Featured Our Undergirding

You state an opinion that you can't back up with Scripture, and then call my position, which is scriptural, shameful. Now that is shameful isn't it?

Faith, in the Bible, is described as a spiritual gift (now ceased), and as a fruit of the Spirit. Either way it is something for believers. Show me from scriptures where God gives spiritual gifts or spiritual fruit to unbelievers. That position is absurd.

No one denies that Christ is the Author and Finisher of our "Faith." You have erected a straw man. You are inadvertently defining faith as a "work," but it is not a work, and never was a work.

We are saved by grace through faith and not of ourselves. It is the gift of God not of works.
Salvation is the gift of God.
We are saved "through faith." It is our faith by which we are saved. God's faith does not save us. We need to believe God. We need to put faith in His promises. God does not believe for us. He does not come with his big hypodermic needle and inject faith into us that we might believe. That is Calvinistic nonsense--Calvinistic fairy tales.

The Bible testifies of Abraham.
"He staggered not at the promises of God through unbelief but was strong in faith, being fully persuaded that what he had promised he was fully able to perform."
--That is a definition of faith--it is confidence: "being fully persuaded that what one has promised he will do." In the Biblical realm that promise comes from God.

Faith is innate. The faith to believe the gospel comes from hearing the gospel (Romans 10:17).

 

An excellent post on the subject of faith, that comes by hearing the Word of God. Hebrews 11:1 is one of the best descriptions in the Bible. You are a better person than me, being able to answer in a civil tone such posts as the garbage you were responding to.

 

DHK

Every saved person was an unsaved person at one point in time.When God grants them repentance and faith they become saved persons having been given those gifts by God.So yes ...God gives His Spirit and gifts to unsaved persons....only they no longer remain unsaved.

People who know what the bible actually says....know that man is NEVER said to be saved...BECAUSE of faith...it is only and always ...by or through faith......everytime.

Those described as reformed are as biblical or more so than you DHK.IN fact as they understand this truth...it would seem clear they are even more biblical on this.

As every reformed catechism and confession state in the first chapter.To make as if you believe the bible but reformed do not is very dishonest.

 

Jesus said that NOTHING goes proceeds out from the heart of man, our inner selves, and Jeremiah, isaiah, paul et all agreed with Him!

we do not have inherit faith within us to believe in jesus, as we cannot respond to his offer to turn to him and be saved until/unless the Lord Himself grants us the heart to do such!

 

"When God grants them repentance..." Go find out what the means. The Bible does not contradict itself. When you find a passage of Scripture that seemingly contradicts the other 99% of the Bible, then you know your interpretation is wrong. Are you ready to hang all your theology on just one verse of Scripture? Really, is that the best you can do?
I can give you scores of verse where the command is "to believe" "have faith," "Trust," etc. God does not give God's faith so that I put God's faith in Christ to be saved with his own faith. Ludicrous!! That is a wild theology.
I must turn to him.
I must seek him.
I must believe him.

God does not give His gifts to the unsaved. Never!
What are the characteristics of unsaved:
Galatians 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

But the characteristics of the saved are:
Galatians 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
--Faith, as well as love, joy, peace, etc are not characteristic of the unsaved person. God does not give the fruit of the Spirit to the unsaved. You are wrong. You do err not knowing the truth.
All the commandments and promises of God in the Bible are written in vain if the above statements are not true.

That is what I said isn't it? I quoted and expounded for you Eph.2:8,9, or didn't you notice?
However, people who know their Bible, know that a man is justified by faith.
Romans 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:
We are not justified by "God's faith."
We are justified by OUR faith. Go back and read the previous chapter about justification and Abraham's faith. It was the faith of Abraham that was being discussed. It was because of his faith in Jehovah that he was justified.
Ye do err not knowing the Scriptures.

Those described as Reformed often don't know their Bibles as well as you think they do, and often take unbiblical positions. Your personal attacks are unwarranted.

