There is only One Gospel

[Jesus is YHWH]

My point was that the gospel of the kingdom is always accompanied by signs and wonders, Jesus made that pretty clear in Matthew 10:7-8, and other passages like Matthew 24:14-24.

If one claims to be preaching that now, but lack the signs and wonders, people can legitimately claim that they are not preaching the true gospel of the kingdom.

If you don't see a problem with your doctrine, I am of course fine too. Cheers.

Nowhere in those passages does it say the gospel of the kingdom is " ALWAYS" accompanied by signs and wonders.

you made that up

 

[Guojing]

Nowhere in those passages does it say the gospel of the kingdom is " ALWAYS" accompanied by signs and wonders.

you made that up

Mark 16:17-18 is another passage.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

Mark 16:17-18 is another passage.

again no gospel mentioned just those who already BELIEVE

 

[Guojing]

again no gospel mentioned just those who already BELIEVE

Isn't Mark 16:16 part of the gospel of the kingdom?

Do signs still accompany those who believed in the "gospel of the kingdom" that you are preaching now?

They don't right? So what makes you think you are still preaching that gospel?

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

Isn't Mark 16:16 part of the gospel of the kingdom?

Do signs still accompany those who believed in the "gospel of the kingdom" that you are preaching now?

They don't right? So what makes you think you are still preaching that gospel?

Marks ending is in brackets for a good reason.

 

[Guojing]

Marks ending is in brackets for a good reason.

Ahh, I see you hold on to the doctrine that the last part of Mark is not a legitimate part of Scripture.

Alright then.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Mark 16:17-18 is another passage.

They don't even have serpents north of the Arctic Circle.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Ahh, I see you hold on to the doctrine that the last part of Mark is not a legitimate part of Scripture.

Alright then.

That's not really a doctrine as such. The rest of scripture doesn't say, "That part is illegitimate". It is just good reasoning, knowing the background, the originals, the style, etc. Good hermeneutics won't build doctrine on that portion.

 

[Guojing]

That's not really a doctrine as such. The rest of scripture doesn't say, "That part is illegitimate". It is just good reasoning, knowing the background, the originals, the style, etc. Good hermeneutics won't build doctrine on that portion.

Yep, I linked that to Matthew 10:7-8 as already stated. I know that good doctrine should not be just based on a single passage.

 

[RCrihfield]

=====================
*You* I get your point but I would add that God creates and we react.

Agreed. Of course we do; I meant no differently. However, that does not imply that our reaction is uncaused.
==================
*You* All Israel was welcome to accept Jesus.

Agreed, again. Just as all sinners are welcome to repent and accept the Gospel of Christ, which yes, is offered to them. The cold fact, though, is that they cannot, and they cannot because they are slaves to sin; they WILL not, unless God changes their heart: regeneration.
=====================
*You* I still see a creation/response relationship.

Of course. Predestination does not imply otherwise. In fact, that is almost ALWAYS the way God accomplishes what he set out to do. Even in the "moment" of salvation, the willed choice of the new believer to turn to Christ is the work of God.
===================
*You* Still I see God creates, circumstance gives the opportunity and we choose what God knew we would. But to say God caused it is a bridge too far for me.

My Atheist antagonists gleefully yell, "God cannot be both Omnipotent and Omnibenevolent." If they knew the power and goodness of God, they would not quickly try to judge his deeds, but.... they do have a logical point there, which they also put words to: "If God knew ahead that what would happen to (with, by) his creation/creatures/humanity in particular, but he went ahead and created it anyway, then yes, he caused it." This logic is sound, yet the blame for evil cannot be placed at his feet, though they wish to, as if he is the sole causer. We too are causers, but we are also caused. As I have said elsewhere, there is only one First Cause, and that is God. There are no little first causes walking about the earth.

(The Chain of Causality is pervasive. I always smile when I think of the poetic way Atheist cosmologist like to put it when they say, "The 'seeds' of everything precisely as it exists today, were sown in the Big Bang." The logic is sound: Absolutely EVERYTHING is caused, except First Cause. And that being so, First Cause caused EVERYTHING in particular. (Whether one wants to argue as to whether God (First Cause) MEANT to cause every particular thing, is another debate (though intimately related), but I expect you can guess my answer.) I like to say, "Of course God has Foreknowledge -- because he Forecauses!).
======================
*You* The same gospel is available to all mankind.... "Whosoever will may come".

Agreed, but like you said, who is that? --only the Elect will come, and that, not until they are changed.
==================
*You* Rom 9:20 "...why hast thou made me thus?" Is the cry of the lgbtq community is it not? Why did God make ME with desires I can't control? But I choose my own response. Is that inconsistent with Calvin?

