Lordship salvation vs. "easy believism"

[oldethennew]

1TIM. 5:17.
Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of 'double honour', especially they
who labour in The Word and doctrine.
18.
For the scripture saith, You shall not muzzle the ox that treads out the corn.
And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.

 

[throughfaith]

1TIM. 5:17.
Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward you, goodness,
(if you continue in His goodness: otherwise You also shalt be cut off.)
18.
For the scripture saith, You shall not muzzle the ox that treads out the corn.
And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.

1 tim 5.17¶Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.?

 

[soggykitten]

It says baptise in Mark 1.8 and baptise in 16 .16 . There's no mention of water in " Baptise with the Holy Ghost ' and no mention of water in 16.16 why do you assume water ? Just the word ' baptise doesn't necessarily mean water .
Acts 11 .
Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized G907 with water; but ye shall be baptized G907 with the Holy Ghost.

Two different types of baptism.
Jesus and his apostles went about baptizing. No mention of water in that verse either but we know it was water baptism.
I'm not going to belabor the point. I don't understand the issue against water baptism so I'll leave those with an issue to it.

 

[throughfaith]

Two different types of baptism.
Jesus and his apostles went about baptizing. No mention of water in that verse either but we know it was water baptism.
I'm not going to belabor the point. I don't understand the issue against water baptism so I'll leave those with an issue to it.

A clue is if it mentions water its water . If you get it wrong telling everyone its water that saves or the Holy Spirit that saves . The consequences are pretty fatal .

 

[soggykitten]

A clue is if it mentions water its water . If you get it wrong telling everyone its water that saves or the Holy Spirit that saves . The consequences are pretty fatal .

Not all scripture that speaks of water baptism says, water. That doesn't mean water isn't a factor.

And I have no worries. I've never said baptism saves.
I've said baptism is integral part of our salvation. If baptism didn't matter at all, Jesus wouldn't have made a point of speaking to its importance in our journey.
I'd think the fatality would actually occur from those teachings and teachers who insist water baptism is negligible.

 

[throughfaith]

Not all scripture that speaks of water baptism says, water. That doesn't mean water isn't a factor.

And I have no worries. I've never said baptism saves.
I've said baptism is integral part of our salvation. If baptism didn't matter at all, Jesus wouldn't have made a point of speaking to its importance in our journey.
I'd think the fatality would actually occur from those teachings and teachers who insist water baptism is negligible.

If you teach water is an integral part of salvation confusing it with the baptism with the Holy Spirit as I believe you are then its a major issue .

 

[soggykitten]

If you teach water is an integral part of salvation confusing it with the baptism with the Holy Spirit as I believe you are then its a major issue .

You are free to believe as you will. I don't agree with your perception of my beliefs as you know.
I'll say this, when you or anyone here dismiss water baptism in any regard as relates to salvation, you're corrupting the message of Christ himself.
The sticky point that you enter in, it doesn't say water, is nonsense quite frankly.
The greek, the tense, the verb, etc... at the linked sites in this discussion make things pretty clear.

Personally, I think anyone who works at negating the importance of water baptism have not a prayer of championing much less understanding holy spirit baptism. Because they're using their own carnal ego's to supersede the holy spirit teacher that was God incarnate as Jesus who himself taught of the importance of water baptism.
Two different baptisms. No equivocation. No nonsense like saying in rebuttal to baptism passages, it doesn't say water...... It doesn't need to. That you and others refuse to see that makes me wonder.

I'm done belaboring this point. When you start off misrepresenting what I've actually said, you've actually not made a point against anything I've written about baptism.
Taking water baptism out of the scripture messages is offensive. You and others like you have my deepest sympathy.
We're done.

 

[throughfaith]

You are free to believe as you will. I don't agree with your perception of my beliefs as you know.
I'll say this, when you or anyone here dismiss water baptism in any regard as relates to salvation, you're corrupting the message of Christ himself.
The sticky point that you enter in, it doesn't say water, is nonsense quite frankly.
The greek, the tense, the verb, etc... at the linked sites in this discussion make things pretty clear.

