The Doctrine of OSAS

[Barrd]

Interesting...John speaks differently

"As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.


Is John referring to someone other than Jesus?

Thanks, Wormwood.


And doesn't it say in Ephesians that there is only ONE baptism?
How does it go again....ONE Lord, ONE faith, and ONE baptism?

Which would sort of eliminate any notion of a separate "baptism of the Holy Spirit", wouldn't it?

 

[Jun2u]

Then I suggest you read 2 Tim 3:16 IN context and learn what that means.

I'm very familiar with the meaning of 2Tim 3:16 as the meaning is straightforward. It merely states that all scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, unto all good works.

What it says in 2 Peter 1:19-21 IN context, is;
We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

It means these men spoke as God told them to, not as they saw fit. Carried along is NOT the same as being filled with the Holy Spirit, which can ONLY happen to one who has confessed Jesus as their saviour and then receives the second Advocate as their power.
Acts 1:4 and Luke 24:49.

While 2Pe 1:21 tells us that God used holy men to write His book which is the Bible. For example, like Moses, Jeremiah, Isaiah, etc., in the OT, while in the NT, He used Paul, Peter, John, and a hosts of others. Seeems your exegesis of 2Pe 1:21 is kinda off. You have accused me in the past of not knowing exegesis, I suppose it takes one to know one? I wonder, where did you learn your hermeneutics?

I've noticed that you answer only questions, statements, and comments that you think you can tackle, and evade those that are more difficult to answer, yet you portray yourself as a know-it-all individual. Could you not have answered my questions about the pouring out of the Holy Spirit? I guess not!

To God Be The Glory

 

[Barrd]

I'm very familiar with the meaning of 2Tim 3:16 as the meaning is straightforward. It merely states that all scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, unto all good works.

Let me point out once again that, when Paul wrote those words, he could not have been referring to the Bible, as the Bible did not exist yet.

 

[StanJ]

What does this have to do with mjrhealth's post?

He commented on my statement "The entire Bible is of the Spirit."
His comment was "Which one?" Then he quoted get behind me Satan...

Read back...I'm sure you'll figure it out.

 

[StanJ]

Interesting...John speaks differently
"As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
Is John referring to someone other than Jesus?

John doesn't say ANYTHING differently. I suggest you read John 14 and 15 to see what Jesus said about the Holy Spirit.
Do YOU think this is a different Jesus?

 

[StanJ]

I'm very familiar with the meaning of 2Tim 3:16 as the meaning is straightforward. It merely states that all scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, unto all good works.

While 2Pe 1:21 tells us that God used holy men to write His book which is the Bible. For example, like Moses, Jeremiah, Isaiah, etc., in the OT, while in the NT, He used Paul, Peter, John, and a hosts of others. Seeems your exegesis of 2Pe 1:21 is kinda off. You have accused me in the past of not knowing exegesis, I suppose it takes one to know one? I wonder, where did you learn your hermeneutics?

I've noticed that you answer only questions, statements, and comments that you think you can tackle, and evade those that are more difficult to answer, yet you portray yourself as a know-it-all individual. Could you not have answered my questions about the pouring out of the Holy Spirit? I guess not!

Then why did you ask, if you knew?

Actually I WASN'T exegeting it, I was quoting it IN context. You're the one that brought it up, WITHOUT explanation. You do that a lot. You must think we are all mind readers, or you just like muddying up the waters?

I answer what I can or have time for. In your case, that is low priority, given these type of expected responses. If you don't know why you are making posts, then don't make them, but don't expect me to keep track of your attempt to obfuscate.

 

[StanJ]

Thanks, Wormwood.


And doesn't it say in Ephesians that there is only ONE baptism?
How does it go again....ONE Lord, ONE faith, and ONE baptism?

Which would sort of eliminate any notion of a separate "baptism of the Holy Spirit", wouldn't it?

That wasn't wormwood you thanked.

 

[Barrd]

That wasn't wormwood you thanked.

Woops, sorry.
Thanks, Justaname...

 

[Barrd]

John doesn't say ANYTHING differently. I suggest you read John 14 and 15 to see what Jesus said about the Holy Spirit.
Do YOU think this is a different Jesus?

Are you talking about where Jesus says He will send the Comforter?

I don't see how this is a "different Jesus" than the Jesus Who is to baptize us with the Holy Spirit and with fire....

Could you enlighten me, please?

 

[Jun2u]

Let me point out once again that, when Paul wrote those words, he could not have been referring to the Bible, as the Bible did not exist yet.

That's true the Bible was not yet complete but the Old Testament or Jewish Bible was and can be resolved by reading Ro 15:4.

I hope this helped.

To God Be The Glory

 

[mjrhealth]

SO you believe the bible is your reference to know thta it is Jesus that is speaking.

Mat 4:5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,
Mat 4:6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

Guess what the devil knows the bible too. Why do you think Jesus gave us the Holy spirirt, and why we are supposed to be led by the spirit.

 

[justaname]

Read back...I'm sure you'll figure it out.

Ambiguous language and refusal to clarify...things don't change much.

I still love you Stan...

 

[justaname]

John doesn't say ANYTHING differently. I suggest you read John 14 and 15 to see what Jesus said about the Holy Spirit.
Do YOU think this is a different Jesus?

John says He will baptize; referring to the one "mightier than I" which I believe to be Jesus.

Stanj says Jesus never baptized on earth and does not in heaven.

