The Wonderful Dispensation of Grace

Bob Hill

TOL Subscriber
Now, in regards to predestination, we find that predestination means to determine beforehand.

The BGD Greek Lexicon gives this definition (edited) decide upon beforehand, predestine, of God predestine someone. When we put our trust for our salvation into Christ and the fact that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose again, then, the Holy Spirit baptizes us into the body of Christ.

Because we are put into Christ by the Holy Spirit, we are put into a predestined program.

God had already predestined the body of Christ to be holy and blameless before Him in love.
Eph 1:3-5 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, 5 having predestined us to adoption as Sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will.

He also predestined us to be conformed to His Son’s image in Rom 8:29: “For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.”

This predestination is for our security once we trust Christ as our Savior.

Most important, His counsel makes our salvation very secure, because God performs everything that must be done for our benefit once we’re saved according to Eph 1:11,12: In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will, 12 that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory.”

The “all things” in verse 11, that is the body of Christ according to Eph 1:23: “which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all [according to the Greek, who fills the all things] in all.”

Therefore, we experience the security of predestination.

Although it could be one of the most disliked doctrines, it is really one of our greatest spiritual blessings. Predestination is not what some try to make it. God doesn’t make everything happen as they say.

Instead of pursuing the idea any further, I want to emphasize again that predestination pertains to our security, not our salvation. Our inheritance is predestined. God takes great pleasure in doing this for us. We become a new creation, we receive a new name, we have a new identity in Christ, and our inheritance is predestined.

How spectacular, that God did all of these things for us.

That’s why I see predestination as a triumph to His praise. Eph 1:6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He has made us accepted in the Beloved. Paul rejoices in this spiritual blessing. Just think, we’re secure in Christ because it is God’s pleasure to make us secure. We should exult in this blessing too, because this grace of predestination is poured out on us. It is our grace, we are accepted because we are in Christ.

Our response to this wonderful spiritual blessing of security should be like Paul’s response in Eph 3:14-21 For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, 16 that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with might through His Spirit in the inner man, 17 that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; that you, being rooted and grounded in love, 18 may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the width and length and depth and height – 19 to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge; that you may be filled unto all the fullness of God. 20 Now to Him who is able to do exceedingly abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that works in us, 21 to Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus to all the generations, of the age of the ages. Amen.

In Christ,
Bob Hill
 

patman

Active member
lightninboy said:
Dear patman,
Thank you for your reply.


You never told me what denomination you went to. Lighthouse thought he had gone to an Acts 2 Dispensationalism church, but it turned out it had an Arminian doctrine.

Here, you can answer Lighthouse’s questions:

Show me where works are required for salvation in this Acts 2 Dispensationalism beliefs statement:
http://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinalstatement/

Show me where water baptism is required for salvation by Acts 2 Dispensationalism churches in the Wikipedia article about baptism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptism

Tell me what John 3:16 means.


Jesus naturally upheld the Israelites’ duty to obey the Law, but where does He ever deny that salvation is by grace through faith plus nothing? Obeying the Law and believing God for salvation are two different things, duh. I can pick up sticks on the Sabbath and still believe God for salvation. Matthew 11:28-30 I will give you rest.


Peter was saved, wasn’t he? And he had to have been saved by grace through faith plus nothing, even if he didn’t think to take the Gospel to the Gentiles. And of course those thousands of other Israelites in the Early Church were saved by grace through faith plus nothing, remember. It was Peter who first took the Gospel to the Gentiles, remember.


Are you saying God failed and Jesus lied when He said “Behold, I come quickly”?
I am interested in the Mid-Acts opinion of the Great Tribulation and End Times. Please post as much good stuff as you can about it.


Duh, you see a need for MAD because you are MAD.

Duh, you didn’t critique #196.

Duh?

I am trying to show you where to look, otherwise you will not even attempt to listen. Who cares what church I went to before, it was Christian Church, that is a denomination, one with an unoriginal name.

I do not like to pile on issues when the confusion is not even addressed. I simply want to show you the reason MAD is needed to unify the gospel. You still do not realize the importance of my point about Peter being dumfounded by Grace way into acts.

You also do not realize that Paul was the one who took the Gospel to the Gentiles, not Peter. Just because Peter did preach to Gentiles in Acts 10 doesn't mean it was his new message to preach. The point is almost useless and gets Acts 2 nowhere, because Peter had to learn about Grace through Paul years later before he got it, and even then he didn't get it because Paul had to rebuke him later on.

