Bill Parker is a friend of mine. I have heard lots and lots of his messages. He has published several books. I have eaten with him and talked with him in person back in May. He is not ignorant of the views of others.
Ignorance in understanding the imputation of Christ's righteousness to God's elect and Christ as the Lord our Righteousness is extremely dangerous.
For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. - Romans 10:3
How is God a Just God AND a Savior?
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by KenH, Nov 26, 2022.
Page 2 of 7
-
CEV
Christ never sinned! But God treated him as a sinner, so Christ could make us acceptable to God.
MOUNCE
He made him who knew no sin to be a sin-offering for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
NLT
For God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ.
TLV
He made the One who knew no sin to become a sin offering on our behalf, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God.
2Co 5:21 (NASB)
He made Him who knew no sin to be [fn]sin in our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
Footnote: Or Sin Offering.
Thus the basis of the false doctrine that Jesus was "sin" and also "just" is the majority choice of translators to perhaps unwittingly create an inconsistency in God's inspired text.
God sacrificed the just (His sinless lamb) for the unjust (all sinners) to satisfy His justness. So the answer to the question "How is God a just God and Savior" is simple, the cross of Christ. -
@Van I had previously told you that I would not be responding to you any further on this board. In my post #14 in this post I quoted you and responded. I apologize.
-
2 Corinthians 5:21 Jesus was our sin offering, the just for the unjust so we could become the righteousness of God in Him. -
But in the end of the day he is asking people to believe his view is the only one that glorifies Christ and presents God as just and the justifier of sinners. That is asking people to believe a lie.
I was giving him the benefit of the doubt. If you are correct, then the pastor is intentionally dishonest.
Maybe he isn't ignorant of other views. Maybe he knows his isn't the only one that glorifies Christ while presenting God as just and justifier. Maybe he is lying to the church so that they will depend on him rather than God. I don't know.
But I prefer to think better of people.
Romans 10:3 offers no support for your position. It also does not justify your pastor friend teaching his own understanding as if it was God's Word.
I've preached from the same ground on which your friend now stands. He needs to be more careful. -
I take personal umbrage at you calling him a liar.
I encourage you, as well as anyone else reading this post, to read this book(for free), entitled What is Salvation?:
SKU-000697434_TEXT.indd (b5z.net)
Also, this is a GREAT website:
Reign of Grace Ministries at Eager Avenue Grace Church in Albany, Georgia (rofgrace.com) -
And I don't doubt that Pastor Parker is a faithful preacher of the gospel of Christ.
My point is that faithful preachers of the gospel of Christ should not diminish one another's positions by claiming theirs is the only interpretation that glorifies Christ and preserves God as just and justifier. -
@KenH
Let me give you an example of what I mean.
I could be a preacher who holds Recapitulation as true (I'm not) and be faithful to the gospel of Christ. Now, Recapitulation highlights Christ as the "Last Adam". But if I were to say that Recapitulation is the ONLY understanding that views Christ as the "Last Adam" then I would have made a false statement.
There are two possibilities that could account for the error.
I could simply not understand other views (ignorance of how Ransom Theory, Christus Victor, Satisfaction, Penal Substitution Theory, etc. view Christ as "the Last Adam"). Were this the case then I may be an honest teacher, just ignorant in that I lack in understanding other views.
OR, I could understand the other views and that they also present Christ as the "Last Adam" yet choose to lie to the congregation. Maybe this is so that they would not stray from my understanding (what I believe is the correct view). If I keep them ignorant of other views then they are more likely to hold what I believe is true. Then I may be a pastor with good intentions, but I would also be dishonest and leaning on my own understanding by forcing it upon others without their knowledge.
A good Pastor would teach Scripture, explain other interpretations, offer tge reason he believes his correct, and let God's Word stand. -
RipponRedeaux Well-Known Member
-
@JonC It is clear that we disagree about the gospel of Christ and the necessity of believing the one true gospel of Christ. Let's just leave it at that and disengage from each other in this thread. I am not ecumenical. Okay? I don't go along with the idea that some apparently have that "Well, as long as you believe certain historical facts about Jesus, or well, just as long as you love Jesus, nothing else really matters."
-
Here is where we now stand:
I have not disagreed with your position of imputation (I have not said either way, other than pointing to Isaiah 61:10...and I susoect we agree there)..
