Does 2 Peter 2's warning of false teachers describe Witness Lee?

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Igzy

If you've been born again, and most people who have know it when it happens and the rest figure it out soon afterwards, then you had faith. How could you become born again without faith? So you must have had it. Pretty simple unless you have an over-complicated mind.

I agree faith is actually gifted to us by God but it comes when we fully surrender to him. I can look at all the miracles God has done in my life and use that as a basis of his perfect integrity to trust him in the future.

At what point do you become born again? Is it by mere credence that Jesus is the son of God and he died for our sins? How do you arrive at this from the scriptures?

To quote Col. Stonehill from True Grit, "I do not entertain hypotheticals. The world as it is is vexing enough."

Bring me such a person and we can talk about it. I don't know of any myself.

http://new.exchristian.net/2011/07/f...-satanist.html

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by bearbear

At what point do you become born again? Is it by mere credence that Jesus is the son of God and he died for our sins? How do you arrive at this from the scriptures?

I think this is where you got stuck. You don't see real faith as the scripture does. You continually discredit faith as "mere credence," which is probably due to one verse in James which says "even the demons believe."

"Mere credence" is not saving faith. No one here, or in the LC's for that matter, is saying this. Mere credence is closer to the situation of the tares, who outwardly look like real believers, but do not have eternal life within, and thus are not real "wheat."

You remind me of some extreme tongue-speakers. Since they spoke in tongues when they first got saved, they hold every one else up to that same standard. They see tongues in every verse of the bible, which just reinforces their stance.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I think this is where you got stuck. You don't see real faith as the scripture does. You continually discredit faith as "mere credence," which is probably due to one verse in James which says "even the demons believe."

"Mere credence" is not saving faith. No one here, or in the LC's for that matter, is saying this. Mere credence is closer to the situation of the tares, who outwardly look like real believers, but do not have eternal life within, and thus are not real "wheat."

You remind me of some extreme tongue-speakers. Since they spoke in tongues when they first got saved, they hold every one else up to that same standard. They see tongues in every verse of the bible, which just reinforces their stance.

Hebrews 11:1 defines faith as the assurance of things hoped for (God performed the ten plagues and parted the red sea, so he should be a trustworthy Guy we can base on assurance in) and the conviction of the unseen things (We have conviction in God's integrity so we don't have to trust in what we see).

Say a person believes Jesus is the son of God and died for his sins and has gone to church all their life by attending Tuesday night prayer meeting, Friday night small group and Lord's Day meetings. One day the beast government prophesied by Daniel has taken over his country and he is forced to renounce his faith or his children will be killed. He renounces his faith due to wanting to preserve the lives of his children and he lives out his life with his family in retirement conforming to the pagan culture that he lives in and dies. He figures that he is saved after all, because eternal life is not something that can be lost due to his earlier "faith". Is such a person going to heaven?

[Peter Debelak]

Originally Posted by bearbear

Hebrews 11:1 defines faith as the assurance of things hoped for (God performed the ten plagues and parted the red sea, so he should be a trustworthy Guy we can base on assurance in) and the conviction of the unseen things (We have conviction in God's integrity so we don't have to trust in what we see).

Say a person believes Jesus is the son of God and died for his sins and has gone to church all their life by attending Tuesday night prayer meeting, Friday night small group and Lord's Day meetings. One day the beast government prophesied by Daniel has taken over his country and he is forced to renounce his faith or his children will be killed. He renounces his faith due to wanting to preserve the lives of his children and he lives out his life with his family in retirement conforming to the pagan culture that he lives in and dies. He figures that he is saved after all, because eternal life is not something that can be lost due to his earlier "faith". Is such a person going to heaven?

Hi Sam:

How do interpret Matthew 16? Peter confessed with his mouth (essentially)that Jesus Christ is Lord. Jesus said that it was upon this revelation of who Christ is - this belief - that He would build his church. Would you contend that, at that point, Peter was "saved"?

If so, how do you reconcile Peter's denial of Jesus 3 times when fearing persecution?

If not, when did Peter get saved?

Thoughts?