IF grace were really the message all along, Jesus could have explained it to them, but he never did. God didn't lie, he didn't make a mistake, the Jews did and rejected God. God didn't force them to change, so he went on to the Gentiles and postponed the Tribulation that was supposed to happen right then.

It is VERY easy to read things into the word at times. Act 2ers, and others as well, do it whenever they try to make Paul's message and the 12 and Jesus' message the same. Instead just read Jesus' words and realize the audience was not the same audience as was Paul's.

And realize that the Other apostles agreed that their audience was the Jews, and Paul's audience was the Gentiles. I already posted that verse last time.

You must also keep in mind that Jesus died for the sins of the world. But that death doesn't mean God killed the law, it means he used his death to save us and that is as basic and as far as we should take it. Doing more is putting words into scripture and implying more than is there.

In grace, Jesus still died for us. In faith+works, Jesus still died for us. But God made the covenant independent of Jesus but made it to work through him.
 

lightninboy

Member
patman proven wrong.

patman proven wrong.

patman said:
Duh? You also do not realize that Paul was the one who took the Gospel to the Gentiles, not Peter.
lightninboy said:
Peter has acted on his new insight by coming without objection (compare Acts 10:20). Now he wants to know why he has been called. Cornelius's response indicates that God has orchestrated this historic meeting, the inauguration of the Gentile mission.
Thus Luke continues to emphasize that the Gentile mission is God's will and would not have happened without divine intervention.

lightninboy has proven patman wrong.


*David holds up Goliath’s head.*


:guitar:
 

patman

Active member
lightninboy said:
lightninboy has proven patman wrong.


*David holds up Goliath’s head.*


:guitar:

Look, lightninboy, I gain nothing from this debate at all. It is nothing for me to drop this and get on with my busy life. I am not angry, but just have a low tolerance for goofiness.

What is this to you, some kind of contest, or do you truly wish to get somewhere?

You have not contradicted me, you have not established anything to convince me that you are right, and certainly not "won"... or whatever you'll call it.

I'll catch you on the flip side.

:wave2:
 

lightninboy

Member
These lists are subject to editing by lightninboy. If you have more data, tell him.

Theology OnLine members against MAD:
lightninboy
elected4ever
Jerry Shugart
Trent
godrulz
Mr. 5020
thelaqachisnext
Berean Todd
themuzicman
Sozo
elohiym
Nimrod
1PeaceMaker
BChristianK
amosman
lowerlevel
Jackson
Morpheus
Nomad
kmoney
Daniel50
csmuda
Chileice
Freak
billwald
Theonomy

Theology OnLine members for MAD:
Jefferson
ApologeticJedi
Knight
Turbo
Lighthouse
patman
Clete
Delmar
Bob Hill
Bob Enyart
*Acts9_12Out*
drbrumley
Hilston
PastorKevin
God_Is_Truth
syntientsynth
MrsDearDelmar
ddevonb
Lucky
Letsargue
Crow
the Sibbie
Cyrus of Persia
Dread Helm
truthteller86
Joe Roberts
Adambassador
Toast
Vaquero45
Stipe
Brother
Frank Ernest
Sharri
webmaster
GuySmiley
Becky
Poly

2/14/2007 edit: The updated lists may be found at this location:

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1336288&highlight=lightninboy#post1336288
 
Last edited:

lightninboy

Member
Jerry Shugart affirms that salvation is always by grace through faith plus nothing, so he is practically Acts 2 Dispensationalism.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
lightninboy said:
Dear Lighthouse,

You have over 14,000 posts of experience on TOL.

Just quit the thread if you don't want to learn from reading it.
That is not the case. I just don't feel like searching for the posts, because I would have to wade through a few pages.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
lightninboy said:
They come across as Mid-Acts for most of their doctrinal statement. However, they do call water baptism and communion sacraments. They were for the dispensation in Acts 2, but they are not now. That, of course, is no reason not to do them, but communion is the only one Paul preached, and there is one baptism now, and it is the one John the Baptist told us Christ would do. Do you know which baptism that is?


Look up baptism in the Wikipedia. There is a chart comparing denominations on baptism.
And?


