A Better Covenant

Posted in Christian Living, Studying the Scriptures, Theology Applied | Tagged Gospel | 61 Comments

61 Responses

1. on September 12, 2008 at 1:59 pm | Reply Carey

   Lionel,

   Are you sure you are reformed? Defending Easy Believism? LOL Just kidding. This is a great post to me and one reason I read your blog is that you are honest and only try to fit with the Bible. I think many of of us just try to fit with whatever group we are reading or have been brought up in. Just know they are going to kick you out of the reformed brotherhood for this one.

   
   
2. on September 12, 2008 at 2:13 pm | Reply lionelwoods7

   Thanks Carey! Yeah I know. It has something I have been struggling with because many who would disagree with me I have an unbelievable and great deal of respect for. I am of the conviction preach the Gospel and Jesus will seperate the Goats and Sheep, he never asks for our assitance.

   
   
3. on September 12, 2008 at 2:50 pm | Reply Bro. Lawrence D.

   Brother Lionel,

   You almost have me in tears over here. Not because I’m laughing hard, as usually is the case, but because the Gospel is so beautiful that it grieves my heart that men have lost confidence in the Holy Spirit to make it effective in the hearts of His elect. Every scripture in the New Testament concerning our salvation establishes it in God through Christ alone. We only need believe!

   When ever I examine myself in light of God’s standards, I see nothing but sin and damnation! Whenever I examine Christ in light of God’s standards, I see nothing but the hope of my salvation! He indeed is our Righteousness!

   
   
4. on September 12, 2008 at 3:16 pm | Reply SOwen

   Lionel,
   I praise God someone is willing to stand for the simplicity of the gospel. None of man’s words will ever do in one day what the words of Christ have done in two thousand years. Brother Lawrence, Amen to your comment also.
   Lionel, Thanks because I need this also.

   
   
5. on September 12, 2008 at 3:44 pm | Reply Q

   hey lionel,

   seems like lately “controversial” has become your middle name bro! glad you are always wanting to challenge folks to be sure we are thinking biblically.

   you are right – the gospel is trusting solely in Christ and in Him alone…and that our confidence resides in His atoning work and the Spirit’s assurance. I do believe that sometimes the preaching of repentance and a life obedience to Christ as necessary fruit of salvation may SOUND like works (or perfectionism) and one must be careful to present the gospel/scriptures accurately so as not to diminish Solus Christus. So, I agree with your post in part.

   But, I believe you may have oversimplified the whole “easy believism” vs. “Lordship salvation” debate and have made an assertion without validation.

   I say that for a few reasons:

   1) you don’t really deal with what the issue of “easy believism” is – you assume the definition and that your reader understand it as well. you say that the gospel is simple and easy – which is true but that’s not the issue with “easy believism” – it is not Christ Alone that we’re dealing with, we’re dealing with the true nature of saving faith – it produces fruit. (i.e., “faith without works is dead”)

   2) you don’t state the “reformed” position against “easy believism”; but you do distort it by accusing it of sliding works on the “tail end” of the gospel. However, you have made merely an accusation without a preponderence of evidence for your argument. I.e., “How do ‘reformed’ folks tack works on to the tail end of the gospel?” or “Exactly what are they saying?” You mention Paul Washer but you never quote him. Which either becomes a failed critique or slander or both.

   3) so i am confused to what you are arguing against. you said you are “fighting against a common mindset among reformed brethren.” but, again, you never defined or stated that mindset. thus your argument becomes groundless (you may have specific points of issue for which you have grounds for your argument that are behind your statements in the article – but the problem is – we can’t read those.)

   4) your argument is not biblically balanced because you do not deal with the nature of the argument (as I mentioned) because you are not stating what salvation produces (according to scripture).

   let me demonstrate:

   you say:

   “We are not to react to those false professors we only need to preach the message of hope of a Savior who decided to lay aside His glory to reconcile us and adopt us as His Father’s children. Christ really did it all and He needs none of our assistance.”

   However, if we are to “preach the Word” – then what do we do with the WHOLE letter of 1 John that deals with “false professors” Let me give you a few examples:

   1:6 If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth.

   1:8 If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.

   1:9 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives.

   2:3-6 We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. 4The man who says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But if anyone obeys his word, God’s love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: 6Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did.

   2:9-11 Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates his brother is still in the darkness. 10Whoever loves his brother lives in the light, and there is nothing in him[c] to make him stumble. 11But whoever hates his brother is in the darkness and walks around in the darkness; he does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded him.

   And what do you do with the words of Jesus:

   “If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned.” (John 15:6)

   I am not trying to give any particular interpretation right now – I am just saying you have not really dealt with the issue but only made reactionary statements without real validation or sound and wholistic biblical forethought.

   Not slamming just trying to help the soundness of your position.

   Jude 2,

   Q

   
   
6. on September 12, 2008 at 4:01 pm | Reply Keith Giles

   Lionel,

   You know I love you, my brother and your insights and this blog have been an incredible source of encouragement and inspiration for me.

   (You knew this was coming)…BUT, I have to diagree slightly with your premise here.

   Yes, the Gospel is easy. It’s not complicated, and it’s not about works. Of course not.

   I think the disconnect for many of us in the West is that we read the verses that say “Believe” and we assume that means: “Accept that this is true”.

   But in the New Testament when Jesus or Paul or Peter use the terms “Believe” they are alluding to a deeper sense of that word which is better understood to be “Trust”.

   If we understand that to “Trust completely” in Jesus is to take him at his word, put these words into practice daily and lean into Him for everything, then YES, I agree with you…all anyone has to do is to “Believe/Trust” in the LORD Jesus and he/she will be saved.

   Dallas Willard has a great quote that goes something like, “The way you know you really understand that you can do nothing (to earn salvation) is revealed by what you do when you realize you can do nothing”. Which translates to: “You know that you’ve understood salvation by Grace when you’re eager to put your heart and soul into the work of the Kingdom- fully understanding that you’re already 100% saved, but full of joy to please your Father who Loves you enough to set you free at such a great expense.”

   Another of my heroes in the faith, Todd Hunter, says, “Instead of asking people if they know they’ll be in heaven tomorrow if they died tonight, we should be asking people if they woke up tomorrow and they were alive, then who would they follow and how would they live their life?”

   In other words, the Gospel of the Kingdom which Jesus came and died to preach is all about our life now, not so much our life to come. He offers us entry into a God-Ruled life today where we can surrender our petty kingdoms in exchange for His Glorious Kingdom.

   Just my three cents.

   Love ya,
   kg

   
   
7. on September 12, 2008 at 4:10 pm | Reply lionelwoods7

   Q,

   It seems that you missed this statement by me, so I will post it then respond:

   I can add a bunch here but I will allow the comments to be the place we work this out.

   Next here is a quote by someone you will be familiar with found here: http://www.founders.org/journal/fj06/article3.html

   The term “easy-believism” carries such pejorative overtones that none openly defends it. Zane Hodges sees it as a term used to disparage the idea that “eternal life can be obtained by a simple act of trust in Christ.” Hodges understandably resists the terms “intellectual assent” and “cheap grace” also. In fact no one wants such epithets attached to his theology, especially on the basis of the other fellow’s definitions.
   Certain aspects, however, of each of those terms have the ring of truth and can’t be avoided in any biblical understanding of saving grace. Sinners are saved “freely,” as a gift, and that by grace. Though this is free it certainly isn’t cheap. Grace comes only because the Father spared not his own Son, and those to whom it comes are called to forsake final affection for every temporal thing. Also, saving faith certainly involves both the intellect and assent. The gospel consists of propositional truth–the “form of sound words,” the “deposit”–which must be grasped by the intellect to some degree; and saving faith cannot exist without assent, for if one did not assent to the truths he could not believe. The gospel, however, does not remain simply an object to be mastered by our minds but is also a subject that acts upon, masters, and subdues us. Furthermore, in one sense belief is “easy.” It comes as a gift of God; it is sovereignly bestowed; it can neither be gained by hard work nor resisted. Nothing could be easier than to be the recipient of a gift that omnipotent love is determined to bestow. But again, true faith does not remain easy because it calls us to conquer the flesh, the world, the evil one, and death itself; not as an option, but as a necessary demonstration of genuineness. This is impossible, as the disciples, to their astonishment, learned from Jesus himself.