Not sure what you are referring to by "that", but if you meant: is it consistent with Calvinism that "I choose my own response" even if God made me "with desires I can't control", I would say yes, if you mean what I do by "choose", haha. Sorry --I had to add that, because many many people claim that if God causes our choices, and causes us to choose, they are not choices at all, and we are but robots. With that I vehemently disagree.

I have enjoyed reading your reply. I still don't understand the reluctance to say choice. If you take away man's free will (choice) then I understand why many would argue it isn't their fault but God caused me to do it. Are you old enough to remember Flip Wilson? The devil made me do it, was his signature line.

We (mankind and our world) were a very good creation. We apparently were meant to commune with God in a perfect place forever. He knew sin would come in before He created...sure....but His purpose (man communing with Him in a perfect place forever) is still the goal.

I choose faith. Wouldn't know faith without the word of God, but the acceptance is mine and yours. Being lost is caused by rejecting that same Word. My choice, your choice.

It feels like a cop out to say God made me do it. "If God hadn't talked to us, none of this would have happened" God has done nothing but good for us. Man is stupid to reject Him. It's our fault.

 

[A. Christian]

again no gospel mentioned just those who already BELIEVE

Do you believe that the Holy Spirit imparts on us gifts of prophecy, wisdom and knowledge, discerning of tongues, and healing? Or do you believe that those gifts were only given to the early church?

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

Do you believe that the Holy Spirit imparts on us gifts of prophecy, wisdom and knowledge, discerning of tongues, and healing? Or do you believe that those gifts were only given to the early church?

the sign gifts upon individuals left with the Apostles.

there are a couple threads on that topic but this thread is not about those gifts.

 

[A. Christian]

the sign gifts upon individuals left with the Apostles.

there are a couple threads on that topic but this thread is not about those gifts.

well finally there is something that we disagree about lol.

I just read the OP and the last few pages to see where the conversation was going and you were discussing "signs following" with someone else. So I jumped in the conversation at its current point, these "signs". But it's cool we dont have to discuss it.
So if you dont mind me asking are you Baptist or church of Christ?

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

well finally there is something that we disagree about lol.

I just read the OP and the last few pages to see where the conversation was going and you were discussing "signs following" with someone else. So I jumped in the conversation at its current point, these "signs". But it's cool we dont have to discuss it.
So if you dont mind me asking are you Baptist or church of Christ?

neither in a non denomination.

in my early days as a believer in the 80's- 90's I was in a dutch reformed church then a Christian Missionary Alliance.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I have enjoyed reading your reply. I still don't understand the reluctance to say choice. If you take away man's free will (choice) then I understand why many would argue it isn't their fault but God caused me to do it. Are you old enough to remember Flip Wilson? The devil made me do it, was his signature line.

Yes, I remember Flip Wilson. Haha, there are some people in life we tend to compare others to, like they are the standard. Flip was one of those. Nobody else quite like him.

I'm not sure why you think I (or maybe you think Calvinism?) is reluctant to say choice. We do not take away man's choice. We do believe in real, responsible choice, that has real, even eternal, results. However, Free Will, many of us deny --others just use it to mean that we do choose --not that our choices are independent of causation.

We (mankind and our world) were a very good creation. We apparently were meant to commune with God in a perfect place forever. He knew sin would come in before He created...sure....but His purpose (man communing with Him in a perfect place forever) is still the goal.

Very good creation, yes, even without error, but no, not complete. Adam and Eve were, for lack of a better term, spiritual simpletons. They were innocent, but so are dolphins. Their intelligence probably not much better than ours, I speculate, still below that of the angels. Although they alone were made in the image of God, they still were not, as created, what God had in mind for the finished product, the Bride of Christ. The elect are not only fallen, but even after regeneration are never complete until we see him as he is.

I choose faith. Wouldn't know faith without the word of God, but the acceptance is mine and yours. Being lost is caused by rejecting that same Word. My choice, your choice.

Without here going too much into what salvific faith actually is, vs common faith that even unbelievers can have, I use the Biblical term, "receive", rather than "accept". We are receptacles of faith, given to us by God. This does not negate the fact that we choose it, and willfully so, but it does not put the power in our silly hands --it is the work of God.

According to John 3:18 They are already condemned --notice the play of tenses --"because they have not believed". That is to say, they were not in a neutral state at any time. The lost are not innocent until such a time as they are given opportunity to choose between acceptance and rejection of the Gospel, as we would consider such things. (Truth is, that is exactly what we do from Day One, being at enmity with God, and without excuse, the huge difference between us guilty ones and the purity and power and mercy/intimacy of God was readily available to our hearts, but we didn't like the pain of that, I think. Disclaimer: all between these parenthesis is my take on the matter --not Reformed/Calvinistic doctrine.)

