Another requirement for salvation; Not that simple
- Thread starter Jackson123
- Start date
-
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.
Faith works through love (Galatians 5:6). Faith is established first, then we receive the Holy Spirit and agape love follows (Romans 5:5). People often confuse God's will for us to become saved (John 6:40) with God's will for us after we have been saved through faith (1 Thessalonians 5:14-18).
Matthew 7:21 - Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
John 6:40 - For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in Him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.
Matthew 7:21 - Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
John 6:40 - For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in Him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.
yep that is what I believe, we may fall in to sin after accepting Jesus, but must confess and ask forgiveness, ask Holy Spirit help stop sin adiction. If we continue practice sin, do not say It is because Jesus not help us to stop It. Jesus do his part, we have to respon It. Jesus die oN the cross to forgive every body, but not every body forgiven, only one WHO positively responded.
Holy Spirit help us to stop practicing sin, but we still sin, because of our stuberness. The fact that Holy spirit help do not mean we success to be sinless. Jesus Said the road to salvation is narrow, only a few Find It. Be focus, not think It an easy.
Matt 7
13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
apostle Paul instruct to set our minds oN things above, seem to me he ask our little partisipation.
colosian 3
2 Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things.
Why? They already believe in Jesus, do not Holy Spirit make them so?, why Paul ask them to do so?
I believe God want our partisipation. God capable to spread the Gospel directly from heaven, why instruct us to do so?
I believe not because He need our help, but He need our partisipation
Holy Spirit help us to stop practicing sin, but we still sin, because of our stuberness. The fact that Holy spirit help do not mean we success to be sinless. Jesus Said the road to salvation is narrow, only a few Find It. Be focus, not think It an easy.
Matt 7
13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
apostle Paul instruct to set our minds oN things above, seem to me he ask our little partisipation.
colosian 3
2 Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things.
Why? They already believe in Jesus, do not Holy Spirit make them so?, why Paul ask them to do so?
I believe God want our partisipation. God capable to spread the Gospel directly from heaven, why instruct us to do so?
I believe not because He need our help, but He need our partisipation
the Commandment/requirement (if you will) of BELIEVE was NOT a ONE TIME THING. It is from SALVATION until the return of Christ. It is an ongoing life long believing. Ask Sister Angela to give you the meaning of believeth/believe in John.
One who BELIEVES in Christ WILL NOT kill or rape or any such....those who do such DO NOT believe in Christ, so your question is just plain silly in my opinion.
BTW........I am NOT an OSAS subscriber either.
One who BELIEVES in Christ WILL NOT kill or rape or any such....those who do such DO NOT believe in Christ, so your question is just plain silly in my opinion.
BTW........I am NOT an OSAS subscriber either.
I do understand the meaning of the word, definitive.
I'm not adding to a definitive, you are. You add repent, confess, baptism to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved. You also reverse the scriptural order of repent and believe.
Ephesians 1:13 says believe the gospel "apart from additions or modification" and the result is sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise. To believe the gospel is to trust in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ as the ALL-sufficient means of our salvation. Ephesians 1:13 does not say, believe the gospel, then afterwards verbal confession, then after that baptism, then finally you are sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise.
Once again, confessing with our mouth that Jesus is Lord and believing in our heart that God raised Him from the dead are not two separate steps to salvation (believe today/still lost; confess next week/finally saved next week) but are chronologically together, so I'm not adding verbal confession to a definitive. If confession was a separate, distinct requirement to become saved "after" we believe the gospel/place faith in Christ for salvation (believe the gospel today/still lost; confess next week/finally saved next week) then multiple passages of Scripture would be incomplete and wrong (John 3:15,16,18; 6:40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:5; 10:4; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8 etc..) God forbid!
Romans 10:8 - But what does it say? "THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, in your mouth and in your heart" (together) that is, the word of faith which we are preaching. It's not the confession in of itself that saves you as an additional requirement after faith. It's the faith behind the confession. So what about someone who is unable to speak (moot). How could they confess with their mouth? Such a person would remain lost according to your erroneous interpretation of Romans 10:9,10.
*If we must be water baptized before we are saved (baptism made unto salvation), then Romans 10:9,10 is wrong. Confess precedes water baptism in your 4 step plan of salvation and Paul said "confession is made unto salvation." hmm...
The people who are willfully blind are the "trust in works" sects who stubbornly refuse to believe the gospel/trust in Christ alone for salvation. Paul explains why in 2 Corinthians 4:3 - But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: 4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
So what Jesus said in John 3:16 is a lie? Did Jesus really mean to "add a check list of works" to John 3:16 but forgot to mention it? Your reasoning is foolishness. 1 Corinthians 1:18 - For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
Roman Catholics seem to have bought into your faulty human logic as well. I was once in a discussion with a Roman Catholic who claims that the Roman Catholic church does not teach salvation by works (just because they don't teach we are saved by perfectly obeying the law), but then afterwards, he said this below:
We ARE saved by faith - as long as you properly define "Faith".
Faith is NOT simply "believing". Faith INCLUDES:
Being baptized, Eating His body and drinking His blood/partaking the Lord's Supper during Mass, Works of mercy and charity, Obeying his commandments.
Of course that is absolutely false! What this Roman Catholic is saying is that faith "is" baptism, faith "is" multiple acts of obedience, faith "is" works. It's no wonder that people teach salvation by works when they basically define faith as works and try to "shoe horn" works "into" salvation through faith.
It's your willful ignorance that causes you to trust in "water and works" for salvation and NOT in CHRIST ALONE. Then you use faulty human logic to try and explain away the truth. Your Campbell soup theology is the result of bad semantics and flawed hermeneutics and you desperately need to repent and believe the gospel. Only then will the blinders be removed.
I'm not adding to a definitive, you are. You add repent, confess, baptism to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved. You also reverse the scriptural order of repent and believe.
Ephesians 1:13 says believe the gospel "apart from additions or modification" and the result is sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise. To believe the gospel is to trust in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ as the ALL-sufficient means of our salvation. Ephesians 1:13 does not say, believe the gospel, then afterwards verbal confession, then after that baptism, then finally you are sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise.
