|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 6/29/2010 10:29:48 PM
|
|
|
jjbird
Posts: 869
Joined: 5/20/2009
From: Hotlanta Ga.
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
quote:
ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
And of course you are going to have that testimony in the churches that teach what you believe. So which is true? Both? Yours? Mine?
What does scripture teach?
I'm beginning to get the impression that it doesn't much matter what Scripture teaches as long as we have our experience. We must make Scripture correspond to our experiences, not the other way around.
Of course, I am diametrically opposed to such a position. As far as I'm concerned experience never trumps scripture and where there is a discrepancy between my experience and scripture, I will examine my experience before I will dismiss Scripture. Apparently not everyone thinks like that, though.
The problem with what you're saying you assume your understanding of scripture is the correct one by which all experiences can be measured. You are making a big, big mistake if you never examine what you are sure scripture is really saying because real life experience isn't lining up with it. That is just as big a mistake as the person who never examines the experience he was sure was so right when he learns it isn't lining up with scripture.
What's so ridiculous about the baptism argument is we have a very clear example in the Bible of Cornelius receiving the message of the gospel "by which you will be saved, you and all your household" (Acts 11:14) from Peter in which he and his family receive the Holy Spirit before and completely separate from the act of water baptism. Your doctrine is the one that doesn't stand hard and fast and absolute scripturally, nor experientially. It loses on both counts. And I'm supposed to believe it and share it with others? I could not do that with a clear conscience. Especially since my own personal experience with receiving the Holy Spirit is the same as Corn's.
How come we don't see any other conversion example like Cornelius's in the book of Acts?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 6/29/2010 10:46:58 PM
|
|
|
Rastus_
Posts: 2357
Joined: 10/17/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
Well of course you're going to have that testimony in the churches that teach what you believe and have a baptismal in every pew, lol.
And of course you are going to have that testimony in the churches that teach what you believe. So which is true? Both? Yours? Mine?
What does scripture teach?
Peter says EXPLICITLY to Jews who believed the message to repent and be baptized and they would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit and forgiveness of sins.
But you so conveniently like to read around that passage of the bible! 
I suppose I do, like around in Acts 10 and 11. The whole counsel of God forces one to assess what exactly Peter meant by what he said. If there was nothing else in the Bible to cause us to do that (let alone the lack of solid experiential evidence) then you'd be right on.
quote:
quote:
The rest of us have the genuine experience of not receiving the Spirit in salvation at baptism along with a smattering of those who testify to receiving it as they came up out of the water--just as both happened in Acts.
Both did not happen in Acts. People in Acts were saved when they faithfully responded to the message by being immersed for the forgiveness of sins.
Romans 6 teaches that baptism is a participation in the death, burial & resurrection of Jesus Christ.
We know it is the baptism of the Holy Spirit that puts to death, not water. And we also know it can and does happen apart from water baptism. The Holy Spirit is our participation in the death, burial & resurrection of Christ. That's the exact point Paul is making. Though in the first century this truth is clearly associated with water baptism. But as we know, not as a hard and fast doctrine such that if a person believes but is not baptized that they will not be saved.
quote:
quote:
And may I remind you, your doctrine is the fringe doctrine in the church, not mine that you should patronize me with some kind of similarity to Apollos, a knowledgeable but inadequately informed minister of the gospel. What I believe hardly represents the isolated ministry of a sole Apollos who needs a more adequate mainstream explanation of the way of God.
Fringe? I would say its the other way around. This is not a popularity contest. Jesus' teaching wasn't very popular with the religious world either. Wasn't mainstream!
Mainstream doesn't equate to being right.
Not categorically, I agree. I made this point earlier, but after all these centuries many of the church's age old controversies have been settled upon by the majority and dissension pretty much remains in the smaller fringe groups in the church.
quote:
quote:
I know you say baptism is not a work (ahem), but how you discourse on John 8 is very telling about what you believe about salvation and works, even though you essentially deny the obvious in what you say.
Jesus says IF YOU HOLD TO MY TEACHINGS YOU ARE REALLY HIS DISCIPLES.
I didn't say that Jesus did!
If you hold to Jesus' teachings you SHOW that you are really his disciple, your obedience being the result of a genuine faith in him.
quote:
Besides this all boils down to how you define works.
By your definition of (works being anything you do) you make yourself out to be a hypocrite and Jesus a legalist.
Then you're saying Paul did mean the work of believing when he said this in the context of the gospel in his letter to Timothy?
"...join with me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God, 9who has saved us and called us to a holy life—not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time, 10but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel." (2 Tim. 1:8-10)
Did he, or did he not include 'believing' in this verse?
quote:
Anything you do are works and damn you biblically according to you.
Only if the performance of specific things is offered up as something God is now obligated to declare you righteous by. The only thing that God is obligated to declare us righteous by doing is believing in Christ. Which Paul says is hardly something we can boast in as even that is a gift given to us apart from our own merit to produce it. Unlike baptism, or circumcision, or other things.
quote:
Well you have to believe in order to be saved. You have to obey that command in the bible.
And that's what this thread is all about--the work of believing in Jesus plus something else. Believing is not the same as being baptized or circumcised, or whatever because we don't produce faith in Jesus, it is given to us freely, whereas we ourselves produce the work of being submersed in water, or circumcised, or whatever.
quote:
quote:
Do you think it's coincidental that folks who believe you are saved during the act of water baptism also interpret James 2 the same way and believe you must be an obedient Christian as a condition in and of itself for salvation?
Being obedient most certainly is a condition for salvation.