Now, this believing (salvific faith) is not shown to be an act of the will here in John 3 --we merely assume it to be so, because we well know our will is active in choosing, which indeed we do choose, in believing. Yet God remains the cause.

I thank God, that whether or not you, or anybody else, understands or agrees with me on what I say, or even understands a better explanation, the work of God remains capable of accomplishing what he has planned. That capability (shown in many passages of Scripture) is why the Reformed say that belief (i.e. the act of the will to believe) is the result, and not the cause, of salvation. One cannot be saved without regeneration, and regeneration is the result of the "installing" of the Spirit of God in the heart of the individual (it may even be possible to show that regeneration IS the Spirit of God in the heart).

Some people can even tell you there came a time in their life when they realized they already believed, without any particular turning point or choice on their part.

It feels like a cop out to say God made me do it. "If God hadn't talked to us, none of this would have happened" God has done nothing but good for us. Man is stupid to reject Him. It's our fault.

All true, it does feel like a cop-out. (That's why I try not to put it that way). I like to point out a difference between the act of will (see John 3 again) of the believer and the unbeliever. The unbeliever is already at enmity with God, (and he freely chooses to behave according to the nature to which he is enslaved). The believer is born again by the Spirit of God into a new nature, (yet the old man remains, and we must constantly, by act of will, be putting it to death.) The unbeliever, being apart from God, is alone in his choices, whether they be caused or not. The believer is never alone in his choices, but God works in him, (even by use of his disobedience). In both cases, the choices are real, but only in the one is God to be credited. "Without me, you can do nothing."

 

[A. Christian]

neither in a non denomination.

in my early days as a believer in the 80's- 90's I was in a dutch reformed church then a Christian Missionary Alliance.

Never heard of Dutch reformed or Christian missionary Alliance. And it is rare to see someone in the nondenominational denomination who does not believe in the gifts of the spirit. I don't know if it's about staying to the OP or just don't want to talk about this subject, but if you are cool with it maybe we could start a conversation and discuss it there?

 

[Mark Quayle]

Never heard of Dutch reformed or Christian missionary Alliance. And it is rare to see someone in the nondenominational denomination who does not believe in the gifts of the spirit. I don't know if it's about staying to the OP or just don't want to talk about this subject, but if you are cool with it maybe we could start a conversation and discuss it there?

My experience with CMA is that they pretty much all concentrate on the gifts and the working of the Spirit during the meetings, and try to maintain that attitude outside of the meetings, doing things like anointing the sick and so on. They are usually a very friendly and accepting group. But like most loosely knit denominations/ organizations there is a lot of difference between the different churches. My favorite that I have any experience with was the one where the Pastor was not at all convinced of the need for that focus, but merely pursued biblical teaching. For example, if somebody began to speak in tongues, he preferred translation or silence to allowing the oohs and aahs and exhuberant babbling.

 

[ralfyman]

The number comes from the same tradition that formed the Christian Bible.

 

[A. Christian]

My experience with CMA is that they pretty much all concentrate on the gifts and the working of the Spirit during the meetings, and try to maintain that attitude outside of the meetings, doing things like anointing the sick and so on. They are usually a very friendly and accepting group. But like most loosely knit denominations/ organizations there is a lot of difference between the different churches. My favorite that I have any experience with was the one where the Pastor was not at all convinced of the need for that focus, but merely pursued biblical teaching. For example, if somebody began to speak in tongues, he preferred translation or silence to allowing the oohs and aahs and exhuberant babbling.

Well Paul does say that tongues in church require an interpretation or it's not beneficial to the church. So at one point you did believe in the gifts? Was changing your belief on this topic the reason for leaving that denomination or did it change after leaving and being influenced by different views?

Never mind thought I was replying to a different person.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Well Paul does say that tongues in church require an interpretation or it's not beneficial to the church. So at one point you did believe in the gifts? Was changing your belief on this topic the reason for leaving that denomination or did it change after leaving and being influenced by different views?

Never mind thought I was replying to a different person.

It's ok. Yeah, I wasn't a member and no, I don't believe in the sign gifts as taught, though I am not going to say that God can't use them. But the teaching I have seen concerning them doesn't generally add up, to my mind.

My primary influence, I suppose, has been my own disability to do anything of myself to please God, and discovering that this life is not about me, nor my Christian success or performance, but about (and for) God himself. I came to my current views before I found out they were essentially Reformed in nature: Sovereignty and Imminence of God in all things. Inability of man to do anything worthy in and of himself. Predestination of all things, but particularly the elect becoming one with Christ. And many many implications of these things, such as monergism.

Thanks for the opportunity to explain, even if you didn't mean it for me, lol.