Once again, confessing with our mouth that Jesus is Lord and believing in our heart that God raised Him from the dead are not two separate steps to salvation (believe today/still lost; confess next week/finally saved next week) but are chronologically together, so I'm not adding verbal confession to a definitive. If confession was a separate, distinct requirement to become saved "after" we believe the gospel/place faith in Christ for salvation (believe the gospel today/still lost; confess next week/finally saved next week) then multiple passages of Scripture would be incomplete and wrong (John 3:15,16,18; 6:40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:5; 10:4; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8 etc..) God forbid!
Romans 10:8 - But what does it say? "THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, in your mouth and in your heart" (together) that is, the word of faith which we are preaching. It's not the confession in of itself that saves you as an additional requirement after faith. It's the faith behind the confession. So what about someone who is unable to speak (moot). How could they confess with their mouth? Such a person would remain lost according to your erroneous interpretation of Romans 10:9,10.
*If we must be water baptized before we are saved (baptism made unto salvation), then Romans 10:9,10 is wrong. Confess precedes water baptism in your 4 step plan of salvation and Paul said "confession is made unto salvation." hmm...
The people who are willfully blind are the "trust in works" sects who stubbornly refuse to believe the gospel/trust in Christ alone for salvation. Paul explains why in 2 Corinthians 4:3 - But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: 4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
So what Jesus said in John 3:16 is a lie? Did Jesus really mean to "add a check list of works" to John 3:16 but forgot to mention it? Your reasoning is foolishness. 1 Corinthians 1:18 - For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
Roman Catholics seem to have bought into your faulty human logic as well. I was once in a discussion with a Roman Catholic who claims that the Roman Catholic church does not teach salvation by works (just because they don't teach we are saved by perfectly obeying the law), but then afterwards, he said this below:
We ARE saved by faith - as long as you properly define "Faith".
Faith is NOT simply "believing". Faith INCLUDES:
Being baptized, Eating His body and drinking His blood/partaking the Lord's Supper during Mass, Works of mercy and charity, Obeying his commandments.
Of course that is absolutely false! What this Roman Catholic is saying is that faith "is" baptism, faith "is" multiple acts of obedience, faith "is" works. It's no wonder that people teach salvation by works when they basically define faith as works and try to "shoe horn" works "into" salvation through faith.
It's your willful ignorance that causes you to trust in "water and works" for salvation and NOT in CHRIST ALONE. Then you use faulty human logic to try and explain away the truth. Your Campbell soup theology is the result of bad semantics and flawed hermeneutics and you desperately need to repent and believe the gospel. Only then will the blinders be removed.
This is adding to a definitive! Can you truly not see this!
You then accuse me of adding to a definitive when I am the one claiming Ephesians 1:13 is not definitive.
You can not add to, take away, inject, redefine or ignore a definitive. If you believe Ephesians 1:13 is definitive, Romans 9:9-10 is a contradiction.
Ephesians 1:13 makes no mention of specifically believing that Jesus was raised from the dead. Telling someone they must accept this truth would be "shoe horning" something into Ephesians 1:13 that is not there.
This is the logical dead end that results from the patchwork of general statements being labeled as definitive.
Either you do not understand the meaning of definitive or do not care what the word means.
I have asked you and others of the "trust only" sects to tell me if Proverbs 22:6 is a general or definitive statement. The lack of a response is telling. You and your ilk do not have the intellectual honesty to answer the question. Yet you will accuse me of blindness.
Ephesians 1:13 - In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise. *Did Paul say having also believed, and confessed and were baptized you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise? OR simply having also BELIEVED?
So once again, confessing with our mouth that Jesus is Lord and believing in our heart that God raised Him from the dead are not two separate steps to salvation (believe today/still lost; confess next week/finally saved next week) but are chronologically together, (the word of faith is in our mouth and in our heart together - Romans 10:8) so I'm not adding verbal confession to a definitive.
If verbal confession was an "additional requirement" to become saved "after" we believe the gospel/place faith in Christ for salvation (believe the gospel today/still lost; verbal confession next week/finally saved next week) then multiple passages of Scripture would be incomplete and wrong (John 3:15,16,18; 6:40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:5; 10:4; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8 etc..). Can you truly not see this!
*Also, once again I ask, what about someone who is unable to speak? How could they confess with their mouth? Such a person would remain lost according to your erroneous interpretation of Romans 10:9,10.
*I see that you dodged my other question, AGAIN. If we must be water baptized before we are saved (baptism made unto salvation), then Romans 10:9,10 is wrong. Confess precedes water baptism in your 4 step plan of salvation and Paul said "confession is made unto salvation."
It's adding to a definitive ONLY if I said that "after" a person believes the gospel, they "remain lost until they verbally confess Christ afterwards," but that is not what Paul is teaching in Romans 10:9,10 and that is certainly not what Paul is teaching in Ephesians 1:13. You are making this out to be a lot more complicated than it really is and all for the sake of your perverted gospel.
You are adding to a definitive by trying to "add" verbal confession and water baptism as "additional requirements" to believe the gospel in order to be sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise and to be saved, but Paul simply said BELIEVE in Ephesians 1:13. Through your patch work, you are perverting the gospel.
No contradiction at all because believe and confess are not two separate steps to salvation in Romans 10:9,10 but are chronologically together.
Ephesians 1:13 clearly states BELIEVE THE GOSPEL. Paul has already spelled out for us in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 what the gospel is. 1 Corinthians 15:1 - Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scripture.
This is the illogical dead end that results from your patchwork of definitive statements being labeled as general. The result is you distorting and perverting passages of scripture in an effort to "patch together" your so called gospel plan.
I understand the meaning of definitive and I do care that you are perverting the gospel and still need to repent and believe the gospel.
Blind indeed and this is really a ridiculous argument because there are multiple things involved in which we "train up a child in the way he should go" but there are not multiple ways in which we believe the gospel. There is only one way to believe the gospel and that is by trusting in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ as the ALL-sufficient means of our salvation. Trusting in "water and works" for salvation is not believing the gospel.
