SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation
Give To SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : John MacArthur on Lordship Salvation

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Re:

Quote:
There have been some very good discussions on this topic in years past that would be well worth review. Key words such as 'the flesh' 'sin nature', etc. ought to bring them up.



I don't need these discussions on it to determine whether or not it is correct. A believer simply has two natures.

Quote:
There are many members of this site past and present that would not share the 'two-nature' view, myself included.



Because many here are of the LS persuasion, I would expect that to be the case, but each will have to deal with the ramifications of this in due time....


OJ

 2011/4/28 22:28
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
St. Joseph, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
Each will have to deal with the ramifications of this in due time.



Your dogmatic assertions are not helpful. Past discussions deal with this subject in depth and from multiple points of view. This thread on the flesh (sarx) is a good starting point.

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&order=0&topic_id=4198&forum=36&post_id=&refresh=Go



_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2011/4/28 22:34Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
St. Joseph, Missouri

 Re:

This is a discussion from 2004 when I argued from the position of 'two natures'. I have since refined my understanding in a way that takes into account all of the related scriptures. This thread seeks to examine the question, 'why does a Christian still commit sins.'

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=2081&forum=36&start=0&viewmode=flat&order=0


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2011/4/28 22:42Profile









 Re:


Quote:
This is a discussion from 2004 when I argued from the position of 'two natures'. I have since refined my understanding in a way that takes into account all of the related scriptures. This thread seeks to examine the question, 'why does a Christian still commit sins.'

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=2081&forum=36&start=0&viewmode=flat&order=0



Robert

With all due respect, you lost an argument to a man who does not have everlasting life. Philo believes salvation can be lost, and therefore that his salvation can be lost which therefore means what he has is not everlasting.

One nature fits his works based theology.

OJ

 2011/4/28 22:54
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
St. Joseph, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
Philo believes salvation can be lost, and therefore that his salvation can be lost which therefore means what he has is not everlasting.



That is quite a judgment to make. Your immoderate comments have taken me off guard a bit. Philo is Ron Bailey and he is a dear brother in the Lord.


Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, [take heed] lest he also spare not thee. (Romans 11:17-19 KJV)

What is the clear teaching of these verses?


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2011/4/28 23:03Profile









 Re:

Robert

I know who Philo is, I did business with him here a few times, enough to know where he stands.

I will leave you and Ron figure out whether or not you two have a life that is everlasting or something else.

John 6:47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.


OJ

 2011/4/28 23:18
Oracio
Member



Joined: 2007/6/26
Posts: 2094
Whittier CA USA

 Re:

OJ,
I have not looked at all the links you provided only the last one so far. But just from your posts there are serious concerns I have about you.

You seem to imply that the two nature doctrine as well as eternal security are essential to one's salvation.

You call John MacArthur a heretic and lost for preaching repentance and the Lordship of Christ and holding to the view of one nature in a believer. And you call into question Ron Bailey's salvation simply because he does not hold to eternal security.

Seriously, statements and beliefs like that are what cause me to just want to give up trying to debate with you, since it seems you made up your mind a long time ago on these views you hold and will not reconsider them.

Regarding MacArthur's prior views on the nature of Christ's eternal position in the Trinity, I do not see him ever denying an essential Christian doctrine as much as you would like to think so.

In all honesty the one that seems to be denying essential Christian doctrine to me is you, in that you come against the necessity of preaching the call to repentance and Christ's Lordship along with faith in Him.


_________________
Oracio

 2011/4/28 23:19Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
St. Joseph, Missouri

 Re:

And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. (John 17:3 NKJV)


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2011/4/28 23:19Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
St. Joseph, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
I will leave you and Ron figure out whether or not you two have a life that is everlasting or something else.



As I posted previously, this is the Lord's definition of eternal life.

And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. (John 17:3)

Are your comments in step with James':

But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, [and] easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace. (James 3:17, 18)


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2011/4/28 23:24Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
St. Joseph, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
John 6:47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.



As you should know 'hath' here is ἔχει and is in the present active indicative. "He is running" is an example of this construction. It is not an unconditional perpetual reality. The same verb is used with the same construction a few chapters before:

The woman saith unto him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast thou that living water? (John 4:11)

Here 'hast' is ἔχει and is in the present active indicative as well. Obviously our Lord was not deprived everlastingly of something to draw with, it was His present condition.

Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, [take heed] lest he also spare not thee. (Romans 11:17-19 KJV)

Here 'standest' is in the perfect imperative as sure as saying 'it is finished'. And yet we are still warned, Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, [take heed] lest he also spare not thee.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2011/4/28 23:46Profile





©2002-2024 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Revival to this Generation.
Privacy Policy