Featured One Must Hold to the Physical bodily resurrection to be saved?

It is...when they themselves call themselves by those titles, lol.

And the question is...are they following Christ. If so, then they are Christians.

The focus is whether one can be a Christian and not be born again or not. You say they can be, Scripture denies that.

The same way I know what you think...they tell me, just as you have revealed your heart.

Whereas I find most people do very little thinking, but instead have the "faith" they profess spoon fed to them by those in authority over them.

That is why we have so many people involved in cults, and so many people who say they belong to one group or another yet their doctrine is totally incompatible with that group.

Like you: you say you are a baptist yet you teach doctrines held by cults and those derived from Jewish Tradition.

I have asked you numerous times exactly what type of Baptist you are, and you will not even be honest about that.

The reason? Most likely because even if you do attend a Baptist Church, you know your doctrine is incompatible with what that group teaches.

Most of them.

Just about every fellowship I have ever been a member of has always erroneously taught Hebrews 10:25 out of context, and that it is speaking about going to Church. In the fellowship I am a member in now it is often said, "If you go to Church on Sunday, you love the church, if you go on Sunday night, you love the Pastor, and if you go on Wednesday...you love the Lord."

It is a typical Pulpit Bred mentality that derives from both the teaching of most churches as well as the perception of the average pew warmer, lol.

Nothing Biblical about it at all.

The idea that if one regularly attends "church" they must be saved is a religious concept which can be found in just about every denomination you can think of.

Why do you think I address your posts?

I certainly don't want people to come to this forum, read the heresy and Liberal Philosophy you endorse...

...and think that is representative of what Baptists teach and believe.

There is already enough error to be had without people thinking that Abortion and Annihilation are acceptable doctrinal positions.

In this thread it grows worse because now you are speaking about Salvation in Christ and presenting the very position that one can be saved...and not born again.


Continued...

 

Do I need "spiritual ears?"

Was it really difficult for Adam to understand "Do not eat of that tree?"

Scripture is not a secret spy book one needs the magic decoder ring for, it is the revelation of God to man, and given so...

...man can understand it.

So what part of...


John 3
King James Version (KJV)


3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.


...do you not understand?

I have told you, I will be glad to help you understand it.


Continued...

 

I agree, but...only those who are born again have the capacity to follow the teachings of Christ in faith.

Muslims have "learned about God."

They trust the god they have learned about.

They regularly make an oath of allegiance of faithfulness to Allah.

They submit to the teachings of Muhammad.

But they are not born again.

The foundational principle of faith in God is not relevant to an Age in which the Gospel of Jesus Christ is being revealed. While I do believe those who are sincere in their obedience to the internal witness of God and the testimony of Creation stand a good chance when they are judged, that does not change the fact that I also believe that the Comforter gives every man and woman the opportunity to come to Christ and be born again.

Muslims seek to force the world to submit to the teachings of Muhammad, whereas Christians understand that every man and woman must respond to God and the Gospel directly. There is no middle man among men as there is with all other religions.

A man who has not submitted is rejecting Christ, that is what he is doing.

So it is false to suggest they are "following Christ."

Don't tell me that, tell the Charismatics, Protestants, Conservatives, and Evangelicals that you say they need to stop calling themselves by those titles.

If you view direct response with Scriptural presentation and support deflection, what do you call actual deflection?

Again, I know. And again, that is why we are still having this discussion.

You have not provided the first Scripture for Annihilation, life after physical delivery, being a Christian without being born again, or, that Abortion is an acceptable Christian position.

Furthermore, you have not addressed the Scripture provided you that shows such positions to be Liberal Philosophy.


Continued...

 

Then my suggestion is that you spend a little more time with Him in His Word.

He'll speak to those who sincerely want to understand His will for our lives. That is the very reason He gave us the Word.

And I praise God for that.

Its not "accusation" if its true, Happy.

You deny the humanity of Christ?

Well, another heresy to add to the collection...

I have been very clear in distinguishing between the spirit of man which pertains to the life w receive when we are conceived...and the Life we receive when we are Regenerated through the indwelling of God.

And yes, an "incomplete formed fetus" has life, though they do not have Life.

And when the child in the womb dies, or is murdered in Abortion, they fall under the grace of a God Who did not impose eternal separation on Old Testament Saints who also died not receiving regeneration and the eternal indwelling of God.

That's why they went to Hades, Happy.

Show what is carnal.

