-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
P
Besides the obvious false charge of false witness, this is not what is in view. We are not talking about a Christian falling into sin, and whether that is denying Christ, I am asking you pointedly to show how your prooftext supports that believers can be faithless, which is the simple question I asked you when you asked if I didn't believe the verse, which is you saying you see it teaches that. The second is like unto it, a simple question, can believers deny Christ.
At this point you do not need to answer the questions, James, the public record already has it, and the discerning of the Body will see it as well.
God bless.
At this point you do not need to answer the questions, James, the public record already has it, and the discerning of the Body will see it as well.
God bless.
Lol, you are the one being shown to happily break commandments without a care in the world
If you had of understood what 2tim2:13 meant you would never have questioned me about it in the first place, but you didn't.
Possibly you can't even understand the answer you have repeatedly been given
Try not to worry so much ad to how others view you in debate when you are wrong, then you wont have to make up lies as to what people have written. Good grief, none of us are perfect in knowledge
If you had of understood what 2tim2:13 meant you would never have questioned me about it in the first place, but you didn't.
Possibly you can't even understand the answer you have repeatedly been given
Try not to worry so much ad to how others view you in debate when you are wrong, then you wont have to make up lies as to what people have written. Good grief, none of us are perfect in knowledge
Last edited:
Your only question was how believers could be faithless? Do you not read answers given? Obviously not. So let me once again explain. You were faithless to the christian walk by once again lying as to what I wrote. Have I suggested by your being faithless to that walk you have denied Christ or cannot be a christian? No!
Being faithless as Paul meant in 2tim 2:13 is when we don't follow after the holy spirit and live as a christian should live
What will you do now? Say I still haven't answered the question lol
Being faithless as Paul meant in 2tim 2:13 is when we don't follow after the holy spirit and live as a christian should live
What will you do now? Say I still haven't answered the question lol
Having read this again I see you want to know if believers can deny/disown Christ. I really don't know why you even ask that(well I do) because I have already quoted to you from 2 timothy if we disown Christ he must disown us
The mistake you are making is, if a christian is faithless they ARE NOT denying Christ in the context Paul is using. This is obvious as Paul states if we are faithless Christ remains faithful. Paul does not say if we are faithless Christ will disown us, as he would if we disowned him. Surely from Paul's words you can see they are two totally different things.
Believers are faithless when they err, but believers can err without disowning Christ.
A man could meet a pretty woman, sleep with her and feel much guilt by doing so for they are a christian. They have pandered to the flesh in a moment of weakness, but they are not disowning Christ, they are being faithless though to the christian walk, how Christ wants us to live. But they gave into the flesh rather than followed after the spirit(the eternal struggle of man)
However. That is totally different from determining to reject /disown christ. And I repeat, Paul thought they were totally different obviously, for one resulted in Christ remaining faithful and the other resulted in him disowning us.
As this should be pretty basic knowledge, I would have thought you would have understood it. Possibly I your exuberance to find fault you overlooked the simple truth of what was written.
2tim 2:13 is a beautiful passage. It shows the eternal security of the believer while also showing that we are rewarded for faithfulness.
If we endure with Christ, we will reign with Him, if we fail to endure, we will be denied the reward of reigning with Him.
Yet since all believers have died with Him, all believers will live with Him.
If we endure with Christ, we will reign with Him, if we fail to endure, we will be denied the reward of reigning with Him.
Yet since all believers have died with Him, all believers will live with Him.
P
Again, Eternal Security in Christ is not questioned or in view. Those who are in Christ cannot lose their salvation.
The focus at this point would be what do you see Christ denying us as referring to, as well as "believing not"?
2 Timothy 2:10-13
King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]10 [/SUP]Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.
[SUP]11 [/SUP]It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him:
[SUP]12 [/SUP]If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:
[SUP]13 [/SUP]If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.
God bless.
The focus at this point would be what do you see Christ denying us as referring to, as well as "believing not"?
2 Timothy 2:10-13
King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]10 [/SUP]Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.
[SUP]11 [/SUP]It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him:
[SUP]12 [/SUP]If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:
[SUP]13 [/SUP]If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.
God bless.
K
I just don't get what the big deal is here.
"Salvation was never a reward for human works; it has always been a gift of grace for repentant sinners, made possible by the work of Christ."
MacArthur, John F.; MacArthur, John F. (2009-05-26). The Gospel According to Jesus: What Is Authentic Faith? (Kindle Locations 1025-1026). Zondervan. Kindle Edition.
"Salvation was never a reward for human works; it has always been a gift of grace for repentant sinners, made possible by the work of Christ."
MacArthur, John F.; MacArthur, John F. (2009-05-26). The Gospel According to Jesus: What Is Authentic Faith? (Kindle Locations 1025-1026). Zondervan. Kindle Edition.
I am not sure there is a big deal.
There are some on the "spirit" side who feel "right" living is emphasised too much, because it is there background, and they have rejected it, but they are just hurt individuals who do not know quite what they are rejecting.