Peter

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Peter Debelak

Hi Sam:

How do interpret Matthew 16? Peter confessed with his mouth (essentially)that Jesus Christ is Lord. Jesus said that it was upon this revelation of who Christ is - this belief - that He would build his church. Would you contend that, at that point, Peter was "saved"?

If so, how do you reconcile Peter's denial of Jesus 3 times when fearing persecution?

If not, when did Peter get saved?

Thoughts?

Peter

Hi Peter,

Glad to see you show up

This is one question I love to answer!

Peter's case is interesting. The salvation of the disciples all had some assurance because they were predestined to be saved from the foundation of the world as God's elect and Jesus even spoke of this. Jesus told the disciples once to rejoice because their names were written in heaven (Luke 10:20), barring the one who would betray him later. No matter what would happen, God's grace would save Peter to the end even if he fell away.

Peter was going to deny Jesus three times and that's why I believe Satan asked God to sift him as wheat, in the same way that Satan asked God if he could test Job's faith. However it seems that God actually granted Satan his request because Jesus didn't say "But we told Satan to bugger off", instead he said "But I have prayed for you that your faith would not fail". Not only did Jesus seem to imply God granted Satan's request but Jesus was strongly implying an expectation for Peter's faith to endure until the end, otherwise why would he be praying for it? Satan wanted Peter to follow the story of the seed that fell on rocky soil which received the word with joy and *believed* for a while but perished due to persecution because it had no root. But where Satan creates uncertainty, God's grace restores that certainty for his elect. If Jesus Christ is interceding for your behalf, that prayer is going to get answered! Hallelujah Jesus is also interceding in heaven for the faith of his elect to not fail.

Despite Peter spending three and a half years with Jesus it was still not enough for him to not deny him three times However Jesus told the disciples it was actually better for them if he went up and the Holy Spirit came down. We see the results of this later because after the Holy Spirit came down during Pentecost at Jerusalem, Peter was a changed man. He witnessed with boldness and thousands of Jews repented and believed forming the beginnings of the early church in Jerusalem.

I adhere to the definition of being saved at the point of glorification, which the born again experience ultimately leads us to. See David Pawson's talk here if you are interested (Note he's not a Calvinist, but I like his points still

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vy3tSIg7Gi0

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I think this is where you got stuck. You don't see real faith as the scripture does. You continually discredit faith as "mere credence," which is probably due to one verse in James which says "even the demons believe."

BB,

And of course, if it is mere credence, then it is not much. But it does take some credence. It takes some mental acceptance of the facts as presented. That is part of the deal.

Like I mentioned in another post, pointing to creed, or declaration of faith, and declaring it is "mere" is a distractor. It is a misdirect. It is possbily a misrepresentation of the facts. Just because you only know of the statement of belief does not make it unreal. Or the works non-existant. Just not visible to you.

I fear that there is too much desire in some to seek the scirptures for a formula rather than seeking God. You don't have to find a formula to believe in the "creed" of Jesus, and obey what he commanded (or at least keep trying) as you seek Him for your help in achieving.

And expecting that at death you will still not be fully there.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by OBW

BB,

And of course, if it is mere credence, then it is not much. But it does take some credence. It takes some mental acceptance of the facts as presented. That is part of the deal.

Like I mentioned in another post, pointing to creed, or declaration of faith, and declaring it is "mere" is a distractor. It is a misdirect. It is possbily a misrepresentation of the facts. Just because you only know of the statement of belief does not make it unreal. Or the works non-existant. Just not visible to you.

I fear that there is too much desire in some to seek the scirptures for a formula rather than seeking God. You don't have to find a formula to believe in the "creed" of Jesus, and obey what he commanded (or at least keep trying) as you seek Him for your help in achieving.

And expecting that at death you will still not be fully there.

Sorry if I misrepresented your definition of faith. I guess I'm still struggling to understand it. I'm basing it off what I've read and knew back in the LCs.

Jesus said if you do not forgive someone from your heart, the Father cannot forgive you. According to Lordship Salvationists if you die with unforgiveness, you do not receive forgiveness from God. Forgiving is deemed as an act of faith because we perform this act of obedience out of having faith that God's commands are true, just as Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac because he trusted in God's promises. Would a person who said he believed in Jesus and the word of God still go to heaven under your definition of faith, if he couldn't bring himself to forgive because the pain was too great?