   Here is a link to a video that starts out talking about not being works then tacking works to the tail end by Mr. Washer http://www.recoverthegospel.com/?p=1947. Let me ask you does he faithfully exposit “strive” in the context of both Matthew 7 and Luke 13 is Jesus even remotely insinuating morality in the context?

   Now before you accuse me of slander or anything of the sort lets ensure that we are asking questions brother. Because you disagree with someone theolgocially doesn’t make it slander or some of your favorite men have slandered Joel Olsteen, Jakes and others. Simply watch the video and read the articles and you will see where we differ. Slander would be huge leap.

   Next we must understand that this is a blog. Not a James White debate. I only have so much space to convey as much as possible to stimulate conversation. I can’t cover every angle in my post even if I wanted because different perspectives will drive different comments and responses. So I will ask again that we start with those disclaimers. I can only do so much with the attention of those who read blogs. This response is rather long

   cheap medicines online

   Now on to your statements:

   1. What kind of fruit and how much fruit Q? And how is the fruit measured to Christ or something else? Tell me Q how much fruit do you have? Or better yet what sins do you commit today that you committed before you were saved. Based off of those sins do you have any confidence that you are saved? If so how? Because you “struggle with them” or because you trust Christ? Which sins do you wished to have conqured by now that you don’t have conqured? Do you have any confidence that you are saved? Which sins can’t I commit in order to know that I am really bearing fruit?

   2. Check the two links I included. Also see the Christian’s Great Interest (Puritan work) check “Motrification of Sin” (John Owen which I believe you posted something about), also check this link http://www.gty.org/Resources/Articles/2439

   3. What I am arguing against in the post. To make it clear so that all understand. Fruit and Works is a moving target. If any of your salvation is based in either you have polluted the Gospel. The Gospel is Christ’s work alone. To be saved you must only trust in what Christ did, not subjective works. That should clear up any confusion.

   4. I appreciate the verses and I am providing you the entirety of Scriptures. Faith is faith in objective truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It is funny that you include those verses because he said to be growing. Now let me ask you some questions.

   1. Do you obey all of God’s commands?
   2. Did Johnathan Edwards hate his brother by enslaving him against his will?
   3. What is Jesus referring to in John? What does it look like to remain? We can’t have a discussion without you providing an exposition of what this means.

   Finally let me ask?
   In the list of fruit bearing that Paul lists in Galatians 5 which of those have you not beared in the last week? If any of them what assurance do you have that you are saved because you don’t bear fruit in those?

   
   
8. on September 12, 2008 at 4:18 pm | Reply lionelwoods7

   Kieth,

   I will say the same thing. That makes faith a moving target. Lets work it out practically because I hear a bunch of good stuff but in practice this would equate to some form of perfectionism.

   You said:

   Another of my heroes in the faith, Todd Hunter, says, “Instead of asking people if they know they’ll be in heaven tomorrow if they died tonight, we should be asking people if they woke up tomorrow and they were alive, then who would they follow and how would they live their life?”

   So let me ask:

   1. Which of Jesus’ commands did you not follow this week?
   2. You mentioned Dallas Willard’s quote. Let me ask you who’s job is it to test the heart? Ours or Christs. In Matthew 7 Jesus talks about this people group who believed and were doing good works why don’t they make it in?
   3. Lets measure fruit because given the responses between you and Q we have to if we are to say fruit is the measurement or the cherry on the top that tells us we “know we are saved”.

   Here is the list that I aksed Q to provide:

   22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. 24 And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

   Now tell me which of those do you not walk in and if you aren’t walking in them what gives you confindence that you are saved?

   
   
9. on September 12, 2008 at 5:27 pm | Reply Brian Foulks

   I always find it interested how many of use have such triumphantalistic thoughts on our beliefs that they can’t be placed under the light of error.

   Not declaring that anyone is doing that here but we are consumed to believe that certain people hold a monolopy on truth.

   Ryan Turner wrote this today”This is probably one of the most stereotypical texts that apologists use in their defense of the Christian faith. However, often times we turn this verse into an exhortation to dive into apologetics by learning Greek parsing, fourteen letter heresy names, and engaging in deep-seated theological debates.” (He was using the scriputre 1 Peter 3:15)

   
   
10. on September 12, 2008 at 5:51 pm | Reply Q

    Brian,

    and many use the excuse that “no one holds a monopoly on the truth” to act as though Scripture isn’t clear and does not possess objective truth that can be known by the hearers.

    i think it’s best to deal with the issue at hand then to make statements like that – especially if you not saying anyone on here is doing that. I just don’t think it is a word that is “needful for the moment.” The goal here is to be mutually edifying and focus on a biblical understanding the issue. At least that’s my goal.

    Jude 2,

    Q

    p.s. Lionel…i’m getting back to you…

    
    
11. on September 12, 2008 at 6:42 pm | Reply Brian Foulks

    The statement was not one issued as an excuse but to show sometimes we can get so enamored with theological swordplay that we miss the points.

    The point of Lionel’s was not to debate or exhaust his thesis but to “throw raw fish out that others could naw upon.” Simply put to as he states “to allow others to comment.”

    
    
12. on September 12, 2008 at 6:42 pm | Reply Bro. Lawrence D.

    Bro. Q.

    I don’t know you so please see my comment as being meant in total respect.

    The book of I John (at least chapters 1-3) has to be read as a response to an early form of gnosticism and not as a test by which believers are to measure themselves. Look into the tenets of gnosticism and then see if any of John’s statements appear to be in response to those tenets.

    For instance, look at verse 6,8 and 10 of chapter 1. A Christian would not say that it was okay for him to walk in darkness, or that he has no sin, or that he had not sinned. But a gnostic who believed that the body and the spirit of a man were seperate and that the acts that he did with his body had no effect on his inner man, would.

    Chapter 4 is given to combat the fear that false teaching had brought as to the authenticity of their salvation in Christ. And also to spur them on to demonstrating love for one another. And so on and so on…

    To be quite honest, I John does more to PROVIDE assurance of salvation than it does to TEST it.

    Just thought that you could use a different perspective on I John. Please don’t take my word for it but check these things out for yourself. Peace.

    
    
13. on September 12, 2008 at 6:44 pm | Reply Q

    Hey Lionel,

    thanks for the detailed post bro. I want to respond in way that the real issues at hand don’t get clouded – so I will start from the ground up so to speak (I will attempt to address your questions).

    Before I do that, I will say that I actually did see your first comment; but, the point I was making is that you cannot make strong assertions against a position without stating the position you are arguing against. To do so is not a fair argument bro.

    We need to begin by getting to the heart of the issue – which I will end by asking a series of rhetorical yes or no questions:

    The issue with the doctrine coined “easy believism” is whether the Bible teaches that someone can profess genuine faith in Christ and there not be visible evidence of love and obedience to Christ and Christian character in their life? It is an issue of the nature of saving faith. The problematic issue is there are those who teach a kind of faith that is a mere intellectual assent which allows for and excuses a (practicing) life that is willfully disobedient and rebellious to God at worst or at best a life that may be moral but is generally apathetic to the things of God. Those who teach this claim that following Christ in obedience is merely a second step of “becoming a disciple.” Those who teach otherwise do not say that obedience saves you – but it sure is a mark a genuine work of the Spirit in your life.

    I don’t think you would deny that there is a genuine work of the Spirit in someone’s life. But, I believe that the real issue for you is the last sentence in the last paragraph. I think there is an assumption on your part that “obedience” means “perfect obedience” or that “obedience” is not quantifiable. But, the problem in that is the Scripture never quantifies it as such in the way that you are asking me to do, but it does qualify it by stating what that obedience looks like. Thus obedience/fruit isn’t as subjective as you claim – if so we need to toss out most of the NT with all of its imperatives and warnings.

