SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Looking for feedback: Free From Sin Teaching

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 Next Page )
PosterThread
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
While the legal standing of justification is the same under the new covenant as the old covenant, people under the old covenant were only justified and left in the Romans 7 experience and were not born again as people are now under the new covenant.


What you need to do is to distinguish, not divide, between justification and regeneration. They may be synchronized but they are not synonymous; they each present a different image of God's dealings with men and women.

Although this thread has widened my initial involvement was because you were implying that a single infraction jeopardized salvation. Is this your position?


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2008/12/10 3:14Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re: Chicken Little?

Quote:
I don't know Robert you seem to see boggy men every where. I am starting to wonder what kind of life experiences you have had. Have you seen a lot of this stuff going on?



In my circles these types of things have almost ruled the day for decades. Almost everything you talk about I have taught and preached with more zeal than my fathers. In fact, you only need listen to [url=http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/viewcat.php?cid=306]one of my messages [/url] to hear the word of repentance. I have not changed in my views of all these essential truths.

However, this is not what we are talking about at all. The 'danger' I keep referring to is preaching all of these things with a Finney view of justification and assurance. He believed and taught that saints are on the same ground as sinners when they sin. He then reserved the right to define sin. When I read your works I hear Charles Finney. I have a keen ear for it. I guess I ought to (lectures on revival, been on an Oberlin grave visitation pilgrimage, etc.).

Bob, do you salt you food? Do you eat for pleasure? You don't have to answer me, just think about it. Finney would have called you a sinner and to repentance for it. I dare say that very very few people would enter heaven if Finney's criteria were used as the standard. Where I'm from smokers are at risk for eternal damnation. In fact, I have heard it said that if a person were traveling at 60 MPH willingly in a 55 mph zone and were suddenly killed they would go to hell for not obeying the laws of the land.

Moreover, most people I know never feel a sense that God really loves them. And the reason why is your first article. That is theology they have lived by for decades. This is the religion that has been passed down to them. Holiness or hell type preaching that says that if you give 8% as the tithe of your gross salary; you are tipping God and might just go to hell for it.


Quote:
Well everywhere I see people pushing easy-believism. I guess you must be being exposed to misuse.



So you admit that this is the motivation for your caustic Gospel? And, yes, I have been exposed to a type of assurance-less salvation that you teach my whole life. God had to deliver me from it. In fact, just a few weeks ago. It's the first real peace I have known in my life.

Quote:
I am not show who you are reading. Where did I say a person should live in constant godly sorrow. I said that godly sorrow is a condition to be saved. Not a condition one must live in to be saved. I think perhaps you are on a different page that I am on.




Bob, trust me, if you are not careful what I am describing will be the natural [u]consequence[/u] of your teaching whether you intend it or not.


Quote:
Sound like to me you are being beaten by Babels lords. Might be time to come up and be separate.




Revivalism theology seeks to keep a person in fear of their salvation at all times in order to induce what the revivalist believes is 'godly sorrow'. I submit that if it were a godly sorrow then God would have come and bound up the wounds. But because the revivalist is taking the people by the hand with one hand on the ARK of God, their experience is probably the highest form of abuse.

Quote:
What kind of a group you spending time with any way.



Well, mainly folk who have been influenced by Finney and view it their job to help God bring them to godly sorrow and repentance. I have spent time with people that believe they are one sin away from damnation based on a similar line of salvation theology to yours. And at the risk of you thinking I'm a nut case and others reading this thinking I'm antinomian, etc.

I have tried to share with you the natural consequence of a theology that ties justification to sanctification. When you preach the Gospel, what profit is there in distilling the severe and demanding elements of the Gospel (as it were) from the mercy and grace of God? They have to go together as a unit or it is not the Gospel, it is abuse.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2008/12/10 5:01Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Just to be sure I am not misunderstanding you Bob I gave a look at your blog. ;-) I pulled out this one entry [url=http://morechristlike.com/spiritual-death/]Sinning Brings Spiritual Death. [/url] In this blog you equate Eve's Sin with our sin. Error begets error. This is probably a place to start looking at your soteriology.


[color=000066] Wherefore, as by [u]one man[/u] sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (Romans 5:12) [/color]

This is [u]S[/u]in the dynamic. This is Sin the 'root' entering into Adam and consequently all that are [u]in[/u] Adam. He stood in the beginning as the head of the human race. His actions would have consequences that my sin or your sin could not possibly have.