The reason I'm citing examples of works and faith is James says there is a saving faith and a dead faith which can be judged by the fruit or the works produced from the faith in question. Hebrews 11 is also a laundry list of works that were done out of saving faith. So I just want to test the waters to see what level of saving faith you need to obtain eternal life under free grace.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by bearbear

Jesus said if you do not forgive someone from your heart, the Father cannot forgive you. According to Lordship Salvationists if you die with unforgiveness, you do not receive forgiveness from God.

Then Lordship Salvationists believe in a salvation that can be lost. It is never certain until you die on the right side of the ledger. The life of any "believer" can be on and off again throughout their life. Just because death does not occur we don't have to take the status into account. But under that understanding, I have no assurance of my salvation. If something is done to me and I for a short period withhold forgiveness, but a meteor falls on me, I have passed from life to death (not talking about the meteor) due to becoming temporarily unforgiving but having insufficient time to return back to life.

I cannot accept that kind of constant taking of the temperature. (Not because I just don't like it, but because it runs contrary to what I see in scripture as a whole.) That does not mean that I 100 percent reject the very idea that a long and protracted rejection of God is not evidence that what was formerly thought to be faith was, in fact, just show. But even in that case, I am hesitant to declare that it means "no longer in the Father's hand" which would suggest that they actually were in His hand, but are no longer.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by OBW

Then Lordship Salvationists believe in a salvation that can be lost. It is never certain until you die on the right side of the ledger. The life of any "believer" can be on and off again throughout their life. Just because death does not occur we don't have to take the status into account. But under that understanding, I have no assurance of my salvation. If something is done to me and I for a short period withhold forgiveness, but a meteor falls on me, I have passed from life to death (not talking about the meteor) due to becoming temporarily unforgiving but having insufficient time to return back to life.

It depends if you're talking to folks from Reformed tradition or outside it. Reformed folks are Calvinists and Lordship Salvationists. There is Reformed Lordship Salvation and an Armininian version one also.

I cannot accept that kind of constant taking of the temperature. (Not because I just don't like it, but because it runs contrary to what I see in scripture as a whole.) That does not mean that I 100 percent reject the very idea that a long and protracted rejection of God is not evidence that what was formerly thought to be faith was, in fact, just show. But even in that case, I am hesitant to declare that it means "no longer in the Father's hand" which would suggest that they actually were in His hand, but are no longer.

Jesus told us to judge people by their actions because it gives an indicator of the condition of their heart. In the same way James said works was an indicator of the condition of our faith.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by bearbear

Jesus told us to judge people by their actions because it gives an indicator of the condition of their heart. In the same way James said works was an indicator of the condition of our faith.

And as much as I give those the thumbs up, it is still not our place to be so certain as to how the only one who sees everything is looking at it.

I like any kind of theology that encourages active righteousness and obedience, along with a profession of belief/faith. But we must always be careful how we use snippets to define-away some people from the faith. Probably better to just suggest that there are hints that everything might not be as the cheap-grace people like to believe. Show that there is more to it than mere salvation (as in "initial salvation") and that what we do with what we are given does affect things to come. We just are not clear how that is because it is mostly found in metaphor (And just what is a meta for?)

It is the determination that a lot of verses that indicate significant spiritual and righteous activity is required means something about ultimate salvation when salvation is used in more ways than just "getting saved." And what is it saying when it says "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved"? We can say that it is initial salvation. (I think that is clearly included there.) We can say that it is ongoing salvation. (That could be asserted, and I would not stand against it, but might suggest caution in such a certainty that it becomes dogma.) It could mean "saved from this perverse generation" or "from the world." And those could be implied within either or both of the previous verses.

But none of them speaks of a fact of losing it all if your active faith ceases. And that might be the real kicker in this whole conversation. Even for many who seem to really turn away, it may not be that they simply do not believe any more, or have no faith. It may be that they simply are captured by other things that have taken first place.

