What is the Gospel?

[Danoh]

This does seem to imply that the time of the resurrection (ie the third day) was revealed in the the OT...though, no doubt, not explicit.



What say you daqq?

If I understood him right, actually, he replied to that back in page 200, where he mentioned Galatians.

Rom. 5:6-8.

 

[meshak]

Yep; that first question is basically the very first question the Jehovah's Witness starts a conversation with, when approaching people with their Watch Tower propaganda.

And its a good question. One that can and should be dealt with.

1 - The problem is that the JW's use of it is strategically based on very specific sales tactics the JW is unwittingly taught to use throughout his or her presentation, or what the Apostle Paul negatively refers to as "the wisdom of words" in passages like....

1 Corinthians 1:17's "For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect."

2- Another problem with your "why would a loving God do" this; that; the other, is that it intentionally appeals to the ignorance about such things in the average person; including the average "church goer."

It is the exact tatic that Genesis 3 depicts the Adversary subtily applying during his attempted and successful tempting of Adam thru Eve.

Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

3 - Lastly, of other issues with it that could be cited and or explored in depth, is the simple fact that it was a loving God Who sent His Son to suffer that horrible death for ALL.

"What loving Father would have" allowed the following?

But He did just that.

Luke 22:39 And he came out, and went, as he was wont, to the mount of Olives; and his disciples also followed him. 22:40 And when he was at the place, he said unto them, Pray that ye enter not into temptation. 22:41 And he was withdrawn from them about a stone's cast, and kneeled down, and prayed, 22:42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done. 22:43 And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him. 22:44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.

Talk about the anxiety of His obviously OVERWHELMING agony that "his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground."

Which only happens to a person under VERY, VERY great, practically UNBEARABLE stress.

No Meshak, you have been deceived.

Your ignorance (unawareness) of basic, sound teaching on this issue way back when you were first approached by the JW cult, allowed them to deceive you into their own self-deception with them.

Of course, that is NO reason to spit on you.

None - At - All.

There is simply no cause for it from ANYONE claiming THEIRS is THE gospel of the G-R-A-C-E - OF GOD."

For God's view of you ALSO and despite the deception you were carefully reeled into by a very strategic cult against your eternal soul - God's view of you NEVERTHELESS continues to be the EVER patient GRACE of how that...

Romans 5:6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. 5:7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

2 Corinthians 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God. 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Until that day when HE ALONE decides against the WILLINGLY lost to.. "speak unto them IN HIS WRATH, and VEX them in his SORE displeasure." Pslam 2:5.

And that is only the kindest part of HIS WRATH...

Personally, what awaits you for your error is more than enough against you - it is no one's call to spit on so confused and lost an individual as you continue to appear to be.

Especially given that one CAN know for SURE whether or not they are saved or lost RIGHT NOW.

This IS a Principle taught IN the Scripture.

1 John 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

Rom. 5:6-8 towards you.

Dear Danoh,

Your lengthy commentary will not faze my faith in God and Jesus.

It is not deception to believe God and Jesus are love.

That's the core or Christianity.

You are the ones who are fooling yourselves.

blessings.

 

[meshak]

You must realise that God will judge fairly, which means He will send people to Hell. Do you not believe this?

1)so you dismiss the main part of God is love?

2)What's the purpose of burning anyone for eternity?

3)That's the most cruelty thing to do and you call that just?

Let me ask you another one.

4)Are you pro-military for Christians, do you support them too?

 

[meshak]

You must realise that God will judge fairly, which means He will send people to Hell. Do you not believe this?

Your interpretation is so out of context.

You don't know God and Jesus' love.

Ok, here is another question for you.

Do you believe the Bible is all literal?

 

[Clete]

Probably because you don't make a habit of reading things into a person's every word.



Believe it or not, the disagreement was over the fact that I said Paul was speaking to believers in 1 Cor. 15:1-4 (with the use of the word "our"). When we see the word "our" in Paul's writings, we can be pretty sure that's the case. "Unless you believed in vain" should have made that clear, in my estimation. Personally, I saw it as a "power trip" that resulted from my offending the Evil One.

