to impinge our limited comprehension of space/time upon the power and reality of God.

 

[sawdust]

that is a long post sawdust , the first thing that struck me was the usual seeking to place the ground of salvation somwhere at the sinners feet ........ instead of the Saviours.......... you see innocence as the ground of Paul's conversion !

No, I do not see innocence as the ground for Paul's conversion, I see the mercy of God as the ground for Paul's conversion. I see innocence as the impetus for natural curiosity but the sin nature distorts it into a "race of pride and lust". That is, the pride of place and the lust for power.

let me just tell you , far , far from this man being innocent , he was a nasty piece of work , a real out and out fanatic , who hated Christians , who wanted them all dead !
Such a horrible and mean spirited person can only be avoided , and even after Paul's conversion it took over 14 YEARS before anyone of the Christians (except Barnabas) would come anywhere near him .......... they feared him that much.

Saul of Tarsus never hated Christians, he hated Christ, that is why he did what he did.

If the Lord held your attitude that one like that "can only be avoided"? .... then we wouldn't have half the NT that we have. But thankfully, mercy and grace has no fear of sin or evil, even when it is at it's worst and hence did not avoid him but met him fair and square on the Damascus road. I suspect Barnabas had the "gift of faith" which is how he could find the courage others couldn't to face Paul. However, that is speculation on my part.

Then we have the man's own testimony , several times he tells us how ruthless he was , and desribes himself as "The Chief Of Sinners" ....... so , I conclude ......... It was Grace , Sovereign , Predestinating , Selective , Powerful , Active , RICH Grace and nothing less that saved Paul ....... the same as it did me.

And I would contend for nothing else. "For by grace are we saved". But if all the grace of God is poured out upon all the world? Will it save sinners? Whether you like it or not or whether you want to admit to it or not, the fact remains you had to say "I will". One cannot be married until one says I will. (and we are the Bride of Christ) God forces no man to choose for Him. Calvin was wrong in saying God holds "shotgun weddings" because He doesn't work that way.

BtW , as another example see the saved thief on the cross ......... see his aweful sinnful , God hating Christ rejecting personality displayed (he too taunted Christ) then see the astounding , Glorious , unexpected transformation under Sovereign Grace !

There were two thieves and no I don't see their "awful sin". What I see are two men, one who accepted Jesus as the Christ and one who didn't. Both saw the grace of God (Christ forgiving His enemies) but one chose to humble himself and receive mercy the other preferred his arrogance and rejected such mercy.

And just so you know... not all who live in darkness, love the darknesss. For reasons I do not fully understand sometimes the Lord reveals only enough light to show one they are in darkness yet not enough to bring them out. (I am speaking from personal experience) But I do know this, that if a soul can claim to be anything then in Paul's own words......

But by the grace of God I am what I am,... 1Cor.15:10a

.... and I thank God every day for His grace.

peace

 

[sawdust]

Again, you have yet to show where the SCriptures say that this is what occurs. I suggest that when a person dies, they die completely, as a whole person. There is nothing of them that automatically persists into eternity. Only by the grace and power of God are the dead raised to the resurrection life. Furthermore, this resurrection life is not simply an animation of the the molecular structure of matter in space/time that is rejoined to the rogue, eternity wandering soul, but is rather something that occurs in the fulness of time in which God dwells where one can be fully resurrected even while one remains a rotting corpse in the ground. We must always be careful not to impinge our limited comprehension of space/time upon the power and reality of God.

So let me get this straight.

The prophet Samuel, being a believer, would have got his resurrection body when he died and would have gone to be with the Lord. Yes?
If so, how come then this....

And the king said to her, “Do not be afraid. What did you see?”
And the woman said to Saul, “I saw a spirit ascending out of the earth.” 1Sam.28:13

If Samuel was with the Lord shouldn't he be descending from heaven not ascending out of the earth?

peace

 

[GenemZ]

There is a reason these are called "theological" forums... Besides, given that this thread is entitled the "thid dimension of soteriology", I hardly think your criticism of my preference to utilize theologically technical language is just.

Fine... see you around. I hope you find fertile discussions with .00001% of the population.

Grace and peace, GeneZ