Only as the expected and obligatory outcome of genuine faith, in the same way getting wet is the expected and obligatory outcome of someone who claims they went swimming. Obedience is not a condition for salvation in the way you claim.
quote:
Doing works of the law is not a condition under the NT.
However Jesus has a NT law.
Jesus is King! And as Jesus' subjects we must submit and obey his Laws to be a part of His divine and Holy kingdom!
Only as the normal expression of genuine faith, not as a coagent of justification we purposely add for that purpose.
_____________________________
“And now I will show you the most excellent way.” (1 Corinthians 12:30)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 6/29/2010 11:05:32 PM
|
|
|
Rastus_
Posts: 2357
Joined: 10/17/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
quote:
ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
And of course you are going to have that testimony in the churches that teach what you believe. So which is true? Both? Yours? Mine?
What does scripture teach?
I'm beginning to get the impression that it doesn't much matter what Scripture teaches as long as we have our experience. We must make Scripture correspond to our experiences, not the other way around.
Of course, I am diametrically opposed to such a position. As far as I'm concerned experience never trumps scripture and where there is a discrepancy between my experience and scripture, I will examine my experience before I will dismiss Scripture. Apparently not everyone thinks like that, though.
The problem with what you're saying you assume your understanding of scripture is the correct one by which all experiences can be measured. You are making a big, big mistake if you never examine what you are sure scripture is really saying because real life experience isn't lining up with it. That is just as big a mistake as the person who never examines the experience he was sure was so right when he learns it isn't lining up with scripture.
What's so ridiculous about the baptism argument is we have a very clear example in the Bible of Cornelius receiving the message of the gospel "by which you will be saved, you and all your household" (Acts 11:14) from Peter in which he and his family receive the Holy Spirit before and completely separate from the act of water baptism. Your doctrine is the one that doesn't stand hard and fast and absolute scripturally, nor experientially. It loses on both counts. And I'm supposed to believe it and share it with others? I could not do that with a clear conscience. Especially since my own personal experience with receiving the Holy Spirit is the same as Corn's.
How come we don't see any other conversion example like Cornelius's in the book of Acts?
There is another example in Acts 8. Philip preaches the gospel to the Samaritans and they believe and are baptized. But they do not receive the Holy Spirit until Peter and John are sent to them and they lay their hands on them. Trust me, I'm not a legalist in any sense of the word, but it seems that people only receive the Holy Spirit in water baptism if they have not already received it, and they are baptized in order to specifically receive the Holy Spirit as indicated by whose name you baptize the person in. Apparently, you get in water baptism what you do not already have and what you ask for. Which makes sense when you consider that Peter told the people what to expect from water baptism and surely prayed accordingly. If he had not done that, the outcome would have been different.
_____________________________
“And now I will show you the most excellent way.” (1 Corinthians 12:30)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 6/29/2010 11:23:22 PM
|
|
|
jjbird
Posts: 869
Joined: 5/20/2009
From: Hotlanta Ga.
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
quote:
ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
And of course you are going to have that testimony in the churches that teach what you believe. So which is true? Both? Yours? Mine?
What does scripture teach?
I'm beginning to get the impression that it doesn't much matter what Scripture teaches as long as we have our experience. We must make Scripture correspond to our experiences, not the other way around.
Of course, I am diametrically opposed to such a position. As far as I'm concerned experience never trumps scripture and where there is a discrepancy between my experience and scripture, I will examine my experience before I will dismiss Scripture. Apparently not everyone thinks like that, though.
The problem with what you're saying you assume your understanding of scripture is the correct one by which all experiences can be measured. You are making a big, big mistake if you never examine what you are sure scripture is really saying because real life experience isn't lining up with it. That is just as big a mistake as the person who never examines the experience he was sure was so right when he learns it isn't lining up with scripture.
What's so ridiculous about the baptism argument is we have a very clear example in the Bible of Cornelius receiving the message of the gospel "by which you will be saved, you and all your household" (Acts 11:14) from Peter in which he and his family receive the Holy Spirit before and completely separate from the act of water baptism. Your doctrine is the one that doesn't stand hard and fast and absolute scripturally, nor experientially. It loses on both counts. And I'm supposed to believe it and share it with others? I could not do that with a clear conscience. Especially since my own personal experience with receiving the Holy Spirit is the same as Corn's.
How come we don't see any other conversion example like Cornelius's in the book of Acts?
There is another example in Acts 8. Philip preaches the gospel to the Samaritans and they believe and are baptized. But they do not receive the Holy Spirit until Peter and John are sent to them and they lay their hands on them. Trust me, I'm not a legalist in any sense of the word, but it seems that people only receive the Holy Spirit in water baptism if they have not already received it, and they are baptized in order to specifically receive the Holy Spirit as indicated by whose name you baptize the person in. Apparently, you get in water baptism what you do not already have and what you ask for. Which makes sense when you consider that Peter told the people what to expect from water baptism and surely prayed accordingly. If he had not done that, the outcome would have been different.
You are way too predictable!
Opening more cans of worms......Going to sleep.....will address this in the morning!
Good night my friend and sincerely, thank you for the kind dialogue! I know many many other folks would have gotten a lot more impatient with each other! 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 6/30/2010 8:07:06 AM
|
|
|
greatdivide46
Posts: 2159
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Coffee County, Alabama
Status: offline
|
While it is true that Cornelius and his household received the gift of tongues from the Holy Spirit before they were baptized, I don't believe that is the same thing as receiving the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit. God clearly says, through Peter, in Acts 2:38 that one of the results of repenting and being baptized is receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit. So, unless He was less than truthful in Acts 2:38, Cornelius could not have received the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit until he was baptized. Obviously he could, and did, receive the gift of tongues from the Holy Spirit prior to his baptism though.