    So here are a few questions that I think will help the discussion further (with few helpful Scriptures); again these are rhetorical. I will answer your questions on fruit and deal with how do we qualify it on the next response (much latter in the day):

    Should those who are saved obey God? Yes: John 14:23-24; 1 John 2:3; Eph 5:5-12

    Do Christians perfectly obey God? No: 1 John 1:8-10, 2:1-2; Gal 6:1; James 4:1-10

    Should Christians produce any visible fruit of godly character? Yes: Gal 5:22-23, James 3:17-18

    Are there degrees of growth in the Christian life (are there Christians who are more mature than others)? Yes: Phil 3:15; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 3:1-7 (with an emphasis on “must be” in 3:1); Heb 5:13-14

    Can Christians be saved and still sin? Yes: 1 John 1:8-10, 2:1-2; Gal 6:1;

    Can Christians be saved and be “caught in sin” and struggle with sin? Yes: Gal 6:1

    Should Christians who are “caught in sin” remain in that state of habitual sinful behavior? No: Gal 6:1; 1 John 2:1

    
    
14. on September 12, 2008 at 7:08 pm | Reply Q

    Bro Lawrence,

    Thanks for your attempt to enlighten me on 1st John. I have studieded the letter extensively and have even written cirriculum on it that i hope to publish one day. no offense taken, but anyhoo…

    1) You have assumed that I have defined the statements of 1 John as intended to be a TEST (I actually never stated that). I actually said that “the whole letter deals with ‘false professors’” in which the gnostic believers would clearly fall into that category. You are 1 John is intended to provide assurance; that is the whole intention of 1 John.

    2) But, John’s intention to provide assurance for his hearers are given in the form of conditional statements that provide neccessary and sufficient conditions for having genuine “fellowship” with God or “having the Son/life” or being “born of God.” Thus, these necessary and sufficient conditions provide clear markers for whether or not someone “has the life” or is “in Him.”

    John takes great pains to define authentic Christianity so that they would recognize the counterfiet in the gnostic Christianity. Their assurance is based upon recognizing those conditions not only in the false teachers but themselves as well. (remember the false teachers “went out from us”) John just didn’t give them a flippant word for their assurance: “hey didn’t you believe one day – don’t worry about it – you’re fine.” But, he provides them the necessary and sufficient conditions upon which assurance is firmly grounded.

    we can discuss 1 John more if you like…

    Jude 2,

    Q

    
    
15. on September 12, 2008 at 7:32 pm | Reply Lionel Woods

    Q,

    That is my point exactly. You see that fruit bearing and commandment obeying is subjective. In one statement you said we should be obeying in another one you said that we won’t do it perfectly, so how are we to do it then? And much (many) of the commandments must I obey to assure myself that I am a Christian? How much fruit should I bear brother? Is 5 out of 6 good or is 50% acceptable?

    When can I assure myself that I am His and that He is mine and that I can say with confidence I know that I am positioned in Him? I don’t understand that, this again is a moving target. Paul Washer says this “if you look like the world, talk like the world, enjoy the things that world enjoys, listen to the things the world listens to, then you have no assurance that you are saved”. What does that look like practically? Is that smoking, drinking, clubbing, listening to R.Kelly or Kanye? Is that watching a rated R movie? What exactly does that look like and how do I know that I am not doing those things?

    Again Q where is my assurance? Let me ask again:

    1. What sins did you committ before you were a Christian that you commit today and if you do commit any that you did then, what makes you think that you have grown at all?

    2. Was Johnathan Edwards a Christian or George Whitfield? But man held human beings against their will and treated them as if they were cattle? Doesn’t that violate the loving your brother scripture you provided? He didn’t bear any fruit in this area but he is one of the most widely quoted theologians I know.

    3. When can I know FOR SURE that I am a Chistian Q? When can I wipe the sweat from brow, put down the plow and say I have been adopted into the family of God? When exactly does that happen or do I roll the dice into heaven? How many or how much works must I do to gurantee my salvation?

    These are serious questions brother and I ain’t trying to debate I just have a disconnect.

    
    
16. on September 12, 2008 at 7:49 pm | Reply Msamu

    2 Cor 13:5a Examine yourselves to see if your faith is really genuine. Test yourselves.

    How are we to test our self’s

    Jhn 13:35 By this shall all [men] know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

    This is Christ, this is how believes are known, not by doctrine, works, not by sacraments, long devotion, church attendance, how we dress, or how many scriptures we can remember.

    1Jo 3:17 But whoso hath this world’s good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels [of compassion] from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?

    I believe we’re to examine our self only to humble our self, Christ is the bridge to everlasting life, this is a fact.
    There will be many that come across the bridge that only love can cross, this too is a fact.

    I’m not sure if I’m following this line, but hay doesn’t it all come down to love.

    
    
17. on September 12, 2008 at 7:56 pm | Reply Brian Foulks

    msamu,

    Can not the world display love one to another as well. What marks us as bonifide partakers of salvation that is distinctive of believers? Is love the only criterion?

    
    
18. on September 12, 2008 at 8:51 pm | Reply Keith Giles

    Lionel,

    Let me answer your questions:
    1. Which of Jesus’ commands did you not follow this week?

    Nearly all of them. I’ve made a habit of this, actually. The point being that it’s not how well I keep these commands that saves me, it’s my submission to Christ; both the initial submission and the ongoing submission to Him. I am depending on Christ for my salvation, and for daily Grace to walk out His commands. I fail, yes. We all fail, but this doesn’t determine salvation.

    2. You mentioned Dallas Willard’s quote. Let me ask you who’s job is it to test the heart? Ours or Christs. In Matthew 7 Jesus talks about this people group who believed and were doing good works why don’t they make it in?

    Because it’s not about doing good works. I can’t stress that enough. But even where it says, “We are saved by Grace” it continues on to say, “to do good works” doesn’t it? Yes, it does.

    3. Lets measure fruit because given the responses between you and Q we have to if we are to say fruit is the measurement or the cherry on the top that tells us we “know we are saved”.

    The point is that we are not to measure anything to determine if ANYONE is saved or not. That’s what Jesus refers to when he tells us not to judge others. There is only one Judge and He is God. Not us. Watch out for the log in my eye, ok?

    kg

    
    
19. on September 12, 2008 at 8:57 pm | Reply Msamu

    Brian:

    How are we known of Christ? Christ said

    Jhn 13:35 By this shall all [men] know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

    the love of God produces the fruit of the Spirit,

    Mankind outside of Christ can produce the fruit of the flesh.

    The Love that Christians produce must resemble the love of Christ

    Jhn 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

    Because we cannot see into the heart of man (only God can) there is no way of knowing if one’s salvation is bonifide, I believe it’s the reason Paul tell us to “Examine yourselves,
    whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves”

    Have you given your life for a friend? We are so accustomed to calling each other brother, but David said under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit

    Pro 18:24 A man [that hath] friends must shew himself friendly: and there is a friend [that] sticketh closer than a brother.

    Who is that friend?

    Jhn 15:15 Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you.

    Giving one’s life for a friend is to love beyond yourself to sacrifice your self, this is the Love god gives the believer not the world.

    I believe it’s the single defining mark of a true believer.

    
    
20. on September 12, 2008 at 9:31 pm | Reply Brian Foulks

    Msamu,

    I agree with that it is a mark of a true believer but as i said before that the same thing happens in the world. When i was buckwild in the street I had brothers that would take a bullet for me as well. I had brothers that gave me the shirt off their back and money to eat with. So did that love equate to salvation. It goes back to what Lionel said earlier “When can I know FOR SURE that I am a Chistian Q? When can I wipe the sweat from brow, put down the plow and say I have been adopted into the family of God? When exactly does that happen or do I roll the dice into heaven? How many or how much works must I do to gurantee my salvation?”