I see.

I can't claim I understand the difference there.

The lack of evidence is not an affirmative argument FOR something.

If someone accused you of murdering your neighbor based on the fact that there is no evidence that you didn't do it, you'd object. If, on the other hand, they presented affirmative evidence that you did do it, they'd have a stronger case. The former is an argument from silence.

In the case of Judas, we have good biblical evidence to support the idea that he was not saved when he died, which is way more convincing than to say he wasn't saved based on a lack of evidence to the contrary.

Yes. But let's face it....if I was as "picky", and well spoken as you are, Clete, I wouldn't always be getting into trouble. :chuckle:

Seems to me that you do pretty well. Besides, people who want to disagree with you are gonna find a reason to do so, no matter what you say or how you say it. Attitude is everything.

Clete

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

1)so you dismiss the main part of God is love?

2)What's the purpose of burning anyone for eternity?

3)That's the most cruelty thing to do and you call that just?

Let me ask you another one.

4)Are you pro-military for Christians, do you support them too?

I see that you really don't know or use scripture. No wonder people here eventually avoid you or argue with you etc. This is also why you say you are persecuted or criticised here etc.

Until you learn what your Bible says and believe it you will continue to struggle with other Christians who know more than you, and it's safe to say from talking to others here that most of them seem to know more than you.

How long have you been a believer?

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Your interpretation is so out of context.

You don't know God and Jesus' love.

Ok, here is another question for you.

Do you believe the Bible is all literal?

I would agree that by the end of the Millennial Reign most people will be saved but there will still be a hard core of rebellious humans that will go to Hell.

 

[meshak]

I see that you really don't know or use scripture. No wonder people here eventually avoid you or argue with you etc. This is also why you say you are persecuted or criticised here etc.

Until you learn what your Bible says and believe it you will continue to struggle with other Christians who know more than you, and it's safe to say from talking to others here that most of them seem to know more than you.

How long have you been a believer?

Let me ask you again since you have been avoiding to answer.

Do you believe the Bible is all literal?

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Let me ask you again since you have been avoiding to answer.

Do you believe the Bible is all literal?

You still have not answered my questions in posts #3022 and #3024. Can you see why people here call you a hypocrite?

 

[meshak]

You still have not answered my questions in posts #3022 and #3024. Can you see why people here call you a hypocrite?

Yes, I explained but you did not accept it.

Why does it bother you so much that people call me a hypocrite?

 

[meshak]

You still have not answered my questions in posts #3022 and #3024. Can you see why people here call you a hypocrite?

I explained at my thread of hypocrisy.

They are practicing hypocrisy so their accusation of calling anyone hypocrite is not legit.

They have no business calling anyone hypocrite when they are hypocrites themselves.

I showed example of their hypocritical bashing of their opponents at my thread of hypocrisy.

You seem to believe I am hypocrite too.

You made fun of my thread.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Yes, I explained but you did not accept it.

Why does it bother you so much that people call me a hypocrite?

If you don't respect other peoples questions then how can you expect others to respect yours. This is probably one reason why they call you a hypocrite.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

I explained at my thread of hypocrisy.

They are practicing hypocrisy so their accusation of calling anyone hypocrite is not legit.

They have no business calling anyone hypocrite when they are hypocrites themselves.

I showed example of their hypocritical bashing of their opponents at my thread of hypocrisy.

You seem to believe I am hypocrite too.

You made fun of my thread.

And I explained why I made fun of it and you did not accept that. I can see you are a hypocrite as can others.

 

[meshak]

And I explained why I made fun of it and you did not accept that. I can see you are a hypocrite as can others.

I know that.

You need to remember if your judgment of others is not just, Jesus does not take it lightly.

blessings.

 

[meshak]

It is your word against mine.

Jesus is the Judge.

 

[Clete]

I think Jesus did die for those who hate Him...because that, it seems to me, is what we all have done (assuming the truth of scripture). Psalm 14, Roman 3:23.