The Samaritan believers are much the same. They were baptized, at which time they received the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit. Then the apostles came and laid hands on them and they received the gift of tongues from the Holy Spirit.
_____________________________
<<< me, leading the ABC song during VBS
greatdivide46
"Like a madman who throws firebrands, arrows, and death is the man who deceives his neighbor and says, 'I am only joking!'". Proverbs 26:18-19
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 6/30/2010 9:12:52 AM
|
|
|
Rastus_
Posts: 2357
Joined: 10/17/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
While it is true that Cornelius and his household received the gift of tongues from the Holy Spirit before they were baptized, I don't believe that is the same thing as receiving the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit.
The indwelling Spirit is the seal of the Spirit in salvation. The gifts of the Spirit are the coming forth of that same Spirit for works of ministry and witness.
The gifts of the Spirit are reserved for the hands, feet, ears, and eyes of the Body of Christ, for people already joined to Christ by the INdwelling Holy Spirit (the same way your spirit dwells in all your parts, not in someone else's parts). They are not for Body of Christ wannabes, no matter how sincere they are.
quote:
God clearly says, through Peter, in Acts 2:38 that one of the results of repenting and being baptized is receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit.
If that's what you are purposely seeking and baptizing somebody in the name of to receive. And, obviously, if the people you are speaking to have not already received the Spirit. It's not an automatic, hard and fast doctrine, gd46. If you construct a salvation experience just the way they often did in Acts and have baptismals at the ready you can recreate the Acts 2 experience and perpetuate the doctrine of Churches that push and emphasize their misguided agenda. The experience is legitimate. The doctrine gleaned from the experience ('the Spirit is only given through water baptism, therefore you are saved at your baptism') is not.
quote:
So, unless He was less than truthful in Acts 2:38, Cornelius could not have received the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit until he was baptized.
It's not a matter of being truthful or not. That's what Peter purposely sought and led the people toward. It's a legitimate experience, just not hard and fast doctrine. We know this scripturally and experientially. They both line up on this subject. You have to rationalize them away to make everything fit into the doctrine of 'salvation only at baptism'.
quote:
Obviously he could, and did, receive the gift of tongues from the Holy Spirit prior to his baptism though.
Here's a very good example of needing the rest of the teaching and understanding about the gifts in the Bible to know your conclusion is not as obvious as you're making it out to be. Gifts of the Spirit are given to the children of God, not wannabe children of God.
quote:
The Samaritan believers are much the same. They were baptized, at which time they received the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit. Then the apostles came and laid hands on them and they received the gift of tongues from the Holy Spirit.
I'm curious as to what would happen to your doctrine if we reexamined the entire book of Acts with now accepting that 'receiving the Holy Spirit' now means receiving the gifts of the Spirit, not the seal of the Spirit. I think the doctrine you build on Acts 2:38 crashes and burns if we do that.
Hopefully, you all are seeing there are too many obstacles to your doctrine for the church to have accepted it as mainline, established doctrine. That's why I believe, generally speaking, the church has gone the way of my beliefs.
_____________________________
“And now I will show you the most excellent way.” (1 Corinthians 12:30)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 6/30/2010 9:40:38 AM
|
|
|
greatdivide46
Posts: 2159
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Coffee County, Alabama
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
The indwelling Spirit is the seal of the Spirit in salvation. The gifts of the Spirit are the coming forth of that same Spirit for works of ministry and witness.
No argument from me on this.
quote:
The gifts of the Spirit are reserved for the hands, feet, ears, and eyes of the Body of Christ, for people already joined to Christ by the INdwelling Holy Spirit (the same way your spirit dwells in all your parts, not in someone else's parts). They are not for Body of Christ wannabes, no matter how sincere they are.
So are you saying that the Holy Spirit cannot work in the lives of the unsaved, even to the point of granting them a gift of the Spirit?
That may be true under normal circumstances, but Scripture plainly tells us the Cornelius was an unusual example. In order for the Jews to accept a Gentile into the church something unusual had to happen to convince them. And it did, praise the Lord!!! And as soon as it happened, Peter commanded that they be baptized. How else were they to be joined to the body of Christ -- to put on Christ?
_____________________________
<<< me, leading the ABC song during VBS
greatdivide46
"Like a madman who throws firebrands, arrows, and death is the man who deceives his neighbor and says, 'I am only joking!'". Proverbs 26:18-19
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 6/30/2010 9:43:30 AM
|
|
|
jjbird
Posts: 869
Joined: 5/20/2009
From: Hotlanta Ga.
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
There is another example in Acts 8. Philip preaches the gospel to the Samaritans and they believe and are baptized. But they do not receive the Holy Spirit until Peter and John are sent to them and they lay their hands on them. Trust me, I'm not a legalist in any sense of the word, but it seems that people only receive the Holy Spirit in water baptism if they have not already received it, and they are baptized in order to specifically receive the Holy Spirit as indicated by whose name you baptize the person in. Apparently, you get in water baptism what you do not already have and what you ask for. Which makes sense when you consider that Peter told the people what to expect from water baptism and surely prayed accordingly. If he had not done that, the outcome would have been different.