The problem with your ridiculous argument demonstrates your complete dependency on intellectual reasoning (faulty human logic) to interpret the Bible instead of the Holy Spirit. 1 Corinthians 2:11 - For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God. 13 These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
It's essential that the Holy Spirit work in conjunction with the gospel, or the Word, as ADDITIONAL to the preaching. Campbellites deny such a work of the Holy Spirit, holding that there is nothing more than the Word in bringing about the new birth. I once heard a Campbellite say that the only thing involved in coming to saving faith in Christ is "paper, ink and human intelligence."
In effect, Campbellites deny the very essence of regeneration, which is to be "born from above" (John 3:3). This error leads to their denial of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, as taught by evangelical Christianity. They postulate everything upon man’s "obedience" to the letter of the Word, denying an accompanying work of the Holy Spirit. They represent evangelical Christianity as teaching the work of the Spirit "apart from" the Word, when in reality the position as set forth by Paul:
"For our gospel came not unto you IN WORD ONLY, but also in power, and in THE HOLY SPIRIT" - I Thessalonians 1:5.
“Lydia . . . whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul” - Acts 16:14.
If there is no additional work, or influence, of the Holy Spirit, then this last verse, which says the Lord "opened her heart," is superfluous. While the Word is the means of communicating that which is to be believed, the additional unseen work of the Holy Spirit is necessary for being "born from above."
Is this not why, as so many believers have observed, Campbellite preaching is dead, and relies so heavily upon "human logic" and "legalism?" The only explanation of this barren spirituality is the absence of the Holy Spirit. This likewise explains their lack of a proper understanding of the Word of God - 1 Corinthians 2:14. - http://jesusiscreator.org/?p=777
So once again, confessing with our mouth that Jesus is Lord and believing in our heart that God raised Him from the dead are not two separate steps to salvation (believe today/still lost; confess next week/finally saved next week) but are chronologically together, (the word of faith is in our mouth and in our heart together - Romans 10:8) so I'm not adding verbal confession to a definitive.
If verbal confession was an "additional requirement" to become saved "after" we believe the gospel/place faith in Christ for salvation (believe the gospel today/still lost; verbal confession next week/finally saved next week) then multiple passages of Scripture would be incomplete and wrong (John 3:15,16,18; 6:40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:5; 10:4; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8 etc..). Can you truly not see this!
*Also, once again I ask, what about someone who is unable to speak? How could they confess with their mouth? Such a person would remain lost according to your erroneous interpretation of Romans 10:9,10.
*I see that you dodged my other question, AGAIN. If we must be water baptized before we are saved (baptism made unto salvation), then Romans 10:9,10 is wrong. Confess precedes water baptism in your 4 step plan of salvation and Paul said "confession is made unto salvation."
It's adding to a definitive ONLY if I said that "after" a person believes the gospel, they "remain lost until they verbally confess Christ afterwards," but that is not what Paul is teaching in Romans 10:9,10 and that is certainly not what Paul is teaching in Ephesians 1:13. You are making this out to be a lot more complicated than it really is and all for the sake of your perverted gospel.
You are adding to a definitive by trying to "add" verbal confession and water baptism as "additional requirements" to believe the gospel in order to be sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise and to be saved, but Paul simply said BELIEVE in Ephesians 1:13. Through your patch work, you are perverting the gospel.
No contradiction at all because believe and confess are not two separate steps to salvation in Romans 10:9,10 but are chronologically together.
Ephesians 1:13 clearly states BELIEVE THE GOSPEL. Paul has already spelled out for us in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 what the gospel is. 1 Corinthians 15:1 - Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scripture.
This is the illogical dead end that results from your patchwork of definitive statements being labeled as general. The result is you distorting and perverting passages of scripture in an effort to "patch together" your so called gospel plan.
I understand the meaning of definitive and I do care that you are perverting the gospel and still need to repent and believe the gospel.
Blind indeed and this is really a ridiculous argument because there are multiple things involved in which we "train up a child in the way he should go" but there are not multiple ways in which we believe the gospel. There is only one way to believe the gospel and that is by trusting in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ as the ALL-sufficient means of our salvation. Trusting in "water and works" for salvation is not believing the gospel.
The problem with your ridiculous argument demonstrates your complete dependency on intellectual reasoning (faulty human logic) to interpret the Bible instead of the Holy Spirit. 1 Corinthians 2:11 - For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God. 13 These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
It's essential that the Holy Spirit work in conjunction with the gospel, or the Word, as ADDITIONAL to the preaching. Campbellites deny such a work of the Holy Spirit, holding that there is nothing more than the Word in bringing about the new birth. I once heard a Campbellite say that the only thing involved in coming to saving faith in Christ is "paper, ink and human intelligence."
In effect, Campbellites deny the very essence of regeneration, which is to be "born from above" (John 3:3). This error leads to their denial of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, as taught by evangelical Christianity. They postulate everything upon man’s "obedience" to the letter of the Word, denying an accompanying work of the Holy Spirit. They represent evangelical Christianity as teaching the work of the Spirit "apart from" the Word, when in reality the position as set forth by Paul:
"For our gospel came not unto you IN WORD ONLY, but also in power, and in THE HOLY SPIRIT" - I Thessalonians 1:5.
“Lydia . . . whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul” - Acts 16:14.
If there is no additional work, or influence, of the Holy Spirit, then this last verse, which says the Lord "opened her heart," is superfluous. While the Word is the means of communicating that which is to be believed, the additional unseen work of the Holy Spirit is necessary for being "born from above."
Is this not why, as so many believers have observed, Campbellite preaching is dead, and relies so heavily upon "human logic" and "legalism?" The only explanation of this barren spirituality is the absence of the Holy Spirit. This likewise explains their lack of a proper understanding of the Word of God - 1 Corinthians 2:14. - http://jesusiscreator.org/?p=777
Ephesians 1:13 - In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise. *Did Paul say having also believed, and confessed and were baptized you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise? OR simply having also BELIEVED?
So once again, confessing with our mouth that Jesus is Lord and believing in our heart that God raised Him from the dead are not two separate steps to salvation (believe today/still lost; confess next week/finally saved next week) but are chronologically together, (the word of faith is in our mouth and in our heart together - Romans 10:8) so I'm not adding verbal confession to a definitive.
