Another verse that blows ME out of the water

Hey TC, if you have no faith in Christ but instead worship your left sock, you will die.

I just addressed that advice to a Christian. Does that mean he might have no faith in Christ and is capable of worhiping his left sock?

Yes, it is a gross misunderstanding, especially of Romans. Romans is a long, methodical walk through the whole concept of salvation.

 

Are you saying there are no believers who fit this description? What is the conclusion here? Simply this: where there is no fear of God, all manner of evil will prevail. True of the lost, true of the saved. Hence this fits perfectly into KA doctrine.

 

No, that is not the description of any Christian that I know. Perhaps your Christian friends are like that. I suggest then that you find new friends. Christian characteristics are not those that "are swift to shed blood," "whose mouths are full of cursing and bitterness," "where destruction and misery are in their ways." I know of no Christian of whom this charaterizes. It is the charateristics, the embodiment of evil itself, found only in vile, wicked unsaved sinners. The Christian produces a change in his life, and as he grows he produces the fruit of the Spirit.

 

Dang, if there are no Christians like that, to whom can the self-righteous feel superior? Unbelievers? Bah, that's no fun.

 

I would agree that we don't get "saved" by forgiving, but can we be saved if we aren't willing to forgive, or at least be willing to forgive as we are surely led by the Spirit to do once we are saved? This passage is all about having the kind of heart Jesus had. Surely a part of committing one's life to Christ would involve forgiving others as He forgives us.

Remember that Jesus prayed that we would be forgiven as we forgive others.

Or, the passage could be referring to temporal judgements against us, as christians, if we don't forgive others.

Anyway, the whole point of the parable isn't about what happens to those who don't forgive. The point is that we as christians should follow Jesus and forgive as He does.

But, whatever the punishment entails, there's nothing there about being punished for 1000 years during a millenial kingdom. There's no smoking gun there.

Les

 

Perhaps YOUR friends are like that and you don't know it! Maybe you should find new friends. ha ha ha!

Sorry. I should not repay railing for railing. I apologize.

You are certainly naive' or willfully ignorant of the fact that Christians can indeed be some or all of those things. For example; John Calvin took great pleasure in the burning of another man to death. Would you say that Calvin was unsaved? And what about the many who persecuted Baptist pastors early in this country's history? Were ALL of them unsaved? No sir; methinks you have willfully ignored the testimony of history that indeed, Christians can and do act like that passage describes.

 

If these men, like Calvin, killed one person (like Servetus) and then repented, (like David) God forgives and forgets. The above passage speaks of a manner of living.
If Calvin lived a life of murder, then I (like some others have already suggested) doubt if he was saved.

The same holds true in American history. No true Christian lives a life of persecuting other believers. I would conclude that the "persecutor" was not a true believer, but one in name only.

 

How can this possibly be unsaved people Paul is dealing with?
1. They started out being "saved." Romans 1:6 "the called of Jesus Christ." And again in verse 7 "beloved of God."

2.They KNEW God. I do not know any unsaved person who KNOWS or KNEW God. vs.21

3. They did not RETAIN God in their Knowledge. To retain something, you must posses it to start with. vs.28

4. They KNEW the JUDGEMENT of GOD. vs.32 How can an unsaved person who had never believed upon Christ, know the Judgement of God?

This is just a few examples. REMEMBER Paul was writing to Brethren. Why would he be trying to get them "saved" all over again? Also, as an Epistle, he deals with the Brethren, not with the lost. Paul was not like most baptists today. Gathering the believers every Sunday and telling them how they must be "Born Again."
I am not against evangelizing. As a matter of fact I am about to leave the house to spread the gospel of grace door to door but when I have believers together, speaking to believers, I edify them and teach them what will help them prepare for the Judgment seat of Christ.
God Bless

 

Of course, the entire epistle is written to believers. I don't think anyone would deny that. Does that mean that Paul would not describe the condition of the unsaved in his epistle.
In the Book of Revelation John writes to believers also. He also describes the GWT. Are those beleivers that stand before the GWT just because John is writing to believers. I believe some common sense is in order here.

 

I think I understand you now. Correct me if I am in error about what you believe to be true.

A "true" Christian will not continually be overtaken in sin (any sin) and if he is then he is not "truly" saved? Is that what you believe?

If this assessment is true of what you believe then you have backloaded salvation by placing a man's works as evidence of his salvation and one can only know if one is saved at the very last moment of his life: for, only at THAT moment will he know that he has lived a continual life of obedience.

Hence you can then agree with Paul when he said in Philippians 3:11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead. Here it is evident that Paul does NOT know for sure he will be resurrected; but later in his life 2 Timothy 4:7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: Paul is assured of his resurrection and crown.

In your view then; a) in the first passage Paul is adding works for his salvation and b) in the second Paul is only assured of His salvation at the last of his life.

Your understanding is too narrow and erroneous.

 

And that is just what Paul is doing.

Les

 

Definitely not. Was David overtaken in sin? He was a man after God's own heart.
Was the believer who committed incest in 1Cor.5 overtaken in sin? Yes, and yet he repented and was accepted back into the church.
Annanias and Sapphira as far as we know were believers. Were they overtaken in sin. The obvious answer is yes, but I believe they are in heaven today.
Were those in 1Cor.11:30, who abused the Lord's Table and were severely judged for--even to the point of physical death, overtaken by sin. Yes. But they never lost their salvation.