John "Jesus will baptize"
Stanj "Jesus will allow to be baptized"


Hmmmm....

 

[justaname]

SO you believe the bible is your reference to know thta it is Jesus that is speaking.

Mat 4:5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,
Mat 4:6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

Guess what the devil knows the bible too. Why do you think Jesus gave us the Holy spirirt, and why we are supposed to be led by the spirit.

You did not answer the question...which Spirit do you believe the Bible is from?

 

[Barrd]

Ambiguous language and refusal to clarify...things don't change much.

I still love you Stan...

Stan is a very lovable guy....even if he is just a tad hard-headed at times...

But then, ain't we all?
Hard-headed, I mean.
Lovable, too...

 

[Wormwood]

justaname,

I wanted to take a moment to respond to your comment from earlier.

This one verse argues against most of your post regarding coming to faith...
The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. - 1 Corinthians 2:14
The entire Bible is of the Spirit. It is by the Spirit men are moved to believe the gospel and come to faith. If the gospel message moved men to belief then all who simply hear the gospel would come to belief.

So, what you are proposing here is that a "natural" person cannot understand or respond to the Gospel because it can only be accepted if the Spirit precedes and spiritually awakens a person so that they are capable of understanding and accepting the Gospel. Your proof-text for this notion is 1 Cor. 2:14. Let's take a look at the entire context of 1 Cor. 2:14 and see if this is what Paul is suggesting...

“these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For who knows a person’s thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual. The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ.” (1 Corinthians 2:10–16, ESV)

So, the reason I believe this passage is so widely misunderstood is because many assume the first person pronouns are referring to Christians in general. This is simply not the case. The "us" and "we" pronouns in this text are referring to the Apostles, not to Christians in general. Paul is talking about the revelatory message of the Gospel that Paul and the other Apostles have received and how this message is not based in human wisdom but divine revelation. It did not come from the wisdom of the world, but from the Spirit of God. That is Paul's point!

Paul says, "and we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual. The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned."

So, is Paul suggesting that this message he preaches cannot be understood apart from a miraculous inner illumination by the Spirit? No. Paul is saying that because the message of the Gospel was given to them by means different than the ways of the world, those who clamor for human, natural wisdom will feel that this message is foolish. In fact, Paul is showing how many of the Corinthian Christians are part of these people who fit this group! He goes on to say,

“But I, brothers, could not address you as spiritual people, but as people of the flesh, as infants in Christ. I fed you with milk, not solid food, for you were not ready for it. And even now you are not yet ready, for you are still of the flesh. For while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh and behaving only in a human way? For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not being merely human?” (1 Corinthians 3:1–4, ESV)

You see, the "I, we, us" pronouns are referring to the Apostles who have received a hidden wisdom from God that is very different than the wisdom of the world. It is wisdom, but those who love the wisdom of the world do not accept it because it does not come from the world. In fact, many of these Corinthian believers are fighting and dividing amongst one another because they are following the wisdom of the world rather than the Spirit. This is Paul's point! Paul is not saying, "No one can understand the Gospel unless God enables them because they are prechosen." He is saying, "We preach wisdom, but it is a different kind of wisdom. This is a wisdom from God that looks silly to those who are caught up in being wise in the eyes of the world. In fact, many of you Corinthian Christians still dont really get it because if you did, you wouldn't be acting like the world and arguing about which Apostle or church leader is the best and wisest. God's message doesnt work like that! This isnt a competition! We are all just fellow workers building God's Kingdom. Stop acting like the world! The message of God and the ways of God are different than the praise-seeking, vain glory the world pursues."

So, this text is not saying only Christians who have the Spirit can receive the Gospel. It is saying that the wisdom of God is revealed in humility and weakness. Unless these Corinthian Christians start humbling themselves and understanding the message and ways of God properly, they will never mature. This is not a plea for OSAS. It is very similar to Christ's call to "repent" so they can receive the Kingdom. You have to turn from the ways and pride of the world to receive the Gospel (which is why the "sinners" were entering before the religious leaders). The NT is clear that we are capable of responding in this way when confronted with the Gospel.

 

[StanJ]

Ambiguous language and refusal to clarify...things don't change much.

I still love you Stan...

I know you comprehend and are not obtuse, so your reasons for posing those type of questions is clear, and as before, you know I won't play your games. It's pretty simple.

 

[StanJ]

Are you talking about where Jesus says He will send the Comforter?

I don't see how this is a "different Jesus" than the Jesus Who is to baptize us with the Holy Spirit and with fire....

Could you enlighten me, please?

I didn't say He was a DIFFERENT Jesus, I said He baptizes us by SENDING the Holy Spirit. It's still Jesus that causes the Baptism of the Holy Spirit to be initialized. As there is an order in the trinity, I suspect you understand that order...Father/Son/Holy Spirit.
Only God can enlighten...I do my best to explain.

 

[StanJ]

Stan is a very lovable guy....even if he is just a tad hard-headed at times...
But then, ain't we all?
Hard-headed, I mean.
Lovable, too...

if you connote it to mean "steadfast", I fully agree.

 

[StanJ]

John says He will baptize; referring to the one "mightier than I" which I believe to be Jesus.
Stanj says Jesus never baptized on earth and does not in heaven.

John "Jesus will baptize"
Stanj "Jesus will allow to be baptized"


Hmmmm....

You're getting there. Don't worry, agreeing with me only serves to make things clearer, so you won't be hmming very long.