That's all you have to do, Happy.

Not sure how the simple fact that a man must be born again is ignorance, but then, I don't make it a habit of trying to understand Liberal Philosophy, just addressing it.

Oh, so you use to have a sound doctrinal position that could be verified by the very Word of God?

What happened?


Continued...

 

You say, ahem, that you...figured that out?

Then explain why you advocate for the murder of the unborn and deny the necessity of the new birth?

Just doesn't quite add up, Happy.

You should, with all of what you have been told and with all of the Scriptures provided to show you what Regeneration means, and when it began.

The Baptism with the Holy Ghost is taught as empowerment by most, and that is error.

Its okay, take your time, try to get them together. Though in the future you don't have to share that with the public.




Continued...

 

Ah, you're catching on...

Agreed. That is kind of the point.

I am not a Charismatic, I am a Baptist.

So no babbling here...

Then perhaps it should be them witnessing to you, rather than myself.

So I guess you also think "Genuine Leather" is inspired as well?

Just what Scripture teaches it means. The disciples of Christ, following Pentecost, are seen to become Apostles, which is not a term applied to them when they went out to preach the "Kingdom of Heaven/God" during Christ's Ministry. They were empowered by the Spirit of God to go out and preach, and they preached according to the revelation that was being revealed in that Age, the Age of Law.

But, when, after "not many days" from the time of Christ's teaching in Acts 1:4-5, they received the Spirit of God in the Eternal Indwelling Ministry that began at Pentecost, they were sent to preach, not the Gospel of the Kingdom, but the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

The distinction can be seen in that Christ states twice He had come to Israel only, and the Kingdom Prophesied, which we know as the Millennial Kingdom, is the Kingdom they preached about, and is prominent in most of Christ's Parables (and that does not deny an application of His teaching to this Age).

Old Testament Saints were not "Christians," as they did not understand what Messiah would come to do. All who place their faith in Christ from Pentecost forward are Christians. They are, at salvation, indwelt eternally by God, and this is the primary reason for Regeneration.

Adam died, and all his descendants are conceived in that state. We are born again spiritually, receiving the Life lost in Adam through his sin.

Not my job. But what I also do not do is assume that everyone in a Sunday School classroom is a born again Christian.

Again, not my job. I seek only to correct doctrinal issues with those God places in my path.

Or sights, however you want to look at it...

That you have shown to be false, because you teach that which He denies.


John 3
King James Version (KJV)

3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.


God bless.

 

Duh - that is what I just said.

I didn't say that, so your point is moot.

I said it is provided, it is for everyone, it is their salvation, IF one accepts it!

reality - another irrelevant word.
And I already addressed gifts are provided, and one must accept it, claim it, to benefit from it.

That is a lie!

That is a lie!

I didn't say SAVED. Pay attention! I said SALVATION is provided for all, it is THEIRS to have. < that is not SAVED! I was clear it is their Salvation to have, and they must accept it to BECOME savED!

Uh ya you do. Once received it is KEPT forever.

Nonsense!

Salvation IS provided for all.

The caveat IS.......IF you accept Christ, you ARE accepting Salvation provided for you
and ~ you WILL be savED.

The caveat IS.......IF you reject Christ , you ARE rejecting Salvation provided for you
and ~ you WILL not be savED.

No, that is where you completely fail in understanding.

Again, you divert to name calling when you lack understanding, as if that justifies your lack of understanding. A long standing liberal tactic. Congrats ~

LOL ~

So Salvation was provided for you ~ and according to you "men do not "claim Salvation" ~

So what happened for YOU, who did not claim your Salvation - did mommy force you to become saved?
Did God force you to become saved?

LOL ~

 

You are being very deceitful, Darrell, and that is necessary because you do not want to accept what you are being told.

 

No, I am not "catching on" to what I already know.

Not if your comments could just stay on point.

Disagree.

Ignorant. And nothing what I said.

Understanding comes from God to the individual.

Huh ~ you ASSUME 5 ~ 10 yr olds are born again Christians? wow!

Lie. And AGAIN, you provide NOT MY WORDS to your false claims.

 

Since you are so enamored with "titles / name tags"...

is a "Christian" a "saint" ?

 

hummm....

I have never called myself a Liberal.
I have never called myself an advocate of philosophy.
I have never called myself an advocate of abortion.
I have never called myself a denier of the truth of scripture.

However, in CONTRAST to what you just said, you do not hesitate to call people what they do not call themselves.

I will CLARIFY what "I" have said;

A person FOLLOWING the teachings of Christ, HAVING FAITH, BELIEVE what they are LEARNING, ARE being ENLIGHTENED by the Word of God, can and do call themselves a Christian.

A person FOLLOWING the teachings of Christ, HAVING FAITH, BELIEVE what they are LEARNING, ARE being ENLIGHTENED by the Word of God, AND "ACCEPT" Christ Jesus as their Lord and Savior, AND ACCEPT "their" Salvation from the Lord, can and do call themselves BORN AGAIN Christians.

IF YOU, want to EXCLUDE children, men, woman from your "EXCLUSIVE" TITLE of Christian, because they are FOLLOWING SCRIPTURE and FIRST LEARNING ABOUT GOD BEFORE they commit an oath to the Lord, that is YOUR BUSINESS. I don't.

AND FYI ~ such a person NOT SAVED, IS being enlightened, by the Spirit of God, during the time they are following what Scripture teaches, to FIRST LEARN ABOUT GOD, BEFORE submitting unto the Lord!

Funny - because you babble on about nonsense, liberalism, philosophies, etc., that has nothing to do with what is in my heart.

I've noticed. I say something, you disagree, then repeat what I said in your words and call me some ignorant name. OR you say something, I DID NOT SAY, and proceed as if YOUR WORDS are mine, when they ARE NOT.

I've noticed. I can imagine YOUR CHURCH, a supposedly Christian Church, that DIVIDES with "name tags", "IF one has come to follow Christ's teachings, CAN NOT CALL themselves a CHRISTIAN, "until" they have "SUBMITTED" to the Lord. Eweee, must be frustrating for you to sit in YOUR Church among such aliens who are there to follow and learn ABOUT Christ, BEFORE they submit.

You make accusations, as if, that justifies YOUR CULT. You are more concerned with titles and name calling than the TRUTH!

You seem to ignore "Saints" are not exclusive to the OT.
Believing and Trusting the Word of God, is not a new phenomenon.
Believing and Trusting there is a Messiah, is not a new phenomenon.
Believing and Trusting the Word of God, has a NAME, and TITLE, and APPEARED to mankind IS a revelation that some accept and some do not.

You would rather carry on and on about silly nonsense.

Does your Pastor greet the people coming into YOUR Church and label them saved or unsaved so "your Christians" are not mingling and influenced by "your NON-Christians"?

Another deceitful tactic! Challenging HONESTY, has to do with challenging something that "IS" said.

Yes you have asked. No I have NOT answered you. That is NOT being DISHONEST, it is ignoring your question!

The reason? You do not know. However per your M/O, in much of what you say, you make "guesses", and carry on "as if" it is a fact.

Thanks for sharing the layman's understanding of the mission statement of the Churches you have held membership in....

I can only wonder, why you committed yourself to the membership, when you now announce your disagreement with what they teach.

Why? Because you like to tell people what they think. And if what they think is similar to your thinking, they should be expressing their thoughts, in YOUR words. And because you like to LABEL people according to what YOU determine, whether or not "they themselves" have announced such a LABEL for themselves.

And why don't you make a plain tidy list of my supposed "heresy" and supposed "Liberal Philosophy" that I "supposedly" endorse?

No need to give a list regarding that....you already have...

Add that to your list of heresy and Liberal philosophy charges , and I'll address your false claims then.

Add that to your list of heresy and Liberal philosophy charges, and I'll address your false claims then.

 

Uh huh - It is called following and learning. Apparently you were born with ALL knowledge and understanding, and did not have to participate in a LEARNING period!

Why would I have the need to EXPLAIN, YOUR WORDS? I didn't say those things. YOU DID.

Nothing YOU SAY "for me" adds up.

All I have been "told".... I presume you think, "told" by you. eh?
You are not my Spiritual teacher.

The ONLY thing you have taught me, is "your way" of how "you favor name tags", "favor name calling",
'speak for others," "give false testimony", "bounce around joining different Churches", and "the Churches you become members of do not teach properly or have a flippant laughable attitude", "favor arguing over silly nonsense".

False

Acts 1 [8] But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you:

No need for me to sift through your expressed jumbled thoughts....I just ignore them.

 

I agree, you do say that, it's just the rest of it that neutralizes any chance of doctrine that can be supported by Scripture.