There are a couple of senses in which God died for those who hate Him.

1. He didn't have any idea who would believe and who wouldn't and so paid a price sufficient to pay for the whole lot - and then some.
2. Everyone hates God to one degree or another - everyone.

It is difficult for any of us to get a perspective on such as you discuss here (beings in time musing on an entity outside of time).

There is no biblical reason to believe that God exists outside of time. Which, in fact, is a good thing because the concept is self-contradictory and couldn't be true. If the bible claimed that God existed outside of time, it would falsify the bible.

Further, it isn't that much of a stretch at all to suggest that if God had believed that there would be no one who would have faith that He would've simply wiped out the whole mess and moved on. It would be in keeping with what we see God doing or wanting to do in the bible. He wiped out everyone but Noah and his family and if not for Moses talking Him out of it, He'd have wiped out the whole of Israel and started over with Moses.

For me, telling a person that someone (who claims to be God) claims to have died for you to save you...that could be the very thing that induces belief.

I am now unclear that you would do this.

Oh for cry out loud! :bang:

The point is that there is nothing in my doctrine that would preclude or prohibit it. It would in no way contradict anything in my doctrinal worldview to tell anyone I came across that Christ died for them. Whether that actually happens depends on the situation.

Your whole objection doesn't make any sense in the first place because it isn't Limited Atonement that ought to logically prevent a Calvinist from preaching the gospel, its predestination that ought to do that. Every day of their lives, which is filled from dawn to dusk with one choice after another, is lived in contradiction to their doctrine.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Evil.Eye.*{@}*]

There are a couple of senses in which God died for those who hate Him.

1. He didn't have any idea who would believe and who wouldn't and so paid a price sufficient to pay for the whole lot - and then some.
2. Everyone hates God to one degree or another - everyone.


There is no biblical reason to believe that God exists outside of time. Which, in fact, is a good thing because the concept is self-contradictory and couldn't be true. If the bible claimed that God existed outside of time, it would falsify the bible.

Further, it isn't that much of a stretch at all to suggest that if God had believed that there would be no one who would have faith that He would've simply wiped out the whole mess and moved on. It would be in keeping with what we see God doing or wanting to do in the bible. He wiped out everyone but Noah and his family and if not for Moses talking Him out of it, He'd have wiped out the whole of Israel and started over with Moses.


Oh for cry out loud! :bang:

The point is that there is nothing in my doctrine that would preclude or prohibit it. It would in no way contradict anything in my doctrinal worldview to tell anyone I came across that Christ died for them. Whether that actually happens depends on the situation.

Your whole objection doesn't make any sense in the first place because it isn't Limited Atonement that ought to logically prevent a Calvinist from preaching the gospel, it predestination that ought to do that. Every day of their lives, which is filled from dawn to dusk with one choice after another, is lived in contradiction to their doctrine.

Resting in Him,
Clete

I had you nailed within my last post that you dodged and lifted To arrogance towards. You and Glory are of the same spiritual makeup.

As for you... Bob E’ism is a joke, when it becomes a rigid system...! I don’t even think Bob E. Would assert himself as a closed system... but... I don’t know him. The second Open Theology becomes a “closed” systematic system... it is a joke!

God is clearly inside and outside of time simultaneously! Do I know this? No! But simply put... only this befits God. To bind God by any physics is a grievous jest!

“I don’t know” is the best answer in such instances... but if time BINDS God by anything but choice... Hubris has been imbibed by a soul.

Your cup is full.

As far as you employing the words “ground to powder”... I find your mind too rigid to even begin discussion of “judgment” with. You defend Bob E’s Judgment teaching... because you fancy yourself a god. I will speak no more, but to point out the arrogance that dares belittle and in Glory’s place... judge others arrogant.

I know this is to [MENTION=16283]Sonnet[/MENTION] ... but I caught up on your posts and seriously have learned more about what has been going on. I figured I would answer here.