And one thought that has gone through my head on these kinds of issues that i have never spoken out loud to anyone (and don't even know what I really think about it other than it is something to consider) is as follows. Are there certain verses that are aimed at those who would be the active followers — the leaders, evangelists, etc. — that may still apply to everyone, but not in the same way? I'm pretty sure that those verses in 1 Corinthians 3 about wood, gold and being saved through fire are not aimed at the average local believer, but at those who would be their teachers. Someone already pointed out that the directive to "go and sell all" was aimed at someone who wanted to follow Jesus (as in be a rabbi trainee), not at the crowd that came to hear, to be healed, etc., and went back to their homes believing. I have pointed out several times that the so-called Great Commission was not given to all of those who were following after the resurrection. Jesus took the 11 aside and told them to go. He didn't tell the others to go. Does that take us entirely off the hook? Probably not. But it was not given as a general directive for door-to-door evangelism by the entire membership of the Church. It was a mandate to those that Jesus trained.

And someone is going to say "well, we all can be trained now." But is that what we all are called to? Or is it an important task in the kingdom that is primarily given to those who get specific training? Is it maybe quite good that churches ordain those that they determine to be fit to go out and lead the flock, whether there or somewhere else? Just might be.

Did I answer your question? Probably not. But did the question get questioned? Maybe so.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by bearbear

Jesus said if you do not forgive someone from your heart, the Father cannot forgive you.

And I return to an even shorter portion of the quote I just used.

What does this mean?

Is it eternal or in time?

Does it override everything else, or is it like finding some wood among your gold and therefore be "saved, yet as through fire"?

We are clearly commanded to forgive others because even the prayer we were given declares that we forgive others as the Father forgive us.

Are we so certain that the isolation of those few words means what it seems to when it remains in isolation? Or if someone suggested a different meaning for what it means in isolation, might we find ourselves changing to that one. Or arguing about which "out of context" understanding is correct, only to put it back in context and discover both are wrong.

This is what I am complaining about when i mention "fortune cookie" reading of scripture. That kind of approach assumes that whatever we come up with by taking a sequence of words that happen to occur in that way in scripture must be a word from God. Might go like this: "Look! Mine says 'You shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name Jesus!' Wow, I'm going to bear the Son of God!!" "No you're not. You a guy!!" "Hey! Mine says '10 15 22 37 39 51' . . . . Ooops! Wrong side."

I know that is a little too tongue-in-cheek. But it might help to look at the side of the map (Google maps or Mapquest) where the "+" and "-" are and back out on your view. See a little more than the roof of the house that some guy keeps asserting belongs to Bill Gates. It might be that as you back out you discover that you are looking a poor part of Tupelo, Miss. Or Sarbourg, France.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by OBW

And I return to an even shorter portion of the quote I just used.

What does this mean?

Is it eternal or in time?

Does it override everything else, or is it like finding some wood among your gold and therefore be "saved, yet as through fire"?

We are clearly commanded to forgive others because even the prayer we were given declares that we forgive others as the Father forgive us.

Are we so certain that the isolation of those few words means what it seems to when it remains in isolation? Or if someone suggested a different meaning for what it means in isolation, might we find ourselves changing to that one. Or arguing about which "out of context" understanding is correct, only to put it back in context and discover both are wrong.

This is what I am complaining about when i mention "fortune cookie" reading of scripture. That kind of approach assumes that whatever we come up with by taking a sequence of words that happen to occur in that way in scripture must be a word from God. Might go like this: "Look! Mine says 'You shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name Jesus!' Wow, I'm going to bear the Son of God!!" "No you're not. You a guy!!" "Hey! Mine says '10 15 22 37 39 51' . . . . Ooops! Wrong side."

I know that is a little too tongue-in-cheek. But it might help to look at the side of the map (Google maps or Mapquest) where the "+" and "-" are and back out on your view. See a little more than the roof of the house that some guy keeps asserting belongs to Bill Gates. It might be that as you back out you discover that you are looking a poor part of Tupelo, Miss. Or Sarbourg, France.

Jesus gives more detail here:

Matthew 18
33 And should not you have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you?’ 34 And in anger his master delivered him to the jailers,[e] until he should pay all his debt. 35 So also my heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart.”

