The baptism in Fire

[Charlie24]

You've made an arbitrary statement. The loss of one's soul is death. Jesus gave His soul for sin. Would you suggest that Jesus died spiritually, as you put it?

The Second death is called the second because it's like the first. I don't ask someone to give me a second piece of cake if I want ice cream. If I ask for a second piece of cake, it's because I want another like the first one I had.

Christians would learn so much if they would just look at church history. What makes you think that everything you've been taught is correct?

No, I'm not a Word of Faith believer that say Christ died spiritually, garbage if you ask me.

Are you a Christian, or what are you? You seen to be at odds with us Christians on several counts.

 

[Butch5]

No, I'm not a Word of Faith believer that say Christ died spiritually, garbage if you ask me.

Are you a Christian, or what are you? You seen to be at odds with us Christians on several counts.

I'm a Christian who got tired of trying to explain logical contradictions and fallacies, of believing things that made no sense, and of hearing, "It's a mystery" or "Some things are hard to understand" every time someone couldn't explain a passage of Scripture. One church teaches you can't lose your salvation and another teaches you can. Both teaching from the same book they claim is without error. I believe the book is without error, therefore, the Law of Noncontradiction says that at least one of those churches must be wrong. They could both be wrong, but at least one of them must be wrong. That started my journey. If I want to know what is true I need to see what was first. Whatever was first is true. You can't have false doctrine before the doctrine exists. Therefore what is first is true. If I want to know what is first I have to go back to the beginning ie. the early church. What an eye-opener that was. Much of what churches teach today would have been deemed heresy by the early church. I simply looked at their teachings, compared them to Scripture, and saw that the majority of what they said fit with Scripture. Since then I've studied different doctrines to see where they entered the faith. Because if the first Christians didn't know of them they had to come from somewhere other than the apostles. By doing that one can easily see where several doctrines that are considered Christian entered the faith. One can see where the doctrines of "Just War", "Penal Atonement", "Satisfaction Atonement", Trinity, "Pre-Trb Rapture", "Hypostatic Union" and others entered into the Christian Faith. The Faith of the early church was quite different than that of today. However, unless one studies church history they'll never know how far the church has strayed from its roots.

There's a saying, we don't know what we don't know. When one studies church history they'll learn the things that, today, they don't know

 

[Charlie24]

I'm a Christian who got tired of trying to explain logical contradictions and fallacies, of believing things that made no sense, and of hearing, "It's a mystery" or "Some things are hard to understand" every time someone couldn't explain a passage of Scripture. One church teaches you can't lose your salvation and another teaches you can. Both teaching from the same book they claim is without error. I believe the book is without error, therefore, the Law of Noncontradiction says that at least one of those churches must be wrong. They could both be wrong, but at least one of them must be wrong. That started my journey. If I want to know what is true I need to see what was first. Whatever was first is true. You can't have false doctrine before the doctrine exists. Therefore what is first is true. If I want to know what is first I have to go back to the beginning ie. the early church. What an eye-opener that was. Much of what churches teach today would have been deemed heresy by the early church. I simply looked at their teachings, compared them to Scripture, and saw that the majority of what they said fit with Scripture. Since then I've studied different doctrines to see where they entered the faith. Because if the first Christians didn't know of them they had to come from somewhere other than the apostles. By doing that one can easily see where several doctrines that are considered Christian entered the faith. One can see where the doctrines of "Just War", "Penal Atonement", "Satisfaction Atonement", Trinity, "Pre-Trb Rapture", "Hypostatic Union" and others entered into the Christian Faith. The Faith of the early church was quite different than that of today. However, unless one studies church history they'll never know how far the church has strayed from its roots.

There's a saying, we don't know what we don't know. When one studies church history they'll learn the things that, today, they don't know

If you're speaking of Church history outside of Scripture, it can't be confirmed and it's not inspired.

I agree we have serious problems with all the different interpretations, and we do have to read between the lines.

The important thing is to get Christ right. Jesus Christ is the foundation of all, as Paul said, and all doctrine is built on that.

The finished work of Christ is the key to all of it. Paul said we had better be careful how we build on that foundation.

You can get all the doctrines wrong but if you get Christ right, you have found eternal life.

The rest is just conversation as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Butch5]

If you're speaking of Church history outside of Scripture, it can't be confirmed and it's not inspired.

I agree we have serious problems with all the different interpretations, and we do have to read between the lines.

The important thing is to get Christ right. Jesus Christ is the foundation of all, as Paul said, and all doctrine is built on that.

The finished work of Christ is the key to all of it. Paul said we had better be careful how we build on that foundation.

You can get all the doctrines wrong but if you get Christ right, you have found eternal life.

The rest is just conversation as far as I'm concerned.

Let me ask you two questions. Who wrote the books of Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John? And, how do you know who wrote them?

 

[Br. Bear]

Good to see a discussion that is not heated. Reading what is presented in calmness while digging deep, checking boundaries that each has in place, is refreshing.

While there are a few different things being discussed here, care is needed to address each in it's own place, otherwise we can get deluded in defence, while never honesty tackling things each presents.

Keep lovingkindness and patience going, Brothers.

Jesus Christ is the Lord


><>

 

[Charlie24]

Let me ask you two questions. Who wrote the books of Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John? And, how do you know who wrote them?

Paul said that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God. In the Greek it means, "God-breathed."

We have to believe this in order to believe the Scripture is infallible, and the final word on all things.

So God gave these men the words to say. this means God is the author of Scripture. More specifically, God the Holy Spirit wrote it.

2 Peter 1:20-21

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

 

[Charlie24]

Paul said that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God. In the Greek it means, "God-breathed."

We have to believe this in order to believe the Scripture is infallible, and the final word on all things.

So God gave these men the words to say. this means God is the author of Scripture. More specifically, God the Holy Spirit wrote it.

2 Peter 1:20-21

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

Something interesting that I remember from Scripture that happened 2 times with Paul, I can't remember the second off hand but I know it happened twice with Paul writing Scripture.

1 Cor. 7:6

"But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment."

Paul received permission from God to write Scripture that was not a commandment from God.

In this case it was about marriage., remaining single if possible. God didn't command this, by permission Paul suggests it for those who can contain themselves. Notice in vs. 8 he says. "I say." KJV

This tells me that Paul was not writing in his epistles what he wanted, not without permission, but what God had commanded.

Then in vs 10 he goes back to the commandment of God in writing.

"And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:"

So we can see from this alone that God is the author of Scripture.

 

[complete]

Yes, He bore the sins of many. That doesn't necessitate appeasing the wrath of God. I'm not quite sure what you're getting at Chris.

'And to wait for His Son from heaven,
whom He raised from the dead,
even Jesus,
Which delivered us from the wrath to come.'
(1Th 1:10)

Hello @Butch5.

The Lord Jesus Christ has delivered us from the wrath to come (1 Thess. 1:10). How? If not by the sacrificial offering of Himself in our place?

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[Butch5]

'And to wait for His Son from heaven,
whom He raised from the dead,
even Jesus,
Which delivered us from the wrath to come.'
(1Th 1:10)

Hello @Butch5.

The Lord Jesus Christ has delivered us from the wrath to come (1 Thess. 1:10). How? If not by the sacrificial offering of Himself in our place?

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

Hi Chris,

I didn't say it wasn't a sacrificial offer in our place. My argument is that it is not a payment to God.

Scripture speaks if Christ being a ransom for us. People don't pay a ransom to themselves. If Christ is a ransom and the payment is to God, then God is paying Himself. That doesn't make any sense.

The first theory of the Atonement was known as the Ransom theory. When man sinned He chose to listen to Satan rather than God. God said don't eat of the tree. Satan said go ahead, eat of the tree. Man listened to Satan and ate. Because he ate he fell under Satan's rule. Or, he was in the kingdom of darkness. Man was sentenced to death with no hope. However, God would, buy back or ransom what was His. Christ was that ransom. Christ would die in our place. Not at the Father's behest, but rather, at Satan's behest. Christ died in our place so that we could be freed from the power of Satan and reconciled back to God.

There's plenty of Scriputre support this. However, at the moment I'm working and typing this on my phone. Later when I'm at the computer I can give you the Scriptures.

 

[Butch5]

Paul said that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God. In the Greek it means, "God-breathed."

We have to believe this in order to believe the Scripture is infallible, and the final word on all things.

So God gave these men the words to say. this means God is the author of Scripture. More specifically, God the Holy Spirit wrote it.

2 Peter 1:20-21

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

But you didn't answer my questions. How do we know who wrote the Gospels and how do we know it?

Paul said all Scriputre is given by inspiration of God. How do you know it was the apostle Paul who wrote that and not some other guy named Paul?

 

[Charlie24]

But you didn't answer my questions. How do we know who wrote the Gospels and how do we know it?

Paul said all Scriputre is given by inspiration of God. How do you know it was the apostle Paul who wrote that and not some other guy named Paul?

If you're going to ask a question such as this, having doubt in the Scripture, you may as well ask how do we know the Lord was actually crucified.

If God is all powerful and created everything don't you think He also has the power to preserve His Word in tact for us today?

God places His Word above His very name, and I have never doubted its authorship or anything written in His Word.

Doubting the Word of God in any measure is like a cancer that spreads to other parts until it eventually takes your life.

 

[Curtis]

All born-again believers have the Spirit of truth living within them. He is also known as the "inward witness" who confirms the truth. If you are going outside the written Word of God to find truth then you are trusting the word of man and not God.

 

[Butch5]

If you're going to ask a question such as this, having doubt in the Scripture, you may as well ask how do we know the Lord was actually crucified.

If God is all powerful and created everything don't you think He also has the power to preserve His Word in tact for us today?

God places His Word above His very name, and I have never doubted its authorship or anything written in His Word.

Doubting the Word of God in any measure is like a cancer that spreads to other parts until it eventually takes your life.

Again, you didn't answer the questions. Sure God can preserve His word. Who has it? The Calvinists? The Methodists? The Baptists? The Church of God? I could go on. They all beleive different things.

What about the gospel of Peter or the gospel of Thomas? Why aren't they in the Scriptures. Both men were Jesus' disciples. What about Luke? He wasn't a disciple?

I'm not doubting God's word. I'm asking you how do you know who wrote the Gospels.

I'm asking you for the basis of your belief that the Bible is in fact God's word.

If you say "just because" that fedeism. Which means there is no basis.

On the other hand. I believe the Gospels were written by the men whose name they bear because the first Christians tell us they are the authors of those Gospels. We know Paul's letters are valid for that same reason. You shouldn't be so quick to dismiss church history because it's not "inspired" or "infallible". Church history is your only way back to the original Christian faith if you choose to go look for it.

 

[Butch5]

All born-again believers have the Spirit of truth living within them. He is also known as the "inward witness" who confirms the truth. If you are going outside the written Word of God to find truth then you are trusting the word of man and not God.

Then why don't all born again beleivers believe the same things? Some people believe Christians can lose salvation and some don't. These are opposing positions that can't both be true. How can Christians who have the spirit not be in agreement?

 

[Charlie24]

Again, you didn't answer the questions. Sure God can preserve His word. Who has it? The Calvinists? The Methodists? The Baptists? The Church of God? I could go on. They all beleive different things.

What about the gospel of Peter or the gospel of Thomas? Why aren't they in the Scriptures. Both men were Jesus' disciples. What about Luke? He wasn't a disciple?

I'm not doubting God's word. I'm asking you how do you know who wrote the Gospels.

I'm asking you for the basis of your belief that the Bible is in fact God's word.

If you say "just because" that fedeism. Which means there is no basis.

On the other hand. I believe the Gospels were written by the men whose name they bear because the first Christians tell us they are the authors of those Gospels. We know Paul's letters are valid for that same reason. You shouldn't be so quick to dismiss church history because it's not "inspired" or "infallible". Church history is your only way back to the original Christian faith if you choose to go look for it.

Heb. 11:1

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

I didn't see who wrote the Scripture, but I have faith in God that He has preserved His Word.

Everything concerning God requires faith to believe the unseen, and to know His truth.

The Atheists tell me quite often, "so you believe the Bible and have no facts of who wrote it and if what they are saying is true."

I tell them,

Rom. 8:16

"The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:"

I know I'm a child of God by the witness of the Spirit to my spirit. The believers spirit is energized by the Holy Spirit.

I can feel His presence at times and I'm aware of His reproof in my life, His correction, and His drawing.

But without faith none of this is possible.

As the Spirit works in my life from experience to experience, He takes me also from faith to faith.

The more experience, the more faith.

 

[Curtis]

Then why don't all born again beleivers believe the same things? Some people believe Christians can lose salvation and some don't. These are opposing positions that can't both be true. How can Christians who have the spirit not be in agreement?

That is because many who call themselves Christians do not read the Bible, and what they do believe only comes from someone who does not know the truth, but they think they do.

The ten virgins is a perfect example. Five were real believers while other five were not, but they thought they were.

 

[Butch5]

Heb. 11:1

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

I didn't see who wrote the Scripture, but I have faith in God that He has preserved His Word.

Everything concerning God requires faith to believe the unseen, and to know His truth.

The Atheists tell me quite often, "so you believe the Bible and have no facts of who wrote it and if what they are saying is true."

I tell them,

Rom. 8:16

"The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:"

I know I'm a child of God by the witness of the Spirit to my spirit. The believers spirit is energized by the Holy Spirit.

I can feel His presence at times and I'm aware of His reproof in my life, His correction, and His drawing.

But without faith none of this is possible.

As the Spirit works in my life from experience to experience, He takes me also from faith to faith.

The more experience, the more faith.

You've got Romans 8 out of context. Paul was speaking of the inheritance. Which I don't think you believe.

Sure. A person can "just believe". The problem is you have no basis for that belief which is why the atheists you speak of dismiss you. You're essentially telling you believe, "just because". I can believe the sky is green. I don't have any basis for it. I "just believe" it.

But, if we have no basis for our belief we have no way to defend our belief. Sure, one can say the Bible is the basis for my belief. However, they have no basis on which to base the Bible, so they have no basis on which to base their faith.

Notice the passage you posted from Paul from Hebrews, what did he say?


"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

Notice His words. "The evidence". Paul had evidence for his faith. It wasn't fedeism, or believing "Just because." He had evidence. He had a basis on which his faith was founded. That's why he could go out into the world and "PROVE" Jesus is the Christ. That's why we need to have evidence to prove what we say. Paul didn't say, I just believe Jesus is the Christ and so should you. He was a master at using the Old Testment Scriptures to prove beyond doubt that Jesus is the Christ. He was so good at it that the Jews tried to kill him.

Paul is not talking about fedeism in Hebrews 11. He had evidence.

 

[Butch5]

That is because many who call themselves Christians do not read the Bible, and what they do believe only comes from someone who does not know the truth, but they think they do.

How could they not know? You said the spirit guides them.

The ten virgins is a perfect example. Five were real believers while other five were not, but they thought they were.

How do you know what the 5 virgins thought? Surely you weren’t there.

 

[Curtis]

How could they not know? You said the spirit guides them.

Not if you are not a child of God.

 

[Charlie24]

Then why don't all born again beleivers believe the same things? Some people believe Christians can lose salvation and some don't. These are opposing positions that can't both be true. How can Christians who have the spirit not be in ag

You've got Romans 8 out of context. Paul was speaking of the inheritance. Which I don't think you believe.

Sure. A person can "just believe". The problem is you have no basis for that belief which is why the atheists you speak of dismiss you. You're essentially telling you believe, "just because". I can believe the sky is green. I don't have any basis for it. I "just believe" it.

But, if we have no basis for our belief we have no way to defend our belief. Sure, one can say the Bible is the basis for my belief. However, they have no basis on which to base the Bible, so they have no basis on which to base their faith.

Notice the passage you posted from Paul from Hebrews, what did he say?


"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

Notice His words. "The evidence". Paul had evidence for his faith. It wasn't fedeism, or believing "Just because." He had evidence. He had a basis on which his faith was founded. That's why he could go out into the world and "PROVE" Jesus is the Christ. That's why we need to have evidence to prove what we say. Paul didn't say, I just believe Jesus is the Christ and so should you. He was a master at using the Old Testment Scriptures to prove beyond doubt that Jesus is the Christ. He was so good at it that the Jews tried to kill him.

Paul is not talking about fedeism in Hebrews 11. He had evidence.

If you had read all of my post, doubtful, you would have seen that I also have proof through the Holy Spirit.

That proof involves faith, and a willingness to to work with God.

When the pot boils down, it's blind faith. There is nothing you can hold in your hand and say, "look Atheists, here it is, the facts you require and must see, here it is.

If you evidence the proper faith in God, and prove that faith by turning at His reproof, that is when God will settle it all in your heart.

The fears, the doubts, the agony of it all is taken away. You're left with peace no matter what's going on with others.