    I like the words Paul use “make you calling and election sure”(2 Peter 1:10) which would be manifested in the fruit of the spirit.

    
    
21. on September 12, 2008 at 9:35 pm | Reply Brian Foulks

    Keith,

    But is the questioning of the fruit an investigation of or an all out attempt to declare that someone is wrong.

    1 Cor. 2:15
    But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

    
    
22. on September 12, 2008 at 11:02 pm | Reply Daniel

    The point is that just saying certain words, I claiming that you “believe” does not automatically mean you DO believe in the eyes of God, because to Him, belief is not merely intellectull, but like Keith said, a matter of trust. And that IS something we are supposed to communicate to those who claim to know Christ, and who adamently oppose him….

    To say that the gospel is simple, but not easy, doesn’t mean that the target is moving, the target (Christ) never changes, it is US that are constantly prone to moving away, to falling back into trying to appeal to our works to save us…

    That is why we must always be on guard, not so we don’t “stop being good enough”, but so that we don’t get sucked back into trying to be good enough….

    John 15:3-5

    3You are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you. 4Remain in me, and I will remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me.

    5″I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.

    
    
23. on September 13, 2008 at 2:40 am | Reply msamu

    Brian: Christ is clear Jhn 13:35 By this shall all [men] know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

    The work has been done, it’s by grace that you have been saved not of work’s lest you boast, I’m sure you know that.
    When you were planted in the soil of the world, and men tasted of your bitter fruit, did they glorify your heavenly father or did they Heep praise on you and what you have accomplished.

    but their must be clear attributes as a result of your regeneration, you were planted in the fertile soil of Christ, as you draw from Christ you begin to grow, the season will come when you will mature and flower you must bring forth fruit ( love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith) or you are good for nothing, as men seek you out to partake of the sweet fruit you’re bearing, fruit that has been drawn from being planted in Christ Jesus, as men taste of your fruit (good works) they will glorify your heavenly father.

    I’m sorry brother, since theirs no way for the world to know your of your father out side of what Christ said was the sold identifier that we LOVE One another as he has loved us, then we’re just religious and have a work based faith, and that’s to heavy to cross the bridge of grace.

    But you can know for your self brother, for the Spirit will bear witness of itself
    Rom 8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

    
    
24. on September 13, 2008 at 4:59 am | Reply lionelwoods7

    Craig and Daniel,

    I don’t think we disagree. The problem is the fact that we don’t know the difference. For three years many would have thought they trusted, secondly those in Matthew 7 themselves thought they trusted.

    What we want to do is refrain from offending one of these little ones. What I am fighting against is the teaching that can cause newer and weaker believers from shifting there focus from Christ to themselves as the Galatians did.

    Finally it is funny that we spend all of our time preaching a Gospel of grace to the nonbeliever. We tell them they can never earn God’s favor by their works. We run them through Romans 3 and the commandments to show them that they can’t earn it. Then we get them in the door lock it and tell them that if they really want to know they are saved they must bear some type of subjective fruit. So on the front end we tell them “grace, grace grace” and we debate about it. Then we get them in and we tell them “fruit, fruit, works, works” to ensure the profession they really made was geniune. Isn’t this the bait and switch?

    
    
25. on September 13, 2008 at 6:42 am | Reply Larry A. Cochran

    Lionel

    In your response to Daniel and Craig you struck a cord on this point. This is one point that I believe needs to be driven home. Christ said:

    John 3:3 Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again[b] he cannot see the kingdom of God.”

    I have seen so many people being told to present something naturally impossible in the flesh. They are told to present fruits of the spirit.

    A man who truly believes does exemplify fruits, but the fruit is a mere result of the faith and grace delivered to them at the point of regeneration. God gives us commandments to live a certain way and then gives us the ability to do it by faith in Him alone. When a nonbeliever is given a false sense of security in their so-called fruit because it may seem to be genuine, they never take time out to do what is said in:

    II Peter 1:3His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to[c] his own glory and excellence,[d] 4by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire. 5For this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue,[e] and virtue with knowledge, 6and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, 7and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love. 8For if these qualities[f] are yours and are increasing, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9For whoever lacks these qualities is so nearsighted that he is blind, having forgotten that he was cleansed from his former sins. 10Therefore, brothers,[g] be all the more diligent to make your calling and election sure, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall. 11For in this way there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

    This scripture has been used for many things in the “Word Faith Movement”, but rarely for the purpose intended, to call true believers out from among those who make a false profession of faith. When people are presented with a faithless faith, they become more easily controlled and manipulated. I am sure that some kind of heat would come down on us for thinking to dare challange the genuieness or quality of someones faith, but this is needed in order to deliver the doctrine of saving faith toward the elect.

    
    
26. on September 13, 2008 at 8:52 am | Reply Mark R

    The Law cannot do the job – period. History reveals that slavish devotion to religious externals could not save Judah. The people thought if one observed cultic ritual and offered the prescribed sacrifices all would be well and so God sent His prophets.

    Amos 5:22-24

    22 Even though you bring me burnt offerings and grain offerings,
    I will not accept them.
    Though you bring choice fellowship offerings, [a]
    I will have no regard for them.

    23 Away with the noise of your songs!
    I will not listen to the music of your harps.

    24 But let justice roll on like a river,
    righteousness like a never-failing stream!

    
    
27. on September 13, 2008 at 9:20 am | Reply Chuck

    Hey Guys,

    If the Bible was the word of God, then it would not be so imperfect and debatable. As a matter of fact it is so easily debatable, that a cave man can do it. Normally I would have left this post uninterrupted, but the comment about the Muslim friend never having the peace and security and freedom from God’s wrath that you experience and that his sincerity is going to land him in hell ignited me. It ignited me because you do not know this to be a fact. This is only what you believe to be true. As a matter of fact, if anyone of these so called Christians were at peace with their faith, they would be on this blog search for reassurance. I think about how Christians (and others) are so quick to condemn Muslim extremist but refuse to HONESTLY research the Dark Ages, The Crusades and The Inquisition to see how Christianity was in fact forced upon people in similar manners. Research the Panare Indian Version of the Bible. It is just another example of fear tactics. Know this… Religion is and always will be Slavery. It is not fact and if Christian weren’t so bound by their fears, they would have the ability to read the Bible in the proper symbolic way as opposed to Literal. The bible tell you this “…For which these things are an allegory.” For those you who still think you should be like Jesus, well… he didn’t drive… do you?

    
    
28. on September 13, 2008 at 12:37 pm | Reply Brian Foulks

    Larry,

    I do not think that Lionel is questioning the born agagin process but he is pointing out that we have some ambiguity in our defining what is “being saved.” Are we saved by grace or is the fruit the manifestation of our salvation?

    Is it one or the the other or does salvation by grace put you in a place to manifest the fruit?

    
    
29. on September 13, 2008 at 12:38 pm | Reply Brian Foulks

    msamu,
    Were all Christ disciples saved though?

    
    
30. on September 13, 2008 at 12:49 pm | Reply msamu

    Brian: yes all of Christ’s disciples were saved,

    Jhn 17:12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

    
    
31. on September 13, 2008 at 1:36 pm | Reply Brian Foulks

    What about the son of perdition, Judas. Was he not a disciple?

    Once again my thoughts are those of what I perceive Lionel is saying. Which is is there a clear definiton that is engulfed in the easy believism thought about salvation? Do we just build doctrines that we think are ironclad without subjecting them to scrutiny? Can it be, that some of the fahters of the faith are and were wrong?

    Just a thought

    
    
32. on September 13, 2008 at 2:11 pm | Reply msamu

    Brian: It”s important that you read the scripture, Christ said none were lost except son of perdition, why was lost because he was never given to Christ from the father. he was the son of Perdition.

    Jhn 17:12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

    If your part of a local assembly you should submit to it’s doctrine, but being a member does not guarantee your salvation, not being a member of a local Church does not mean your not saved, It’s your chose join or not we have that liberty. Could the so called Church Fathers have been wrong? absolutely, Church fathers were not inspired of God, their interpretation and doctrine is not the word of God, the word of God is the word of God. Let the Holy Spirit guide you.

    Check out http://www.preterism-eschatology.com/

    
    
33. on September 13, 2008 at 2:34 pm | Reply Brian Foulks

    msamu,

    I can agree with you on the things you said but you still have not clearly answered the question that was presented from the jump. i am not sure we have a difference of thought just the verbiage.

    Here in lies the dilemma of sorts, Judas was considered a disciple but was not saved. Does the scripture declare that he was never a disciple. The questions that I asked was whether all of the disciples were saved?

    As the son of perdition, he was damned for eternity but where in scriputure does it declare that he was not considered a disciple.

    
    
34. on September 13, 2008 at 3:21 pm | Reply msamu

    Brian: the Scripture says Christ lost none that were given to him, But, the “but” says to me that Judas was a student i.e disciple, he was chosen by Christ because he was elected by God to betray the Christ, so indeed he was numbered with the twelve, The other disciples wondered who the betrayer was, their observation was inadequate, looking at the outward they couldn’t tell, just as we are unable to tell who’s a true believer by mare observation, But God knows who are his, and Judas was not his, but was a student.

    We cannot see into the heart of a man, so we come up with doctrine and institutions that we call the Church, demanding faithfulness to the institution ( the system) as a means of obeying God, This is also a form of salvation based on works. Again too heavy to cross that bridge called grace

    I continue to see the horror of who I am with out Christ,

    
    
35. on September 13, 2008 at 3:48 pm | Reply Bro. Lawrence D.

    Bro Q,

    I had hoped that you would not be offended at my response but unless I misread the tone of your response, it seems that I failed and for that I apologize. I did not intend to respond to things that you didn’t say. So you are right. You did not say that I John was intended to be a TEST. But you did say this in comment #5:

    (Q) “However, if we are to “preach the Word” – then what do we do with the WHOLE letter of 1 John that deals with “false professors” Let me give you a few examples:”

    (BLD) This statement seemed to express that you believed the “Whole letter of I John” dealt with false professors. That’s why I gave my brief synopsis of I John. If you were saying that false professors were being dealt with and not that it was the purpose of the Whole letter, then I was mistaken. However, I must again state that John’s letter was intended to protect them from doubting their salvation because of the false teaching of these early gnostics. Not so that they could test and judge one another.

    As far as the gospel and grace (which is at the heart of this post) is concerned, you really messed up with this statement:

    (Q) “But, John’s intention to provide assurance for his hearers are given in the form of conditional statements that provide neccessary and sufficient conditions for having genuine “fellowship” with God or “having the Son/life” or being “born of God.”

    (BLD) Did you intend to use the word or phrase “sufficient conditions”? If so, then that my friend is the purest example of a works based system I’ve ever seen. Was John telling them in order to have “genuine fellowship with God”, or “having the Son/life”, or “being born of God was to first meet these “sufficient conditions”? NO he was not! My brother, Christ has met ALL THE CONDITIONS for those of us who have genuine fellowship with God and have the Son/life, and are born of God. Christ met them. WE CAN’T MEET THEM!

    Now perhaps you meant to convey something else and I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. But you must understand that there are those who say what you did say and they mean it. They believe that certain conditions must be met by the unbeliever first. But he’s an unbeliever! Also, a believer has all of these qualities at varying levels all of his/her Christian experience. That’s why it’s so necessary for I John to be read as a treatise against this early form of gnosticism and not as a demonstrative “graph/chart” of the authentic Christian.

    Here is another statement that doesn’t comport with the text in discussion or scripture as a whole”

    (Q) ” Their assurance is based upon recognizing those conditions not only in the false teachers but themselves as well.”

    (BLD) This is the problem with all “test yourself” preaching. NOBODIES ASSURANCE SHOULD BE BASED OFF OF ANYTHING OTHER THAN CHRIST. (Did I type that loud enough? LOL!) There’s no way John intended to teach otherwise through this letter. Recognizing these false teachers could not have been a condition of their assurance. That is patently false!

    As a brother in Christ, I beg you to let me see that curriculum before you release it. So far it doesn’t seem that it could be sound enough to teach anyone.

    This last statement is further evidence that your understanding of I John is dangerously flawed:

    (Q) ” John just didn’t give them a flippant word for their assurance: “hey didn’t you believe one day – don’t worry about it – you’re fine.” But, he provides them the necessary and sufficient conditions upon which assurance is firmly grounded.”

    (BLD) Q, do you believe that John was writing to a bunch of people that he didn’t know? Do you believe that he was writing to a group of people who’s authenticity was in question? Let me know if you really think that John would direct the following statements towards this group of people or if these statements even make sense in that context:

    I John 2:1 “My little children”
    I John 2:7 “Beloved”…”a commandment which you have had FROM THE BEGINNING”.
    I John 2:12-14 “I am writing to you, little children, because your sins HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN YOU for His name’s sake.
    I am writing to you, fathers, because YOU KNOW HIM WHO has been from the beginning. I am writing to you, young men, because YOU HAVE OVERCOME THE EVIL ONE. I have written to you children, because YOU KNOW THE FATHER. I have written to you, fathers, because YOU KNOW HIM WHO has been from the beginning. I have written to you, young men, because YOU ARE STRONG, and the word of God ABIDES IN YOU, and YOU HAVE OVERCOME THE EVIL ONE.”
    I John 2: 18,”Children”
    I John 2:20 “But YOU HAVE AN ANOINTING FROM THE HOLY ONE, and you all know”

    Man Q, I could go on and on demonstrating that John had full confidence in the authenticity of these believers and that this was in no way a test, guide, measuring stick, list of conditions or anything else for them. It was an encouragement that they were already authentic. Just read the verses.

    And on a side note, the antichrists had “went out”, past tense. There wasn’t an intention on the part of John to spur them to remove any other antichrists. None were left.

    Finally, my main objection is that any self-examination that leads to assurance of salvation, only proves that I’m self-righteous and prideful. There is no commandment in the New Testament for one to examine themselves for evidence of the authenticity of their salvation. (Don’t get me started, again, on the misuse of II Corinthians 13:5)

    As believers we have attributes of godly character that we ought to aim for as a matter of daily living. But when it comes to my salvation and my assurance, I’ll examine the gospel which causes me to examine Christ. For He is our only hope. (I Corinthians 15:1-8, note in verse 1 “the gospel which I preached to you, which also YOU RECEIVED, in which also YOU STAND, by which also YOU ARE SAVED, if you hold fast THE WORD which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain.)

    Nothing in this post was meant to be harsh, condescending or insulting. If you feel this way about any of it, then I accept full responsibility and I extend my full apology

    
    
36. on September 13, 2008 at 4:32 pm | Reply Larry A. Cochran

    There is a fruit that is a direct result of genuine saving faith. The fruit is love which will be seen or manifested in special ways without contradiction.

    Lets say that I have been led to believe I am saved by repeating what someone who thinks they are leading me to Christ tells me. Here lies the contradiction in itself. Christ said this:

    John 6:44No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.

    and

    John 6:65And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”

    This means that the fact that someone claims salvation is only validated by God and what He says. His word is clear that although we cannot of our own come to Him due to our depravity, we must still somehow come to Him. This would be a contradiction in a so-called easy believism type faith, yet to a genuine saving faith it begins to make sense as the Word of God by the Power of the Holy Spirit in perseverance works out in us what is said here:

    Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

    Notice there are good works prepared beforehand that we should walk in.

    Also, would it not be a false claim to say we believe in something that we do not follow both outwardly and inwardly.

    
    
37. on September 13, 2008 at 4:54 pm | Reply Bro. Lawrence D.

    Bro. Larry,

    Do you believe that the following three (3) conditions can all be true about the same person at the same time: A man who (1) desires to be saved, also (2) believes he is saved, but he is actually (3) a false professor. Think about the scripture you used above before you answer.

    You see Larry, I don’t believe that people can even desire to be saved except it be given them of God. I also don’t believe that God gives an individual the desire to be saved but refuses to save them. Therefore, I also must conclude that the individual who is “professing” to be saved but is actually not, must know in some way themselves that they are faking. I don’t believe that the “professors” of Matthew 7 are surprised that they don’t get in because they actually thought they were saved. I believe they are just surprised that Jesus didn’t fall for their hypocrisy like everyone else did. The false professor does not really want Christ. They may want not to go to hell. They may want the respectability of being considered “religious” but the final analysis Christ is just a means to an end and not an end Himself. These people cannot be scared out of their hypocrisy by preaching subjective standards of outward piety as a means to judge salvation. They need the grace of God, by God’s own sovereign decision, to awaken them from the dead!

    
    
38. on September 13, 2008 at 5:22 pm | Reply lionelwoods7

    Larry,

    Let me ask you som questions. I would ask that you not skirt these questions they are the same ones I asked Q.

    1. What sins did you committ before you were a Christian that you commit today and if you do commit any that you did then, what makes you think that you have grown at all?

    2. Was Johnathan Edwards a Christian or George Whitfield? But man held human beings against their will and treated them as if they were cattle? Doesn’t that violate the loving your brother scripture you provided? He didn’t bear any fruit in this area but he is one of the most widely quoted theologians I know.

    3. When can I know FOR SURE that I am a Chistian Q? When can I wipe the sweat from brow, put down the plow and say I have been adopted into the family of God? When exactly does that happen or do I roll the dice into heaven? How many or how much works must I do to gurantee my salvation?

    4. There is a list of fruit in Gal 5, do you bear all of these fruit? If not then why do you think you are saved. In all other words how much fruit and how many good works must be produced in order for someone to be ENSURED they are saved?

    These are serious questions brother and I ain’t trying to debate I just have a disconnect.

    
    
39. on September 13, 2008 at 5:59 pm | Reply Q

    Lionel,

    Sorry it took me a minute to get back to you…a brother got responsibilities…

    But, these are serious questions bro and I don’t want to downplay them in the least bit; and it’s good to reason together in charitable Christian discourse about it.

    There’s been a lot of discussion in between that I may end up overlapping because I don’t have time to read it all. So, if I make a redundant point (or don’t give someone credit for a point already made) – please forgive me. I am sorry this is long.

    There are two points/questions I want to raise then give you some other things to consider as we wrestle with this.

    1) Honestly brother, I think you’re asking the wrong questions. There are fundamental questions and issues behind the questions of “how can obedience be mark of assurance?”; “is fruit bearing and commandment obeying subjective?” “How many of the commandments must I obey to assure myself that I am a Christ? How much fruit should I bear brother?”

    I’m not saying that your questions don’t matter or are not a part of the equation – especially the question of “how are we to obey.” I believe every believer struggles with that question. But in asking these questions we have to be sure not to negate and dismiss the most fundamental ones to which a biblical theology of obedience must be understood.

    The first fundamental question is “what does the Bible say?” – You have to be careful not to talk above the Text bro – trying to have a conversation about the text without the Text. You’re asking me for the answers to these questions when you need to be asking God’s Word.

    So I ask…Does the Bible say that fruit bearing and commandment obeying is subjective? Does the Bible imply it? Does the Bible quantify fruit bearing for us? Our own perspectives may be subject to fallibility – but does that negate that the Bible has a clear teaching? Do we not trust the Holy Spirit to give us an understanding of the truth of fruit/obedience just as He gave us understanding of who Christ is?

    I say this to say you asking the wrong questions and the wrong person.

    2) Also, have you thought through the implications what you are saying about “obedience” with the questions you are asking? Are you suggesting that obedience to God is not required in any sense nor is a result of being saved?

    You said that “In one statement (Q) said we should be obeying in another one (Q) said that we won’t do it perfectly, so how are we to do it then?” But, I ask you – should and do regenerate people obey God? And I was merely stating something that the Scriptures clearly teach – do you deny this?

    You are asking for a quantification that is not provided in Scripture, however, this does not in any imply that obedience is then subjective. It only means that Scripture expresses obedience to God in a different way. So, again, I submit that you must ask a different question. The question is… “what does the Bible say about the believer and obedience”

    I submit that the Scriptures present obedience, bearing fruit, and doing God’s will as something that is continuous; matter of fact, it is an ongoing progressively growing practice of life. Thus, this practice and growth is something that is observable. This is an ongoing observable practice of the believer’s life because something has fundamentally changed in soul of the believer as a result of their salvation/regeneration. They have in essence become “a new creature.”

    There is a particular word that you find throughout the NT that describes the ongoing progressive practice of the believer’s life. It is the word that in Matt 7:17-18 is translated “producing” fruit and in 7:21 for “doing” the will of the Father and in 7:24 and 26 for those who “does” or are “not doing”. You also find this word in 1 John and John 3:21 for what is often translated “practice” the truth; in older translations it is rendered “do”, “doing” (the reason why it is “producing” for fruit because someone can’t “do” fruit – which this context of its usage helps us understand what “doing” means).

    The will of God is what you see a believer doing or practicing, it is their way of life, it is their moral compass…it is something that they are producing. Producing fruit (in the natural sense) is a progressive thing…but it is observable. If your garden isn’t growing fruit then there is something very wrong at the root of the plant. The very issue Jesus was dealing with in Matt 13…it is only the good soil that is rooted to Christ and produces real fruit or righteousness; and this is the fundamental issue in 1 John (“if we say…but…we lie”). One can easily observe if a garden produces fruit or not. One can easily observe what a person “practices” as a way of life. This practice is ongoing, but it is progressive.

    Jesus’ rebuke in Matt 7:21 is that these individuals, while “having a form of godliness” there was something wrong with their root – “I never knew you.” It told them that they were “lawless” – without or against law…they had no concern for His Word and doing it. “Therefore, anyone who hears (his) words and does” them is the one who is like a house firmly planted (or a root). The wise man is one who “knows Christ.”

    The fundamental issue at the heart of the whole “easy believism” debate is a fundamentally soteriological one. The grounds of our assurance is the work of Christ; that work is a real and vital work and it produces real and vital results. You should understand this as a New Covenant theologian (e.g., Jer 31:31-33). Thus, fruit is a necessary and sufficient condition for having been “baptized into” Christ – of having the circumcision of the heart – of being born again – of being a member of the New Covenant. This is why I say you are not talking with the text – the whole counsel must inform our theology. And we must deal explicitly with what the text says.

    So, how do I know if I am Christian? I’ll let John answer it: “Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him. By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and observe His commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome. For whatever is born of God overcomes the world; and this is the victory that has overcome the world – our faith.” (1 John 5:1-4)

    Jude 2-3,

    Q

    
    
40. on September 13, 2008 at 6:02 pm | Reply Q

    Hey bro Lawrence,

    I just saw your response…i will read it over and get back to you either later this evening or tomorrow…i need to give attention to other things at the moment.

    But, actually wasn’t offended as I said “no offense” my tone was one of a touch of sarcasm, but not of offense.

    Jude 2,

    Q

    
    
41. on September 13, 2008 at 6:11 pm | Reply Q

    Bro Lawrence,

    I have read your response – you need to read my last post to Lionel. It may help your understanding of what I am saying regarding “necessary and sufficient conditions.”

    This has nothing to do with works based system – it has everything to do with the Work of Christ for and in us. Is the work of Christ a real and vital work?

    I will give you a detailed response later to your accusations of what I am saying as you have made some very strong statements that I must reply to.

    Blessings,

    Q

    
    
42. on September 13, 2008 at 6:46 pm | Reply lionelwoods7

    Q,

    I wrote a comment that was erased by mistake. So let me try to summarize.

    Listen to me carefully. If any day in our Christian life we take our eyes off of Jesus Christ and even take a peek at ourselves in order for us to earn or validate our salvation we have made the Gospel subjective. At all, regardless of how much fruit I bear, don’t bear or how many good works I do or don’t do, neither of those either validate or negate my position in Christ. My position is founded, maintained and secured in the unchangeable, immutable, eternal Son of God who reconciled me to the Father by His death on a rugged cross. Nothing more or nothing less.

    Next my problem is this. We start by telling people grace, grace, grace. We force people into a hopeless and helpless position outside of Christ. We invite them into fellowship with other believers, then they hear “if you are not bearing fruit then your profession, alter call, sinners prayer means nothing” This is wack my friend.

    I asked a question about Whitfield and Edwards both of held men and women against their will in one of the most demonic institutions called “slavery” even defending it with the “sovereignty of God”. What do you say of the lack of fruit bearing in which the WORD says “if you don’t love your brother, you don’t love God”?

    Finally I am not saying that a Christian will not bear fruit or do good works. As a matter of fact Paul promises it in both Titus 3 and Romans 8. The writer of Hebrews talks about the New Heart that was promised in Jeremiah 31 and the writer of Ezekiel makes a point in Chapter 37. Every Christian will bear fruit and do good works and as the mature the will do both even the more; however, I am to NEVER look at those to establish, validate or even insuante that my salvation has anythign to do with these. My salvation is in Christ alone.

    So you can’t say I am not using the word because I refuse to pick proof text that can be conquered by other proof texts. We can go at that all the day long. However, I will tell you that the totality of both the Old and New Testaments prove to me that my righteousness is foregin and only applied by faith in Christ and His work on the cross.

    So my problem is that when a young or immature Christian here that their faith may not be genuine because they don’t bear fruit and they begin to look at themsleves to validate their salvation and they take their eyes off of Christ and his work in the cross we infinge upon the Gospel because it is He that saves by the Gospel and I will fight against it everytime. I will tell anyone who has put their faith in Jesus is saved because anything besides that is subjective.

    
    
43. on September 13, 2008 at 8:28 pm | Reply Q

    Hey Lionel,

    Our phone conversation was good bro…it was good clarification; and as you said…I do believe we are saying the same thing. Here are the things we said we agree (I think I summarized this well…let me know if I missed something)

    1) Our salvation is in Christ alone…it ALWAYS rests upon His saving work…”if anyone sins we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous, and He himself is the propitiation of our sins…” This is undeniable.

    2) Christ saving work accomplishes more for us than just a positional justification/righteousness. It secures our regeneration and progressive sanctification as well.As you said in your last response…”Every Christian will bear fruit and do good works and as the mature the will do both even the more.” So, one who truly trusts Christ is promised to see fruit in His life (opposite of Zane Hodge’s position).

    3) The BASIS of our assurance IS Christ and His Work – but we see the fruit of that work in a fundamental change in the disposition of the believer who is now has a changed attituded toward God and sin and a progressive growing in obedience to God. This shows Christ’s accomplishing work on the Cross is vitally at work in us. (e.g., we are saved by Faith alone but faith is never alone.)

    4) There is a concern that the preaching of examining ones fruit as assurance can be misunderstood and must be preached carefully – again, because OUR ASSURANCE IS IN CHRIST and not anything we do or have done. As you said, “a young or immature Christian hearsthat their faith may not be genuine because they don’t bear fruit (in a particular area) and they begin to look at themsleves to validate their salvation and they take their eyes off of Christ and his work in the cross…” Preaching “examine yourself” (which we are commanded to do) must be done carefully in order to not be misunderstood that our works are the basis of our salvation. (remember the concern is the grenade/friendlies analogy when you post again)

    5) There are those who are who profess Christ falsely but show NO evidence in their life of true faith and repentance and must be confronted with their apparent unbelief. (e.g., the professed believer who continues to purposefully commit adultery on his wife and refuses to repent? Can that man be assured of salvation if he says he believes? (“faith without works is dead”)

    6) When I get them…I will post those two sermons from this past week I preached on the believer and remaining sin. Also, take a listen to that last message again on “Clarifying Our Message – Jesus is Lord!” and tell me if when came out fits your concern.

    Bless you bro…

    Q

    p.s. bro Lawrence – I ain’t forgot about bruh!

    
    
44. on September 13, 2008 at 10:07 pm | Reply Larry A. Cochran

    I will tell you what I am assured of. This may be lengthy, but I am sure that it may help. I am definitely not a self justifier nor a person who attaches any works to salvation for salvation. I am merely stating that there will be evidence of it.

    1. What sins did you committ before you were a Christian that you commit today and if you do commit any that you did then, what makes you think that you have grown at all? There are things that I once committed that Christ has completely given me revelation by His word how to stop committing. Because of my condition before Christ, I was a slave to sin and did it because I could not stop, now, if I should sin, it is with confidence that Christ is real and that when I confess I am forgiven. There really is no big difference in the fact that I was a sinner then and still struggle with sin from time to time. I do not pretend now to be more than I am. I am sure that as long as I am in this body I will struggle with various things that will try to control me. But now, I am a slave to Christ and He dictates my grace, if I should sin, there is chastisement. The catechisms deal with issues like this in this manner:

    Q32: How is the grace of God manifested in the second covenant?
    A32: The grace of God is manifested in the second covenant, in that he freely provideth and offereth to sinners a Mediator,[1] and life and salvation by him;[2] and requiring faith as the condition to interest them in him, promiseth and giveth his Holy Spirit [3] to all his elect, to work in them that faith,[4] with all other saving graces;[5] and to enable them unto all holy obedience,[5] as the evidence of the truth of their faith [6] and thankfulness to God,[7] and as the way which he hath appointed them to salvation.[8]
    1. Gen. 3:15; Isa. 42:6; John 6:27
    2. I John 5:11-12
    3. John 1:12; 3:16
    4. Prov. 1:23
    5. II Cor. 4:13
    6. Gal. 5:22-23
    7. Ezek. 36:27
    8. James 2:18, 22
    9. II Cor. 5:14-15
    10. Eph. 2:18

    Q72: What is justifying faith?
    A72: Justifying faith is a saving grace,[1] wrought in the heart of a sinner by the Spirit [2] and word of God,[3] whereby he, being convinced of his sin and misery, and of the disability in himself and all other creatures to recover him out of his lost condition,[4] not only assenteth to the truth of the promise of the gospel,[5] but receiveth and resteth upon Christ and his righteousness, therein held forth, for pardon of sin,[6] and for the accepting and accounting of his person righteous in the sight of God for salvation.[7]
    1. Heb. 10:39
    2. II Cor. 4:13; Eph. 1:17-19
    3. Rom. 10:14, 17
    4. Acts 2:37; 4:12; 16:30; John 16:8-9; Rom. 5:6; Eph. 2:1
    5. Eph. 1:13
    6. John 1:12; Acts 10:43; 16:31
    7. Phil. 3:9; Acts 15:11

    I myself am broken by my own sin first and so broken that I have truthfully accepted my state as being broken and in need of death for my transgression. This is part of that calling from God onto life. Most people that we are dealing with bypass this process and are not mournful over sin wchich leads to the type of repentance that Christ speaks of.

    2. Was Johnathan Edwards a Christian or George Whitfield? But man held human beings against their will and treated them as if they were cattle? Doesn’t that violate the loving your brother scripture you provided? He didn’t bear any fruit in this area but he is one of the most widely quoted theologians I know.

