The Journey Home

Salty,

Pastors should:

1. Live holy, godly lives in Christ Jesus, walking with Jesus and being subject to fellow elders as equals to remain accountable, including fellowship and accountability with other Churches of like-mind.

2. Teach the Scriptures expositionally and teach and preach the whole counsel of God.

3. Avoid wordly temptations to entertain the flock and shun the temptation to respectability among peers and the world.

4. Adopt or craft a thorough statement of faith/creed to which the church membership should be required to have substantial agreement. If they cannot, then they should not be members.

5. Establish according to Scripture (if its not already) biblical church discipline. Excommunicate those in willful sin and error (bar from the Lord's Table and hospitality).

6. Preach against false doctrine as appropriate in keeping with Scripture. Identify the error by name, teacher, et. Contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints.

 

The Jesus they preach needs their help to save people he can't do it on his own. Doesn't sound like the bible Jesus to me.

 

The Jesus they preach is also a Jesus they worship in the form of a wafer which they call the host. This is unbiblical, a different Jesus, a different Gospel, and antichrist.

 

I believe it's the same Jesus, but from what lens one sees Him through.

I know who you are through the BB, and your wife has an intimate relationship with you. I'm sure my view of ReformedBaptist is different than your wife's, yet if I ever meet your wife I wouldn't claim you are a different person than the one she knows.

As I've stated in the past, "right players, wrong game".

 

To answer the OP, "the father of lies". If one suppresses the Spirit as Scripture warns us against, and opens the door a crack...satan will come busting in.

 

Your analogy doesn't work. Knowledge is important in biblcial faith. To have a false knowledge of Christ, biblically, is to not have Christ.

Nonetheless, modern evangelicalism is too close to Rome. The Reformers were correct in their interpretation of what Rome is: It is Antichrist.

 

My analogy works perfectly, else your statment "knowledge is important in biblical faith" makes no sense. My knowledge of you is different than your wife's knowledge of you, yet you wouldn't claim to be two different people.

 

1 Cor 1:5
That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge;

2 Cor 4:6
For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.


Eph 1:17
That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:

Col 3:10
And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:

1 Tim 2:4
Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

2 Tim 3:7
Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

2 Peter 1:2-3
Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord, According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:

2 Peter 3:18
But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.


A true Christian has a true and accurate knowledge of Christ and His Gospel. Rome does not have this.

 

We are not discussing what a "true Christian" is...but your claim of their belief in a different Jesus. They believe Jesus was born of a virgin, died on the cross, and was raised on the third day...as do we. Their understanding of His role in salvation is where we part ways. Even amongst us we differ on who the atonement of Christ was made for, yet I would hope neither side would claim the other believes in a "different Jesus" or "anitchrist". Words have meanings, and we need to remember that when talking to our catholic friends.

 

We need to remember when talking to Roman Catholics that we are talking to unbelievers---those who are not Christians, that Roman Catholicism is not Christian, and that Roman Catholics need to be reached with the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

We also need to remember that Romanism presents itself as true Christianity, which makes it worthy of strong rebuke.

Yes, I am aware of their orthodox positions. Yet in every one of them by their dogmas and practice they deny them all. There is not a single tenant of the Christian faith that the papacy has not twisted, perverted, mocked, destroyed, or usurped.

It is indeed Antichrist and ROman Catholics need to be warned about it.

 

Back to the OP. Obviously he was never saved. For if he were he could never fall away.

 

This is not a designation you or I can make...we are not in the man's heart. There were those believers in the early church called the Circumcision Party that allowed false doctrine to take prevalence in their lives, and I do not doubt their salvation.

 

But I was taught on another thread that if one truly beleived that they could never fall away. So either he has fallen away or the RCC doctrine is correct.

 

It would depend on the definition of "fall away". The "P" in TULIP teaches this, although the scriptural support is scant. I think Lot is the perfect example of a righteous, godly person who lived a pretty unrighteous, ungodly life. He was saved in the same manner we are, by grace through faith.

 

Actually, the Scriptural teaching is insurmountable that those who are truly saved will never "finally" fall away. They may struggle, and turn back for a time, but they will keep believing.

As for particular individuals, we will never be able to tell in this life.

 

But if he believed Christ was sufficient for salvation and now beleives that Christ is not sufficient for salvation, how can one no longer beleive something you once beleived? I have heard this very argument many many time here.

In order for that to be true he either he did not beleive Christ or he does not beleive thre RCC doctrine, for he could not believe both.

 

I don't think it's a matter of no longer believing, but giving in to another belief that overshadows the original. Satan is called the father of lies...he will put them before believers hoping to get them to believe his lies in order to make the believer fruitless. The positional relationship never leaves...we still remain sons...although our relationship can be severed.

 

A person cannot go into apostacy and expect to be counted as a brother.

 

According to man, true...but not true of God.

The Lord does not see as man sees; for man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the Heart 1 Sam 16:7

 

Not according to Hebrews 6