ECT Mid Acts Dispensation salvation #1 salvation #2

[Jerry Shugart]

Joh 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.

That does not change the fact about what is said at John 3:16.

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life" (Jn.3:16).​

Those in the Neo-MAD camp says that a Jew who lived under the law could believe and indeed perish if he didn't do certain works.

 

[Danoh]

deductive reasoning

Mar 16:15 And he said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation.
Mar 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

no baptism of the holy spirit yet ,therefore water

Eph 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—
Eph 4:5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism,

one Spirit one baptism of the spirit

A thought...

Deductive reasoning goes hand in hand with, and greatly relies on Inductive reasoning.

Inductive reasoning gathers information it then examines towards forming a Premise it then attempts to Deduce a Conclusion from which it then Asserts.

If the Induction is off, all the rest will end up off, but because it is based on the Induction, it will appear to make "make sense" to its particular subscriber.

Consider, for example, the Information Gathering that, say, someone like Columbus must have focused on gathering and examining, in contrast to that Information most everyone else gathered and formed a Premise on, and so on...

In one, the "tradition" was that "the world is flat; every one knows that.."

In the other the realization was "no its not; watch this you - fourteen ninety two!"

In this, when ever I see some fool post this, that, or the other supposedly sound because it is based in "Church History, Josephus, this or that scroll, and Drs so and so..." I know right off, I am dealing with someone possibly bought into a mess not based in their own Induction - Premise-Deduction - Conclusion - Assertion....

I know I am dealing with someone who's Premise is based on another man's labors.

I know I am possibly dealing with someone who does not stand much of a chance of knowing how to look at what is actually in front of him.

I know I am dealing with someone likely to conclude that "God forbid" I am not adhering to "the Traditions."

I know I am dealing with someone likely to conclude that just as they right off pull out their wallet and buy the next book in that mess, it must mean that I and some of mine, do as well.

This is as predictable as the fact that ships will not fall off the earth, at some point on that Ocean blue.

As predictable as the responses to this post will be.

 

[Nick M]

Are you talking about speaking in tongues?

all necessary prophesy is done.

It's all in the Scripture.

I am glad you are gone. However, this is the only post I have seen you make that is correct about the Bible.

 

[way 2 go]

A thought...

Deductive reasoning goes hand in hand with, and greatly relies on Inductive reasoning.

Inductive reasoning gathers information it then examines towards forming a Premise it then attempts to Deduce a Conclusion from which it then Asserts.

If the Induction is off, all the rest will end up off, but because it is based on the Induction, it will appear to make "make sense" to its particular subscriber.


As predictable as the responses to this post will be.

induction
Logic : any form of reasoning in which the conclusion, though supported by the premises, does not follow from them necessarily.

which would be this

Eph 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—
Eph 4:5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism,

one Spirit one baptism of the spirit


deduction
Logic : a process of reasoning in which a conclusion follows necessarily from the premises presented, so that the conclusion cannot be false if the premises are true.

which would be this

Mar 16:15 And he said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation.
Mar 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

no baptism of the holy spirit yet ,therefore water

 

[way 2 go]

That does not change the fact about what is said at John 3:16.

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life" (Jn.3:16).​

.

Joh 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.

adds a warning

 

[Danoh]

induction
Logic : any form of reasoning in which the conclusion, though supported by the premises, does not follow from them necessarily.

which would be this

Eph 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—
Eph 4:5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism,

one Spirit one baptism of the spirit


deduction
Logic : a process of reasoning in which a conclusion follows necessarily from the premises presented, so that the conclusion cannot be false if the premises are true.

which would be this

Mar 16:15 And he said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation.
Mar 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

no baptism of the holy spirit yet ,therefore water

Sure, if you go by definitions on Google and in books - try rolling up your own sleeves as to such "logic" for a change :bang:

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Joh 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.

adds a warning

That is a faulty translation. Here is a correct one:

"He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him" (Jn.3:36; KJV).​

 

[way 2 go]

Sure, if you go by definitions on Google and in books - try rolling up your own sleeves as to such "logic" for a change :bang:

 

[Interplanner]

That is a faulty translation. Here is a correct one:

"He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him" (Jn.3:36; KJV).​

the verb in question is 'pisteuo' although again 'pistis' can mean to remain loyal, to accomplish an involved task, to be consistent, ie, faithful to the end. (Even the English has the stem 'faith' in that one!)

 

[rainee]

I am glad you are gone. However, this is the only post I have seen you make that is correct about the Bible.

Have you really picked the right point to agree with her on?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

the verb in question is 'pisteuo' although again 'pistis' can mean to remain loyal, to accomplish an involved task, to be consistent, ie, faithful to the end. (Even the English has the stem 'faith' in that one!)