Let me repeat:
Those described as Reformed (and their catechisms and confessions, etc.) often don't know their Bibles as well as you think they do, and often take unbiblical positions. Your personal attacks are unwarranted.

 

actually, we are fully justified by the death of jesus on the Cross as a propiation for all our sins, and faith is the means to acess/get that Grace that saves!

 

You have contradicted yourself and you have contradicted Christ.
What did Jesus say:

Mark 7:21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,
22 Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness:
23 All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.
--This is what comes out of the heart of man.
Who put it there? God? When a man has the confidence to murder another, puts his faith and confidence in himself to devise a plan to murder another, then does that "faith" come from God?
Faith always has an object. In the above example the object of the faith is the man himself--his own vile wickedness and ability to kill. But the faith is still his. It is the object of the faith that is important.

Where does faith come from?
Faith "to believe in Christ" comes from "hearing and hearing from the Word of God" (Romans 10:17). God does not directly give faith to any person. That is not found in the Bible. A person will put his confidence in the message of the Bible because he hears it, understands it, is convicted that it is true, and therefore will act on it. If he rejects it, he will face eternal consequences.
The choice is his to make. God does not force salvation on any person.

God did not force the first person to murder. He chose deliberately to plan from the intent of his evil heart to kill. He put faith in himself that he could carry out this wicked deed.

God does not force the second person to put his faith in Christ. He must make that choice. God does not force individuals. The world is like it is today because of sin.

 

DHK

.

here you go again.... I know what it means DHK...It means just what it says here in ACTS...God granted the Spirit, repentance and faith as a gift to the gentiles as well as the Jews......God did it.

16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.

17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?

18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

What I posted to you is true and accurate .You constantly attack anything reformed as other than biblical.This is a mistake.





I can give you scores of verse where the command is "to believe" "have faith," "Trust," etc. God does not give God's faith so that I put God's faith in Christ to be saved with his own faith. Ludicrous!! That is a wild theology.
I must turn to him.
I must seek him.
I must believe him.

Everytime....Listing the fruit of the flesh and the fruit of the Spirit only proves my point DHK......God gives the Spirit at regeneration than the gifts of the Spirit can be execised by the person.
.

Correct...that is why God draws and regenerates by His Spirit.

Looks as if it is you attacking again DHK...only it is you who are dead wrong.

No...your misunderstanding does not make void God's word or promise.

No....it is not .The Pastors I know, teach and expound from the greek text and it is not as you claim my friend......NEVER in the word of God does it say because of faith.....it is always by or through faith.I would make it available to you but you reject those who know it,as Van rejects Archangels correction:thumbs:

Yes good verse.....by faith...just as I posted to you each time...NOT Because of faith as if man had it on His own.

No one said that....we say faith is part of the gift...it is an instrument used by the saved sinner.

Yes once given we exercise it.That we do this does not indicate where it came from.

This is your words and yet another attack...the reality is..you do err not knowing the greek text of the Holy Scriptures ...on this ,or the carnal christian heresy.

Anyone of those I quote would shred your ideas in a heartbeat.For you to insult them and attack them is not right.Everytime one of us shreds your ideas...you say we err or are unbiblical...you do this all the time.

You tried to pull this on Herald a few weeks ago and he called you on it.

.
They only come in response to your posts as a correction.
DHK,

What you are speaking of here as "your personal attacks" are very simply a response to your wrong posts in which you imply that if a person is identified as reformed ...he is not scriptural, or biblical.That is a horrible attack against all manner of brothers and sisters in Christ.

 

Let's consider for a minute your "personal attacks."
Consider that about half of the posters here, and possibly quite a bit more (including theologians like John MacArthur who so many here like to quote) are dispensational in their theology.
What have you to say about "my dispensationalism, Icon?
Even when I don't bring dispensations into the subject you still attack it.
Why?
Why the attack on more than half of the posters on this board, a continual barrage of "heresy" against those that are your brothers and sisters.