The servant has no way of paying back the master if he is in jail so he'll stay there until he rots. The Father will probably be doing the same to us in eternity if we do not forgive. We have no way of paying back the wages of sin which is death since only Jesus could do this for us. Regardless, it seems like something everyone should avoid at all costs. The parable doesn't make the results of holding onto unforgiveness pleasant.

Here's an NDE of a pastor who found himself in hell after he couldn't forgive his wife in case you're interested:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAmtJF3YuhQ

There's a theme in the bible that we reap what we sow. Perhaps we cannot expect to sow unforgiveness to others yet receive forgiveness from God. Some have likened forgiveness as a door in our heart, we can only receive forgiveness if we also give forgiveness out.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by bearbear

Jesus gives more detail here:

Matthew 18
33 And should not you have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you?’ 34 And in anger his master delivered him to the jailers,[e] until he should pay all his debt. 35 So also my heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart.”

The servant has no way of paying back the master if he is in jail so he'll stay there until he rots. The Father will probably doing the same to us in eternity if we do not forgive. We have no way of paying back the wages of sin which is death since only Jesus could do this for us.

Another principle that must be considered is when to stop milking the metaphor or the analogy. And this is being spoken in terms of extremes. Are we in a situation in which the extreme is provided to make a point. Not to assert some extreme absolute of eternity? I do not know the answer. But a response that simply says something like "that is what it says" will be ignored because there must be a reason for such certainty.

It is pretty well accepted that the discussion about loving God and hating money or loving money and hating God was not the literal opposite pole discussion that was spoken. It was understood as getting priorities clear. But since nothing is that extreme (except maybe some kind of ascetic), we are often too quick to question the faith of a rich person because they surely could not love God if they could accumulate that much money.

Says who? Do we know their heart? For some people, their lot in life is to make and accumulate money without much effort. Without the kind of greed that would drive a Richard Cory to go home and put a bullet through his head. "But I . . . I work in his factory. And I curse the life I'm livin'. And I curse my poverty. And I wish that I could be . . . Richard Cory."

[awareness]

bearbear, are you suffering panic attacks over your salvation?

[Cal]

Originally Posted by bearbear

I agree faith is actually gifted to us by God but it comes when we fully surrender to him. I can look at all the miracles God has done in my life and use that as a basis of his perfect integrity to trust him in the future.

At what point do you become born again? Is it by mere credence that Jesus is the son of God and he died for our sins? How do you arrive at this from the scriptures?

You become born again when you initially truly believe and the Spirit comes in and makes you alive in Christ. I'm not going to quote the verses because you know what they are.

http://new.exchristian.net/2011/07/f...-satanist.html

I don't know this person or really know anything about him. I don't even know if he is truthfully representing anything.

In general, I try to not comment on whether someone I've never met and know little about is truly a believer or not. In fact, I don't actively try to discern whether someone is saved or not. If someone tells me they believe in Jesus I give them the benefit of the doubt until I get enough evidence to think they really don't.

In general, however, I doubt that anyone who has truly tasted the Spirit could become a Satanist. Though I do believe that a nominal Christian could.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Igzy

You become born again when you initially truly believe and the Spirit comes in and makes you alive in Christ. I'm not going to quote the verses because you know what they are.

I'm not sure of which verses you are referring to but I know that Jesus says in John 14 that he will send the Holy Spirit to us after we love him and keep his commandments ( such as forgiving and loving your enemies, etc.).

15 “If you love me, you will keep my commandments. 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever,

Jesus repeats this again in verse 23 and says he and the Father will make his home in our hearts once we love and obey him, presumably via the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

23 Jesus answered him, “If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.

What level of love and obedience is required exactly? He did tell us to love God with all our heart, soul and mind and that this was the greatest commandment.

By loving God we also love those who are made in his image.

Jesus said he came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it. Paul says the law is fulfilled by loving our neighbors, perhaps with the love that comes from Christ living in us.

Galatians 5:14
For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

So this is my understanding of when you become born again, when you surrender your heart to Jesus and in doing so love him with all your heart.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by bearbear

I'm not sure of which verses you are referring to but I know that Jesus says in John 14 that he will send the Holy Spirit to us after we love him and keep his commandments ( such as forgiving and loving your enemies, etc.).