As I have stated over and over again: I don't know if you are saved, and you don't know if I am saved. Only God knows the heart. Salvation is between you and God. We are not to judge. I accept a man on his testimony of salvation, and that is the best that I can do. God knows them that are his. I don't have a monopoly on the omniscience of God. There are many immoral insiders and many moral outsiders. God knows; I don't. By grace are ye saved through faith and that not of yourselves. It is the gift of God not of works.

Paul did know for sure. He is stating a goal for his life. Don't lsolate a verse out of its context:

Philippians 3:11-12 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
12 Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.
--He had already attained it. His goal was to keep on striving.

Darby translates it this way:
Philippians 3:11-12 if any way I arrive at the resurrection from among the dead. Not that I have already obtained the prize, or am already perfected; but I pursue, if also I may get possession of it, seeing that also I have been taken possession of by Christ Jesus.
--Does that make it any clearer?

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said any such thing. Salvation is by grace through faith...and not of works. Paul is consistent with that message.
Paul is assured of his salvation from the first day that he is born again. Where are you getting these nonsensical assumptions?

I think yours is.

 

1. The knowledge that these people possessed of God was not saving knowledge.

2. General revelation is for all to come to a general revelation of God (1:20). But we dare not conclude that such knowledge is saving knowledge.

3. Which book(s) then of the NT should we use to include those who are non-Christians?

4. "For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek" (Rom. 1:16).

a. If this verse is not talking about the Gospel to the unsaved/non-Christians, what then is it referring to?

b. Is Paul trying to save the already saved?

 

DHK;
You totally ignored the adverb. Continually

You made your whole point as if I did not use this word. I am NOT putting words in your mouth. You said that one who contiually sins is not a true Christian which would by definition require that one cannot know UNLESS works are added.

I'll be back with direct quotes (again) to show this is true of what you SAID. But for now I have things to do.

 

Not one of these verses point to a Child of God being excluded from the Millenial Kingdom.

You are taking verses out of context to preach a Christ that denies His own Word.

 

On what grounds do you claim this? I will give you a chance. If you will study you too will see that this is a sure knowledge of God.

But you dare conclude that it is not. Your argument has double standards.

????? Do you mean what book should we use to lead someone to Christ Jesus? If this is the question, I use the books of Genesis, and John. At times I only use John. Is it not sufficient? It tells us of the good news of Grace does it not? The argument by some would be to use Romans. There are general verses in Romans that deal with both spectrums but others are taken so far out of context it isn't funny. Example: "Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." This has nothing to do with becoming born from from above. Why give conflicting verses that confuse people?

 

3. Are you to say that the GWT is only attended by sinners without Christ? Or is it possible that John saw it, wrote of it by the authority of God, for we will one day be witnesses thereof?

 

Might I add this:
Why would Paul be trying to lead these people to the Lord again and again, and again? The gospel of grace is simple. It is so simple that it is dealt with and we are then to move on. Hebrews says to lay it aside. Not that we should forget it but too many baptists know nothing else. They never grow. Paul is trying to grow these believers. Not bash the unbelievers in the presence of the brethren.

 

Yes, at one time. This is a passage that must be taken in a historical setting. Let me give you an example.

Romans 1:18-20 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

We can see in these three verses that there was a time when they believed the Word of God. God revealed it unto them. Nature itself declared it unto them (which is general revelation--such as nature: See Psalm 19:1-3)
However, they rejected whatever light they were given instead of responding to it.

An example: Northern Africa in the first couple of centuries after Christ was a center of missionary activity for Christ. They had the gospel and the gospel went out from there. Remember the Ethiopian eunuch returning as a missionary to his own nation. There were others. History bears this out.

Gradually they began to reject God.

Romans 1:21-23 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

This is what happened. They rejected God and foolishly turned to idolatry. They changed the glory of the God that the professed to know into images of creatures, and then worshiped the creatures instead of God. This was not sudden, but gradual.

Romans 1:24-25 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
--Thus, first, God gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts. They began to dishonor their own bodies. The served the creature more than the Creator.

Romans 1:26-27 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
--Their sin beame progressively worse. Now they were given up to vile affections. The sin of lesbianism is described; also homosexualism, and the judgment that goes with it.

Romans 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
--Now they don't even retain God in their knowledge, and a dark list of sins is listed in verses 29-32, which they practice. Their lives are full of these sins. It is a way of life for them.

Look at the history of Northern Africa. It went from Christianity to Animism to Islam. Most of Northern Africa has converted to Islam, one of the most anti-Christian religions on the face of this earth. Over time they followed the steps given in Romans one. It was not sudden. It is not speaking of one individual. It is historical, happening over a period of time.

 

No, not at all. David committed both adultery and murder and was saved. But he repented of his sin. He did not continue in a life of sin. If one says he is a believer and continues in a lifestyle of immorality--fornication and adultery--never with any sign of repentance, do you think that he would be a Christian?

I believe John was given special revelation for us to see what would happen in the future. So was Daniel. In both cases there were times that they were told not to reveal that which was revealed to them. Paul said that he saw things too wonderful that it would be not lawful for him to utter.
Believers will stand before the JSOC. They will not stand before the GWT, at least not in judgement. Whether they will witness it is a matter of conjecture and theological debate. The Bible is silent on that issue. The GWT is a judgment for the unsaved only.