Reviving Biblical Christianity (The Way) Part 2

[amigo de christo]

The sins that are past..as it is written. But new sins, worse sins, arise due to sins against holiness, pride, iniquity, blasphemy..etc So until judgment day we are to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling....not in smugness and self-assurance.


You mean believed ABOUT Jesus. It is the easiest thing in the world to believe things ABOUT Jesus. But it is not so easy to believe INTO Jesus. That takes His approval. How many here seek God's approval BEFORE making claims about themselves? And the wise make no claims at all. Again, the righteous NEVER see themselves as righteous. God does.


You have it backwards. We can't apply the sacrifice of Christ to ourselves. We are the ones who make sacrifices to God...and He decides to accept them or not. Ever since Abel was justified before God. Jesus died in obedience to the Father. He was NOT our sacrificial Lamb...but God's. The Lamb of God. NOT the Lamb of Lizbeth. The only humans that sacrificed Jesus were evil men. He is not our sacrifice for sins. Jesus made a way to the Father...that most people don't believe in...including yourself. He did that because God loves His people. But His people don't love Him, for the most part...they only love what He provides for them. And they HATE the truth as seen here.

I hate having to always show what is actually written in the bible...just like for novices.


Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
Gal. 3:16

Exercise some reading skills.....does Paul say to SEEDS (plural) or to SEED (singular, as in Christ)?

like the SIN OF UNBELEIF that calls GOD a liar EPI . that darn sure is blasphemous all right .
ONLY you cant see it . nor could gilbert , nor could t orro . it seems inclusivity
and its inclusive god is gonna take captive all who rejected the love of the truth to a lie
and they will merge as one mind and one heart . ANd yes epi they will all be damned .
PRIDE . oh yeah ITS PRIDE TO CALL GOD A LIAR epi . And he who beleives not the testimony that GOD gave of the SON
DOES call GOD a liar . But inclusivity tries to claim THIS UNBELEIF LIE is of GOD . wow .
Talk about beleiving things about JESUS while omitting a whole lot of what he said , EPI you guilty of it too .
You cannot help the lost , you cannot help the hyper grace false ones
YOU as lost as they are my friend . EVEN THEY are going down this same road as you do .
OH yalls doctrine is not identical , but the lie is identical .
GUESS what one lie they all trying to pump unto christendom and all religoins IS ...........
that UNBELEIF IN JESUS is okay . JUST like you do epi . I been watching ALL camps
FROM the ecumeincal , WHICh IS HIGHLY inclusive and from which Inclusivity came
To hyper grace , to prosperity preachers , to both the left and the right
THE SAME LIE epi . SEEMS like you all have that IN COMMON now .

 

[Episkopos]

like the SIN OF UNBELEIF that calls GOD a liar EPI . that darn sure is blasphemous all right .
ONLY you cant see it . nor could gilbert , nor could t orro . it seems inclusivity
and its inclusive god is gonna take captive all who rejected the love of the truth to a lie
and they will merge as one mind and one heart . ANd yes epi they will all be damned .
PRIDE . oh yeah ITS PRIDE TO CALL GOD A LIAR epi . And he who beleives not the testimony that GOD gave of the SON
DOES call GOD a liar . But inclusivity tries to claim THIS UNBELEIF LIE is of GOD . wow .
Talk about beleiving things about JESUS while omitting a whole lot of what he said , EPI you guilty of it too .
You cannot help the lost , you cannot help the hyper grace false ones
YOU as lost as they are my friend . EVEN THEY are going down this same road as you do .
OH yalls doctrine is not identical , but the lie is identical .
GUESS what one lie they all trying to pump unto christendom and all religoins IS ...........
that UNBELEIF IN JESUS is okay . JUST like you do epi . I been watching ALL camps
FROM the ecumeincal , WHICh IS HIGHLY inclusive and from which Inclusivity came
To hyper grace , to prosperity preachers , to both the left and the right
THE SAME LIE epi . SEEMS like you all have that IN COMMON now .

So then stop with the pride that makes you call God a liar. Simple. But will you heed your own advice?

 

[Laurina]

CONTEXT

Matt 8:5 When he had entered Capernaum, a centurion came forward to him, appealing to him,
Matt 8:6 “Lord, my servant is lying paralyzed at home, suffering terribly.”
Matt 8:7 And he said to him, “I will come and heal him.”
Matt 8:8 But the centurion replied, “Lord, I am not worthy to have you come under my roof, but only say the word, and my servant will be healed.
Matt 8:9 For I too am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. And I say to one, ‘Go,’ and he goes, and to another, ‘Come,’ and he comes, and to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.”
Matt 8:10 When Jesus heard this, he marveled and said to those who followed him, “Truly, I tell you, with no one in Israel have I found such faith.
Matt 8:11 I tell you, many will come from east and west and recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven,
Matt 8:12 while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
Matt 8:13 And to the centurion Jesus said, “Go; let it be done for you as you have believed.” And the servant was healed at that very moment.

Story is about a gentile (not God's chosen people), then view for further context in v11, gentiles coming from all over the world entering the kingdom of heaven, saved. Contradictory in v12 (keyword while) many chosen people (Jews) thrown into outer darkness because they rejected Jesus. I don't see how people thrown into outer darkness are saved people.

So, 2 lost, 2 saved

You didn't answer the question...check out Luke 13:28...it says "kingdom of God", not "sons of the kingdom." You didn't reconcile that.