If verbal confession was an "additional requirement" to become saved "after" we believe the gospel/place faith in Christ for salvation (believe the gospel today/still lost; verbal confession next week/finally saved next week) then multiple passages of Scripture would be incomplete and wrong (John 3:15,16,18; 6:40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:5; 10:4; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8 etc..). Can you truly not see this!
*Also, once again I ask, what about someone who is unable to speak? How could they confess with their mouth? Such a person would remain lost according to your erroneous interpretation of Romans 10:9,10.
*I see that you dodged my other question, AGAIN. If we must be water baptized before we are saved (baptism made unto salvation), then Romans 10:9,10 is wrong. Confess precedes water baptism in your 4 step plan of salvation and Paul said "confession is made unto salvation."
It's adding to a definitive ONLY if I said that "after" a person believes the gospel, they "remain lost until they verbally confess Christ afterwards," but that is not what Paul is teaching in Romans 10:9,10 and that is certainly not what Paul is teaching in Ephesians 1:13. You are making this out to be a lot more complicated than it really is and all for the sake of your perverted gospel.
You are adding to a definitive by trying to "add" verbal confession and water baptism as "additional requirements" to believe the gospel in order to be sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise and to be saved, but Paul simply said BELIEVE in Ephesians 1:13. Through your patch work, you are perverting the gospel.
No contradiction at all because believe and confess are not two separate steps to salvation in Romans 10:9,10 but are chronologically together.
Ephesians 1:13 clearly states BELIEVE THE GOSPEL. Paul has already spelled out for us in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 what the gospel is. 1 Corinthians 15:1 - Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scripture.
This is the illogical dead end that results from your patchwork of definitive statements being labeled as general. The result is you distorting and perverting passages of scripture in an effort to "patch together" your so called gospel plan.
I understand the meaning of definitive and I do care that you are perverting the gospel and still need to repent and believe the gospel.
Blind indeed and this is really a ridiculous argument because there are multiple things involved in which we "train up a child in the way he should go" but there are not multiple ways in which we believe the gospel. There is only one way to believe the gospel and that is by trusting in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ as the ALL-sufficient means of our salvation. Trusting in "water and works" for salvation is not believing the gospel.
The problem with your ridiculous argument demonstrates your complete dependency on intellectual reasoning (faulty human logic) to interpret the Bible instead of the Holy Spirit. 1 Corinthians 2:11 - For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God. 13 These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
It's essential that the Holy Spirit work in conjunction with the gospel, or the Word, as ADDITIONAL to the preaching. Campbellites deny such a work of the Holy Spirit, holding that there is nothing more than the Word in bringing about the new birth. I once heard a Campbellite say that the only thing involved in coming to saving faith in Christ is "paper, ink and human intelligence."
In effect, Campbellites deny the very essence of regeneration, which is to be "born from above" (John 3:3). This error leads to their denial of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, as taught by evangelical Christianity. They postulate everything upon man’s "obedience" to the letter of the Word, denying an accompanying work of the Holy Spirit. They represent evangelical Christianity as teaching the work of the Spirit "apart from" the Word, when in reality the position as set forth by Paul:
"For our gospel came not unto you IN WORD ONLY, but also in power, and in THE HOLY SPIRIT" - I Thessalonians 1:5.
“Lydia . . . whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul” - Acts 16:14.
If there is no additional work, or influence, of the Holy Spirit, then this last verse, which says the Lord "opened her heart," is superfluous. While the Word is the means of communicating that which is to be believed, the additional unseen work of the Holy Spirit is necessary for being "born from above."
Is this not why, as so many believers have observed, Campbellite preaching is dead, and relies so heavily upon "human logic" and "legalism?" The only explanation of this barren spirituality is the absence of the Holy Spirit. This likewise explains their lack of a proper understanding of the Word of God - 1 Corinthians 2:14. - http://jesusiscreator.org/?p=777
So once again, confessing with our mouth that Jesus is Lord and believing in our heart that God raised Him from the dead are not two separate steps to salvation (believe today/still lost; confess next week/finally saved next week) but are chronologically together, (the word of faith is in our mouth and in our heart together - Romans 10:8) so I'm not adding verbal confession to a definitive.
If verbal confession was an "additional requirement" to become saved "after" we believe the gospel/place faith in Christ for salvation (believe the gospel today/still lost; verbal confession next week/finally saved next week) then multiple passages of Scripture would be incomplete and wrong (John 3:15,16,18; 6:40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:5; 10:4; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8 etc..). Can you truly not see this!
*Also, once again I ask, what about someone who is unable to speak? How could they confess with their mouth? Such a person would remain lost according to your erroneous interpretation of Romans 10:9,10.
*I see that you dodged my other question, AGAIN. If we must be water baptized before we are saved (baptism made unto salvation), then Romans 10:9,10 is wrong. Confess precedes water baptism in your 4 step plan of salvation and Paul said "confession is made unto salvation."
It's adding to a definitive ONLY if I said that "after" a person believes the gospel, they "remain lost until they verbally confess Christ afterwards," but that is not what Paul is teaching in Romans 10:9,10 and that is certainly not what Paul is teaching in Ephesians 1:13. You are making this out to be a lot more complicated than it really is and all for the sake of your perverted gospel.
You are adding to a definitive by trying to "add" verbal confession and water baptism as "additional requirements" to believe the gospel in order to be sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise and to be saved, but Paul simply said BELIEVE in Ephesians 1:13. Through your patch work, you are perverting the gospel.
No contradiction at all because believe and confess are not two separate steps to salvation in Romans 10:9,10 but are chronologically together.
Ephesians 1:13 clearly states BELIEVE THE GOSPEL. Paul has already spelled out for us in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 what the gospel is. 1 Corinthians 15:1 - Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scripture.
This is the illogical dead end that results from your patchwork of definitive statements being labeled as general. The result is you distorting and perverting passages of scripture in an effort to "patch together" your so called gospel plan.
I understand the meaning of definitive and I do care that you are perverting the gospel and still need to repent and believe the gospel.
Blind indeed and this is really a ridiculous argument because there are multiple things involved in which we "train up a child in the way he should go" but there are not multiple ways in which we believe the gospel. There is only one way to believe the gospel and that is by trusting in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ as the ALL-sufficient means of our salvation. Trusting in "water and works" for salvation is not believing the gospel.
