The Proof of Salvation

[marks]

I would suggest that instead of unfolding the scriptures, that this we have already done, and it is time rather to fold them again.

I keep coming back the this. For the life of me I can't figure out what you mean here. Fold them again? How about just reading what the Writer wrote to us?

For all the mystical permutations I hear people come up with, I can't find anything more spectacular that what it plainly says.

I remain amazed!

Much love!
mark

 

[ScottA]

Let's actually talk about the Scriptures germain to the point.

Except, if you really really actually think I should remain silent, why do you encourage me?

I know that you are the arbitor of those who know and those who don't.

Just the same, I still maintain that if you declare Scritpure to be symbols, but lack the clear definition of those symbols in Scripture, then your interpretations by definition lack Scriptural authority.

I think we're just going to go in circles now.

Much love!
Mark

That is why I told you "Do not misunderstand." What we are doing is not going in circles, unless you double back. Alternatively, I have been attempting to reason with you, that I am not speaking riddles and nonsense, but simply quoting and paraphrasing the scriptures...which you should already know.

However, if you are not ready to add the two and two of scripture with the help of the Spirit, I am happy to slow down. For which I will explain: Scriptural authority is not determined by defining symbols in scripture...it is by revelation. Thus, I now frustrate you, because when you have attempted to quiz me, I have quizzed you. So I will quiz you again: Is that not the very method used which is written of Christ? And this I do, because you have stated the terms, and I have met them, even without you knowing.

Should I have done less, that you might think more of me?

 

[ScottA]

Make like I'm dense and actually show the link. I don't see it.

We sow, and we reap. The Spirit is poured out on all flesh.

But in another man's understanding, the Spirit is poured out on all flesh for the purposing of drawing all men to Christ, to save them from judgment. Why should that not be so?

Much love!
mark

You are doing well yourself to quote the scriptures. Therefore, I will move on to addressing your question.

The two different perspectives on the above scriptural points, just shows a lack of understanding. One does not contradict the other. The "all" of the one passage, however, is not the "all" of the other. You know that "all men" will not be drawn to Christ, but only those whom the Father draws. But the prophecy of God pouring out his spirit upon all flesh does not make that same distinction. But it does say they have been given the power of God to choose to answer when he knocks. Thus, given the faith to do so, "all men are drawn." Nonetheless, what is written, is: "many are called, but few chosen."

 

[marks]

Scriptural authority is not determined by defining symbols in scripture...it is by revelation.

Extra-Biblical revelation?

Whose?

 

[marks]

You know that "all men" will not be drawn to Christ, but only those whom the Father draws.

Actually, Jesus taught that if He were to be crucified, that He would draw all men to Himself.

I'm certain you know that.

Much love!
Mark

 

[ScottA]

I keep coming back the this. For the life of me I can't figure out what you mean here. Fold them again? How about just reading what the Writer wrote to us?

For all the mystical permutations I hear people come up with, I can't find anything more spectacular that what it plainly says.

I remain amazed!

Much love!
mark

We know that all that are/were in Adam did in effect unfold from his linage, referred to in the scriptures as if one man, and that in the end conversely, we become as one man again in Christ. If you have not perceived it, it is not because the scriptures to not say the same, because they do, but this is the Way and the Life. Perhaps instead of the word "unfold" and "fold", if I had used the words "of" and "gathering", it might be easier to understand. Nonetheless, according to the scriptures, we came from one, and return to One.

 

[marks]

Extra-Biblical revelation?

Whose?

@ScottA

Coming back to this for a moment . . . were you planning to reply?

Much love!
Mark

 

[marks]

You are doing well yourself to quote the scriptures. Therefore, I will move on to addressing your question.

The two different perspectives on the above scriptural points, just shows a lack of understanding. One does not contradict the other. The "all" of the one passage, however, is not the "all" of the other. You know that "all men" will not be drawn to Christ, but only those whom the Father draws. But the prophecy of God pouring out his spirit upon all flesh does not make that same distinction. But it does say they have been given the power of God to choose to answer when he knocks. Thus, given the faith to do so, "all men are drawn." Nonetheless, what is written, is: "many are called, but few chosen."

Hi Scott,

I had thought I had been asking you how the Holy Spirit being poured out on all flesh was connect to reaping and sowing. It seems we've gotten a bit off track.

Much love!
mark

 

[ScottA]

Extra-Biblical revelation?