Keep in mind... a lack of an answer is an answer, on my part. And... not the inferred answer by “whosoever” intends to define why I didn’t answer.

Spoiler

I keep seeing these accusations but never with any quotation or post references.

Okay... proof Glory is being "Intellectually Dishonest" with you and others here. She wants to say key Calvinist phrases and claim she doesn't embrace the "L". Well, nope. Not going to happen. She is relentless on others and daily tells many people they are hypocrites and Proud... but do as she says, not as she does!

I addressed this so ardently because [MENTION=6696]Lon[/MENTION] is indeed a Calvinist and he will say the Atonement is sufficient in ability for all, but not "indented" for all. In other words... after hours of debate... Lon will say... "Jesus only died for those that "believe". This is Glorydaz exact stance and it is proven in her very own words!

Calvinist's even say that the Blood "could" save all, but it is not for "all". This is not a semantics GAME! It is saying we shouldn't tell others Jesus died for all. Glorydaz applauded the quote that you initially saw from [MENTION=16283]Sonnet[/MENTION] ... that he had taken from a Calvinist on the site... about it being ... some harsh word like abominable or something... to tell all people that Jesus died for them.

Clete...

You are a scholarly person... reach past the bias. The evidence is clear, and you all would do well to humble and correct Glory! She does it daily for others. It would be well if someone she would listen to would be 100 with her!

I've never been a butt kisser and I never will. I'm transparent and I have even talked as I talk sometimes publicly... here. I don't hide the music I listen to, language I use, or the fact that I am a saved sinner! You can write this off, but Clete... I didn't get so upset because I dislike Glory... but because I used to see her as a powerful witness, but now... I see hooks that are bad in her.

John 13:35

By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.​

Sonnets Belief or Lack of Belief in Jesus has no thing to do with you or I. Certainly you know he knows this better than all?

Would you tell him... as the hell bound man “you” have judged that he is... that Jesus died for him?

Preach it hypocrite. We've all seen your "love".

I believe him when he says he's a non-believer. I believe he's not only a non-believe, but an active minister of satan. He's condemned himself, and continues to do so by claiming to know what the Gospel says while still rejecting it.

I won't offer the reprobate a chance to keep spitting on the blood of Christ. I'll not tell him that until and IF he ever humbles himself in the sight of the Lord.

I have no issue saying we all struggle with hypocrisy... (We includes I) I have no issue with saying I have imperfect Love. I do feel convicted for all of the hate I've dished out under the applause of people like Glorydaz and others... on this site. The issue here is that this is Glory... again refusing to say the words... Jesus died for ALL.

You say that anything else is essentially demented. Well, by your words... the message and judgment is clear. I would say opinion, but you like the word "Judge".

How so? You won't tell the world Christ died for all - so how GD?

If He had died for all, then all would be saved. Are all saved? No.

So, why would I say something that isn't true? Instead, I say what is true.

So, NO, I will not tell an unbeliever that Jesus died for his sins,

This is Limited Atonement... flirtation... and though the Atonement is said to be "Sufficient"... she is iterating that she refuses to tell the unbeliever that Jesus died for them.

The attitude here appears to be that the Holy Spirit isn't there to explain this to the individual... but instead... Glory inserts herself into the need of the person knowing that the person will die in their sins... the issue here is that Glory knows that Sonnet already knows this portion of the Gospel and thus... Glory is deferring.... to a 50% argument that says... "No... Because that person may die in their sins if I tell them Jesus Died for their sins..."

Sonnets point and the Bibles is "Behold what manner of LOVE"... "While we were yet sinners"... "He Who justifies the Ungodly" "While we were at enmity"...

when that man may very well die in his sins, never coming to belief in God. I tell them to BELIEVE on the Lord Jesus Christ and they will be saved. Sins are paid for by the blood. If they do not apply the blood through faith, they have no access to that blood.