I got into this debate over a disagreement with Bob Hill on the applicability of John 3:16.
Okay?

Please give examples.
The idea that salvation can be lost by an act of rejection is one. Or the idea that salvation can be lost by sinning, and that you must repent to be re-saved. The A/G teaches that.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
lightninboy said:
16 Fundamental Truths of the Assemblies of God

5. The Salvation of Man
Conditions to Salvation
Salvation is received through repentance toward God and faith toward the Lord Jesus Christ. By the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, being justified by grace through faith, man becomes an heir of God, according to the hope of eternal life.
The Evidence of Salvation
The inward evidence of salvation is the direct witness of the Spirit.
The outward evidence to all men is a life of righteousness and true holiness.
7. The Baptism in the Holy Spirit
All believers are entitled to and should ardently expect and earnestly seek the promise of the Father, the baptism in the Holy Spirit and fire, according to the command of our Lord Jesus Christ. This was the normal experience of all in the early Christian Church. With it comes the enduement of power for life and service, the bestowment of the gifts and their uses in the work of the ministry.
This experience is distinct from and subsequent to the experience of the new birth.
With the baptism in the Holy Spirit come such experiences as:
• an overflowing fullness of the Spirit, John 7:37-39 [KJV/NIV], Acts 4:8 [KJV/NIV]
• a deepened reverence for God, Acts 2:43 [KJV/NIV], Hebrews 12:28 [KJV/NIV]
• an intensified consecration to God and dedication to His work, Acts 2:42 [KJV/NIV]
• and a more active love for Christ, for His Word and for the lost, Mark 16:20 [KJV/NIV]

8. The Initial Physical Evidence of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit
The baptism of believers in the Holy Spirit is witnessed by the initial physical sign of speaking with other tongues as the Spirit of God gives them utterance.
The speaking in tongues in this instance is the same in essence as the gift of tongues, but is different in purpose and use.

9. Sanctification
Sanctification is an act of separation from that which is evil, and of dedication unto God.
The Scriptures teach a life of "holiness without which no man shall see the Lord."
By the power of the Holy Spirit we are able to obey the command: "Be ye holy, for I am holy."
Sanctification is realized in the believer by recognizing his identification with Christ in His death and resurrection, and by the faith reckoning daily upon the fact of that union, and by offering every faculty continually to the dominion of the Holy Spirit.
10. The Church and its Mission
The Assemblies of God exists expressly to give continuing emphasis to this reason for being in the New Testament apostolic pattern by teaching and encouraging believers to be baptized in the Holy Spirit. This experience:
1. Enables them to evangelize in the power of the Spirit with accompanying supernatural signs.

2. Adds a necessary dimension to worshipful relationship with God.
3. Enables them to respond to the full working of the Holy Spirit in expression of fruit and gifts and ministries as in New Testament times for the edifying of the body of Christ.

12. Divine Healing
Divine healing is an integral part of the gospel. Deliverance from sickness is provided for in the atonement, and is the privilege of all believers.

Confession of Sins

The word confess means "acknowledge." Confession of sins is an acknowledgment or admission of sins, with the intent of seeking forgiveness. The Scriptures promise, "If we confess our sins, he [God] is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins" (1 John 1:9). Today when we come to Jesus with our sins our prayer ought to be that of the repentant tax collector, "God, have mercy on me, a sinner" (Luke 18:13).
When we share the gospel with sinners, God uses us to challenge them to repent and receive His forgiveness. In leading people to Christ, the confession of sins is to be directed to God through Jesus Christ. Nowhere does God’s Word tell us to confess our sins to a clergyman or human mediator in order to receive God’s forgiveness. Instead this is to be done from the repentant heart of the sinner directly to the Savior–Jesus Christ.