To give you a more compact answer at this time, the Samaritans did receive the indwelling at baptism, though not any outward sign. This was an historical boundary: the inclusion of the Samaritans in the covenant, long ago were cut off (2 Kings 17) and viewed with suspicion. God was making it perfectly clear, in a visible and dramatic manner, that he had accepted them. The sign was necessary. Also remember that only the apostles could pass the miraculous gifts of the Spirit by laying on of hands and biblically speaking Miracles had two specific purposes. 1. To confirm God's word giving the apostles authority 2. So that we can believe
As for the Caesareans of Acts 10, they equally needed an outward confirmation. They were the first purely Gentile audience an apostle addressed. Again, a moment of historic import. Modern people tend to read the passage and think about the experience itself. ("That's cool! I'd like that to happen to me.") But the reason these passages are in the Bible is not so that we may emulate a similar experience, but to make it clear that salvation started with the Jews, yet is no longer exclusively for them alone. That is the point! This is early church history here!
As for Peter's comparison of the Caesarean outpouring with the Pentecostal event, he is referring to the outward manifestation of the Spirit. I believe the apostles had already received the Holy Spirit; they were saved before Pentecost, nor is there any evidence that they were (re-)baptized at that time.
< Message edited by jjbird -- 6/30/2010 10:34:54 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 6/30/2010 9:46:48 AM
|
|
|
greatdivide46
Posts: 2159
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Coffee County, Alabama
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
It's not a matter of being truthful or not. That's what Peter purposely sought and led the people toward. It's a legitimate experience, just not hard and fast doctrine. We know this scripturally and experientially. They both line up on this subject. You have to rationalize them away to make everything fit into the doctrine of 'salvation only at baptism'.
I disagree. I think Acts 2:38 is hard and fast doctrine. I find nothing in Scripture to make me think otherwise. As for my own experience, I will gladly rationalize it away in order to get at the truth of Scripture. My own experience has been at odds with Scripture too many times for me to trust it.
_____________________________
<<< me, leading the ABC song during VBS
greatdivide46
"Like a madman who throws firebrands, arrows, and death is the man who deceives his neighbor and says, 'I am only joking!'". Proverbs 26:18-19
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 6/30/2010 10:01:59 AM
|
|
|
patricius79
Posts: 3420
Joined: 9/10/2009
Status: offline
|
The argument that baptism doesn't save, since some begin their salvation process before baptism doesn't follow logicallly
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 7/1/2010 5:06:16 AM
|
|
|
Rastus_
Posts: 2357
Joined: 10/17/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ASharpSword
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
I didn't ignore your previous post. It's just hard to address everything posted.
The James passage is so terribly misunderstood. I understand perfectly why Luther hated the book. It takes so much articulation to explain that James is not in opposition to Paul at all. In fact very, very much in agreement with Paul. But once you see that you see how simple what James is saying really is...and entirely consistent with Paul.
James is not saying the addition of works now makes faith able to save where it could not before without those works, no matter how real and sincere that faith is. He is saying the addition of works shows you have the faith that saves. The faith that genuinely changes your behavior in accordance with the Holy Spirit, given to you in a genuine salvation experience, and according to the character of Christ is the faith that is alive and which can save you. A change of behavior does not now categorically make a faith that could not save you before now able to save you. The change of behavior is the result of the faith that saves, not what makes faith able to save.
I do truly believe that submitting to baptism is ultimately a show of faith. But, like in the example of James' teaching, it does not now make a faith that could not save you now able to save you.
The way baptism is used in the Bible to illustrate salvation is figurative. Easy to understand when you consider, as you say, baptism is generally completed in obedience to God because people have placed their faith in Christ. In the early church, more so then it is now, everyone who believed got baptized very close to the time they believed. It is the common experience all believers had, and the visible, tangible connection with salvation, that makes it possible for the Bible to use it figuratively as the agent of our justification.
I think James is brutally simple in what he says in chapter 2 of the book.
Now, I know you're not trying to say that works aren't necessary, but what you are saying is that faith saves and then is evidenced by what we do. James is not saying that at all. James is actually marrying faith and works together. Not apart, but together. I do not think it's possible that one can have faith alone and be saved and THEN do works as evidence of that salvation, which is what I believe you're supporting. James doesn't say that, Paul doesn't say that either.
That is most definitely what I'm defending. Anything less is a salvation by works gospel.
Maybe these passages will help you to see that people sin because they don't have the seed of God within, and people do right because they do have the seed of God within because they have had that seed placed within through a born again (salvation) experience:
"9No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God. (1 John 3:9)
John is saying it is because we are born again (saved) that we do not go on sinning. And he goes on to show us in the form of a rhetorical question that it is because the love of God is in us (through being born again and saved) that we do works of compassion (the kind of works that James says in his letter shows the faith that saves):
"17If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him?" (1 John 3:)
Can you see the prerequisite for having the love of God in you first through a salvation experience to do righteous things? Righteous deeds are the result of having had the love of God born into us by the Holy Spirit in a salvation experience. We do right things because we are born again as children of God. We are not born again as children of God because we do right things.
And because we have been born after the seed of our Father, God, we bear his likeness in all kinds of righteous deeds. Our righteous deeds do not point back and act as some kind of assisting agent in being born of the Father as you are suggesting, and think James is saying, but rather our righteousness points back to confirm that we have been born again as children of God and have received his righteousness--the righteousness that saves.
When you put Paul, John, and James all together you see it is because we have the righteousness of God that saves, by faith, that we now act according to that declaration of righteousness. We don't act like him to get the righteousness of God that saves.