The problem with your ridiculous argument demonstrates your complete dependency on intellectual reasoning (faulty human logic) to interpret the Bible instead of the Holy Spirit. 1 Corinthians 2:11 - For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God. 13 These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
It's essential that the Holy Spirit work in conjunction with the gospel, or the Word, as ADDITIONAL to the preaching. Campbellites deny such a work of the Holy Spirit, holding that there is nothing more than the Word in bringing about the new birth. I once heard a Campbellite say that the only thing involved in coming to saving faith in Christ is "paper, ink and human intelligence."
In effect, Campbellites deny the very essence of regeneration, which is to be "born from above" (John 3:3). This error leads to their denial of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, as taught by evangelical Christianity. They postulate everything upon man’s "obedience" to the letter of the Word, denying an accompanying work of the Holy Spirit. They represent evangelical Christianity as teaching the work of the Spirit "apart from" the Word, when in reality the position as set forth by Paul:
"For our gospel came not unto you IN WORD ONLY, but also in power, and in THE HOLY SPIRIT" - I Thessalonians 1:5.
“Lydia . . . whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul” - Acts 16:14.
If there is no additional work, or influence, of the Holy Spirit, then this last verse, which says the Lord "opened her heart," is superfluous. While the Word is the means of communicating that which is to be believed, the additional unseen work of the Holy Spirit is necessary for being "born from above."
Is this not why, as so many believers have observed, Campbellite preaching is dead, and relies so heavily upon "human logic" and "legalism?" The only explanation of this barren spirituality is the absence of the Holy Spirit. This likewise explains their lack of a proper understanding of the Word of God - 1 Corinthians 2:14. - http://jesusiscreator.org/?p=777
You have repeatedly labeled me a follower of Campbell, who I know little of and have never read any of his writings. You make a habit of bringing up the works of men both for and against your arguments instead of relying on the scriptures. You have referred to the views of:
Alexander Campbell
E. Calvin Beisner
Kenneth Wuest
Walter Scott
Julius Mantey
Barton Stone
Daniel Wallace
Thomas Campbell
A.T. Robertson,
to name a few.
Your reliance on the arguments of men is disturbing to say the least. You may think your knowledge of the works of these men enhances your point but it does not. It shows a willingness to accept "fine-sounding arguments" (Colossians 2:4) over what the scriptures plainly teach. Get you head out of the commentaries and into the Bible. Whatever you think some "Campbellite" preacher told you has no bearing on this discussion. Get a grip.
Your claim that the Holy Spirit is some how guiding you in comprehending the true meaning of the scriptures, as well as my lack of this gift causing my blindness is old and self-serving. A common sign of a lack of a cogent argument is the appeal to mysticism.
"I know I am right and you are wrong because you don't have the Holy Ghost" is a childish attempt to silence someone who is attempting to reason out a question (Isaiah 1:18). This is an appeal of last resort and you have reached it.
It is pointless to continue this discussion if you are going to use your self-proclaimed Holy Spirit powers as a trump card. Every false prophet and cult leader has used this reasoning as a defense. I will not engage in a one-sided discussion, listening to you proclaim what the Holy Spirit has revealed to you and not me.
If you can read verses such as Acts 2:38, 1st Peter 3:21, Acts 22:16, Mark 16:16 etc. and come away with the understanding that baptism is not needed because the Holy Spirit told you, I suggest you are fooling yourself or dabbling with the occult. The above verses say what they mean and any warm fuzzy feeling you may have will not change it.
Yes, the Holy Spirit will certainly guide us in our walk with God but to use it as a weapon against the arguments of others is but self-serving.
I have a real argument and I've had numerous discussions with people over the years who attend the church of Christ who have no real argument and it's typical for them to resort to straw man arguments and character assassination when they have no proper rebuttal. I also see that for a third time you refused to answer my questions below, which is very telling:
*AGAIN I ask, "what about someone who is unable to speak? How could they confess with their mouth? Such a person would remain lost according to your erroneous interpretation of Romans 10:9,10."
*AGAIN, I ask, "If we must be water baptized before we are saved (baptism made unto salvation), then Romans 10:9,10 is wrong. Confess precedes water baptism in your 4 step plan of salvation and Paul said "confession is made unto salvation."
Whether you know little of Thomas and Alexander Campbell or not, your theology has originated with men, namely THOMAS CAMPBELL, ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, WALTER SCOTT, and BARTON W. STONE. These men did not restore the gospel, the church, or true New Testament worship, as they claim.
Instead of relying on the scriptures? That is a straw man argument. I rely on the scriptures and have shared numerous scriptures with you and I properly harmonized scripture with scripture in order to reach the correct conclusion on doctrine, but unfortunately, you are unable to see anything beyond your church of Christ indoctrination.
So? On numerous occasions in discussions I've had with church of Christ debaters, they referred to Greek scholars as well, not to mention the church fathers. In your thread "EIS" OR "DIA" OR "HOTI" ?? oldhermit (who attends the church of Christ) mentioned such scholars as Mounce, Beauer, McCord, Crouch, Wallace, Bruce, Clark, Moule, Block in defense of his arguments.
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/151495-eis-dia-hoti-2.html
In post #40, he said and I quote, "If you are going to research the use of εἰς, or any other word in Greek, I recommend you do so from such men who are the tops in their fields and gather the collective consensus of the full body of scholarship on the subject."
Is it equally disturbing for oldhermit or other church of Christ debaters to mention arguments from Greek scholars or is there a double standard here?
Does that same accusation apply to oldhermit and other church of Christ debaters? You may think that attacking my character and creating straw man arguments enhances your point but it does not.
What Campbellite preachers teach has a bearing on this discussion because you attend the church of Christ. I already told you that at one time I had temporarily attended the church of Christ. I'm familiar with their doctrine. I have a grip.
Appeal to mysticism? Really? Look who needs to get a grip. The Bible is not simply a novel or text book that we rely solely on human intelligence to properly interpret. (John 14:26; 16:13; Acts 16:14; 1 Corinthians 2:11-14; 1 Thessalonians 1:5; 1 John 2:27)
You have attempted to reason out a question? You refused to answer two very important questions that I asked you multiple times. Now you call me childish? Another attack on my character. So typical.