Security of the Believer (Backsliding)

The Assemblies of God has taken a strong stand against the teaching that God’s sovereign will completely overrides man’s free will to accept and serve Him. In view of this we believe it is possible for a person once saved to turn from God and be lost again. However, we do not go to the other extreme of teaching that mankind’s choice of receiving or rejecting Christ makes a person totally responsible for his own salvation apart from Christ’s atonement.
In view of the biblical teaching that the security of the believer depends on a living relationship with Christ (John 15:6); in view of the Bible's call to a life of holiness (1 Peter 1:16; Hebrews 12:14); in view of the clear teaching that a man may have his part taken out of the Book of Life (Revelation 22:19); and in view of the fact that one who believes for a while can fall away (Luke 8:13); The General Council of the Assemblies of God disapproves of the unconditional security position which holds that it is impossible for a person once saved to be lost.
The Assemblies of God leans toward Arminianism, though it accepts scriptural truth found in both positions. We agree with the Calvinist emphasis on God's sovereignty or supreme power and authority. But we also firmly believe the Arminian emphasis on mankind's free will and responsibility for his actions and choices. We believe the Bible teaches both truths.
The Assemblies of God also stands on these wonderful truths knowing we need not fear that something external will overpower us and take away our salvation. Only our willful choices can do that.
But because we are creatures with free wills, we must be vigilantly on guard because the enemy of our soul, the devil, "prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. Resist him, standing firm in the faith" (1 Peter 5:8,9). In our Fellowship we believe carelessness can lead to apathy, apathy to neglect, and neglect to a conscious decision to sin. We often refer to this spiritual decline as backsliding. We believe one who backslides is in danger of losing his salvation if the individual persists in rejecting the Spirit's call to repentance and restoration.
Luke 8:13 makes clear the fact that believers can lose their salvation. It says some "believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away." Revelation 22:19 says "If anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life, and in the holy city."
Certainly there are true Christians who believe and teach Calvinism; there are also true Christians who believe and teach that men and women have free will. Unfortunately, both sides have spent more time arguing doctrinal terminology and interpretations of theology than reaching out to a lost world. The irony of the disagreement is that Calvinists, who believe in predestination, are sometimes more active in witnessing and evangelism than Arminians who believe that man has a free will and should be encouraged to accept Christ as Savior. God, of course, looks on the heart and the actions rather than on the eloquence with which one defends a position.
Although the Assemblies of God adheres basically to the Arminian position on the spiritual security of the believer, there are extremes and potential abuses which must be avoided. The Christian life is not a roller coaster of Sunday salvation and Monday through Saturday backsliding. On the other hand, no Christian, no matter how spiritual, can claim perfection and sinlessness (1 John 1:8-10; 2:1). Therefore as Christians we must continually come to God sincerely asking His forgiveness for living below the potential He makes possible through the gift of His Holy Spirit.
The truth of God's marvelous and free grace has sadly led some to imagine and indulge in a cheap grace, a grace that covers all sins with no need to live a holy life. Such an attitude is an insult to the great price Christ paid to purchase our salvation. Though we may fail and fall, and sometimes sin, the heart of the true believer always regrets, repents, asks forgiveness, and seeks never to sin that way again. To carelessly participate in sin, expecting to gain forgiveness later, is itself an act of backsliding that will lead ultimately to losing one's salvation. We therefore reject any "once saved, always saved" doctrine that excuses sinful lifestyles.
Once saved can mean forever saved–if one continues in faith, growing in sanctification and holiness day by day. But God will not arbitrarily usurp mankind's free will. Our sovereign God does not overrule free will just to prove He is sovereign.
Everything I bolded is wrong.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
lightninboy said:
Jerry Shugart affirms that salvation is always by grace through faith plus nothing, so he is practically Acts 2 Dispensationalism.
I say the same thing. However, the dispensation being preached in Acts 2 said water baptism was a must, and the law was to be followed. It may not have been for salvation, but it was required as an act of faith.
 

lightninboy

Member
Dear Lighthouse,
Thank you for your reply.

Lighthouse said:
That is not the case. I just don't feel like searching for the posts, because I would have to wade through a few pages.
You might as well wade through this thread and read it, because you might learn something you can use.

Lighthouse said:
They come across as Mid-Acts for most of their doctrinal statement. However, they do call water baptism and communion sacraments. They were for the dispensation in Acts 2, but they are not now. That, of course, is no reason not to do them, but communion is the only one Paul preached, and there is one baptism now, and it is the one John the Baptist told us Christ would do. Do you know which baptism that is?
Dallas Theological Seminary said:
We believe that water baptism and the Lord’s Supper are the only sacraments and ordinances of the church and that they are a scriptural means of testimony for the church in this age (Matt. 28:19; Luke 22:19–20; Acts 10:47–48; 16:32–33; 18:7–8; 1 Cor. 11:26).