Personally, I think anyone who works at negating the importance of water baptism have not a prayer of championing much less understanding holy spirit baptism. Because they're using their own carnal ego's to supersede the holy spirit teacher that was God incarnate as Jesus who himself taught of the importance of water baptism.
Two different baptisms. No equivocation. No nonsense like saying in rebuttal to baptism passages, it doesn't say water...... It doesn't need to. That you and others refuse to see that makes me wonder.

I'm done belaboring this point. When you start off misrepresenting what I've actually said, you've actually not made a point against anything I've written about baptism.
Taking water baptism out of the scripture messages is offensive. You and others like you have my deepest sympathy.
We're done.

9But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, ( Water ) whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
Gal 4

 

[Budman]

Let me ask you, why are you opposed to Baptism?

Nope. But it certainly has nothing to do with salvation.

And then they don't change at all from what they were but remain the ahole they were, the criminal they were, the party drunk animal they were, etc... Yep! That's not the true gospel. That's the lazy gospel. Have faith, act like the devil, go to heaven.

Do you still sin? How many sins are attributed to believers? Did Jesus indeed pay for every singe sin or not?

Your gospel is one of works. no matter how much you try and spin it.

You believe in universalism then?

Nope. A pardon is only as good as it's acceptance.

Never said it was! Never said it don't need to defend what wasn't said.

You say no, but then you add performance as "proof" one is truly saved.

You say as much with this quote again:

And then they don't change at all from what they were but remain the ahole they were, the criminal they were, the party drunk animal they were, etc... Yep! That's not the true gospel. That's the lazy gospel. Have faith, act like the devil, go to heaven.

 

[throughfaith]

Like I said there certainly appears to be an anti-gospel front active in the world today.
Christians, and new Christians especially, please read this. Follow the scripture! Do not believe every spirit but test the spirits. Because there are spirits intent on leading you wrong and that can be costly.




It is a false gospel when its proponents claim all you have to do is believe! That's it. All done.
And then they don't change at all from what they were but remain the ahole they were, the criminal they were, the party drunk animal they were, etc... Yep! That's not the true gospel. That's the lazy gospel. Have faith, act like the devil, go to heaven.
Not in scripture. Not one word of it is scripture.

You believe in universalism then?

Never said it was! Never said it don't need to defend what wasn't said.
What is this? A club?
Misrepresent what someone says, make up our own narrative in place of what they actually said, challenge the person we misrepresented to then defend our words that we blame on them as having written not! them.

Rom 11
6And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

 

[Budman]

It is a false gospel when its proponents claim all you have to do is believe! That's it. All done.

Belief (or simply "faith") is indeed all that is required for salvation:

Ephesians 1:13, 2:8-9, Romans 3:28, Galatians 2:16, 3:6-7, 22-26, John 1:12, 3:15-18, 36, 5:24, 6:40, 11:25-26, 20:31, Acts:10:43, 13:39, 16:31, Romans 1:16, 3:26, 28, 4:5, 20-25, 5:1-2, 9:32-33, 10:4, 10: 9-17, 1 Timothy 1:16, 2 Timothy 3:15, Hebrews 11:7, 16, 1 Peter 1:5, 9, 1 John 5:1a. 5:5, 10, 13.

 

[Budman]

If all sins were intentional, then all people would go to heaven, regardless of how they lived.

What sins are "accidental"? Does God view them as such? Or does He see them as sin all the same?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Nope. But it certainly has nothing to do with salvation.



Do you still sin? How many sins are attributed to believers? Did Jesus indeed pay for every singe sin or not?

Your gospel is one of works. no matter how much you try and spin it.



Nope. A pardon is only as good as it's acceptance.



You say no, but then you add performance as "proof" one is truly saved.