 

God did NOT cause us to be sinners, Adam did!

We are all bent on walking in the darkness, away from God.

We are enemies of His, at war against following and obeying Him, as our fallen natures want no God, but to have ourselves "calling our own shots!"

My point was that from such a cesspool as we are are, there is not inherit faith to seek and receive the Lord, for we MUST have Him first choose us, and enable us to than be willing and able to choose Him!

 

hey, I get the best "attacks" of both worlds, as a Dispy who also holds to a calvinistic Sotierology viewpoint!

 

You are probably not the only Calvinist that is dispensational. I think there are quite a few that hold that view.

 

DHK

Mostly because they have never heard the other views which never get taught.

Because it is your main hermeneutic and does damage to most every major teaching .
You deny Jesus is King now, You deny The new covenant is for Christians now.You deny the kingdom now. You deny parts of the scripture are for gentiles.

Going after a doctrinal position is "not an attack" on half the posters here.
if you want to see that look at your posts as you claim if we do not believe what you do, we do not believe scripture.
You make it personal.when we answer then you get uncomfortable

The more historic view of the church is not heresy.

 

So John MacArthur and others like him are ignorant and have no idea what others like you believe. He just blindly believes dispensationalism because he is ignorant of all other views.
The same is true of all the dispensational posters on this board, even though we read posters' views like yours (ad infinitum), and you still think we are ignorant of your view? You still think "we have never had a chance to 'get taught.'" Unbelievable!!

Dispensationalism is not "my main hermeneutic."
It is one of the doctrines that you despise. But I don't base all doctrines on that one doctrine. What would make you think that?
There are far more important doctrines than that: the deity of Christ; the inspiration of Scriptures, the atonement of Christ, etc. Dispensations is quite away down my list of doctrines.

These are absurd false accusations. Jesus is Lord of lords and King of kings and always will be. But we don't live in His kingdom right now. That much is evident.

I deny preterism. It is a false theology. I am not amill or postmill. Certainly I deny those also as false theologies. Why wouldn't I?

That depends on the way you go after that doctrine. If you make it personal, as you have in the past, then you imply all who believe that way are not believers.

You allegorize scripture to the extent that scripture is no longer scripture any more. What do you say about that?

The same holds true for you and even more so.
You made two very personal accusations, and then denied that you made them.

You may not consider it heresy. It may be your opinion. But it is not biblical. It doesn't match up with the totality of Scripture. You must consider that.

 

DHK

I am glad you brought this up.I added to my last post, but the edit did not take due to losing the connection. I had added that if a person studies each view and that person holds and defends the premill that is fine.
At least they looked and considered these things.

JohnM.....is well respected by most everyone in reformed circles as a brother and a solid teacher. Most do not understand his stance on endtimes,and openly challenge him on it.
I personally enjoy his ministry and have for years.i have learned much from Him and still do. The only area I would challenge him on is endtimes....not so much on what he believes...I know his view ...but his responses to Michael Horton, and Ken Gentry,
John M preached a message on the key is how you view Israel....this is the issue DHK.....I would press him on this.....I am still learning on this so it would not be easy...as he is much more of a gifted person all around...nevertheless I think I could approach him on this....

If he signs up on BB...i would come at him the same way,and take my lumps if need be....

I have more spare time than most DHK...i am in the middle of california sitting in a truckstop in Santa Nella...i cannot legally drive the truck until tommorow...so I have a commentary on hebrews with me ,and my laptop...I just witnessed to the waitress, and now turn my attention this way...so I post{ad infinitum} as you say.

Most posters on BB ...as you said yesterday....do not read long posts or links. that is why they hold that view. Most who are premill cannot give the other views ...they just accept what they are told.


I did not say John m. does not know the other views.....but you say that to try and sway the discussion in your favor.

It is not "my view" but another held by many throughout time. And yes...many just do not bother to look into it...that to me is unbelievable.