Ordinances are not normally considered requirements for salvation by Baptists.
DTS could have mentioned “sacraments” for people who are Presbyterian, etc.
Even so, they are said to be a means of testimony.
Well, if Jesus baptizes, it must be the Baptism of the Holy Spirit.
I’ve been doing some reading on baptism, and Paul did baptize.

Lighthouse said:
The chart says Baptists don’t require water baptism for salvation.
Maybe some Baptists do, but they’d be wrong.
You can mention other Protestant denominations, but are they really Acts 2 Dispensationalism?

Lighthouse said:
Can you use John 3:16 as a verse to prove your assurance of salvation? I can. Bob Hill can’t.

Lighthouse said:
The idea that salvation can be lost by an act of rejection is one. Or the idea that salvation can be lost by sinning, and that you must repent to be re-saved. The A/G teaches that.
Okay, that sounds like one form or another of Lordship Salvation.
Mid-Acts Dispensationalism is a refuge from Lordship Salvation, but not the best one, as it puts the thing you hate, Lordship Salvation, onto people of the Old Covenant.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
lightninboy said:
Dear Lighthouse,
Thank you for your reply.


You might as well wade through this thread and read it, because you might learn something you can use.
It's about time constraints. Nothing more.

Dallas Theological Seminary said:
We believe that water baptism and the Lord’s Supper are the only sacraments and ordinances of the church and that they are a scriptural means of testimony for the church in this age (Matt. 28:19; Luke 22:19–20; Acts 10:47–48; 16:32–33; 18:7–8; 1 Cor. 11:26).

Ordinances are not normally considered requirements for salvation by Baptists.
DTS could have mentioned “sacraments” for people who are Presbyterian, etc.
Even so, they are said to be a means of testimony.
Well, if Jesus baptizes, it must be the Baptism of the Holy Spirit.
I’ve been doing some reading on baptism, and Paul did baptize.
I never said that they intended them as mandatory for salvation. I am only saying they are wrong about them being sacraments and ordinances for the current dispensation.

The chart says Baptists don’t require water baptism for salvation.
Maybe some Baptists do, but they’d be wrong.
You can mention other Protestant denominations, but are they really Acts 2 Dispensationalism?
I wouldn't know. I have come to realize that anyone who calls themselves Covenant Theologians usually fall into the Acts Dispensationalist category, because they believe the current church age started then.

Can you use John 3:16 as a verse to prove your assurance of salvation? I can. Bob Hill can’t.
Assurance of my eternal security, or assurance I have salvation now? I can do the latter, but not the former.

Okay, that sounds like one form or another of Lordship Salvation.
Mid-Acts Dispensationalism is a refuge from Lordship Salvation, but not the best one, as it puts the thing you hate, Lordship Salvation, onto people of the Old Covenant.
What? What do you mean by "Lordship Salvation?"
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Lighthouse said:
They come across as Mid-Acts for most of their doctrinal statement. However, they do call water baptism and communion sacraments. They were for the dispensation in Acts 2, but they are not now. That, of course, is no reason not to do them, but communion is the only one Paul preached, and there is one baptism now, and it is the one John the Baptist told us Christ would do. Do you know which baptism that is?



And?



Okay?


The idea that salvation can be lost by an act of rejection is one. Or the idea that salvation can be lost by sinning, and that you must repent to be re-saved. The A/G teaches that.

As a former ordained pastor who studied Pentecostal doctrine and history for a degree (PAOC sister organization of Assemblies of God), the A of G does NOT teach that you must be resaved or that salvation is lost by sinning. UNBELIEF/apostasy persisted in is the only fatal sin, not 'sinning' in general. If a local church AofG pastor taught you must go to the altar to get resaved every week, he is out of step with denominational views!
I just reread Stanley Horton's (Pentecostal perspective) views on OSAS and sanctification. He quotes AofG statements and would not agree with your misrepresentation of his views. The other views in the book from other perspectives objected to his baptism in Spirit/tongues concepts, not other issues.