15 “If you love me, you will keep my commandments. 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever,

Jesus repeats this again in verse 23 and says he and the Father will make his home in our hearts once we love and obey him, presumably via the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

23 Jesus answered him, “If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.

What level of love and obedience is required exactly? He did tell us to love God with all our heart, soul and mind and that this was the greatest commandment.

By loving God we also love those who are made in his image.

Jesus said he came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it. Paul says the law is fulfilled by loving our neighbors, perhaps with the love that comes from Christ living in us.

Galatians 5:14
For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

So this is my understanding of when you become born again, when you surrender your heart to Jesus and in doing so love him with all your heart.

None of these verses have anything to do with being born again.

bearbear, you read the Bible like someone who is colorblind. You just see black and white. To you, either the verses are about getting eternal salvation or about losing eternal salvation. It's outside of your concept that the Lord could be talking about anything else.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Igzy

None of these verses have anything to do with being born again.

bearbear, you read the Bible like someone who is colorblind. You just see black and white. To you, either the verses are about getting eternal salvation or about losing eternal salvation. It's outside of your concept that the Lord could be talking about anything else.

I'm open to your point of view and I think I'm capable of nuance. This is a subject I haven't spent a long time studying and I think I can learn from you guys. But maybe it's not a subject worth delving into. The process of being born again does seem quite a bit controversial and it does seem like splitting hairs if you look at all the verses that talk about receiving the Holy Spirit, being born again, receiving a new heart and new spirit etc. Even Billy Graham lists some formulaic steps saying you have to repent of your sins, believe and try to obey the Lord. In my case, those all result from a desire for obeying and loving the Lord once convinced enough to trust in the message of the Gospel.

http://billygraham.org/story/how-to-be-born-again/

"Jesus Christ says that we must be born again. How do we become born again? By repenting of sin. That means we are willing to change our way of living. We say to God, “I’m a sinner, and I’m sorry.” It’s simple and childlike. Then by faith we receive Jesus Christ as our Lord and Master and Savior. We are willing to follow Him in a new life of obedience, in which the Holy Spirit helps us as we read the Bible and pray and witness."

Maybe it's all bit of a mystery and that's why Jesus left it at "the wind blows where it wills". But it still wouldn't hurt to make sure your heart is good earth via repentance and loving Jesus with all your heart in full surrender would it? Why take any chances? Shouldn't we encourage people to do so?

[Peter Debelak]

Originally Posted by bearbear

I'm open to your point of view and I think I'm capable of nuance. This is a subject I haven't spent a long time studying and I think I can learn from you guys. But maybe it's not a subject worth delving into. The process of being born again does seem quite a bit controversial and it does seem like splitting hairs if you look at all the verses that talk about receiving the Holy Spirit, being born again, receiving a new heart and new spirit etc. Even Billy Graham lists some formulaic steps saying you have to repent of your sins, believe and try to obey the Lord. In my case, those all result from a desire for obeying and loving the Lord once convinced enough to trust in the message of the Gospel.

http://billygraham.org/story/how-to-be-born-again/

"Jesus Christ says that we must be born again. How do we become born again? By repenting of sin. That means we are willing to change our way of living. We say to God, “I’m a sinner, and I’m sorry.” It’s simple and childlike. Then by faith we receive Jesus Christ as our Lord and Master and Savior. We are willing to follow Him in a new life of obedience, in which the Holy Spirit helps us as we read the Bible and pray and witness."

I will say this however. Maybe it's all bit of a mystery and that's why Jesus left it at "the wind blows where it wills". But it still wouldn't hurt to make sure your heart is good earth via repentance and loving Jesus with all your heart in full surrender would it? Why take any chances? Shouldn't we encourage people to do so?

Sam,

Billy Graham makes a key point: Its simple and child-like. I generally take Occum's Razor to the Scripture, through the lens of the central gospel.

I am sure that there are those (I know some) who abuse grace as license to sin. There are still others who sit on the laurels of their cultural faith (shared upbringing) and master a culture rather than pursue a faith (many in the LC). But most Christians who aren't usurping the CHristian message for their own agenda, are attempting, imperfectly, to follow Him.