You say as much with this quote again:

Sadly like the jews, some people can not see what they actually say as anything but gospel truth, The jews believed for years their way to God was works of the law, sadly to many churches have for years made the same mistake, only instead of commands of the law, commands Which Christ gave.

they fail to see no OT command ever saved anyone, nor will any NT command,

 

[eternally-gratefull]

What sins are "accidental"? Does God view them as such? Or does He see them as sin all the same?

A sin is a sin is a sin.

as James said if we keep all of the law yet even STUMBLE in one part we are guilty

you stumble by accident, you do not intentionally stumble,

accidental breaking of the law makes you guilty, period!

 

[GraceAndTruth]

Repentance does not come from the heart of the unregenerate man.......it comes by the conviction of sin by the Holy Spirit. People do not know what sin is from God's view, only what they know from the society the live in. A headhunter would not see head hunting as a sin because that is acceptable behavior in that society. Americans tend to think the only sins are to disobey the 10 commandments......though we know that Jesus said if we break ONE, we have broken them all. AND whatever sin THOUGHTS we have we are also guilty of. We were told this so we would understand our complete helplessness in obedience and must rely totally
on the propitiation of Christ for His church.

EASY BELIEVEISM are words that try to take away your peace with God and diminish the efficacy of the shed blood of Christ. John MacDonald was one of the leaders in this doctrine from hell..........I am so thankful that the Holy Spirit has shielded the minds of God's children to reject this apostary.

 

[throughfaith]

Repentance does not come from the heart of the unregenerate man.......it comes by the conviction of sin by the Holy Spirit. People do not know what sin is from God's view, only what they know from the society the live in. A headhunter would not see head hunting as a sin because that is acceptable behavior in that society. Americans tend to think the only sins are to disobey the 10 commandments......though we know that Jesus said if we break ONE, we have broken them all. AND whatever sin THOUGHTS we have we are also guilty of. We were told this so we would understand our complete helplessness in obedience and must rely totally
on the propitiation of Christ for His church.

EASY BELIEVEISM are words that try to take away your peace with God and diminish the efficacy of the shed blood of Christ. John MacDonald was one of the leaders in this doctrine from hell..........I am so thankful that the Holy Spirit has shielded the minds of God's children to reject this apostary.

Not sure which scripture your referring to there ?
7Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
8And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin , and of righteousness, and of judgment:
9of sin , because they believe not on me ;
10Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;
11Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.
12¶I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
Notice its not sins in general but one sin . The sin of not Believing on Jesus. Who is being reproved ? The world.

 

[GraceAndTruth]

Not sure which scripture your referring to there ?
7Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
8And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin , and of righteousness, and of judgment:
9of sin , because they believe not on me ;
10Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;
11Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.
12¶I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
Notice its not sins in general but one sin . The sin of not Believing on Jesus. Who is being reproved ? The world.

exactly - because blasphemy is to (blas phemo) speak against the Holy Spirit Who glorifies Deity.
(Denying Christ is to speak against)

 

[throughfaith]

exactly - because blasphemy is to (blas phemo) speak against the Holy Spirit Who glorifies Deity.
(Denying Christ is to speak against)

That verse has absolutely nothing to do with blasphemy. No mention of that word even ?

 

[GraceAndTruth]

Why was a post I posted almost an hour ago not show up????
Anyway, MacArthur has turned from this original teaching as a 4-point calvinist and gone completely to the dogs.
Was a key person in the Lordship Savation apostasy arguing against free grace, and is a dispensationalist.

I expected better from Soggy.....such language.
I don't agree with your lordship salvation either

 

[throughfaith]

Why was a post I posted almost an hour ago not show up????
Anyway, MacArthur has turned from this original teaching as a 4-point calvinist and gone completely to the dogs.
Was a key person in the Lordship Savation apostasy arguing against free grace, and is a dispensationalist.

I expected better from Soggy.....such language.
I don't agree with your lordship salvation either

Your preaching ' Lordship salvation?