It seems to me it is half...the other is the "inner fundamentalist in you that is right there lurking,,,just under the surface...but it is ready to spring out.

I held it at one time...I think it is very harmful however. I do speak against it now...

Good question DHK. I held the view myself, so when I see it expressed It jumps out at me.For you or anyone else to hold the view...you must strive to maintain a consistency to your hermenutic.

When I or anyone else says or presents another view...it triggers an automatic response of...spiritualizing, or allergorizing the scripture.

Correct DHK...and as i said we agree on those much of the time...i have never questioned you or your stance there.

We only agree in part here....

So then...it should not be a surprise if we clash on this then, correct???

.

With any truth there are believers and unbelievers who make claim to it.No blanket statement can be made on it either way.

I understand why you say this...but I do not think it is accurate, or I would not do this.I suggested this was your reaction and view a bit earlier in this very post.

Now this is better than accusing me of being Origen! What i say about it is this;

When i or someone else says Jesus is the New Exodus....for example...

I am aware that scripture does not say this exact statement.It would be up to me to demonstrate why I would teach such a thing, or post such a statement.
It is now up to me to examine;
1] what were some of the events of the first Exodus?

2] is the language of the first exodus found in the Nt in regards to Jesus person and work?

3] I need to put the teaching together and look at it critically

4] If it cannot stand examination it might need to be rejected

5] For this view to be seen as scriptural.....some degree of type, symbol, and allegory would need to be demonstrated.....I believe I can show this very thing. In fact if someone does not believe this...I think they are in error...or defective in their understanding.

6] because someone looks at scripture that employs symbols and seeks to understand those symbols....does not mean they reject scripture.It is demanded by scripture itself...

I can demonstrate this...but that would be another thread.

[/QUOTE]

I welcome any scriptural correction DHK...I might not like when I need to be corrected, but I invite it none the less.

 

S/N regared the above post of mine, as he so ineloquently put it; garbage.

So S/N, if the above is so wrong then you must not believe that God gives faith and repentance. The Lord never gave you faith and repentance is your view? If what I said is garbage in your esteemed opinion then it follows that you do not think God gives faith and repentance.

 

I know several graduates from his school and they know almost nothing about different views. They have told me that he teaches "the truth" which is one point of view. Because he believes he has the truth he does not teach anything that opposes his point of view.

Some of my friends have asked me how I would deal with views present in their congregation that they were not taught about in school.

 

I like John M. He teaches a very consistent Dispensational premillenial view.When they say he teaches the truth that is what they mean.
In any premill church I have been in....They teach that all other views are error but never really teach the other views.
Maybe somewhere there is some churches that are not afraid to look at what has been believed in the church in History.Pastors are expected by the people to know what they are teaching about, so some fear saying....I am not certain about which view is the most biblical, so they pick the most popular and say....This is truth :wavey:

 

That is a problem in the church. People who read know that even good scholars disagree. Educated people know that nobody has all the answers. When I taught on Genesis someone in the congregation spoke to me about when the rains came and he felt that the length of a day changed due to the conservation of momentum. When the rain fell from the sky it would have added mass to surface of the earth. If the water rotated with the earth then the radius of the water would have changed and so a day would have changed. So if one follows that argumentation then what would he say about the length of a day? Genesis defines a day. Science defines a day differently. If one goes by what scripture says is a day, then each day would be different by a few minutes. So which is the truth? Is a day exactly 24 hours or 24 hours + or - a few minutes. Applying the scientific standard to what Genesis teaches as a day (from light to light) as we approach the shortest day of the year would be shorter by a few minutes. So what is the truth of a day?

 

think thre main problem in all of this is when we try to say it is hersy to have differing views on eschatology, as the Church NEVER said that one particular view was true, but HAS stated that hyper pretieriem is, as that view states no physical/l;iteral second coming!

And many Dispy would see it as the Kingdom here in the sense of being in and here thru the Church, but NOT the fullness over all the earth and jesusreigning directly over all, that comes at His second advent!