You need to understand that I am looking at this from a perspective that takes everything you have said into consideration. The idea that men can be saved without being born again is absurd.

Here is the root of the focus right now:

So what is going to be, Happy, can salvation be lost? Or not?

It is not a matter of "which understanding you are giving," and it is not a matter of Liberal Philosophy that does nothing but create the confusion, deflection, and ineffable twaddle you continually present.

You try to argue this point for the sake of argument (and argument that has no place in Doctrinal Discussion and Debate).

There is no "salvation" based on "another understanding," that is the point of everything I have said in recent posts.

Salvation is only legitimate when someone is actually saved, we don't ascribe a philosophical attaining on Salvation in Christ to the world in general. That is why I said we have to distinguish what we mean by the word "given."

It is written, "Unto us a Son is given," and the reality is, "He came unto His Own and His Own...received Him not."

You say that, but it does not jibe with your p[philosophy that men can be "Christians" apart from actually being saved.

As you continually display, that is true for some people.

That is true, however, we cannot overlook the philosophy you propose.

It is precisely what you do:

It is a false dichotomy that is unbiblical and damnable heresy.


Continued...

 

It is the truth.

You have yet to address the Scripture presented that makes it clear that men must be born again.

Yet you propose the view that men can be Christians...yet not born again.

Perhaps we are making progress.

Would that make you...Happy?

You have also said...

Here you are speaking about men being a Christian, which is equable to being saved, who have not submitted to God. I make it very clear in my statement the focus is how one becomes a Christian in, and I know you don't like this term...reality.

There are numerous posts addressing this heresy. Now you want to back-peddle, which is okay with me, but until you renounce this nonsense the discussion will continue.

I know.

That is what I said.

No, what you said was...

And that is the problem with Liberal Philosophy...

...it thinks you can give multiple "understandings" and they are all true.

Reality is subjective.

Again, no, it is not "kept."

Nothing a man or woman does at any time contributes to salvation.

That is like keeping our humanity. If we are human, we are human, we didn't "claim it," and we do not "keep it."

There must be an echo in here...

Let's look at the double-mindedness:

Again, no, Happy...men cannot lose their salvation.

Doesn't matter what "understanding" you are trying to give, but it does matter that you're understanding is in error.

Yup.

No, Happy, Salvation is not provided for all. Air is provided for all. Day and night is provided for all.

Conviction is provided for all, and that does not equate to "salvation is provided for all."

This is true.

We are making progress.

Which is not the same as "Salvation is provided for all."

This would be an issue of semantics if it were not for all the twaddle you proposed earlier.

Not sure how I can be seen not to understand when I directly address the confusion you propose.

I am addressing the doctrine, Happy.

If the shoe fits...

The lack of understanding I have is related to why someone, who has been given much Scripture that shows their doctrine to be error...

...would not want to correct their error.

That is something I will never understand.

Who better to know than one proposing Liberal Philosophy.

It's true. Men are blind to their condition, and even though they sit in a pew for their entire lives, and intellectually understand the Gospel of Christ, they will not understand until God enlightens their natural minds.

Your philosophy that one can go to church and be a Christian without "submitting" and being born again...

...is the Doctrine of Demons.

That is just a fact. It is contrary to the teaching of Christ and the Apostles.

As I already said...

I simply acknowledged the Gospel of Jesus Christ when God showed me the reality of my condition.

That's what everyone who is Born Again does.

That is what every Christian has done.

There was no effort on my part, no contribution that allowed me to be saved.

No, actually I was a 25 year old drug using and drunken Heavy Metal musician when I was saved.

But thanks for asking.

No, actually, the realization that I was a sinner separated from God and destined for eternal separation in Hell, and that Christ was the only Remedy for that condition...forced me to be saved.


God bless.

 

Here is the Doctrine of Demons you propose and the course of the discussion:

So I will let anyone that might read this decide.


God bless.

 

Hopefully...neither is anyone else.

You hardly have a case to deny "staying on point," lol.

How dare you call me a Charismatic!

Actually Humor is the appropriate word here.

Its on the cover, isn't it?

But the problem, Happy, is you think there are multiple "understandings that conflict, not just with themselves, but with what is actually taught in Scripture...

...and that this is acceptable.

You do not think God can minister to the hearts of 5-10 year olds, and save them at an early Age?


Judges 13:5
King James Version (KJV)

5 For, lo, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and no razor shall come on his head: for the child shall be a Nazarite unto God from the womb: and he shall begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines.


Psalm 22:10
King James Version (KJV)

10 I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God from my mother's belly.


Luke 1:15
King James Version (KJV)

15 For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb.


Once again, your philosophy conflicts with what Scripture actually teaches.

It isn't a lie. You teach that men can be Christians without being born again.

Doctrine of demons, a damnable heresy, and one that conflicts with our mandate to see men saved, not placate their fears that their trip to Hell not conflict with their conscience.


God bless.

 

Without controversy.

While a saint might be used to refer to Angels, it is a common term used to designate believers.

It is not a "super Christian."

The basic concept is that which is holy. Not necessarily in the sense of "sinlessness," but in a sense of separated unto the Lord. This was true of the Old Testament Saints, who were "saved" in the sense that their eternal destiny was fixed through justification by faith in God.


God bless.

 

And that IDEA is yours, not mine.
And those WORDS are yours, not mine.

So why do you keep making absurd statements, and dumping them ON ME?

I never said those things.

Good grief - HOW MANY TIMES do you require an explanation?
Maybe the toddler version will sink in...

Here is Jesus' BODY -
Jesus' BODY was prepared of God -
Jesus' BODY was sent to earth for men to SEE Him example How to become acceptable unto God.
Jesus' HOLY BODY was given unto DEATH, so that "ALL" of mankind could RECEIVE Salvation.
By Jesus' DEAD HOLY BODY, "ALL" of mankind has opportunity to RECEIVE Salvation provided for them.

SALVATION provided for "ALL" of mankind.

A piece of pie FOR YOU on the counter, mommy set there FOR YOU.
A dollar FOR YOU left on the counter, mommy set there FOR YOU to buy your school lunch.

If you do not TAKE 'your pie".....If you do not TAKE "your money".....you LOSE having "YOUR PIE"...
you LOSE having "your money".

If you do not TAKE "your salvation"....you Lose having your Salvation.

IF you do TAKE your pie, your money, your Salvation - YOU received it, claimed it... IT IS YOURS to keep! No one can TAKE AWAY YOUR SALVATION.

IF you received it, it is permanently yours forever. A gift from God.

Speaking in half truths leads to confusion.

Jesus provided salvation for ALL. It is THEIRS to take. If they do not receive it they lose it. If they receive it, it is theirs forever.

No. I speak of things you can not comprehend, so you deflect to the limit of your understanding, and call me names because of the lack of your own comprehension.

You state a plain truth, with your mucked up unnecessary words.
legitimate, actually, < irrelevant.

WE ARE SAVED, when we submit to the Lord from the truth in our hearts. PERIOD.

Philosophical? "attaining on Salvation in Christ to the world" ?

Who said, "attains" ? I didn't. You did. And then call it philosophical. That's on you, not me.

The world "in general"? Well speaking from Scripture Jesus precisely (not generally) gave HIS FLESH, for the LIFE "of the world". Not a few, not only some, not only a certain race, not only Christians...but ALL of the world.

SALVATION for ALL is "provided", just as I said before.

And just as I clearly said before....ANY person WHO DOES NOT RECEIVE, TAKE, CLAIM the salvation that was provided FOR THEM, they lose it. They die IN THEIR SINS. THEY ARE NOT FORGIVEN. THEY remain separated from GOD.

And so you disagree, so what.

How does that work in your world? Christian, saved and born again.....and then change their mind, they are no longer a Christian?.....AND? Are they then....UNSAVED and UNBORN AGAIN?

So when are you going to made your list of heretic and liberal philosophical charges against me?

 

Go back, read what was said, and deny that Protestants, Evangelicals, and numerous other groups...call themselves by those titles.

Your deflection is time consuming and boring. So also, go back...and address the Scripture presented to deny your Liberal Philosophy.

And by the way, I have no qualms calling someone who proposes Liberal doctrine and tries to deny Scripture rejects such positions a Liberal.

You should get used to it if you are going to hang around.

And...?

You say this as if properly designating someone by reason of the philosophy and positions they held...is a bad thing.

The question is, how can you embrace such twaddle as this...

You CAN emphasize ALL the DEFLECTION as much, and however you want, and it is not going to change the fact that your philosophy, which has been garnered, not by sitting in a Baptist Church, but musings in your mind...is unbiblical.

I know your emotion will not allow you to see it, Happy, but I am trying to help you.


Continued...