The only thing that justifies is faith. And that is the faith that shows itself in deeds of love:
"The only thing that counts (in context--toward justification) is faith expressing itself through love." (Galatians 5:6)
James also says it is the faith that gets expressed in deeds of love that counts and which has the power to save a person. That is the faith that justifies--the faith that shows itself in deeds of love. If your faith does not find expression in love it has no life in it that it should have the power to justify:
"14What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? 15Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. 16If one of you says to him, "Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? 17In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.
18...I will show you my faith by what I do." (James 2:14-18)
And, as I shared above, John echoes this same truth. It is because the love of God is already in us by the Holy Spirit that we love others and shows that we belong to God, not makes it so we belong to him:
"17If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him? 18Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth. 19This then is how we know that we belong to the truth, and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence " (1 John 3:)
All three, Paul, John, and James show us our works, our deeds of love are how we know we have the kind of faith that justifies. It is because we have the faith that justifies that we then act out the righteousness we have received. Works, deeds of love are not a precondition for a declaration of righteousness. They are the result of first being declared righteous and having the love of God placed in us by the Holy Spirit through believing in Christ.
_____________________________
“And now I will show you the most excellent way.” (1 Corinthians 12:30)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 7/1/2010 5:12:38 AM
|
|
|
Rastus_
Posts: 2357
Joined: 10/17/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
The indwelling Spirit is the seal of the Spirit in salvation. The gifts of the Spirit are the coming forth of that same Spirit for works of ministry and witness.
No argument from me on this.
quote:
The gifts of the Spirit are reserved for the hands, feet, ears, and eyes of the Body of Christ, for people already joined to Christ by the INdwelling Holy Spirit (the same way your spirit dwells in all your parts, not in someone else's parts). They are not for Body of Christ wannabes, no matter how sincere they are.
So are you saying that the Holy Spirit cannot work in the lives of the unsaved, even to the point of granting them a gift of the Spirit?
In regard to the gifts, yes. They are given to the parts of the Body of Christ--saved people that have been joined to that Body by the Holy Spirit. The gifts of the Spirit are the sign of having been joined to the Body by the Holy Spirit.
quote:
That may be true under normal circumstances, but Scripture plainly tells us the Cornelius was an unusual example.
Off the top of my head I can't think of where it says that. Where is that?
quote:
In order for the Jews to accept a Gentile into the church something unusual had to happen to convince them. And it did, praise the Lord!!! And as soon as it happened, Peter commanded that they be baptized. How else were they to be joined to the body of Christ -- to put on Christ?
I don't understand why all that happening in the hard and fast, Biblical way of Acts 2:38 would not be convincing enough...especially if it as you say and that is in deed understood by Peter and the Apostles as the exact, doctrinal way God does it. That would speak the loudest. That would show beyond a shadow of a doubt all by itself that God approved of these outsiders because it lines up with what you say God told them is how he only does it.
_____________________________
“And now I will show you the most excellent way.” (1 Corinthians 12:30)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 7/1/2010 5:16:00 AM
|
|
|
Rastus_
Posts: 2357
Joined: 10/17/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
It's not a matter of being truthful or not. That's what Peter purposely sought and led the people toward. It's a legitimate experience, just not hard and fast doctrine. We know this scripturally and experientially. They both line up on this subject. You have to rationalize them away to make everything fit into the doctrine of 'salvation only at baptism'.
I disagree. I think Acts 2:38 is hard and fast doctrine. I find nothing in Scripture to make me think otherwise. As for my own experience, I will gladly rationalize it away in order to get at the truth of Scripture. My own experience has been at odds with Scripture too many times for me to trust it.
But to rationalize away an experience right in scripture itself? Come on gd46!
_____________________________
“And now I will show you the most excellent way.” (1 Corinthians 12:30)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 7/1/2010 5:24:10 AM
|
|
|
Rastus_
Posts: 2357
Joined: 10/17/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jjbird
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
There is another example in Acts 8. Philip preaches the gospel to the Samaritans and they believe and are baptized. But they do not receive the Holy Spirit until Peter and John are sent to them and they lay their hands on them. Trust me, I'm not a legalist in any sense of the word, but it seems that people only receive the Holy Spirit in water baptism if they have not already received it, and they are baptized in order to specifically receive the Holy Spirit as indicated by whose name you baptize the person in. Apparently, you get in water baptism what you do not already have and what you ask for. Which makes sense when you consider that Peter told the people what to expect from water baptism and surely prayed accordingly. If he had not done that, the outcome would have been different.
To give you a more compact answer at this time, the Samaritans did receive the indwelling at baptism...
How do you know this? (remember you can't use the texts we are debating to defend your doctrine).
quote:
...though not any outward sign. This was an historical boundary: the inclusion of the Samaritans in the covenant, long ago were cut off (2 Kings 17) and viewed with suspicion. God was making it perfectly clear, in a visible and dramatic manner, that he had accepted them. The sign was necessary. Also remember that only the apostles could pass the miraculous gifts of the Spirit by laying on of hands and biblically speaking Miracles had two specific purposes. 1. To confirm God's word giving the apostles authority 2. So that we can believe
As for the Caesareans of Acts 10, they equally needed an outward confirmation. They were the first purely Gentile audience an apostle addressed. Again, a moment of historic import. Modern people tend to read the passage and think about the experience itself. ("That's cool! I'd like that to happen to me.") But the reason these passages are in the Bible is not so that we may emulate a similar experience, but to make it clear that salvation started with the Jews, yet is no longer exclusively for them alone. That is the point! This is early church history here!