Where we disagree is if it is appropriate for a pastor to mislead a congregation (regardless of intent) into believing the pastor's interpretation of Scripture is the only interpretation that addresses the issues in question. I believe it is wrong (it is lening on one's own understanding).
You present the pastors understanding of imputation as the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Regardless of the validity of that pastors interpretation, if it is taken as the gospel of Christ then it is "another gospel".
There is only one true gospel. What you need to do is provide a passage that teaches one must agree with your pastors interpretation of imputation in order to be saved. Prove all of those Christians who hold different interpretations are lost.
There is only one gospel. This gospel is held by Calvinists, non-Calvinists, Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, Catholics, Lutherans....by ANY person who is a child of God.
They may disagree in understandings, but these are disagreements in understanding the same gospel that was the power of their salvation. -
He is telling us that his pastors understanding on imputation IS the gospel of Jesus Christ.
I'm not saying his view of imputed righteousness is wrong. I am, however, saying that it is not the gospel itself.
Christians, even we'll meaning ones, often overstate their position. I pray this is what Padtor Parker and Ken have done. But I don't know that. Both could hold to "another gospel". Both could lean on their understanding of imputed righteousness as the gospel itself. -
Looking to man fulfill conditions of various kinds is a false gospel.
Looking to man to have some part in creating his own righteousness is a false gospel.
Saying that man does not have to have a perfect righteousness to stand before a perfectly holy God is another gospel.
There is no salvation in a false gospel.
There is no other way for a man to have his sin debt paid except for his sins to have been imputed to Christ and Christ to have paid his sin debt.
There is no other way for a man to have a perfect righteousness except to have Christ's righteousness imputed to him.
This all very clear to those whose eyes and ears have been opened by God in His power:
For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
(emphasis mine) -
“What do I need to cure me of the deadly disease of sin? I need a glorious person who is able to work out a perfect righteousness so that I can stand before God, the righteous Judge, and be whole. Well, who is it? That’s Christ. And His righteousness came out of His obedience unto death. And so we wear His cloak, so to speak, symbolically, meaning His righteousness is imputed to us.” - Bill Parker, pastor of Eager Avenue Grace Church in Albany, Georgia
-
"Do You Really Want to Know the Gospel?" - by Henry Mahan
Audio of Sermon - SermonAudio - Media Player
Text of Sermon - (Microsoft Word - 2006.01.25.A Do You Really Want to Know the Gospel - Henr\205) (sermonaudio.com) -
To be clear - so that I understand your position - and no foul regarding your answer (I am asking you....nobody else....and you will not be penalized for your answer).
I believe the gospel of Jesus Christ as recorded as the gospel itself (the gospel, literally, is Christ).
But what you are talking about is doctrines about the gospel.
A man may believe the boat will save him if he gets in. Your argument is the man must get in, but also understand physics as it reates to buoyancy, the construction process of the boat, etc.
I believe that the Father made His Son - who knew no sin - sin for us that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.
But I believe your doctrine - NOT the passage - is false.
So in your mind I believe "another gospel" because I reject your understanding of that passage.
To you, does that mean I am not saved or does that mean that there are many gospels of Jesus Christ that is the power of salvation? -
Alan Gross Well-Known Member
Righteousness and Peace have kissed each other." Psalm 85:10 -
Alan Gross Well-Known Member
6 "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you
into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 "Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you,
and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 "But though we, or an angel from heaven,
preach any other gospel unto you
then that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 "As we said before, so say I now again,
If any man preach any other gospel unto you
than that ye have received, let him be accursed." -
Alan Gross Well-Known Member
by thinking they have a home in Heaven and, "All is Well with Their soul". -
I was saved believing a general free will presentation of the gospel. I came to reject that free will presentation, but it was still the same gospel that saved me.
Many here are like that. Several on this board have testified of being saved in Arminian churches only to become a Calvinist later in their Christian walk. Others were saved in Reformed churches and abandoned Reformed doctrine later in life.
To say that one's understanding of the effects of the gospel is the gospel itself is to teach "another gospel".
@KenH suggests that anybody who rejects Pastor Parkers understanding of imputation is lost (they believe "another gospel"). That is simply a false teaching.
And that is probably why God commanded us not to make such judgments of other Christians.
People can hold incorrect beliefs about the gospel by which they were saved. If this were not true then spiritual growth and learning them rough studying God's Word is a myth.
Page 2 of 7