Sonnet didn't ask this... and Glory knows Sonnet already knows what she is intentionally saying to avoid saying "Jesus died for even the unbelieving". The fact remains that Glory corrects people for saying that Jesus died for all. You can even go to Pate's threads and see her in action. She's becoming a regular TULIP Bee. She's Duplicitous and I wanted to drop this, but you exonerated her out of friendship, instead of doing research for a matter you decided to help mediate. I trusted you to research something you were stepping into without bias.

I was wrong.

It's called Christianity. The term "Free Will" works fine for a title used to distinguish a particular doctrine I suppose but it really is a redundancy. There is no such thing as a will that is not free. If you are not free to choose, you have no will - period.

Clete,

I'm glad you are a "Will" Theist. I see your point, but think we have to say "Free" because of the massive damage Reformed influence has had on western civilization. It's like people need to be reminded they have a brain God gave them, and they are allowed to use it.

Oh boo-hoo!

Look, you either need to grow a thicker skin or else find a different hobby.

This is in response to me forgiving someone for calling me an Unbeliever, a source of discord, invalid and many other things that have been leveled all throughout this thread.

Did I lose my stuff? Oh yes. I admitted shame for losing it! I even wanted to speak kindly to [MENTION=13955]glorydaz[/MENTION] , but she mocked me when I did and like a fool, I took the bait and talked to her like she consistently talks to others... out of pride and hostility, while hiding behind a thin veil of self justification.

If you actually were emotionally invested in me as a friend like you are Glory, you would have had the courtesy to look through this thread before you said something so void of a Holy Spirit Softened Heart... but the fact remains that you most likely dislike certain views I have and know that I don't believe in "Republican Moral Majority Jesus"... thus... you claim I don't have thick skin.

The truth is that I was enormously applauded when I ripped people to shreds and placed Theological agenda over human compassion.

I literally burned all of that applause and humbled myself for my errors... out of conviction of the Holy Spirit. I wanted all the credibility I had obtained while hurting fellow human beings that Jesus died for... to go away... hence... I asked [MENTION=12969]Sherman[/MENTION] to please destroy my old EE account.

The book of James supports my case and explains what the Holy Spirit has done to my heart.

It would help if you'd start practicing biblical forgiveness rather than the blanket, forgive everyone for everything nonsense that permeates popular culture and most churches.

Like when Jesus said... "I did not come to condemn the world but to save it"? Or, when He said... "Woman where are your accusers... I accuse you neither".

Or, how about... "Father forgive them, they know not what they do"?

How about... "Forgive 70 X 7"?

I think the issue is Bob E. is an idol here... and he promotes judging sinners that Jesus died for. How do I know Jesus died for even the sinners that Christians like to single out? Because Paul makes it clear... "WHILE WE WERE YET SINNERS, CHRIST DIED FOR US"...

Funny how the whole judge not thing comes into light. I judge doctrine, not people.. and brother... there is a difference and Christianity as a whole would be much more full of the flavor of Love if it understood.

When most Christians in the US are a step away from Westborro Baptist Church... just without the guts they have to boldly proclaim their hatred for people... We have a problem Denver Bible. (See what I did? I replaced Houston with DBC) DBC looks wonderful BTW... I wish I could go there. The outreach on their web site, does look enormously valuable. That means a bunch!

It isn't right to forgive those who have not repented.

So forgiveness as Jesus taught is a sham? The "Love your enemy" and "While we were yet Sinners" thing should clear this up.

I think Jesus has taken a back seat to the religion built around Him. We all screw up! Judge NOT means more that most admit. And why? Because people like to point fingers and say... "ewwwwww"... thank God I'm not them. James 2 and Romans 2 explain that that is spiritual SUICIDE!

Paul tells us that we will judge the world and even the angels and Jesus teaches us to judge rightly. Do so!

I wonder who our example will be? Jesus... perhaps? He's the light and He showed us that the brutal and Spiritually judgmental of others sins are the ones that have the heat coming.

Remember Matthew 23? Remember that He came for the SINNERS and not the "Self Righteous"?