[color=000066]For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as [u]in Adam[/u] all die, even so [u]in Christ[/u] shall all be made alive.(I Cor. 15)[/color]

And because Adam fell and became corrupt, all of the generations are born [u]in[/u] Adam (Genesis 5), but to be born again is to be [i]in[/i] Christ into the generation of Jesus Christ (Matthew 1:1). Children of slaves are the property of their masters. We are all born 'children of Adam' and hence are all born slaves to sin. When we are born again we become slaves to Christ.

[color=000066] For when you were the slaves of sin, you were free from righteousness.

What fruit did you have then in those things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death.

But now, being made free from sin, and having become slaves to God, you have your fruit to holiness, and the end everlasting life. (Romans 6)[/color]



As slaves to God, [u]what prevents 'spiritual death' when a believer sins?[/u] Can regeneration be 'undone' by a single sin? Not the regeneration of scripture. Finney's could be because it was not biblical regeneration; it was philosophical regeneration.

[u]Answer?[/u] It is the priesthood and eternal sacrifice of Christ our advocate. Adam had no priestly construct on which to atone for His sins and consequently his fellowship with God was cut off and so also for all of those that are in him that have not entered into covenant with God. But we have entered into the New Covenant that are born again. That New Covenant is better than the old in many respects. It contains the promise of an utterly changed creature while [u]at the same time[/u] providing an atonement to make possible ongoing fellowship as God is bring us into ever increasing glory.


Scripture plainly teaches that sin entered and death by sin. BOTH Adam and Christ held authority on a level no other human being has held. They could pass on their [i]nature[/i] to their progeny. Adam enjoined the human race to Sin. Jesus Christ is the great baptizer in the Holy Spirit enjoining us to Him and all that His nature is.

And this is the great error of Finney. He neither believed in Original Sin (original pollution) nor in penal substitution. He also rejected imputed righteousness. He did not believe sin or righteousness could be imputed. This effected his view of the atonement that reduced Christ's death to a mere demonstration of God's anger at sin designed to satisfy public justice and bring respect for His laws. This is utterly unbiblical and dangerous (I suppose at risk I will keep pointing out the dangers).

Error begets more error. My sin does not carry the same consequences as Adam's sin [i]for me[/i] because I am in covenant with God that is maintained by an atoning sacrificial system (i.e. the New Covenant and the High Priestly office and sacrifice of Christ).

Finney's theology is such that taken to it's final conclusion Jesus Christ did not need to die for our sins. He believed God forgave based upon His mercy at the time of asking. Though God does forgive when we confess our sins, etc., his view of the atonement and Christ's sacrificial death is borderlining on blasphemy if not full-on blasphemy.

It is this fundamental misunderstanding that kept Finney from appreciating what God had done through the cross of Christ. This is Finney's version of Christian perfection. It has no real construct for maintaining the relationship when a sin is committed other than to come through godly sorrow and be broken down and mellowed again. All the while the wrath of God looms overhead.


[color=000066]

By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ [u]once for all[/u].

And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:

But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

[u]For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.[/u]

Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before, This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them; [u]And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.[/u] Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin. (Hebrews 10)[/color]

The Gospel cannot be preached unless we include what I have underlined and preach it with the same ferver as we do the sinless aspects.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2008/12/10 6:08Profile
bobmutch
Member



Joined: 2008/6/26
Posts: 90


 Re:

philologos:
>>>What you need to do is to distinguish, not divide, between justification and regeneration. They may be synchronized but they are not synonymous; they each present a different image of God's dealings with men and women.

Clear I have noted that they are not synonymous and I have clearly distinguished between the two already in this thread but let me make that distinction again.

I would hold that the Bible teaches justification and regeneration happen at the same time. Justification is the legal standing before God or what God does for a person. Regeneration is the change that is made in a person and is what God does to us.

>>>because you were implying that a single infraction jeopardized salvation. Is this your position?

Yes I would hold if a person go out and commits adultery the wrath of God abides on them and if they would die with out having godly sorrow and repenting for that sin they would be lost.