The reformed side see the extreme IHop, Bethel groups who seem to never talk about transformation just super spiritual highs, so they want to emphasis boundaries and respect.
If Jesus is not Lord to any of us, He cannot be saviour also, but some dislike the emotional memory it must bring back.
I have read of two people who have testified of their background in very strict churches out of which they came after have a very real experience of the Spirit and how it changed their perspective. I think one big trouble is translating their own failure to understand the meaning of the words they had in their past, to what it means now, does not mean all the people they knew did not know the Lord.
But after seeing how easily people miss-understand or get upset after a few words, I can see how this can progress.
I have been on both sides, and know people in all these different groups, and they can be just as on fire or crazy.
One guy was very spirit led, wanted whole community involvement in his families life and left the church because he did not get enough attention.
Another is brethren, and would not talk about the gifts in this way, but equally is part of the actual brethren movement.
The first guy probably is nuts, while the second is just very conservative. I am sure the Lords grace is enough for both, but you would never get them to agree with each other, so I do not try.
There are some on the "spirit" side who feel "right" living is emphasised too much, because it is there background, and they have rejected it, but they are just hurt individuals who do not know quite what they are rejecting.
The reformed side see the extreme IHop, Bethel groups who seem to never talk about transformation just super spiritual highs, so they want to emphasis boundaries and respect.
If Jesus is not Lord to any of us, He cannot be saviour also, but some dislike the emotional memory it must bring back.
I have read of two people who have testified of their background in very strict churches out of which they came after have a very real experience of the Spirit and how it changed their perspective. I think one big trouble is translating their own failure to understand the meaning of the words they had in their past, to what it means now, does not mean all the people they knew did not know the Lord.
But after seeing how easily people miss-understand or get upset after a few words, I can see how this can progress.
I have been on both sides, and know people in all these different groups, and they can be just as on fire or crazy.
One guy was very spirit led, wanted whole community involvement in his families life and left the church because he did not get enough attention.
Another is brethren, and would not talk about the gifts in this way, but equally is part of the actual brethren movement.
The first guy probably is nuts, while the second is just very conservative. I am sure the Lords grace is enough for both, but you would never get them to agree with each other, so I do not try.
G
"Salvation was never a reward for human works; it has always been a gift of grace for repentant sinners, made possible by the work of Christ."~~Johnny M.
~~~~~~
Just read on a bit after this quote. I don't know how people can't see this.
Salvation is not from human works, but if you don't have human works...........your not saved. How can anyone say this and NOT see the complete contradiction?
I am not fooled, apparently there are many that are.
If Johnny could separate discipleship from salvation, He would be an excellent disciple teacher..........but if one can't even get salvation right....they need to be exposed.
Johnny teaches a false salvation.
~~~~~~
Just read on a bit after this quote. I don't know how people can't see this.
Salvation is not from human works, but if you don't have human works...........your not saved. How can anyone say this and NOT see the complete contradiction?
I am not fooled, apparently there are many that are.
If Johnny could separate discipleship from salvation, He would be an excellent disciple teacher..........but if one can't even get salvation right....they need to be exposed.
Johnny teaches a false salvation.
There is a simple analogy here. If you plant a seed with the hope it will grow into a plant, first you put it in the soil.
If a shoot does not appear with leaves it is dead.
Now if something is the consequence of a previous action or reality, it is reasonable to say one shows the other to be true.
The desire of all parties is simply to say following the Lord is about sin and righteousness. If you loose the focus and it becomes just about having a good time, then it is no longer the gospel.
It is a fair point, and equally those who see rules as a way of self justification is also an error. In the end behaviour does matter but also how we forgive and reach out to one another in love.
B
John M teaches salvation by grace through repentance and follows that the evidence of that salvation is making Christ Lord of your life through the works you are and are not involved in. This is why he is so critical of what goes on in various circles of the church. He is not one who looks to the fruit of the Spirit and he does not take a person's individual capacity into account. He thinks it is his responsibility to expose and root out what he considers to be the 'tares' in the church. That is not his job and no pastor is called to do so. This is the kind of righteousness the scribes and Pharisees ascribe to with the people of Israel. The righteousness of Christ exceeds this kind of critical righteousness because grace reigns through the righteousness of Christ.
P
Apparently you, as many in this thread have been, are completely ignorant of what MacArthur teaches and refuse to acknowledge some very simple statements offered in this thread already that show you are slandering and bearing false witness.
Please quote MacArthur teaching salvation by grace...through repentance.
It is humorous to see you saying...
So what is the reason you slander MacArthur?
Charismatic? Catholic?
Do tell.
It's certainly not because you can show him teaching works-based salvation.
God bless.
Please quote MacArthur teaching salvation by grace...through repentance.
It is humorous to see you saying...
So what is the reason you slander MacArthur?
Charismatic? Catholic?
Do tell.
It's certainly not because you can show him teaching works-based salvation.
God bless.