That is not what it means at John 3:36. At that verse it means the same as it does here:

" And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house" (Acts 16:30-31).

Do you agree?

 

[Interplanner]

I don't know what else they talked about Jerry, at the prison. It may have been the last thing after a long talk about human works and religion, in which case there would be a high contrast to Judaism and religion.

this is why Reformation hermeneutics has always said:
"favor the systematic over the incidental"
among about 4 primary principles of interpretation

This is an incidental use without much context. It has nowhere even close the context which Romans or Galatians has.

 

[Danoh]

the verb in question is 'pisteuo' although again 'pistis' can mean to remain loyal, to accomplish an involved task, to be consistent, ie, faithful to the end. (Even the English has the stem 'faith' in that one!)

I can't resist responding to your words here - they are so "on the money."

Consider adding to them further what you mentioned in a later post.

In that, by doing so, you would know the certainty of your above words here even more so - were you to apply the "systematic" as to John's overall narrative.

That, in contrast to merely relying, as you also later noted; on the uncertainty that the "incidental" alone, often is.

Likewise as to what went on in Acts 16.

It is evident throughout Paul's preaching and or teaching; and that the "systemic" once more allows.

For Paul was consistent in what he preached and taught - we can know from it as a whole what principles he would basically cover when preaching and teaching.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I don't know what else they talked about Jerry, at the prison. It may have been the last thing after a long talk about human works and religion, in which case there would be a high contrast to Judaism and religion.

this is why Reformation hermeneutics has always said:
"favor the systematic over the incidental"
among about 4 primary principles of interpretation

This is an incidental use without much context. It has nowhere even close the context which Romans or Galatians has.

After saying all that then tell me what Paul and those with him were saying when they answered the question in the following way:

"And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house" (Acts 16:30-31).​

 

[Interplanner]

That Christ's work seems to have been presented. That is the object of faith. We know from Paul generally that faith is not a work, not to be spoken of as a work we do. It is also a gift, Eph 2:8. So if he believed on the work of Christ in the Gospel as usually explained, he would be justified from the debt of his sins.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

That Christ's work seems to have been presented. That is the object of faith. We know from Paul generally that faith is not a work, not to be spoken of as a work we do. It is also a gift, Eph 2:8. So if he believed on the work of Christ in the Gospel as usually explained, he would be justified from the debt of his sins.

In other words. he was saved when he believed the gospel.

 

[Interplanner]

You make too much of the individual's decision-moment Jerry. There has to be all the content and understanding in place. Otherwise the decision itself appears to have atoning powers. It does not. The work of Christ has that. Try to let things have that weight all the way through.

Have you ever heard a "evangelistic" presention where they were in a hurry to get a decision made? This is cart before horse and the cart smells badly. Every person has questions and these must be answered. He must be dealt with as a whole person. It is God's job to call his people when the message is explained thoroughly. It is not our job to get people to make decisions when the message is explained badly. That is why "faith is a gift; not of yourselves, lest any man should boast" God doesnt' want us boasting about our faith.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

You make too much of the individual's decision-moment Jerry. There has to be all the content and understanding in place. Otherwise the decision itself appears to have atoning powers.

That is the most ridiculous argument which I have ever heard.

When a person believes he receives the blessings which flow from the Cross, and one of those blessings is salvation:

"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth" (Ro.1:16).​

So believing does not appear to have atoning powers except among those who are totally confused..

 

[DAN P]

That is the most ridiculous argument which I have ever heard.

When a person believes he receives the blessings which flow from the Cross, and one of those blessings is salvation:

"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth" (Ro.1:16).​

So believing does not appear to have atoning powers except among those who are totally confused..

Hi , and will you comment on Rom 10:9 ??

You have to BELIEVE , do you not ?

dan p

 

[Danoh]

You make too much of the individual's decision-moment Jerry. There has to be all the content and understanding in place. Otherwise the decision itself appears to have atoning powers. It does not. The work of Christ has that. Try to let things have that weight all the way through.

Have you ever heard a "evangelistic" presention where they were in a hurry to get a decision made? This is cart before horse and the cart smells badly. Every person has questions and these must be answered. He must be dealt with as a whole person. It is God's job to call his people when the message is explained thoroughly. It is not our job to get people to make decisions when the message is explained badly. That is why "faith is a gift; not of yourselves, lest any man should boast" God doesnt' want us boasting about our faith.

But for your notion that faith is a gift, I couldn't agree more with the rest of what you wrote - if there is one thing Galatians asserts, it is that the gospel of Christ clearly laid out is of paramount importance.

Galatians 3:

1. O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?