I don't blame you for bowing out of the discussion. It's obvious that you are very satisfied with what you believe and don't want to be confused with the facts. The Bible clearly talks about receiving the Holy Spirit, being taught by the Holy Spirit and being led by the Holy Spirit. There is nothing cultic about that, but you just could not help yourself. More character assassination.
Dabbling with the occult? Are you really that delusional? You have gone off the deep end. I find it interesting that false religions and cults, including Roman Catholicism, Mormonism, Oneness Pentecostalism etc.. all teach that water baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation. hmm...
If you can read such verses as Luke 8:12; John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:15,26; Acts 4:4; 5:14; 10:43; 11:17; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:5,9,11; 5:1; Galatians 2:16; 3:6,7; 26; Ephesians 1:13; 2:8; Philippians 3:9; 2 Thessalonians 1:10; 1 Timothy 1:16; 2 Timothy 3:15; Hebrews 10:39; 1 Peter 1:5,9; 1 John 5:13 and come away with the understanding that baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation, then you have flawed hermeneutics. A careful examination of each of those texts on baptism in context will show that none of them prove that baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation, though they do prove that baptism was an assumed initiatory response to the gospel of salvation. In other words, these texts prove only that baptism is regularly associated with conversion and salvation, rather than absolutely required for salvation.
I already thoroughly explained your pet verses here:
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/151495-eis-dia-hoti-10.html
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/151495-eis-dia-hoti-7.html#post3088563
In post #231 in the "EIS" OR "DIA" OR "HOTI" ?? thread, you said - "I too was a unbeliever at one time so I understand your "faith alone" theories."
In post #233, I asked exactly how did you become a believer in Christ? Please explain to me exactly what you believe NOW that you consider no longer makes you an unbeliever, but a believer. YET I RECEIVED NO ANSWER FROM YOU.
More attack on my character. I can see that the sword of the Spirit hurts when it cuts, as you continue to lash out at me. If accommodating your biased church doctrine is the only thing you are interested in, then you won't accept the truth no matter how many times that I explain it to you. All I can do is hope that at least a seed has been planted that one day will be watered and lead you to the truth.
*AGAIN I ask, "what about someone who is unable to speak? How could they confess with their mouth? Such a person would remain lost according to your erroneous interpretation of Romans 10:9,10."
*AGAIN, I ask, "If we must be water baptized before we are saved (baptism made unto salvation), then Romans 10:9,10 is wrong. Confess precedes water baptism in your 4 step plan of salvation and Paul said "confession is made unto salvation."
Whether you know little of Thomas and Alexander Campbell or not, your theology has originated with men, namely THOMAS CAMPBELL, ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, WALTER SCOTT, and BARTON W. STONE. These men did not restore the gospel, the church, or true New Testament worship, as they claim.
Instead of relying on the scriptures? That is a straw man argument. I rely on the scriptures and have shared numerous scriptures with you and I properly harmonized scripture with scripture in order to reach the correct conclusion on doctrine, but unfortunately, you are unable to see anything beyond your church of Christ indoctrination.
So? On numerous occasions in discussions I've had with church of Christ debaters, they referred to Greek scholars as well, not to mention the church fathers. In your thread "EIS" OR "DIA" OR "HOTI" ?? oldhermit (who attends the church of Christ) mentioned such scholars as Mounce, Beauer, McCord, Crouch, Wallace, Bruce, Clark, Moule, Block in defense of his arguments.
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/151495-eis-dia-hoti-2.html
In post #40, he said and I quote, "If you are going to research the use of εἰς, or any other word in Greek, I recommend you do so from such men who are the tops in their fields and gather the collective consensus of the full body of scholarship on the subject."
Is it equally disturbing for oldhermit or other church of Christ debaters to mention arguments from Greek scholars or is there a double standard here?
Does that same accusation apply to oldhermit and other church of Christ debaters? You may think that attacking my character and creating straw man arguments enhances your point but it does not.
What Campbellite preachers teach has a bearing on this discussion because you attend the church of Christ. I already told you that at one time I had temporarily attended the church of Christ. I'm familiar with their doctrine. I have a grip.
Appeal to mysticism? Really? Look who needs to get a grip.
The Bible is not simply a novel or text book that we rely solely on human intelligence to properly interpret. (John 14:26; 16:13; Acts 16:14; 1 Corinthians 2:11-14; 1 Thessalonians 1:5; 1 John 2:27) You have attempted to reason out a question? You refused to answer two very important questions that I asked you multiple times. Now you call me childish? Another attack on my character. So typical.
I don't blame you for bowing out of the discussion. It's obvious that you are very satisfied with what you believe and don't want to be confused with the facts. The Bible clearly talks about receiving the Holy Spirit, being taught by the Holy Spirit and being led by the Holy Spirit. There is nothing cultic about that, but you just could not help yourself. More character assassination.
Dabbling with the occult? Are you really that delusional? You have gone off the deep end.
I find it interesting that false religions and cults, including Roman Catholicism, Mormonism, Oneness Pentecostalism etc.. all teach that water baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation. hmm...If you can read such verses as Luke 8:12; John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:15,26; Acts 4:4; 5:14; 10:43; 11:17; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:5,9,11; 5:1; Galatians 2:16; 3:6,7; 26; Ephesians 1:13; 2:8; Philippians 3:9; 2 Thessalonians 1:10; 1 Timothy 1:16; 2 Timothy 3:15; Hebrews 10:39; 1 Peter 1:5,9; 1 John 5:13 and come away with the understanding that baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation, then you have flawed hermeneutics. A careful examination of each of those texts on baptism in context will show that none of them prove that baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation, though they do prove that baptism was an assumed initiatory response to the gospel of salvation. In other words, these texts prove only that baptism is regularly associated with conversion and salvation, rather than absolutely required for salvation.
I already thoroughly explained your pet verses here:
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/151495-eis-dia-hoti-10.html
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/151495-eis-dia-hoti-7.html#post3088563
In post #231 in the "EIS" OR "DIA" OR "HOTI" ?? thread, you said - "I too was a unbeliever at one time so I understand your "faith alone" theories."
