JohnW. POTD Wow.
- Thread starter MrDeets
- Start date
- Status
Those may be true...
I am saved by grace through faith in the person and work of Christ. He is not judge, jury, executioner.
There is someone for everyone somewhere, likely.:bowser:
One In Christ
New member
I agree. The Grace that SOME (johnw and nickm) MADists like to tout that save them from all sinfulness and unbelief somehow doesn't cover you, because your not MAD, is beyond me.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Are you speaking of godrulz, specifically?
One In Christ
New member
Why, should I not be?
In johnw's view, a person can hate Jesus, worship Satan, kill people, be an atheist and still be OSAS, yet a person like myself who affirms the Bible, received Jesus as Lord and Savior, worships Jesus as God Almighty risen from the dead, etc. is not saved because I reject MAD, reject OSAS, etc. etc.
john is more extreme than most OSAS on this.
STP, this is what I mean by lack of credibility on john's part.
I do not lump you in with him. I can live with our disagreements, but jw is hard to stomach.
Jw is more extreme than I. I believe that a person's conduct is very telling if they are a Christian or not. If a person hates Jesus, well obviously they are not saved. If someone his a homosexual, obviously they are not saved.
I also do not lump everyone who does not agree with me into the unsaved category. Jw is going to be surprised when he gets to Heaven and finds you, Bybee, AMR and a whole lot of others there. :chuckle:
I also do not lump everyone who does not agree with me into the unsaved category. Jw is going to be surprised when he gets to Heaven and finds you, Bybee, AMR and a whole lot of others there. :chuckle:
No one said that grace is not available to William. The issue is that William denies that grace is applied to him because he could theoretically deny Christ and live in continuous, habitual sin and die an unsaved soul and go to hell.
Since he believes that to be possible and he stands in denial of the very word of God on the subject [He therefore admits the Spirit has not borne witness with his spirit] we believe William is not currently in Christ. If he was then he would not deny such truths in the word because he would have the mind of Christ and would know the truth to be the truth.
I have full assurance as a believer. The Spirit DOES bear witness with my spirit that I am saved. The Word also concurs: Jn. 1:12; Jn. 3:16; Jn. 14:6; Acts 4:12; Rom. 1:16; Rom. 10:9-10; Eph. 2:8-10; Titus 3:5; I Jn. 5:11-13.
You have a false, manmade assurance that is Calvinistic (OSAS/POTS). This is an unresolved doctrinal debate held by equally capable, godly believers. Arminians/free will theists/most Open Theists are right to reject determinism, TULIP, OSAS. Rejecting OSAS is NOT rejecting the gospel, Christ, God, Bible. It is rejecting a doctrinal dispute that has raged for centuries.
For a Calvinist to say Arminians are not saved is ridiculous, sectarian, cultish. For a fellow Open Theist to say I am not saved for your above reasons is also retarded (especially since thinking OTs rightly reject Calvinistic OSAS/POTS error).
You also misunderstand and misrepresent my sanctification views. MAD has twisted your mind (as has exchanged life theories). Most of the Body of Christ does not know about EL/MAD, yet are fully saved.
We share a common view of justification/gospel, but differ on sanctification/perseverance of the saints.
It is galling that amateurs on TOL arrogantly think they know more than the greatest Christian thinkers through the centuries.
Would you like a tissue?
If Godrulz believes in the DBR and has received Christ, you are wrong.
Not everything is on the web to check for plagiarism. Books , sermons, tracts may not be on the web. The only way to check if it is someone's work then is to cross examine him. See if you can catch him contradicting what he wrote. I think the work is his,but it just got me to thinking how you would catch someone doing that.
That's the issue; I don't believe he has received Christ because he denies truths which the Spirit would make known to him to be true if he was in Christ.
Now, understand, I did not come to this conclusion lightly. I joined TOL in 2003 and even when I began to disagree with William I did not just assume he was not in Christ. If I were to assume that then I would have had to assume that I was not in Christ at the time I joined TOL, because I agreed with him on most things at that time. Ironically the only major issue [outside of those things generally agreed upon across mainstream Christendom] on which we did not agree when I joined TOL is the only one on which we agree now: the open view.
Now, I spent three years discussing the general issue of eternal security and all entailed: forgiveness of sin as a whole [past, present and future covered in one fell swoop], the righteousness of Christ imputed to the believer and our sins not imputed to us because Christ took all our sin upon Himself on the cross and left it there, our being crucified with Christ and resurrected in His life, etc.
During this time I was not the only one discussing these issues with him. There were a few others, as well. After three years of his denying the plain words of Scripture, that our sin is not imputed to us [he kept saying, "Sin is not something that can be imputed."] no matter how many times he was shown the verses in Romans I finally realized there can be only one explanation for why he says the Bible is wrong. Can you guess what that is?
Well, the fact that he ran away after being caught is pretty telling.
No, I can't guess that. What is it?
I don't see how someone can be around here that long, discussing their faith and not really believe.
Even if some of their theology is off, love will cover a multitude of sins.
He is only caught if he actually did it. You have no proof that he did any plagiarizing. He may simply have not wanted to reveal where he got his ideas from. Putting someone else's ideas into your own words is not plagiarizing.
Well, truth be told, if you check that thread you'll find that I was on it. While I was typing out my response, Johns came up before I hit post.
So, one thing I can say for sure is that the post was already saved and he did paste it.
I would rather have $100.
I Cor. 15:1-4; Jn. 1:12; Rom. 10:9-10; Jn. 3:16; I Jn. 5:11-13.
Only works for Americans, not Canadians, apparently. OSAS or not is simply not justification/gospel. I was saved before I had an opinion on that theological debate. Evangelicals take different positions on a variety of peripheral doctrinal debates.
There are various theories of imputation. Wesley would disagree with other prominent leaders, etc. The context is justification and I fully agree with past sin/justification. As an Open Theist, you should understand the issue I have with you and STP about future sin (may or may not happen). You are assuming flawed exchanged life views, whereas I see aspects that are unbiblical. If this is sufficient to send me to hell, you better tell God that (cannot defend that conclusion from the Word).
Funny how you were saved when you believed my ideas, yet I am not saved and you are still saved when you evolved. For a hyper-grace guy, you are sure legalistic and don't understand grace vs theological infallibility (hence, andy is on to something to smell gnosticism).
- Status