_________________
Bob Mutch

 2008/12/10 9:51Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Some thoughts on Godly Sorrow

We have an example of Godly sorrow in the life of David in the matter of Uriah the Hittite. You will recall that David went to great lengths to cover his sin from the eyes of the people. He tried to bait Uriah to Bathsheeba and when that did not work he calculated a move by which he could assume Uriah's wife at his death. If the plan worked, David's sin may in fact gain the praise of men. For he had taken and comforted the grieving wife to himself to take care of her in Uriah's stead.

But when God put His finger on David at first David was angry. He could not see himself in Nathan's story. But when he did see Himself- his reaction is quite telling:

[color=000066]And David said unto Nathan, [u]I have sinned against the LORD[/u]. And Nathan said unto David, The LORD also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die. (I Samuel 12)[/color]

Here David acknowledged his sin. But more than that he started into a process by which he left off trying to fool men and focused on what He had done before God. It was almost as if what people thought about him no longer mattered. He could almost care less what people knew; now it was between him and God. I submit that this is a classic course that those that sin follow. The first reaction is to destroy evidence. This attitude demonstrates a fear of man and an esteem for their opinions that is unreasonable; but it is quite common.

In time David had a time of reflection. And this is what I think godly sorrow is; it is sorrow 'God-wards'. Almost as if we could care less what everyone else thinks. We could care less about what we have done to our reputation. We concern ourselves with what we have done to God and [u]His[/u] reputation. What was David's answer?


[color=000066]Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest. (Psalm 51)[/color]

[i]Let[/i] God be true and every man a liar. The focus, I think, is on the word 'let'. We need to allow God to be true. We need not to make excuses. We need not to try to justify ourselves. God is a God of tender mercies and there is no reason to maintain the denial or justification. Just 'let God be true'. And when we acknowledge that we have sinned we affirm the truth of His commandment and the reality of His willingness to forgive. To make excuses is to leave the impression that we serve a harsh and reluctant God. "I have SINNED against the Lord." others were involved, but [i]against thee only have I done this evil[/i]. And in so doing may we blind ourselves to the opinions of men and focus on God alone.

This is why I think it is dangerous to look for evidence of repentance if we don't know what to look for. I'll tell you what I look for- it's an attitude that says, "I don't care what everyone thinks about me or what I have done, [i]I have sinned against the Lord[/i] and He is the primary offended party. To dung with my reputation!


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2008/12/10 9:58Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
Yes I would hold if a person go out and commits adultery



What if their last act in this life was to look with lust?


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2008/12/10 10:00Profile
bobmutch
Member



Joined: 2008/6/26
Posts: 90


 Re:

RobertW:
>>>He believed and taught that saints are on the same ground as sinners when they sin.

Finney taught that Christians that sinned were still Christians.

>>>When I read your works I hear Charles Finney.

Not at all. You need to read more of Fletcher, Clarke, and Wesley.

>>>Bob, do you salt you food? Do you eat for pleasure? You don't have to answer me, just think about it. Finney would have called you a sinner and to repentance for it.

Finney didn't teach that salting your food was sin. Now it would depend on what you mean by "eat for pleasure" on whether he could consider that sinful.

I am in no shape of the word a Finneyite.

>>>Where I'm from smokers are at risk for eternal damnation.

I would hope at least they would teach that truth.

>>>In fact, I have heard it said that if a person were traveling at 60 MPH willingly in a 55 mph zone and were suddenly killed they would go to hell for not obeying the laws of the land.

I think that is wrong to teach that.

>>>Moreover, most people I know never feel a sense that God really loves them.

I feel the love of God every day. I have a love relationship with the Lord.

>>>Holiness or hell type preaching that says that if you give 8% as the tithe of your gross salary; you are tipping God and might just go to hell for it.

We must give the Lord 100%. The OT title was 23% or 33% not 10% (10% to the priesthood, 10% to the poor every third year, 10% to the King, and some think there is a 3rd 10% in there). And that is not counting the first of the herd and all the sin sacrifices etc.

Sounds like you are under legalism.

>>>So you admit that this is the motivation for your caustic Gospel?

Not at all. Please don't put words in my mouth.

>>>And, yes, I have been exposed to a type of assurance-less salvation that you teach my whole life.

I am sorry Sir I don't teach a assurance-less salvation. I have full assurance of my salvation.

>>>It's the first real peace I have known in my life.

Lord have mercy! And you are preaching to others. Unbelievable.