This desire to follow Him, based on the revelation that He is God and Savior, is the foundation for a Christian life. It is born in humility and continues there. Sure, there is some fear. But, I don't believe God in Christ to use fear as a primary manipulator. That is just my experience. Christians pursue doing what is right because they are motivated by love to do so. But they also fail miserably. And God helps scoop them up, as soon as they return to a prayerful need for a Savior yet again. There is a process, to be sure. But my belief (credence) told God that I wanted to live my life together with Him. Personally, I take no account of my eternal state. Call me crazy. I pursue Christ as my Savior, because He has given me a rich life in Him, even as hard as it can be.

If you told me I had to deny Jesus in order to get into heaven, I'd likely say I don't care about your threat. I don't need the "carrot" to tell you to go pound salt. I won't deny Jesus because of the rich life I have in Him. Not because I might or might not get some future reward.

Thoughts?

Peter



P.S. I'll respond to your thoughtful post regarding Peter's denial soon. Thanks for it.

[bearbear]

Originally Posted by Peter Debelak

Sam,

Billy Graham makes a key point: Its simple and child-like. I generally take Occum's Razor to the Scripture, through the lens of the central gospel.

I am sure that there are those (I know some) who abuse grace as license to sin. There are still others who sit on the laurels of their cultural faith (shared upbringing) and master a culture rather than pursue a faith (many in the LC). But most Christians who aren't usurping the CHristian message for their own agenda, are attempting, imperfectly, to follow Him.

This desire to follow Him, based on the revelation that He is God and Savior, is the foundation for a Christian life. It is born in humility and continues there. Sure, there is some fear. But, I don't believe God in Christ to use fear as a primary manipulator. That is just my experience. Christians pursue doing what is right because they are motivated by love to do so. But they also fail miserably. And God helps scoop them up, as soon as they return to a prayerful need for a Savior yet again. There is a process, to be sure. But my belief (credence) told God that I wanted to live my life together with Him. Personally, I take no account of my eternal state. Call me crazy. I pursue Christ as my Savior, because He has given me a rich life in Him, even as hard as it can be.

If you told me I had to deny Jesus in order to get into heaven, I'd likely say I don't care about your threat. I don't need the "carrot" to tell you to go pound salt. I won't deny Jesus because of the rich life I have in Him. Not because I might or might not get some future reward.

Thoughts?

Peter



P.S. I'll respond to your thoughtful post regarding Peter's denial soon. Thanks for it.

Those are some good points Peter. I think the human heart is a mystery and there is a different key to unlock everyone's heart guiding them to love Jesus with all their heart. I think Jesus purposely chose the analogy of saying we should be fishers of men. Different fish require different bait. For me coming to know God could cast me to hell drove me to him, and he eventually showed me how much he loved me so I could love him back. If I never feared him in the first place, I probably would have just lived my life as normal. So I was caught by the fear of hell bait. That's my testimony and it may be different for everyone else. The difference in my case was I already believed in Jesus and the Bible as being authoritative. This method of using fear would not work on an atheist for example who would require other means to gradually unlock his heart for Jesus.

I think that's why hellfire preaching doesn't make sense because it does tend to scare all the fish away. That said, one third of Jesus' ministry was spent preaching on hell, and if you study where he did it, it was usually to his followers and disciples and not when he ate and drank with sinners. Jesus always was merciful and gentle in his contact with the outcast sinners of society. Some churches have the opposite practice. They preach hell to those outside the church, then avoid it all together inside the church. Paul also seems to share the same attitude by telling the Corinthian believers to judge those inside the church and not outside (1 Cor 5:12), presumably because everyone outside is going to hell, but those inside have a chance to avoid it if the unrepentant sinner inside it repents.

That said I agree the best way to ensure a healthy relationship with Jesus is to grow in intimacy with him. If we have a real intimate relationship with Jesus, it will help us have the right heart and motivation for how we avoid temptation and practice righteousness, because we're doing it to please him and because we treasure him living inside of us. I wrote a blog post on this a while back as an answer to someone's question during small group time:

http://nodustybunnies.blogspot.com/2...-if-jesus.html