As for Peter's comparison of the Caesarean outpouring with the Pentecostal event, he is referring to the outward manifestation of the Spirit. I believe the apostles had already received the Holy Spirit; they were saved before Pentecost, nor is there any evidence that they were (re-)baptized at that time.
If gd46 is correct, why didn't God do it for the Samaritans in the special way that he says was needed for Corn's family? Your example is an even worse testimony to God's acceptance of these outsiders (the polluted blood line of Israel). Not only is it outside of the (supposedly) accepted doctrine of the Apostles on how God saves people, it delays the evidence of that acceptance, while gd46 says it was necessary to deliver the evidence of their acceptance before they got baptized as a special notice of their approval.
Sorry guys, I can't honestly accept your explanations. I could not share these explanations with another person with a clear conscience without better and more consistent support for these reasons.
_____________________________
“And now I will show you the most excellent way.” (1 Corinthians 12:30)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 7/1/2010 8:19:30 AM
|
|
|
greatdivide46
Posts: 2159
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Coffee County, Alabama
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
In regard to the gifts, yes. They are given to the parts of the Body of Christ--saved people that have been joined to that Body by the Holy Spirit. The gifts of the Spirit are the sign of having been joined to the Body by the Holy Spirit.
Agreed. I still believe, though, that Cornelius, as a Gentile, was a unique example of someone receiving a gift of the Holy Spirit prior to actually being a member of the body of Christ. I believe this was done in order to convince the Jews present that Gentiles were to be accepted into His Body.
quote:
quote:
That may be true under normal circumstances, but Scripture plainly tells us the Cornelius was an unusual example.
Off the top of my head I can't think of where it says that. Where is that?
OK, maybe I stated it wrong. But certainly Cornelius was a Gentile and Gentiles were not considered to be legitimate candidates for membership in the church by the Jews of that day up to that point. Therefore the Jews needed to be convinced by God that He intended them to be in the Body of Christ too. And that's why Cornelius and his household were given the gift to tongues prior to actually being in the Body of Christ.
quote:
I don't understand why all that happening in the hard and fast, Biblical way of Acts 2:38 would not be convincing enough...especially if it as you say and that is in deed understood by Peter and the Apostles as the exact, doctrinal way God does it. That would speak the loudest. That would show beyond a shadow of a doubt all by itself that God approved of these outsiders because it lines up with what you say God told them is how he only does it.
I know you don't understand it, and that's OK. I don't understand how people can just gloss over baptism like it's not even there, either. Not saying you do that, but some do.
_____________________________
<<< me, leading the ABC song during VBS
greatdivide46
"Like a madman who throws firebrands, arrows, and death is the man who deceives his neighbor and says, 'I am only joking!'". Proverbs 26:18-19
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 7/1/2010 2:31:04 PM
|
|
|
ASharpSword
Posts: 16
Joined: 3/29/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
And, as I shared above, John echoes this same truth. It is because the love of God is already in us by the Holy Spirit that we love others and shows that we belong to God, not makes it so we belong to him:
All three, Paul, John, and James show us our works, our deeds of love are how we know we have the kind of faith that justifies. It is because we have the faith that justifies that we then act out the righteousness we have received. Works, deeds of love are not a precondition for a declaration of righteousness. They are the result of first being declared righteous and having the love of God placed in us by the Holy Spirit through believing in Christ.
I really don't see that your explanation of the several verses you quoted actually go against what I'm saying, although I do have a question about the above comments you made.
So, you're saying that someone believes and BAM they're saved, right? They possess the love of God and the Spirit at that point, right? Are you saying that God then sort of "controls" a person to do good works? I'm just trying to wrap my mind around your argument as a whole.
I have a problem with you saying "Works, deeds of love are not a precondition for a declaration of righteousness." Well, obviously I have a problem with that since it goes against my beliefs, lol. Anyway, I'll keep repeating the same mantra of "you are what you do." I think the Bible supports what I'm saying. If you continually disobey God and habitually sin, then you ARE lost and not a Christian. No matter what you say or "believe" you are. If you believe you're a charitable person but never actually donate any of your time, money, resources to any cause, then quite simply you're not a charitable person.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 7/1/2010 6:45:29 PM
|
|
|
Rastus_
Posts: 2357
Joined: 10/17/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ASharpSword
So, you're saying that someone believes and BAM they're saved, right?
Yes, that is what it means to be born again.
quote:
They possess the love of God and the Spirit at that point, right?
Yes, being born again means having the new nature implanted within us by the Holy Spirit. John calls it having God's seed in you, like when a woman becomes impregnated through an intimate encounter with her husband. That is how Christ dwells in the person who believes.
As that seed grows and grows in us it becomes more and more apparent to us and others, just like a baby growing in the mother impregnated by her husband signifying the reality of that intimacy. The child inside of us is Christ by the Word of God through the Holy Spirit, the promised Son of God who comes from our own bodies and inherits the promises God gave to us--just as that was true for Abraham but in the spiritual reality his story represents for us, and everyone else who believes in the promise of that Son.
Just as Abraham had the confirmation of the promise as he watched Sarah's belly grow, so we also have the confirmation of the promise of God as we see Christ grow in us and become more and more apparent in what we do for all to see. That's why John said love is how we know we belong to the truth when we show the nature of God within us by the Holy Spirit that only born again, saved people have. We've got Jesus growing on the inside of us and we can see him showing in ever-increasing deeds of love and righteousness on the outside just like a pregnant woman...until that day he is fully birthed in us on the Day we are glorified and the shell of our humanness is peeled away and "we shall be like him" and "see him as he is" (1 John 3:2) in all his fullness free of the womb of the flesh where he has been growing since he was planted in us through the Word of God by the Holy Spirit when we got born again.
