ECT If MAD is False What Does Hebrews 6:4-6 Mean for Us?

I

Interplanner

Well-known member
steko said:
Nope. The LORD Jesus and His disciples proclaimed the 'good news' of the nearness of the prophesied Messianic Davidic Kingdom to Israel.
Click to expand...


But not in the ordinary sense. He is full of making that kind of qualification: it will not come with marked signs etc.

This is the fundamental error that Ryrie tried to make an official doctrine in his 2P2P classic D'ISM TODAY
 
marhig

marhig

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
No, he was the Lamb of God. There was a way for Israel to save its country, but that wasn't the gospel, no matter how good the news was.
Click to expand...

Romans 10

But what saith it? The word is nigh thee,even*in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.[/B]For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.*For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?*And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?*So then faith cometh*by, and hearing by the word of God.*

But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.

But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by*them that are*no people,*and by a foolish nation I will anger you.

But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me.

But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying*people
 
marhig

marhig

Well-known member
musterion said:
So Christ preached faith in His death for sin and resurrection for righteousness for all who believe, Jew and Gentile without any distinction whatsoever, BEFORE the Cross?
Click to expand...

Show me where Jesus preached that we have to have faith in his death on the cross?
 
musterion

musterion

Well-known member
marhig said:
Show me where Jesus preached that we have to have faith in his death on the cross?
Click to expand...

That's the point. He didn't.

But Paul preached exactly that as the saving Good News (1 Cor 15:3-4).

So when you say there is only ONE saving Good News in all of the N.T., you're automatically saying they all preached the same thing.

They didn't. They didn't even call all of the good newses by the same name.

Yet you insist there's only one.

I can't make it any clearer to you than that. Maybe someone else can help you if you still don't see the implications of what you said.
 
marhig

marhig

Well-known member
musterion said:
That's the point. He didn't.

But Paul preached exactly that as the saving Good News (1 Cor 15:3-4).

So when you say there is only ONE saving Good News in all of the N.T., you're automatically saying they all preached the same thing.

They didn't. They didn't even call all of the good newses by the same name.

Yet you insist there's only one.

I can't make it any clearer to you than that. Maybe someone else can help you if you still don't see the implications of what you said.
Click to expand...
No one preached that we are saved by having faith in the death of Jesus on the cross. Where does it say that in the Bible?

We are saved by the grace of God through faith, that's faith in God and Christ not faith in his death on the cross!
 
steko

steko

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Interplanner said:
But not in the ordinary sense. He is full of making that kind of qualification: it will not come with marked signs etc./
Luk 21:25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
Luk 21:26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
Luk 21:27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
Luk 21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.

It certainly looks like marked signs to me....in the ordinary sense.


This is the fundamental error that Ryrie tried to make an official doctrine in his 2P2P classic D'ISM TODAY
Click to expand...

Your fundamental error runs all the way back to the influence of the pagan Greek philosopher Ammonius Saccas over the Alexandrian theologian Origen in the 2nd and 3rd century
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
marhig

marhig

Well-known member
steko said:
He demonstrated that He was the prophesied Messiah of Israel and she believed it.
Click to expand...

John 4

So when the Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that he would tarry with them: and he abode there two days. And many more believed because of his own word;*And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard*him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.

Jesus preached the gospel to the Samaritans, and they believed his word and they believed that he was indeed the Christ the saviour of the world.

Sorry I must go and clean up the house.
 
Tattooed Theist

Tattooed Theist

New member
Lighthouse said:
So salvation can be lost and once that happens a person is lost forever?


Unless Jesus is the One who commanded it be out? Like He changed the rules on circumcision or food, for instance.

Because, really, there is nothing inherently moral or righteous about baptism in and of itself.


But the question does rise: why were the 12 apostles to the 12 tribes of Israel commanded to baptize, and yet Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, was not?
Click to expand...


I suppose my initial question would be, why do you care so much about baptism? Baptism has never been a prerequisite for salvation, nor is it today, within all non denominational churches I deal with. I do not speak for denominations that require, but only to my own. (Edited for musterion) It's a simple public declaration of faith. (per our use in my culture.)
For believers to argue it to the point of frustration or discontent, to me, Jesus would be and is very disappointed.

Next, the question arises, and then falls as virtually irrelevant. A better question would be, why do you believe Jews needed water baptism and Gentiles did not?



  1. Jesus healed her daughter in spite of the fact He was not sent to her people. He did so because her faith was so strong, even in the face of being called a dog, by Jesus, by the way. That's right, Jesus did reject her, at first. She kept coming. Her faith was persistent, and so was she. That is why He granted her request.
  2. In post 4841598 you used a single verse out of context.
Click to expand...

This changes literally nothing that I said. He still did it. Just like He still, against his wants, adhered to His mother's wishes in Matthew.
Why, how, etc. Doesn't matter, He did it.




If it's not then Paul was a fraud.


:doh:

1.What he said was that Paul saying that he [Paul] was not sent to baptize was obviously in reference to what Christ did and did not send Paul to do.


2.But it would mean that the command of baptism wasn't to all, and therefore you are assuming it is to you. So, can you support that assumption?


3.For instance, as we've shown, Jesus was sent to Israel and not the Gentiles in His time on Earth. But many of the things He said in ministering to them are applicable to the Body of Christ in this present dispensation. While others are not.


4.Did you miss the rest of his response? That wasn't a "one word answer" in the slightest. He actually agreed with you, and you responded as though he was being argumentative. If this is how you treat Scripture no wonder you're so ignorant* of what it says.



I don't see how one could reject Him having known Him.

But that's beside the point right now. This passage says it's impossible to be renewed to repentance once one has fallen away after having tasted the heavenly gift, etc. Explain that.
Click to expand...

1. Yes, so one man. One single man, was sent out with a mission that was not baptism. So due to that fact, you assume all are meant to disregard baptism?

2. There is nothing harmful of baptism. It does not distract or take away anything in terms of doctrine or a church community. So.... better safe than sorry? At the very least.

3. You've shown that His mission was to Israel, yes. Although He DID minister, heal, etc. Those outside of that cultural group. Thus, it is not all inclusive.

4. My Ignorance, sir, is certainly the majority among Scholars in how scripture is read on this topic (MAD).
Personal insults are unnecessary, and show very poorly of your conversation skills.

So to your insult, I will compliment you. I respect very much your resolve, as well as your thorough research on the topic. I also appreciate your taste in Television (per your avatar.)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top