In post #233, I asked exactly how did you become a believer in Christ? Please explain to me exactly what you believe NOW that you consider no longer makes you an unbeliever, but a believer. YET I RECEIVED NO ANSWER FROM YOU.
More attack on my character. I can see that the sword of the Spirit hurts when it cuts, as you continue to lash out at me. If accommodating your biased church doctrine is the only thing you are interested in, then you won't accept the truth no matter how many times that I explain it to you. All I can do is hope that at least a seed has been planted that one day will be watered and lead you to the truth.
E
I have a real argument and I've had numerous discussions with people over the years who attend the church of Christ who have no real argument and it's typical for them to resort to straw man arguments and character assassination when they have no proper rebuttal. I also see that for a third time you refused to answer my questions below, which is very telling:
*AGAIN I ask, "what about someone who is unable to speak? How could they confess with their mouth? Such a person would remain lost according to your erroneous interpretation of Romans 10:9,10."
*AGAIN, I ask, "If we must be water baptized before we are saved (baptism made unto salvation), then Romans 10:9,10 is wrong. Confess precedes water baptism in your 4 step plan of salvation and Paul said "confession is made unto salvation."
Whether you know little of Thomas and Alexander Campbell or not, your theology has originated with men, namely THOMAS CAMPBELL, ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, WALTER SCOTT, and BARTON W. STONE. These men did not restore the gospel, the church, or true New Testament worship, as they claim.
Instead of relying on the scriptures? That is a straw man argument. I rely on the scriptures and have shared numerous scriptures with you and I properly harmonized scripture with scripture in order to reach the correct conclusion on doctrine, but unfortunately, you are unable to see anything beyond your church of Christ indoctrination.
So? On numerous occasions in discussions I've had with church of Christ debaters, they referred to Greek scholars as well, not to mention the church fathers. In your thread "EIS" OR "DIA" OR "HOTI" ?? oldhermit (who attends the church of Christ) mentioned such scholars as Mounce, Beauer, McCord, Crouch, Wallace, Bruce, Clark, Moule, Block in defense of his arguments.
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/151495-eis-dia-hoti-2.html
In post #40, he said and I quote, "If you are going to research the use of εἰς, or any other word in Greek, I recommend you do so from such men who are the tops in their fields and gather the collective consensus of the full body of scholarship on the subject."
Is it equally disturbing for oldhermit or other church of Christ debaters to mention arguments from Greek scholars or is there a double standard here?
Does that same accusation apply to oldhermit and other church of Christ debaters? You may think that attacking my character and creating straw man arguments enhances your point but it does not.
What Campbellite preachers teach has a bearing on this discussion because you attend the church of Christ. I already told you that at one time I had temporarily attended the church of Christ. I'm familiar with their doctrine. I have a grip.
Appeal to mysticism? Really? Look who needs to get a grip. The Bible is not simply a novel or text book that we rely solely on human intelligence to properly interpret. (John 14:26; 16:13; Acts 16:14; 1 Corinthians 2:11-14; 1 Thessalonians 1:5; 1 John 2:27)
You have attempted to reason out a question? You refused to answer two very important questions that I asked you multiple times. Now you call me childish? Another attack on my character. So typical.
I don't blame you for bowing out of the discussion. It's obvious that you are very satisfied with what you believe and don't want to be confused with the facts. The Bible clearly talks about receiving the Holy Spirit, being taught by the Holy Spirit and being led by the Holy Spirit. There is nothing cultic about that, but you just could not help yourself. More character assassination.
Dabbling with the occult? Are you really that delusional? You have gone off the deep end. I find it interesting that false religions and cults, including Roman Catholicism, Mormonism, Oneness Pentecostalism etc.. all teach that water baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation. hmm...
If you can read such verses as Luke 8:12; John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:15,26; Acts 4:4; 5:14; 10:43; 11:17; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:5,9,11; 5:1; Galatians 2:16; 3:6,7; 26; Ephesians 1:13; 2:8; Philippians 3:9; 2 Thessalonians 1:10; 1 Timothy 1:16; 2 Timothy 3:15; Hebrews 10:39; 1 Peter 1:5,9; 1 John 5:13 and come away with the understanding that baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation, then you have flawed hermeneutics. A careful examination of each of those texts on baptism in context will show that none of them prove that baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation, though they do prove that baptism was an assumed initiatory response to the gospel of salvation. In other words, these texts prove only that baptism is regularly associated with conversion and salvation, rather than absolutely required for salvation.
I already thoroughly explained your pet verses here:
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/151495-eis-dia-hoti-10.html
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/151495-eis-dia-hoti-7.html#post3088563
In post #231 in the "EIS" OR "DIA" OR "HOTI" ?? thread, you said - "I too was a unbeliever at one time so I understand your "faith alone" theories."
In post #233, I asked exactly how did you become a believer in Christ? Please explain to me exactly what you believe NOW that you consider no longer makes you an unbeliever, but a believer. YET I RECEIVED NO ANSWER FROM YOU.
More attack on my character. I can see that the sword of the Spirit hurts when it cuts, as you continue to lash out at me. If accommodating your biased church doctrine is the only thing you are interested in, then you won't accept the truth no matter how many times that I explain it to you. All I can do is hope that at least a seed has been planted that one day will be watered and lead you to the truth.
*AGAIN I ask, "what about someone who is unable to speak? How could they confess with their mouth? Such a person would remain lost according to your erroneous interpretation of Romans 10:9,10."
*AGAIN, I ask, "If we must be water baptized before we are saved (baptism made unto salvation), then Romans 10:9,10 is wrong. Confess precedes water baptism in your 4 step plan of salvation and Paul said "confession is made unto salvation."
Whether you know little of Thomas and Alexander Campbell or not, your theology has originated with men, namely THOMAS CAMPBELL, ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, WALTER SCOTT, and BARTON W. STONE. These men did not restore the gospel, the church, or true New Testament worship, as they claim.
Instead of relying on the scriptures? That is a straw man argument. I rely on the scriptures and have shared numerous scriptures with you and I properly harmonized scripture with scripture in order to reach the correct conclusion on doctrine, but unfortunately, you are unable to see anything beyond your church of Christ indoctrination.