Resting in Him,
Clete

Contained in the spoiler is a link of Glorydaz teaching apathy. If we don't put our heart that Jesus gave us into the matter... we are worthless Gongs and Clanging cymbals.

Love exercises GRACE and GRACE is the FACE God wears when He sees imperfect, wicked us.

Spoiler

Glorydaz justifying apathy... despite the New Heart that Jesus gives us

Resting in His Grace and aware I am a flawed human being that was saved by the PERFECT King of Kings,

Nameless.in.Grace.Evil.Eye.<(@)>

Spoiler

It would depend on the circumstance. I wouldn't prohibit saying it to them but I may decide that it's wiser to allow him to be the evil person he desires to be. (Revelation 22:11a)


I don't understand why people think it's okay to treat complex things as though they are so simplistic. People are complex things and relationships between them are even more so. Discernment is required in all things when dealing people, especially when dealing with issues as important and complex as their relationship with the living God. Otherwise well meaning Christians very often do more harm than good with their preaching of the gospel. It turns my stomach to see some syrupy sweet Christian being "nice" to the homosexual, trying to twist his arm into reciting the so called sinner's prayer before giving so much as lip service to the fact that he's wretched, wicked, evil and disgusting and that he's in serious danger of spending eternity in Hell if he doesn't acknowledge is decrepit state and repent of it.

There's no point in throwing a life preserver to a man who doesn't think he's even wet, much less drowning.

Additionally, there is the man who knows the gospel and is actively hostile to it. We are not admonished to preach anything to such a person. Whether our doctrine acknowledges that Christ died for his sins or not does not necessitate our communicating that fact to him over and over in spite of his hostility to it. And if we did, it would just as likely further the hardening of his heart as it would anything else.

Not only that but a straight out of the clear blue sky preaching of the gospel usually has no effect at all anyway. There has to be some sort of a relationship that gives the hearer some reason to think that they ought to listen to anything you've got to say. He has to have some reason to think that you know what you're talking about and that what you are saying has any bearing on his life and situation. It's just not as simple as you want to pretend.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Evil.Eye.*{@}*]

As far as [MENTION=13959]meshak[/MENTION] is concerned... at least Meshak has the fortitude to recognize that scripture defines how we should treat one another. I’ve screwed that up... and I might just screw up again... but the Spirit lets me know and I admit it!
[MENTION=13959]meshak[/MENTION]... don’t let them provoke you to anger... Glory and Crews Game is to do that and then say... aha! Or dig up your past posts and say... aha!

Love keeps no record of wrongs... so have no worries and again... forgive and move on. I know you know this... I’m just trying to encourage you.

 

[glorydaz]

I see.


The lack of evidence is not an affirmative argument FOR something.

If someone accused you of murdering your neighbor based on the fact that there is no evidence that you didn't do it, you'd object. If, on the other hand, they presented affirmative evidence that you did do it, they'd have a stronger case. The former is an argument from silence.

In the case of Judas, we have good biblical evidence to support the idea that he was not saved when he died, which is way more convincing than to say he wasn't saved based on a lack of evidence to the contrary.

Ah, yes, and there is certainly plenty of evidence to support that.

Seems to me that you do pretty well. Besides, people who want to disagree with you are gonna find a reason to do so, no matter what you say or how you say it. Attitude is everything.

Clete

Yep, attitude and motives. One should never be surprised at the lengths some will go to defend their own foolish pride. It's quite the quandary to know when to hold and when to fold.

Proverbs 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

Proverbs 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.​

 

[Evil.Eye.*{@}*]

Ah, yes, and there is certainly plenty of evidence to support that.




Yep, attitude and motives. One should never be surprised at the lengths some will go to defend their own foolish pride. It's quite the quandary to know when to hold and when to fold.

Proverbs 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

Proverbs 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.​

As a senior citizen was driving down the freeway, her car phone rang. Answering, she heard her husband’s voice urgently warning her”, Glory, I just heard on the news that there's a car going the wrong way on 280. Please be careful!"

"Heck," said Glory, "It's not just one car. It's hundreds of them!"