The New Birth

While I agree with your premise, I would add that many of the things you listed, while not being a 'requirement' of salvation, are in fact results, or 'fruit' of salvation and the new birth. Doing good, a love for God's word, a love for the brethren etc., are all listed in scripture as things that we can expect from one who has been "born from above". Certainly the need for repentance, precludes the possibility of the exclusion of some of these things.

 

golfjack, welcome to the Baptist Board. I gather from your name that you occasionally strike a little white ball with relish and sometimes anger. Such a passion ensures that we will remain perpetually humbled.

You make some good points, and havensdad has added some more.

 

Uh, oh -- Ken Hagin? I can see why you had trouble with that.

Word Faith theology is not biblical. We do not create with our words and we are not supposed to be healthy and rich through faith.

 

>And millions will die and be lost without the New Birth because they have been misled concerning the experience of being born again

Zero chance of that because "born again" is the equivalent of regeneration. As the preceding verse teaches, one has no control over one's regeneration:

John 3:8 The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit."

Born of the Spirit = born again else the passage doesn't compute.

 

Without reservation, I will state that Kenneth Hagin is a heretic, and has led tens of thousands of people astray with his word faith garbage. I am not trying to knock you or attack you: only speaking the truth.

 

Scripture for this?

 

golfjack, you were doing fine until post #4. I join with webdog in asking for scripture for your position on the soul and the spirit.

And your reference to Kenneth Hagin set off all sorts of alarm bells. I fear that this thread may veer off into a debate over his heresies. I will try to avoid that, except to say only that Hagin, who did not believe in sickness and disease, is dead, disproving his belief that humans are an incarnation of God just like Jesus.

 

This verse does not mean we can speak things into existence; nor does it mean that faith is a force that can bring health and wealth. Many believers suffer disease and persecution, and it's not because of a lack of faith.

Heb. 4.12 us using parallelism. The bible in more cases than not, uses soul and spirit interchangeably. Sometimes "soul" just means "life."

The bottom line is that we are material and immaterial; whether there is just soul/spirit or soul and spirit is irrelevant. When we are saved, we are totally saved. We are saved now spiritually and later our bodies are redeemed in the resurrection.

 

What do you mean by "recreated"?

Like Marcia said, we are saved completely when we are born again.

 

It might not seem like this is a tangent worth getting off on, but we are talking about the new birth and what it is all about.

You Word of faithers (as you called yourself) seem to be making God into a Jeanie in a bottle that we receive as a reward for being born again. The focus is on the "doing all things" at the expense of through Christ. One can can choose to do all things through Christ, with his strength or do them merely on ones own. For example I can start a Church by following a good plan, but apart from Christ it will be in vain.

Although it seems to contradict scripture, I cannot do all things through Christ. An outrageous example, would be to say one can start a Christian porn shop since I can do all things. Another misuse would be to say that all sickness can be healed here and now. This sadly is what is happening.

 

Horrible hermeneutics. One word: context.

Tell me, do you read electronic instructions the same way you do your Bible?

Man gets ready to use his computer, to copy a music CD for the first time. Man looks at instructions. It says "Rip CD..." Aha, he says, grabbing the CD, and attempting to rip it in half. Realizing he does not have the strength, he goes to his workshop, places the CD in a vice, and rips the CD in half, using a large pair of pliers. Running back inside, He glances back down at the instructions: "Rip CD, by placing CD in drive, and clicking "RIP" on the Windows Media player window".


OOPS.

Tell me, why didn't Paul heal Timothy's stomach? Why didn't God remove Paul's "thorn in the flesh"?

In regards to "I can do all things"... let's look at the context.

Php 4:11 Not that I am speaking of being in need, for I have learned in whatever situation I am to be content.
Php 4:12 I know how to be brought low, and I know how to abound. In any and every circumstance, I have learned the secret of facing plenty and hunger, abundance and need.
Php 4:13 I can do all things through him who strengthens me.

Paul (who was rotting away in a prison cell), is speaking of ENDURING suffering, and ENDURING abundance. This precludes that this "anything" applies to things like starting businesses or other paltry endeavors, but specifically references persevering through trials through Christ.

You cannot apply this to "getting money". Paul says he can "be hungry" and "brought low", through Christ, who strengthens him.

Not exactly "Word Faith" garbage.

BTW: if you don't want to discuss devilish heretics like Hagin, don't promote his silly, unbiblical ideas here. Most of the people here are well educated, God fearing people, who know better.

When you reference unbiblical "Word Faith" teachers, who espouse silliness like rolling on the floor acting drunk, mysticism, etc., you lose all right to make such a statement.

 

Lazarus and the rich man is not a parable as you say. The reason why is, Lazarus.s name was used. All the other parables do not use a name, instead JESUS starts off with a story that is parallel to somethine or someone, but a name of someone is never used.
#2. God put everything into it's own nature. as a dog is put in it's own nature, horse the same way on down to the last thing. A dog barks chases other things and ect. a horse, cow chicken and all does things that is in their nature. Chickens cackle, lay eggs, it can't bark like a dog and can't do what different things that GOD created. GOD put man into it's/his own nature and does all the things that a man in nature does. ONLY after GOD changes the man's heart can a man follow after the things of the regenerated heart. Only then will he try to follow the will of GOD. Nature=spirit,Nature= spirit, Nature= spirit. Man can not change his own nature.

 

Golfjack, if you are willing to discuss why Word Faith is problematic and unbiblical, then please do so. But if you want to convince us of Word Faith or argue it because you are totally convinced of it, you're in for a disappointment.

I've been studying WF for years and have listened to many WF teachers. They twist scripture out of context. They teach a gnostic type spirituality with "hidden" spiritual laws. Some of them say we are "little gods." Some teach that Jesus had to fight Satan in hell to pay for our sins instead of the atonement being completed on the cross.

No credible theologian or reputed Christian that I know of has endorsed or condoned the WF teachings. They are considered heretical.

I am hoping that your presence here indicates a willingness to hear other views rather than wanting to persuade us to yours.

 

I suspect, "Don't quote the facts to me. I already know what I want to believe."

Oh my!

Cheers,

Jim

 

???

I have not threatened you at all. And what do you mean "People like me?" Do you mean people that actually study their Bible, instead of just believing everything that I see on TBN?

You know, my friend, I suggest you look afresh at the scriptures, in a good, readable version, with no Study Guides or commentaries. There is NOTHING Biblical about the Word of Faith movement.

I suggest you start in Jude, or 2 Peter (paying special attention to Chapter 2)...

 

Brother Jack, there's a name for posters who post such as this. They are called "trolls." You're welcome to defend your views and rebut the views of others. This post does neither.

BTW, it's threaten, not threatin, and rhetoric, not reherteric.