Also, you didn't address the Bema seat judgment which is in God's house. In God's house, all of the people there ARE saved. So please explain your take on that.

 

[bdavidc]

I'm not sure that all parables can be proven per se......we walk by faith not by sight. And His sheep know His voice, or learn to know it as we grow. But any true interpretation will be consistent with all scripture, the whole counsel of God.

I agree with one thing you said: any true interpretation will be consistent with the whole counsel of God. But an interpretation can fit with biblical truth without actually being what a particular passage teaches. That is the issue I keep raising.

“We walk by faith, not by sight” does not mean we believe interpretations that cannot be demonstrated from the Word. Biblical faith rests on what God has revealed. “Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Romans 10:17).

And 1 Corinthians 2 does not teach that the Holy Spirit gives believers private symbolic meanings that are nowhere stated in Scripture. Paul is talking about truth God revealed by His Spirit and then communicated in words taught by the Spirit. The passage does not give us permission to assign meanings to Jordan, Canaan, fire, doorposts, servants, treasure, pearls, and then say those meanings are spiritually discerned.

In fact, Scripture already tells us what happened to the old man: “our old man is crucified with him” (Romans 6:6). Paul does not say the old man waits for some later Jordan-crossing experience to be crucified. The believer is united with Christ in His death and resurrection.

The same problem appears again when you say the Holy Spirit is the fire that burns up the old man on the altar, that the whole burnt offering represents complete surrender, and that crossing Jordan represents entire sanctification. Those are connections you are making. Where does Scripture actually assign those meanings?

Even Matthew 3 does not say, “The Holy Spirit is fire which burns up the believer’s old man.” John speaks of baptism “with the Holy Ghost, and with fire,” and the very next verse speaks of chaff being burned with unquenchable fire. You cannot simply take the word “fire,” attach it to sanctification, and then build a doctrine from it.

The rich young ruler does not prove your system either. Jesus did expose his attachment to possessions. But when the disciples asked, “Who then can be saved?” Jesus did not answer, “Those who surrender enough.” He said, “With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible” (Matthew 19:26).

Christ absolutely calls us to deny ourselves, take up our cross, and follow Him. I am not denying surrender, obedience, sacrifice, or sanctification. I am denying that Scripture teaches the particular symbolic system you keep placing on these passages.

That distinction matters.

A devotional analogy may be interesting. A possible connection may even be useful. But once you say, “This is what Jordan means,” “this is what the fire means,” “this is what the pierced ear means,” or “this is what the treasure means,” you have moved from application to doctrine.

At that point the question is still the same: Where does Scripture say so?

“Spiritual discernment” is not a substitute for biblical proof. The Holy Spirit inspired the Word. He does not need us to add meanings to it that He never put there.

 

[bdavidc]

Ok, so maybe between 5 and 10 years old...

Five to ten years old? Excellent. Then surely a man of your great spiritual depth should have no trouble answering the question of a child.

Where is the verse?

You have had page after page, post after post, and plenty of confidence. Yet the one thing your doctrine desperately needs still has not appeared. Perhaps your verse is busy, or on a journey, or asleep and must be awakened.

Mocking my age does not rescue your theology. It only advertises that you still cannot answer the text.

The record is simple: you teach two classes of redeemed people with different eternal destinies, and you still cannot show where the Bible actually says it.

 

[bdavidc]

The thing is...and I haven't considered this until he pointed it out...there were both good AND bad invited to the wedding feast. How did that one guy even get there without a wedding garment?

That is an important question, but the Bible does not tell us how the man got into the wedding without a garment, so I would not invent an explanation.

What Jesus does tell us is enough. The servants gathered “both bad and good” (Matthew 22:10), but when the king came to examine the guests, one man was found without a wedding garment and was cast into outer darkness (vv. 11–13). Jesus then explains, “For many are called, but few are chosen” (v. 14).

So “bad and good” cannot be used to prove two classes of saved people. They are the people gathered by the invitation. The parable itself shows that being among those gathered does not equal being finally accepted by the king.

And that is the point Episkopos still has not answered. Nothing in this parable says there is one class of merely righteous saved people and another class of holy saved people with different eternal destinies. That distinction is being added to the text, not drawn from it.

 

[Episkopos]

That is an important question, but the Bible does not tell us how the man got into the wedding without a garment, so I would not invent an explanation.

What Jesus does tell us is enough. The servants gathered “both bad and good” (Matthew 22:10), but when the king came to examine the guests, one man was found without a wedding garment and was cast into outer darkness (vv. 11–13). Jesus then explains, “For many are called, but few are chosen” (v. 14).

So “bad and good” cannot be used to prove two classes of saved people. They are the people gathered by the invitation. The parable itself shows that being among those gathered does not equal being finally accepted by the king.

And that is the point Episkopos still has not answered. Nothing in this parable says there is one class of merely righteous saved people and another class of holy saved people with different eternal destinies. That distinction is being added to the text, not drawn from it.

The bible ONLY divides the righteous from the holy. It is so plain that you can't see it. You still think the Bride is the same as being a guest. You think glory is the same as mercy. You see being ruled over as the same as ruling with Christ. There's really no help for someone who is both blind and deaf.

When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.


The saints live eternally in the holy city and rule over the saved nations. There is no one class of saved people...sitting on clouds and playing harps and such.