>>>Revivalism theology seeks to keep a person in fear of their salvation at all times in order to induce what the revivalist believes is 'godly sorrow'.

How different from what Wesley taught and his disciples experienced. Perfect love casts out fear. To me God is my friend that I go around the house talking to. While I have reverence toward God I don't fear him nor have I ever been under fear except when I have been in sin making bricks for the devil.

Godly sorrow is what people need to have when they come to Christ for salvation.

>>>But because the revivalist is taking the people by the hand with one hand on the ARK of God, their experience is probably the highest form of abuse.

And you have been involved in preaching this for how long?

>>>I have spent time with people that believe they are one sin away from damnation based on a similar line of salvation theology to yours.

Well we are all one sin again from damnation and this should work a carefulness in us. But keep in mind that perfect love casts out all fear.

We have wonderful promises in the Word of Gods keeping power. 1Cor 10:13, 2The 3:3, 2Pet 1:10, Jud 1:24.

>>>I have tried to share with you the natural consequence of a theology that ties justification to sanctification.

Again I don't tie justification to sanctification. Perhaps you are referring to what you used to teach. But you started off with saying I do this so here I will deny it again just in case.

Sanctification is defined by the Wesleyan as a growth in grace and when entire or wholly is put in front of the word a 2nd work of grace where the heart is purified from the Adamic nature and the Holy Spirit that was with you is not within you. Justification is our legal standing with God when we get saved.

Here is a couple of articles on the Promise of the spirit that will clarify this.

Promise of the Holy Spirit
What the Promise of the Holy Spirit Does

>>>When you preach the Gospel, what profit is there in distilling the severe and demanding elements of the Gospel (as it were) from the mercy and grace of God?

I don't understand what you mean here. Please clarify.

>>>I submit that this is a classic course that those that sin follow. The first reaction is to destroy evidence. This attitude demonstrates a fear of man and an esteem for their opinions that is unreasonable; but it is quite common.

This is the reaction of a religious hypocrite and we know what Jesus said about religious hypocrites.

>>>And this is what I think godly sorrow is; it is sorrow 'God-wards'. Almost as if we could care less what everyone else thinks.

Well godly sorrow works repentance unto salvation where worldly sorrow works death (2Cor 10:7).

>>>This is why I think it is dangerous to look for evidence of repentance if we don't know what to look for.

Well then if I understand you correctly you are instructing John the baptism here also.

Mat 3:4-8 And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leather girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey. Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins. But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:


_________________
Bob Mutch

 2008/12/10 10:18Profile
bobmutch
Member



Joined: 2008/6/26
Posts: 90


 Re:

RobertW:
>>>What if their last act in this life was to look with lust?

Mat 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.


_________________
Bob Mutch

 2008/12/10 10:19Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
Well we are all one sin again from damnation and this should work a carefulness in us. But keep in mind that perfect love casts out all fear.



This is what I am talking about right here. This is the Gospel message that I was raised under. This has been the source of more distress in my life than I can count. Truly, I have no more questions.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2008/12/10 11:25Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
>>>When you preach the Gospel, what profit is there in distilling the severe and demanding elements of the Gospel (as it were) from the mercy and grace of God?

I don't understand what you mean here. Please clarify.



I explained earlier that the point of having a sacrificial system is to allow for the relationship to continue [u]if[/u] we should sin.

What I mean by distilling the demanding elements away from grace is to try and explain away passages that recognize that Christians can and do sin; even though it is not their nature to sin.

We live in a fallen world. We are subject to human desires in a world loaded with sinful means of expressing those desires. This opens up a whole front of conflict while we are yet in the world.

And this is why our sin is not like Adam's sin. We are not one sin away from damnation. Even though I am very versed in the keeping passages, I am not talking about those now. I believe in Christian Perfection. I just do not believe it with Finney's hard trigger damnation theology. I can never believe that God has His children hanging by a thread over hell in a fallen world such as ours. The regenerate are His children and He loves them. He loves them more than we love our children and grandchildren.

So I know with certainty that I do not love my kids more than God loves His children and I would never think to instill fear in my progeny so as to say that if they walk in sinless perfection of heart and deed they are accepted and if not I would cast them into outer darkness. Bear in mind, I am not saying it is OK to sin and would never teach that. But this kind of hair trigger doctrine is extremely dangerous and those reading it should run for the hills!


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2008/12/10 11:39Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy