A Peculiar Kind of Gospel

[Sozo]

Originally posted by lighthouse

I never said you weren't a believer. I just said you're wrong.

I am the one that affirms he is not, because he repeatedly affirms that he does not "believe" that it is the righteousness of God that saves him. The gospel is the revelation of the righteousness of God in Christ. He believes and teaches righteousness through his deeds.

I have offered him an opportunity to accept my challenge. We shall see how he responds. Seriously, I doubt that he is up to the task, apart from quoting his "theological" heros.

 

[Zakath]

Originally posted by Sozo

Being as complicated and scholarly as you are, Zakath, why do you run and hide or lie about your health, everytime you are challenged to defend your world view?

"Run and hide"?
"Lie about my health"? What are you talking about, Sozo?

 

[Zakath]

Originally posted by elohiym

Do you understand that your signature line is repugnant to many people?

I understand that my sig may be repugnant to a few fundy wackjobs, yes.

From what I've read, even at TOL, they do not make up a group large enough to be called "many".

 

[Zakath]

Originally posted by Sozo

Do you understand that Zakath is repugnant to all maggots?

Unsurprising, since maggots generally only consume dead tissue...

... once again your ignorance blunts your attempted wit, Sozo. :nono:

 

[Sozo]

Originally posted by Zakath

"Run and hide"?
"Lie about my health"? What are you talking about, Sozo?

Just like the Egyptians... when the truth will set you free, you are in de Nile.

 

[Sozo]

Originally posted by Zakath

Unsurprising, since maggots generally only consume dead tissue...

But, you are dead.

 

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by Sozo

I am the one that affirms he is not, because he repeatedly affirms that he does not "believe" that it is the righteousness of God that saves him. The gospel is the revelation of the righteousness of God in Christ. He believes and teaches righteousness through his deeds.

I have offered him an opportunity to accept my challenge. We shall see how he responds. Seriously, I doubt that he is up to the task, apart from quoting his "theological" heros.

I agree with you, the he teaches works-salvation, even though he does not believe that he does. I do not believe that I was unsaved when I believed as he does. But the more he denies the scripture that contradicts his beliefs, the more I tend to agree that he is not truly saved. We will see.

 

[Zakath]

Originally posted by Sozo

Just like the Egyptians... when the truth will set you free, you are in de Nile.

"Eating leeks and onions by the Nile...
Ohh what breath, but dining out in style..."
- Ken Medema

Your too little too late, Sozo. Your pathetic efforts are a bit like trying to explain away your failure put the air back into a burst balloon by claiming there was never really any air in the balloon in the first place.

 

[Zakath]

Originally posted by Sozo

But, you are dead.

Sick maybe, but not dead yet. :thumb:

 

[Lighthouse]

Zakath-
You're dead, already...and you've always been dead. You don't even know what it means to be alive.

 

[Sozo]

Hey godrulz, are you going to respond to This post?

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by Lawless

Quote: godrulz



I am not well versed in these labels used here on TOL ( Mid-Acts dispensationalism ), but if that is what corresponds to my comment, then that is fine. How do you Label yourself?

As to Pastor Enyart.... I have just finished reading the Debate " Does God exist". Very enjoyable for sure! I thought he did a remarkable job, what did you think?

I am not Mid-Acts, but agree with some other form of dispensationalism.

I liked Enyart's debate with Zakath.

I believe in biblical eternal security, not unconditional eternal security (OSAS). We are secure in Christ, unless we renounce Him and become apostate (then, logically, we are no longer 'in Christ').

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by lighthouse

Young's Literal Translation


Looks like the NIV fails again.

Either translation is fine. The problem is with your interpretation of the translation.

And who says Young's is preferable? The truth is that the one Gospel was taken to two different audiences.

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by lighthouse

I never said you weren't a believer. I just said you're wrong.

I thought you implied it. I give you more credit than sozo to realize we can differ without negating our precious salvation. I plan to shake sozo's hand in heaven. I look forward to meeting you also.

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by Sozo

I am the one that affirms he is not, because he repeatedly affirms that he does not "believe" that it is the righteousness of God that saves him. The gospel is the revelation of the righteousness of God in Christ. He believes and teaches righteousness through his deeds.

I have offered him an opportunity to accept my challenge. We shall see how he responds. Seriously, I doubt that he is up to the task, apart from quoting his "theological" heros.

I agree that we are saved by the righteousness of Christ. I disagree that we have no responsibility or volition in our discipleship and growth.

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by lighthouse

I agree with you, the he teaches works-salvation, even though he does not believe that he does. I do not believe that I was unsaved when I believed as he does. But the more he denies the scripture that contradicts his beliefs, the more I tend to agree that he is not truly saved. We will see.

Give me a massive break, grasshopper.

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by Sozo

He hasn't, but He has made me a judge of false teachers.

"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves"

"Watch out and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees."

"Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the false circumcision"

I have a command to publically oppose you, so that others will not be taken in by your schemes and distortions of the gospel.

"But what I am doing, I will continue to do, that I may cut off opportunity from those who desire an opportunity to be regarded just as we are in the matter about which they are boasting. For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. Therefore it is not surprising if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness"

Demons know that both those are true. Then you are either insane, suffering from Alzheimers, double-minded, or practing more of your deceptive practices, because you have consistently affirmed the contrary. YOU have "affirmed", over and over again, that Christians can make them(selves) unrighteous through a variety of acts. YOU are still putting righteousness into the hands of self and out of the hands of God. YOU are preaching and defending a gospel of self-righteousness! We are painfully aware of your constant Heinz 57 variety of "acceptable" gospels.

Jesus and Paul were never angry at false teachers?

Perhaps, but at least I know what he taught, and that he didn't make ignorant claims about 5 "acceptable" views on sactification. I doubt that there is anyone at TOL who would not agree that I am in fact quite a character! YOU don't have to accept what I teach, but I have ALL authority to proclaim it. But it is primarily those "truths" which you pervert into another gospel message.


BOTTOM LINE godrulz... I have always, and am now willing to debate you on the issues, but you NEVER respond to those proof texts that expose your false ideas, and you ALWAYS revert back to your foolish statements that there are a plethera of acceptable "truths" within the pale of orthodoxy.

I will stop insulting you when you are willing to discuss these "truths" one by one, rather than your constant obfuscations into what other so-called theologians accept as truth. DEAL?

What is important, is what YOU believe!

Acceptable views do not mean they are all equally valid or correct. The challenge is to determine which is more biblical. Godly believers and scholars from various denominations claim biblical support for their view (as you do). I would be slow to be dogmatic when there appears to be some biblical support for different perspectives. Correct translation and exegesis will lead to a better conclusion.

The NT false teachers (incipient Gnosticism, Docetists, legalists, etc.) were the topic of concern for Paul, John, Jude, etc. Nuances of evangelical theology are not in the same category as these historical heresies.

Is the late Keith Green (Last Days Ministries) in heaven (sozo the Judge of men)? He was more passionate and effective for the Kingdom than you or I combined. He loved Jesus and the lost. Oh, but he was influenced by the writings of Charles Grandison Finney. This means he goes to hell? Either Green and I will both be in heaven, or we will both be in hell. Which one is it sozo? (Who is the false teacher here. You make salvation conditional on theological excellence rather than faith in Christ. This sounds like works salvation to me).

Billy Graham? (will he go)?

John and Charles Wesley?

Martin Luther?

Charles Finney?

Jonathan Edwards?

John Calvin?
Arminius?
Origen?
Church Fathers?
Billy Sunday?
William Booth?
Sproul? Packer?
Anselm?
Augustine?
Dwight Pentecost?
Moody?
LaHaye?
Dave Hunt?
Walter Martin?
Lloyd-Jones?
Spurgeon?

etc. etc.

These men would agree and disagree on many things (both of us would agree/disagree with different things in their views).

How do you determine who goes to heaven or hell? Few would express your exact wording of your understanding of every issue.

If these men go to heaven because they trust Christ as Lord and Savior (without expressing your views specifically), why do I go to hell for disagreeing with OSAS, seeing practical sanctification as a process of growth in grace and knowledge of Christ (explicit in Scripture), affirming justification by faith, etc.?

I do not wish to debate my salvation with you and feel you do not understand views outside your personal articulations or misrepresent them. The fact you deny the possibility of my salvation shows your lack of discernment. I am interested in light, not heat, so let's quit wasting our time. You have lost your right to speak into my life and to be heard. My faith is built on Christ the solid rock and His righteousness. If you are not mature enough or capable enough to interact with other views that stretch your own ideas, you should find a soap box and get off a forum that encourages expression and interaction with other views.

 

[elohiym]

Originally posted by godrulz

Give me a massive break, grasshopper.

We agree! :chuckle:

 

[Sozo]

Originally posted by godrulz

Give me a massive break

Somehow, I see you saying the same thing to God on the day you meet Him face to face.

 

[Sozo]

Originally posted by godrulz

I disagree that we have no responsibility or volition in our discipleship and growth.

For what, godrulz?

I am not opposed to responsibility or voilition.

This is the crux of our debate, and I find it very odd that you are willing to make such a claim, and do nothing to back it up.