Lordship salvation vs. "easy believism"

[OIC1965]

But you do agree that the Tribulation is another name for Jacob's trouble right?

Yes, but the Apocalypse was written to the seven churches in Asia Minor. So John was an apostle to the gentiles too.

 

[OIC1965]

The Greek word for “separated,” here, is “aphorizo,” as it is found in Matthew 25:32; Luke 6:22; and Acts 13:2, 19:9. Not once in either Testament does the word have reference to any eternal act or decree, nor does the text say that Paul was separated BEFORE he was born (see Jer. 1:5). He was separated when he was born (“from my mother’s womb”), and he was not “elected” until he “put his hat in the ring.” No “election” is eternal, and the word never occurs anywhere but in a time setting.
It pleased God to reveal His Son “in Paul” when Paul changed his mind about God’s Son (Acts 9:6) and cried, “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” 2. Furthermore, God’s Son was revealed “FROM HEAVEN” (1 Cor. 15:47) before He ever got “in” Paul.

So why did seperate Paul from his mother's womb? Because his parents were so special? No. SO it doesn't matter that he was seperated from his mother's womb. It was a calling that was not based on anything he or anyone else did. His apostleship was purely by God's Soveriegn choice.

And it's ludicrous to say that God chose Paul to be an apostle before he was foreknown as one of God's elect. Paul would necessarily have to be elect to be an apostle. God wasn't like, "hey, I'm not sure if this guy is going to be saved, but I think I'll call him to be an apostle and hope for the best." That is silly.

So it was already known by God that Paul would be saved. He would have to be saved to be an apostle. And his apostleship was based on God's Soveriegn choice and nothing else.

But God knew that he would be a believer before the foundation of the world. Try to deny that and you are an open theist

 

[OIC1965]

11¶But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.

12For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

13¶For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:

14And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

15¶But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,

16To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

17Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.

y18¶Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.

19But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.

20Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not.

21¶Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia;

This is all Paul speaking about himself. He's not teaching anything on ' calling ' election, ' predestinated ' chosen ' . Its narrative as to what happened to Paul . We learn about Paul and what happened to him ..We learn what HIS mission was ect

God chose Paul before Paul ever thought of choosing God. In his mother's womb. How do you get around that?

 

[OIC1965]

I'm agreeing up to a point . If you mean that in real time God chose Paul to be an apostle to the gentiles . Thats all the verses are saying about Paul . Why would i go further than what the bible says ?

Was God's choice of Paul based on His foreknowledge of Paul or purely and entirely on God's Sovereign CHOICE.

 

[OIC1965]

Why are we comparing what happened to Paul to me ? Are the verses saying anything about any one else other than Paul ?

What is your basis of rejecting God's eternal foreknowledge of us, seeing that God chose someone before they were able to choose Him. So God had no idea that He was going to save you. You were a wonderful surprise for Him. God said "AWESOME, Throughfaith chose me, now I can choose him back!!!"

 

[OIC1965]

Which verses ? We have some verses about Paul i agree with what it says about Paul .

Which do you want verses for?

a. God knew you before you were born
b. That He called you
c. That He has a purpose for you.

Which one are you having trouble with?

 

[Guojing]

Yes, but the Apocalypse was written to the seven churches in Asia Minor. So John was an apostle to the gentiles too.

Think of the term "church" more as a "called out assembly", rather than the Body of Christ.

There were OT assemblies as well, comprised of Jews.

 

[OIC1965]

Think of the term "church" more as a "called out assembly", rather than the Body of Christ.

There were OT assemblies as well, comprised of Jews.

You’re getting away from your original statement. Johns ministry was to Jews and non Jews. Both.

 

[OIC1965]

So God didn’t know Paul as a future adopted son until he got saved even though Paul was already a son by the new birth, but God didn’t foreknow him or predestine him until he got saved, yet he seperated him to be an apostle from his mother’s womb.

Huh?

 

[Guojing]

You’re getting away from your original statement. Johns ministry was to Jews and non Jews. Both.

Do you recall Galatians 2:9?

9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

 

[OIC1965]

Do you recall Galatians 2:9?

9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

The problem is that John’s ministry was not limited to Jews. Nor was Paul’s ministry limited to Gentiles.

 

[Guojing]

The problem is that John’s ministry was not limited to Jews. Nor was Paul’s ministry limited to Gentiles.

There is no scripture evidence that John ever preached to Gentiles. If there is, I would be most keen to know. Can you provide them?

Although I understand we in the Body of Christ tend to regard John with a certain level of fondness.

After all, he is know as the apostle of love, and, thanks to Billy Graham, many of us became Christians thru reading the book of John, and John 3:16 is probably the most popular verse in the entire bible.

 

[OIC1965]

There is no scripture evidence that John ever preached to Gentiles. If there is, I would be most keen to know. Can you provide them?

The scriptures give very little information about John’s post ascension ministry. Most of what is known or surmised about the twelve is from extrabiblical sources. We do know that the apocalypse was written to churches in Asia Minor.

I see very little reason as well to think that John, ignored the great commission. John lived nearl to the end of the first century. century. Your verse you quoted is very early, decades before Johns death

So yours is a mere argument from silence.

 

[Guojing]

The scriptures give very little information about John’s post ascension ministry. Most of what is known or surmised about the twelve is from extrabiblical sources. We do know that the apocalypse was written to churches in Asia Minor.

I see very little reason as well to think that John, ignored the great commission. John lived nearl to the end of the first century. century. Your verse you quoted is very early, decades before Johns death

So yours is a mere argument from silence.

But I already gave you Galatians 2:9, which is a clear piece of information regarding the ministry of Peter, James and John after Acts 15.

You still call that an "argument from silence"?

Israel as a nation, never acknowledged Jesus as their Messiah, all the way to John's death, so why do you think John ever moved on from there?

 

[OIC1965]

In the first place, John was not preaching the mystery of the Body of Christ.

He was an apostle to Israel, together with Peter and James (Galatians 2:9)

So the Jews are not part of the body of Christ?!!

You and TF keep cutting Christ’s body and His testament into pieces. There is ONE BODY, ONE FAITH, AND ONE GOSPEL, not two of each!!

 

[Guojing]

So the Jews are not part of the body of Christ?!!

You and TF keep cutting Christ’s body and His testament into pieces. There is ONE BODY, ONE FAITH, AND ONE GOSPEL, not two of each!!

Individual Jews who are saved now are in the Body of Christ.

We are talking about the nation of Israel.

 

[OIC1965]

But I already gave you Galatians 2:9, which is a clear piece of information regarding the ministry of Peter, James and John after Acts 15.

You still call that an "argument from silence"?

Yes. Because that probably happened decades before John died. You don’t know what he did from approximately 50. AD to the nearly the end of the first century

After all, God did say start in Jude a and work outward.

Plus, it doesn’t matter, because your argument is based on the fact that John would not teach the body of Christ to Jews, I guess because you don’t think saved Jews are part of the body?

I mean, what is your argument? It seems incoherent.

Why would John being sent to the Jews mean that the mystery of the body of Christ would be irrelevant.

Let me know.

 

[OIC1965]

Individual Jews who are saved now are in the Body of Christ.

We are talking about the nation of Israel.

Here is the point. You or someone else said that Paul never said anything about Jesus being a shepherd, which I showed to be false. He did call Gentile believers part of the flock of God.

My response was John never mentioned the body of Christ. You said that’s because he only preached to Jews

Which would be in direct disobedience to the great commission. None of the three of James, John, or Peter would break Christ’s command like that.

And John preached farther into the church age then the others and wrote later than all of them

And if Jews are part of the body of Christ, which they are, john’s recipients would have no bearing on whether he wrote on it, because it would be applicable to the Jews you claim he was writing to, ( without giving evidence that his writings were exclusively to Jews). . He didn’t write on it because He didn’t write on it. No other reason needs to be given.

Your argument fails on every level.

 

[Guojing]

Yes. Because that probably happened decades before John died. You don’t know what he did from approximately 50. AD to the nearly the end of the first century

After all, God did say start in Jude a and work outward.

Plus, it doesn’t matter, because your argument is based on the fact that John would not teach the body of Christ to Jews, I guess because you don’t think saved Jews are part of the body?

I mean, what is your argument? It seems incoherent.

Why would John being sent to the Jews mean that the mystery of the body of Christ would be irrelevant.

Let me know.

But you do agree that Israel as a nation never did acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah correct?

 

[Guojing]

Here is the point. You or someone else said that Paul never said anything about Jesus being a shepherd, which I showed to be false. He did call Gentile believers part of the flock of God.

My response was John never mentioned the body of Christ. You said that’s because he only preached to Jews

Which would be in direct disobedience to the great commission. None of the three of James, John, or Peter would break Christ’s command like that.

And John preached farther into the church age then the others and wrote later than all of them

And if Jews are part of the body of Christ, which they are, john’s recipients would have no bearing on whether he wrote on it, because it would be applicable

Your argument fails on every level.

I see that you don't distinguish between the nation of Israel and individual Jews, maybe that is why you don't understand my argument.