Whose?

This is a topic of great misunderstanding. Most would say just the opposite of what God's method of revelation is. In truth, God has established his actual method as picking an individual of his own choosing, while there are many others who speak falsely.

 

[ScottA]

Actually, Jesus taught that if He were to be crucified, that He would draw all men to Himself.

I'm certain you know that.

Much love!
Mark

Yes, but you missed my explanation. Picking out only part of what is said, is one of the great errors of many who would like to think they are aligned with all truth, but are not, but only in part. Much of what we may discuss, is likely for that very reason.

Jesus made both statements. Both are true. But you have only chosen to believe one.

 

[marks]

This is a topic of great misunderstanding. Most would say just the opposite of what God's method of revelation is. In truth, God has established his actual method as picking an individual of his own choosing, while there are many others who speak falsely.

So . . . that's a yes on the Extra-Biblical revelation? There's One Man who will explain God to us all?

 

[marks]

Yes, but you missed my explanation. Picking out only part of what is said, is one of the great errors of many who would like to think they are aligned with all truth, but are not, but only in part. Much of what we may discuss, is likely for that very reason.

Jesus made both statements. Both are true. But you have only chosen to believe one.

I'm sorry, one was made before Jesus went to the cross, and the veracity of His statement is demonstrated in the Gospels. People didn't understand, and Jesus said that it was because they had not been given to Him by His Father, and only those His Father drew would come to Him.

But then Jesus taught that were He to be crucified, that Jesus Himself would draw everyone to Himself.

Not that both are true, that would be silly. Only those whom the Father draws will come . . . the Son will draw all men . . . why? Why would the Son draw anyone if the only ones who came were those the Father drew. Do you see?

The Cross changed things. No longer to be only those the Father draws, but now the lifegates are open to all, the Son will draw all men to Himself.

Yes, the many be called, few be chosen, and that's sad!

Yes, Jesus made both statements, and both are true, but both are true within their contexts, and in their times. Just like God said He would flood the earth so build an ark, but that was for a certain time. Just like with this.

The key is in Jesus saying, "if I be lifted up".

But why would you so readily conclude that I don't believe what Jesus said? And that I've done this out of a wilfull ignorance? Intellectual dishonesty? Why would you say that?

Much love!
mark

 

[ScottA]

Hi Scott,

I had thought I had been asking you how the Holy Spirit being poured out on all flesh was connect to reaping and sowing. It seems we've gotten a bit off track.

Much love!
mark

No, you were quoting different scriptures with the idea that "all" meant the same in both, and it does not. A rabbit trail I did not chose, but joined you on - not because I need to, but I did it for you (much love).

I will pick up where we were when you come back to the truth of what Jesus explained in saying "all" in two different ways. Both of which are true.

 

[marks]

Picking out only part of what is said, is one of the great errors of many who would like to think they are aligned with all truth,

Oh, and by the way, are you saying this of me?

 

[ScottA]

So . . . that's a yes on the Extra-Biblical revelation? There's One Man who will explain God to us all?

No, not extra-biblical, but entirely according to the scriptures:

It is written that God chose individuals by name throughout all of scripture to deliver his word to all. It is also written that the Word had many more things to say during the times of the apostles, but they could not bear it then. And it is also written that He would send the Holy Spirit to lead us into all truth, giving gifts to men, some prophets, etc..

Are you just trying to tempt me? Because it is not working. Or are you an agent of Satan, that you should speak so against what is written, while claiming that what is there is not?

 

[ScottA]

I'm sorry, one was made before Jesus went to the cross, and the veracity of His statement is demonstrated in the Gospels. People didn't understand, and Jesus said that it was because they had not been given to Him by His Father, and only those His Father drew would come to Him.

But then Jesus taught that were He to be crucified, that Jesus Himself would draw everyone to Himself.

Not that both are true, that would be silly. Only those whom the Father draws will come . . . the Son will draw all men . . . why? Why would the Son draw anyone if the only ones who came were those the Father drew. Do you see?

The Cross changed things. No longer to be only those the Father draws, but now the lifegates are open to all, the Son will draw all men to Himself.

Yes, the many be called, few be chosen, and that's sad!

Yes, Jesus made both statements, and both are true, but both are true within their contexts, and in their times. Just like God said He would flood the earth so build an ark, but that was for a certain time. Just like with this.