Sacrament is more Catholic. Evangelicals usually call water baptism and communion ordinances. Biblically, they are valid for the Church Age and should not be dispensationalized away. Baptism was never a condition of salvation. Baptismal regeneration is heretical in all dispensations.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
godrulz said:
As a former ordained pastor who studied Pentecostal doctrine and history for a degree (PAOC sister organization of Assemblies of God), the A of G does NOT teach that you must be resaved or that salvation is lost by sinning. UNBELIEF/apostasy persisted in is the only fatal sin, not 'sinning' in general. If a local church AofG pastor taught you must go to the altar to get resaved every week, he is out of step with denominational views!
I just reread Stanley Horton's (Pentecostal perspective) views on OSAS and sanctification. He quotes AofG statements and would not agree with your misrepresentation of his views. The other views in the book from other perspectives objected to his baptism in Spirit/tongues concepts, not other issues.

Sacrament is more Catholic. Evangelicals usually call water baptism and communion ordinances. Biblically, they are valid for the Church Age and should not be dispensationalized away. Baptism was never a condition of salvation. Baptismal regeneration is heretical in all dispensations.
They taught that you could lose your salvation if you didn't confess and repent, and that if you persisted in sin, you lost it that way, as well.
 

ApologeticJedi

New member
lightninboy said:
Theology Online members for MAD:
Jefferson
ApologeticJedi
Knight
Turbo
Lighthouse
patman
Clete
Delmar
Bob Hill
Bob Enyart
*Acts9_12Out*
drbrumley
Hilston
PastorKevin
God_Is_Truth
syntientsynth
MrsDearDelmar
ddevonb
Lucky
Letsargue
Crow
the Sibbie
Cyrus of Persia
Dread Helm

What makes Jefferson so special that he gets top billing? I won't stand for second place I'm telling you.
 

lightninboy

Member
Dear Lighthouse,
Thank you for your reply.

Lighthouse said:
I never said that they intended them as mandatory for salvation. I am only saying they are wrong about them being sacraments and ordinances for the current dispensation.
Matt. 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Luke 22:19–20 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake [it], and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup [is] the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.
Acts 10:47–48 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
16:32–33 And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed [their] stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.
18:7–8 And he departed thence, and entered into a certain [man's] house, named Justus, [one] that worshipped God, whose house joined hard to the synagogue. And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.
1 Cor. 11:26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.

Lighthouse said:
Assurance of my eternal security, or assurance I have salvation now? I can do the latter, but not the former.
Both, I guess.
My original dealings with Pastor Hill can be found here:
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28166&page=4&pp=15
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28166&page=5&pp=15
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28166&page=6&pp=15
And the rest is history. Would you have answered differently than Bob Hill?

Lighthouse said:
What? What do you mean by "Lordship Salvation?"
Here is an online pdf book about it:

http://avnonhosting.com/grace-books/FinckI02.pdf
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
lightninboy said:
Dear Lighthouse,
Thank you for your reply.
As awlays, you're welcome.

Matt. 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Luke 22:19–20 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake [it], and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup [is] the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.
Acts 10:47–48 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
16:32–33 And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed [their] stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.
18:7–8 And he departed thence, and entered into a certain [man's] house, named Justus, [one] that worshipped God, whose house joined hard to the synagogue. And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.
1 Cor. 11:26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
The only scripture relevant to today's dispensation is the one in Cor. about communion. And nothing shows it to be a sacrament, or an ordinance. I do not need to take communion for any reason, but there is nothing wrong if I do, and there is definitely no reason to take it twice a month.

Yes. But I am reevaluating, based on some scripture I have come across. But I do still find that it is relevant to initial salavation.

Didn't work. Can you give me a basic outline, like a sentence or two?
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Lighthouse said:
They taught that you could lose your salvation if you didn't confess and repent, and that if you persisted in sin, you lost it that way, as well.


Then they are out of step with official statements of faith. Unbelief is the only way one becomes apostate, not having an affair (some of their ordained leaders have had affairs and were restored and disciplined without claiming they lost salvation).

If someone continues in godless sin, it may show that they are not a believer, but the only way to lose salvation is to renounce the person and work of Christ, not continue with internet porn, alcoholism, gambling problems, stealing music off the internet, etc.

Some holiness groups get legalistic, but the official position is not legalistic. There is a difference between holiness issues and justification by faith and persevering in faith. The AofG deals with sinful discipline issues requiring repentance and restoration without saying the person is not saved. Unbelief and rejection of Christ are different issues than things of the flesh that affect our public witness and credibility. Struggling with lust is not the same thing as becoming a Satanist or atheist.
 
Top