Christ in us by the Holy Spirit is our down payment, our promissory note of our redemption to come.
"...no matter how many promises God has made, they are "Yes" in Christ. And so through him the "Amen" is spoken by us to the glory of God. 21Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed us, 22set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come." (2 Cor. 1:)
If you have the Spirit of God in you, you have the guarantee of what he has promised us. And we know we have the Holy Spirit in us, the guarantee of our redemption, because of the righteous deeds of the Spirit we perform.
quote:
Are you saying that God then sort of "controls" a person to do good works? I'm just trying to wrap my mind around your argument as a whole.
He is working to gain control, bringing us into the obedience of the Holy Spirit. That's a life long journey that's starts with a declaration of right standing before God through believing in the forgiveness of Christ, at which time we were given the righteousness of the Holy Spirit for that believing.
quote:
I have a problem with you saying "Works, deeds of love are not a precondition for a declaration of righteousness." Well, obviously I have a problem with that since it goes against my beliefs, lol. Anyway, I'll keep repeating the same mantra of "you are what you do."
But, you do not make what you are through what you do. You show what you already are by what you do. People who have been made new creations in Christ by the Holy Spirit are the one's who show the righteousness of Christ by what they do, not natural people who have not been born again and have not been made a new creation who is capable of doing righteous things.
quote:
I think the Bible supports what I'm saying. If you continually disobey God and habitually sin, then you ARE lost and not a Christian.
Correct. You are simply showing what you are...a natural, unforgiven, lost person who does not have the Holy Spirit in a declaration of righteousness from God. But that condition is not corrected by now attempting to do right things. It is corrected by getting born again by believing in the forgiveness of Christ for that habitual enslavement of sin and becoming a new creation by the Holy Spirit, and in whom God is constantly at work to bring us to works of righteous motivated by the Spirit he gave us within.
quote:
No matter what you say or "believe" you are. If you believe you're a charitable person but never actually donate any of your time, money, resources to any cause, then quite simply you're not a charitable person.
Right. You don't do those things because you do not have the faith or the righteousness of God to be that kind of person. You are showing you do not know God in a salvation experience. You are not showing that you have failed to become a righteous person by failing to do those things in order to become that kind of person. You are showing you have failed to become a righteous person through believing in Christ and receiving the Holy Spirit which then makes you into a person who does those kinds of things.
_____________________________
“And now I will show you the most excellent way.” (1 Corinthians 12:30)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 7/2/2010 12:19:18 PM
|
|
|
ASharpSword
Posts: 16
Joined: 3/29/2010
Status: offline
|
I think this goes against scriptural evidence. When I look at Paul's conversion for instance, according to the chronology of events he should've been saved before Ananias issued the baptism directive. According to the story, Ananias tells Paul to arise and be baptized, call on the name of the Lord, and have his sins washed away.
The way I read that is Paul already believed, and Ananias wasn't telling Paul to act on his belief to SHOW he was saved, but rather to act and BE saved.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 7/2/2010 1:31:31 PM
|
|
|
Rastus_
Posts: 2357
Joined: 10/17/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ASharpSword
I think this goes against scriptural evidence. When I look at Paul's conversion for instance, according to the chronology of events he should've been saved before Ananias issued the baptism directive. According to the story, Ananias tells Paul to arise and be baptized, call on the name of the Lord, and have his sins washed away.
The way I read that is Paul already believed, and Ananias wasn't telling Paul to act on his belief to SHOW he was saved, but rather to act and BE saved.
I'm all for scriptural evidence. Are we to ignore the scriptural evidence that doesn't follow the hard and fast pattern of salvation you and others say the Bible teaches and claim is the only way God works in salvation in the Church? What do we do with that other evidence since the Bible itself does not tell us what to do with it?
All by itself, your doctrine of 'salvation is achieved at the moment of baptism' is one matter, but like I say, I think it's telling that people who defend that doctrine usually have the overall belief that salvation is dependent on everything we do or don't do as Christians. It's nothing more than a works based doctrine of salvation.
Basically it's the Lordship doctrine. Is Christ Lord of your life because you are saved, or are you saved because you consciously make Christ Lord of your life in your daily life? The scriptural evidence is way in favor of we make Christ Lord because we first have a saving relationship with him which then motivates and moves us to obey, not we establish a saving relationship with him by choosing to obey him as Lord.
God did not give us the grace of the Holy Spirit so we can now successfully work for salvation (this belief is more common in the church than most people suspect). God gives us the grace of the Holy Spirit and saves us first so we can be new, transformed creations that can now obey him. And if we don't obey him, it's ultimately the sign that we were never transformed in the first place by faith in Christ.
_____________________________
“And now I will show you the most excellent way.” (1 Corinthians 12:30)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 7/2/2010 3:23:24 PM
|
|
|
ASharpSword
Posts: 16
Joined: 3/29/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
quote:
ORIGINAL: ASharpSword
I think this goes against scriptural evidence. When I look at Paul's conversion for instance, according to the chronology of events he should've been saved before Ananias issued the baptism directive. According to the story, Ananias tells Paul to arise and be baptized, call on the name of the Lord, and have his sins washed away.
The way I read that is Paul already believed, and Ananias wasn't telling Paul to act on his belief to SHOW he was saved, but rather to act and BE saved.