So? On numerous occasions in discussions I've had with church of Christ debaters, they referred to Greek scholars as well, not to mention the church fathers. In your thread "EIS" OR "DIA" OR "HOTI" ?? oldhermit (who attends the church of Christ) mentioned such scholars as Mounce, Beauer, McCord, Crouch, Wallace, Bruce, Clark, Moule, Block in defense of his arguments.
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/151495-eis-dia-hoti-2.html
In post #40, he said and I quote, "If you are going to research the use of εἰς, or any other word in Greek, I recommend you do so from such men who are the tops in their fields and gather the collective consensus of the full body of scholarship on the subject."
Is it equally disturbing for oldhermit or other church of Christ debaters to mention arguments from Greek scholars or is there a double standard here?
Does that same accusation apply to oldhermit and other church of Christ debaters? You may think that attacking my character and creating straw man arguments enhances your point but it does not.
What Campbellite preachers teach has a bearing on this discussion because you attend the church of Christ. I already told you that at one time I had temporarily attended the church of Christ. I'm familiar with their doctrine. I have a grip.
Appeal to mysticism? Really? Look who needs to get a grip.
The Bible is not simply a novel or text book that we rely solely on human intelligence to properly interpret. (John 14:26; 16:13; Acts 16:14; 1 Corinthians 2:11-14; 1 Thessalonians 1:5; 1 John 2:27) You have attempted to reason out a question? You refused to answer two very important questions that I asked you multiple times. Now you call me childish? Another attack on my character. So typical.
I don't blame you for bowing out of the discussion. It's obvious that you are very satisfied with what you believe and don't want to be confused with the facts. The Bible clearly talks about receiving the Holy Spirit, being taught by the Holy Spirit and being led by the Holy Spirit. There is nothing cultic about that, but you just could not help yourself. More character assassination.
Dabbling with the occult? Are you really that delusional? You have gone off the deep end.
I find it interesting that false religions and cults, including Roman Catholicism, Mormonism, Oneness Pentecostalism etc.. all teach that water baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation. hmm...If you can read such verses as Luke 8:12; John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:15,26; Acts 4:4; 5:14; 10:43; 11:17; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:5,9,11; 5:1; Galatians 2:16; 3:6,7; 26; Ephesians 1:13; 2:8; Philippians 3:9; 2 Thessalonians 1:10; 1 Timothy 1:16; 2 Timothy 3:15; Hebrews 10:39; 1 Peter 1:5,9; 1 John 5:13 and come away with the understanding that baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation, then you have flawed hermeneutics. A careful examination of each of those texts on baptism in context will show that none of them prove that baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation, though they do prove that baptism was an assumed initiatory response to the gospel of salvation. In other words, these texts prove only that baptism is regularly associated with conversion and salvation, rather than absolutely required for salvation.
I already thoroughly explained your pet verses here:
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/151495-eis-dia-hoti-10.html
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/151495-eis-dia-hoti-7.html#post3088563
In post #231 in the "EIS" OR "DIA" OR "HOTI" ?? thread, you said - "I too was a unbeliever at one time so I understand your "faith alone" theories."
In post #233, I asked exactly how did you become a believer in Christ? Please explain to me exactly what you believe NOW that you consider no longer makes you an unbeliever, but a believer. YET I RECEIVED NO ANSWER FROM YOU.
More attack on my character. I can see that the sword of the Spirit hurts when it cuts, as you continue to lash out at me. If accommodating your biased church doctrine is the only thing you are interested in, then you won't accept the truth no matter how many times that I explain it to you. All I can do is hope that at least a seed has been planted that one day will be watered and lead you to the truth.
Amen bro? He s CoC? That would explain a lot.
Amen brother! The Bible clearly teaches in numerous passages of scripture that we are saved through belief/faith "apart from additions or modifications." (Luke 8:12; John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:5; 10:4; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8; 2 Timothy 3:15; Hebrews 10:39; 1 John 5:13) etc..
You don't need to add the word "alone" or "only" next to belief/faith in each of these passages of scripture in order to figure out that the words belief/faith "stand alone" in these numerous passages of scripture in connection with receiving eternal life. Do these numerous passages of scripture say belief/faith "plus something else?" NO! So then it's belief/faith (rightly understood) in Christ alone.
You don't need to add the word "alone" or "only" next to belief/faith in each of these passages of scripture in order to figure out that the words belief/faith "stand alone" in these numerous passages of scripture in connection with receiving eternal life. Do these numerous passages of scripture say belief/faith "plus something else?" NO! So then it's belief/faith (rightly understood) in Christ alone.
E
He who believes is not condemned, but he who does not believe is already in a state of condemnation, because he has not believed.
no mention of water baptism, communion, church membership, obeying some list of rules,
just have faith, trust God and out of that faith recieve his gift, (God knows who has real faith and who does not, let God sort the real from the fake)
DJ2, There is NOT one thing you can add to the ''finished'' work of our Lord Jesus. IF you try to add anything to it you are making VOID that work HE SO painfully accomplished for us.
Being ''saved' is NOT about us. YES< after we are ''saved'' forever then works come into our lives BUT it does nothing to add anything to HIS wonderful completed work. HE paid my full sin debt
Being ''saved' is NOT about us. YES< after we are ''saved'' forever then works come into our lives BUT it does nothing to add anything to HIS wonderful completed work. HE paid my full sin debt
Hi DJ2, Maybe I mix you up with someone else. it is difficult to follow these chats.
I'm speaking to anyone who does NOT see that salvation is totally paid for. Once the LORD saves you, there is nothing you can do to take yourself OUT of HIM. HE is the ONE WHO does the ''saving''
I was saved at 3 yrs old. Even then I understood that salvation was for me. I knew I was lost and a sinner. EVEN children can understand that message IF we allow the LORD to teach them
Salvation is a completed gift to them who simply believe that it was for them personally
I'm speaking to anyone who does NOT see that salvation is totally paid for. Once the LORD saves you, there is nothing you can do to take yourself OUT of HIM. HE is the ONE WHO does the ''saving''
I was saved at 3 yrs old. Even then I understood that salvation was for me. I knew I was lost and a sinner. EVEN children can understand that message IF we allow the LORD to teach them
Salvation is a completed gift to them who simply believe that it was for them personally