The key is in Jesus saying, "if I be lifted up".

But why would you so readily conclude that I don't believe what Jesus said? And that I've done this out of a wilfull ignorance? Intellectual dishonesty? Why would you say that?

Much love!
mark

No...I explained, and still you have not acknowledged it. This is not a debate.

No, again. Things did not change at the cross - they were fulfilled, which is different than changed. God/Jesus are the same yesterday, today, and forever.

I am not going to say it again. You can read it again.

 

[marks]

No, you were quoting different scriptures with the idea that "all" meant the same in both, and it does not. A rabbit trail I did not chose, but joined you on - not because I need to, but I did it for you (much love).

I will pick up where we were when you come back to the truth of what Jesus explained in saying "all" in two different ways. Both of which are true.

Let's see . . . you had mentioned that we would not be subordinate to God. #319
I had asked how you understood "His servants shall serve Him". #321
You replied with the allegorization of the passage.
I responded that I take it literally.
You replied comparing the Bible with children's stories, implying, well, whatever you were implying.
I then asked for Scriptural back up on your allegorization of the passage.
You then said we should fold up the Scriptures instead of unfolding them, that all the Bible is a parable.
I questioned trying to read the Bible that way.
We went back and forth on that for a bit, until . . .

#334 . . .

But the Holy Spirit being poured out upon all flesh according to prophecy for our time, does not say on all "good" flesh, or all "for good." "All" then means the power of God poured out on both the good and the evil, which I say is unto judgement...which I do according to the scriptures, for it is written: "whatever a man sows, that he will also reap."

You were using "whatever a man sows, that he will also reap" as your foundation for saying that when God said the Holy Spirit would be poured out on all flesh unto judgment.

I said that was non-sequitor. I've asked you to show the link between these two and you have not.

You then moved on the those the Father would draw compared to all that the Son would draw after His death, seemingly with the intent of calling into dispute some rather plainly stated verses.

And here we are, spinning in circles, because you've made statements about the Bible I disagree with, and rather than support those statements with Chapter and verse and showing how this word and that word tell us that this means such and thus, well, we go in circles.

But that's OK. Many are that way.

Much love!
Mark

 

[ScottA]

Oh, and by the way, are you saying this of me?

Yes. That is what you are doing when you join scriptures that God has not joined, and separate scriptures that he has not separated. Granted, most begin as mysteries, requiring the Holy Spirit to unravel.

 

[marks]

No, not extra-biblical, but entirely according to the scriptures:

It is written that God chose individuals by name throughout all of scripture to deliver his word to all. It is also written that the Word had many more things to say during the times of the apostles, but they could not bear it then. And it is also written that He would send the Holy Spirit to lead us into all truth, giving gifts to men, some prophets, etc..

Are you just trying to tempt me? Because it is not working. Or are you an agent of Satan, that you should speak so against what is written, while claiming that what is there is not?

Why not just say it? Extra-Biblical.

Added to what is Written in the Word.

Revelation not given in the Apostolic times of Scripture writing, but given now, to be given greater weight that the Words of the Book Itself.

Isn't that what you mean? Why do you hold back from acknowledging it?

Am I an agent of Satan?

Boy! I haven't been asked that in a long time! Why? Are you?

I can never understand why people won't just commit themselves to what they believe. I do. I believe the Bible is the Ultimate Authorative Revelation from God to Mankind. Jesus showed the Father to us, and we have a written record. We have the Law and the Prophets and the other Writings.

No man can say anything that changes what it says. No man has the right to misappropriate a single word, a single letter. No man has the right or authority to add to or take away from what is written.

Anything you say that is not written in Scripture will be less than Scripture for me. I can read the Book and it will tell me what God want's me to know. The apostles and prophets and evangelists and pastor/teachers whom Jesus gave to the church will never differ from the Word of God.

Ok. That's my view. I can be plain, I can be bold, I can be clear.

Do you shy away from saying that there is a man who if he tells us that such and such verse means the opposite of what the words say . . . that he is right. Do you believe that?

Much love!
Mark

 

[marks]

Yes. That is what you are doing when you join scriptures that God has not joined, and separate scriptures that he has not separated. Granted, most begin as mysteries, requiring the Holy Spirit to unravel.

OK. So in your mind, I "think I'm aligned with all truth".

Hm.

But I will agree on the importance of rightly dividing the Word of Truth.