I'm all for scriptural evidence. Are we to ignore the scriptural evidence that doesn't follow the hard and fast pattern of salvation you and others say the Bible teaches and claim is the only way God works in salvation in the Church? What do we do with that other evidence since the Bible itself does not tell us what to do with it?
All by itself, your doctrine of 'salvation is achieved at the moment of baptism' is one matter, but like I say, I think it's telling that people who defend that doctrine usually have the overall belief that salvation is dependent on everything we do or don't do as Christians. It's nothing more than a works based doctrine of salvation.
Basically it's the Lordship doctrine. Is Christ Lord of your life because you are saved, or are you saved because you consciously make Christ Lord of your life in your daily life? The scriptural evidence is way in favor of we make Christ Lord because we first have a saving relationship with him which then motivates and moves us to obey, not we establish a saving relationship with him by choosing to obey him as Lord.
God did not give us the grace of the Holy Spirit so we can now successfully work for salvation (this belief is more common in the church than most people suspect). God gives us the grace of the Holy Spirit and saves us first so we can be new, transformed creations that can now obey him. And if we don't obey him, it's ultimately the sign that we were never transformed in the first place by faith in Christ.
Please don't ever get me wrong. I do not, and will never, advocate a "works based salvation." That totally goes against what I'm saying. I do not believe you can work, or merit, your way to salvation. I simply believe that faith by itself is dead and that works are a requirement to have faith realized. With no works, there is no genuine faith, and that's where I believe that one cannot be saved on faith alone.
"Is Christ Lord of your life because you are saved, or are you saved because you consciously make Christ Lord of your life in your daily life?"
I think this is a GREAT question. Kudos to you for stating it so eloquently. This is really where many doctrines hinge, right on the answer to that question.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 7/2/2010 8:54:10 PM
|
|
|
patricius79
Posts: 3420
Joined: 9/10/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
"Is Christ Lord of your life because you are saved, or are you saved because you consciously make Christ Lord of your life in your daily life?"
I don't see that as an either/or but as a both, and.
I don't see anything wrong with the idea of merit as God's gift to us which we choose to accept.
"work out your salvation with fear and trembling"
"I will render to each according to his works: eternal life to those who seek glory honor and immortality through perseverence in good works".
As somebody said: our merits are Christ's gifts.
Our free will is involved in our salvation because we are God's image and are thus created free, just as God didn't have to create us but freely chose to.
So everything we do that is good is done purely by the gifts of God--the natural gifts, such as our ability to work--done purely by the grace of God
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 7/3/2010 8:54:47 AM
|
|
|
Rastus_
Posts: 2357
Joined: 10/17/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: patricius79
I don't see anything wrong with the idea of merit as God's gift to us which we choose to accept.
"work out your salvation with fear and trembling"
"I will render to each according to his works: eternal life to those who seek glory honor and immortality through perseverence in good works".
As somebody said: our merits are Christ's gifts.
Our free will is involved in our salvation because we are God's image and are thus created free, just as God didn't have to create us but freely chose to.
So everything we do that is good is done purely by the gifts of God--the natural gifts, such as our ability to work--done purely by the grace of God
I think you're making a good point here. Let's look at it.
I emboldened the "choose to accept" part because, correct me if I'm wrong, essentially this is what the 'faith and works' argument hinges on. The argument goes that faith is all well and good, and necessary, but it can not save anyone if you do not accept it (and I agree 100%), and you accept that faith by willfully doing something. Is it more accurate to say that the action shows that you have accepted that faith instead of the action being the acceptance of faith in and of itself?
If a person believes in Christ and is then confronted with the decision to now do something righteous as an obligation of that faith (the obligation we all surely have as believers), what would prevent that person from now actually following through with that righteous action? I say, ultimately, a lack of faith, meaning it was not the absence of the activity that made that person's faith dead and ineffectual, it was the insufficiency of their faith to move them to complete the action.
I have to run, but I've got an interesting passage of scripture to share we can talk about.
_____________________________
“And now I will show you the most excellent way.” (1 Corinthians 12:30)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 7/3/2010 9:27:26 AM
|
|
|
Rastus_
Posts: 2357
Joined: 10/17/2009
Status: offline
|
Here it is...
7Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. 8But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.
9Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are confident of better things in your case—things that accompany salvation. 10God is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown him as you have helped his people and continue to help them. 11We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, in order to make your hope sure. 12We do not want you to become lazy, but to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised. (Heb. 6:7-12)
Digest it and then let's talk about it.
_____________________________
“And now I will show you the most excellent way.” (1 Corinthians 12:30)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: JESUS PLUS SOMETHING ELSE? - 7/3/2010 11:08:58 AM
|
|
|
patricius79
Posts: 3420
Joined: 9/10/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
I think you're making a good point here. Let's look at it.
I emboldened the "choose to accept" part because, correct me if I'm wrong, essentially this is what the 'faith and works' argument hinges on .
Yes, this; and also upon the question of whether justification is a one time event, or something that begins with an event, and continues as a process until the end of one's life and judgment.
|
|
|
|
|
justification from our past - 7/4/2010 10:38:19 AM
|
|
|
Interplanner
Posts: 12
Joined: 6/28/2010
Status: offline
|
Justification is always to apply to our past (we don't justify ourselves in advance!). Even at death it is our comfort. Process wouldn't quite fit the description. Nor trying to figure out what time it happened. No matter where we are, we use it for our past.
Marcus
producer www.interplans.net
related title THE GOSPEL I NEVER KNEW
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