    True, in their beginnings they did hold slaves, but showing love and holding slaves are not contrary in the context of the time they lived. They were merely acting out their christianity by the way their culture dictated it for them. As time progressed both were mournful of those atrocities and repented. History tells me a lot more about the context of slavery than was once believed. I hate slavery of all kinds, but, I understand the cultures of those times and why it persisted then and still persists today, even in America. Which leads me to this catechism explaining the sanctification of a man whom God calls:

    Q75: What is sanctification?
    A75: Sanctification is a work of God’s grace, whereby they whom God hath, before the foundation of the world, chosen to be holy, are in time, through the powerful operation of his Spirit [1] applying the death and resurrection of Christ unto them,[2] renewed in their whole man after the image of God;[3] having the seeds of repentance unto life, and all other saving graces, put into their hearts,[4] and those graces so stirred up, increased, and strengthened,[5] as that they more and more die unto sin, and rise unto newness of life.[6]
    1. Eph. 1:4; I Cor. 6:11; II Thess. 2:13
    2. Rom. 6:4-6
    3. Eph. 4:23-24
    4. Acts 11:18; I John 3:9
    5. Jude 1:20; Heb. 6:11-12; Eph. 3:16-19; Col. 1:10-11
    6. Rom. 6:4; 6:14; Gal. 5:24

    Q76: What is repentance unto life?
    A76: Repentance unto life is a saving grace,[1] wrought in the heart of a sinner by the Spirit [2] and word of God,[3] whereby, out of the sight and sense, not only of the danger,[4] but also of the filthiness and odiousness of his sins,[5] and upon the apprehension of God’s mercy in Christ to such as are penitent,[6] he so grieves for [7] and hates his sins,[8] as that he turns from them all to God,[9] purposing and endeavoring constantly to walk with him in all the ways of new obedience.[10]
    1. II Tim. 2:25
    2. Zech. 12:10
    3. Acts 11:18, 20-21
    4. Ezek. 18:28, 30, 32; Luke 15:17-18; Hosea 2:6-7
    5. Ezek. 36:31; Isa. 30:22
    6. Joel 2:12-13
    7. Jer. 31:18-19
    8. II Cor. 7:11
    9. Acts 26:18; Ezek. 14:6; I Kings 8:47-48
    10. Psa. 119:6, 59, 128; Luke 1:6; II Kings 23:25

    Q77: Wherein do justification and sanctification differ?
    A77: Although sanctification be inseparably joined with justification,[1] yet they differ, in that God in justification imputeth the righteousness of Christ;[2] in sanctification his Spirit infuseth grace, and enableth to the exercise thereof;[3] in the former, sin is pardoned;[4] in the other, it is subdued:[5] the one doth equally free all believers from the revenging wrath of God, and that perfectly in this life, that they never fall into condemnation;[6] the other is neither equal in all,[7] nor in this life perfect in any,[8] but growing up to perfection.[9]
    1. I Cor. 1:30; 6:11
    2. Rom. 4:6, 8
    3. Ezek. 36:27
    4. Rom. 3:24-25
    5. Rom. 6:6, 14
    6. Rom. 8:33-34
    7. I John 2:12-14; Heb. 5:12-14
    8. I John 1:8, 10
    9. II Cor. 7:1; Phil 3:12-14

    Q78: Whence ariseth the imperfection of sanctification in believers?
    A78: The imperfection of sanctification in believers ariseth from the remnants of sin abiding in every part of them, and the perpetual lustings of the flesh against the spirit; whereby they are often foiled with temptations, and fall into many sins,[1] are hindered in all their spiritual services,[2] and their best works are imperfect and defiled in the sight of God.[3]
    1. Rom. 7:18, 23; Mark 14:66-72 ; Gal. 2:11-12
    2. Heb. 12:1
    3. Isa. 64:6; Exod. 28:88

    Q79: May not true believers, by reason of their imperfections, and the many temptations and sins they are overtaken with, fall away from the state of grace ?
    A79: True believers, by reason of the unchangeable love of God,[1] and his decree and covenant to give them perseverance,[2] their inseparable union with Christ,[3] his continual intercession for them,[4] and the Spirit and seed of God abiding in them,[5] can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace,[6] but are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation.[7]
    1. Jer. 31:3
    2. II Tim. 2:19-21; II Sam. 23:5
    3. I Cor. 1:8-9
    4. Heb. 7:25; Luke 22:32
    5. I John 2:27; 3:9
    6. Jer. 32:40; John 10:28
    7. I Peter 1:5

    3. When can I know FOR SURE that I am a Chistian Q? When can I wipe the sweat from brow, put down the plow and say I have been adopted into the family of God? When exactly does that happen or do I roll the dice into heaven? How many or how much works must I do to gurantee my salvation?

    Again it is not the work I work that makes me saved, but it is saying that a man will exemplify by default fruit worthy of repentance. Again the faithful brothers of times past helped us with this:

    Q80: Can true believers be infallibly assured that they are in the estate of grace, and that they shall persevere therein unto salvation?
    A80: Such as truly believe in Christ, and endeavor to walk in all good conscience before him,[1] may, without extraordinary revelation, by faith grounded upon the truth of God’s promises, and by the Spirit enabling them to discern in themselves those graces to which the promises of life are made,[2] and bearing witness with their spirits that they are the children of God,[3] be infallibly assured that they are in the estate of grace, and shall persevere therein unto salvation.[4]
    1. John 2:3
    2. I Cor. 2:12; I John 3:14, 18-19, 21, 24; 4:13, 16; Heb. 6:11-12
    3. Rom. 8:16
    4. I John 5:13

    Q81: Are all true believers at all times assured of their present being in the estate of grace, and that they shall be saved?
    A81: Assurance of grace and salvation not being of the essence of faith,[1] true believers may wait long before they obtain it;[2] and, after the enjoyment thereof, may have it weakened and intermitted, through manifold distempers, sins, temptations, and desertions;[3] yet are they never left without such a presence and support of the Spirit of God as keeps them from sinking into utter despair.[4]
    1. Eph. 1:13
    2. Isa. 1:10; Psa. ch. 88
    3. Psa. 22:1; 31:22; 51:8, 12; 87:1-12; Song of Sol. 5:2-3, 6
    4. I John 3:9; Job 13:15; Psa. 73:15, 23; Isa. 54:7-10

    4. There is a list of fruit in Gal 5, do you bear all of these fruit? If not then why do you think you are saved. In all other words how much fruit and how many good works must be produced in order for someone to be ENSURED they are saved?

    I bear them by Christ alone, not in myself. I bear the fruit of the Spirit by faith, not by trying to do anything. As a matter of fact each time I fall short of any of them, I repent there for causing me to continue on the straight path to Christward. I have no special ability, no special call, or no perfection. I have humility. This humility is what seperated me from who I was. I cannot bear the weight of sin, I cannot bear the weight of th guilt, I cannot bear the weight of the punishment, therefore, I have been enabled by God’s complete sovereignty to this assurance:

    Rom 9:6But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, 7and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 8This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. 9For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.” 10And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, 11though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls— 12she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

    14What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! 15For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16So then it depends not on human will or exertion,[b] but on God, who has mercy. 17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

    19You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— 24even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?

    Finally, I am not made righteous by my own doing, but the Holy Spirit testifies alone of this. I am not who or what I used to be and still am no more perfect than any other human being. It is the word alone that secures me. Most people professing or confessing do not have this assurance within themselves. Sometimes they may also claim it but our brother John says this:

    Read 1 John (chap 1-4 in context) but this in particular grabbed my attention:

    1 John 2:18 Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us. 20But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you all have knowledge.[c] 21I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie is of the truth. 22Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. 23 No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also. 24Let what you heard from the beginning abide in you. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, then you too will abide in the Son and in the Father. 25And this is the promise that he made to us[d]— eternal life.
    26I write these things to you about those who are trying to deceive you. 27But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie—just as it has taught you, abide in him.
    28And now, little children, abide in him, so that when he appears we may have confidence and not shrink from him in shame at his coming. 29If you know that he is righteous, you may be sure that everyone who practices righteousness has been born of him.

    
    
45. on September 13, 2008 at 10:36 pm | Reply lionelwoods7

    Larry you said:

    True, in their beginnings they did hold slaves, but showing love and holding slaves are not contrary in the context of the time they lived. They were merely acting out their christianity by the way their culture dictated it for them. As time progressed both were mournful of those atrocities and repented. History tells me a lot more about the context of slavery than was once believed. I hate slavery of all kinds, but, I understand the cultures of those times and why it persisted then and still persists today, even in America. Which leads me to this

    Would you like to elaborate? Or should I take this at face value?

    
    
46. on September 13, 2008 at 10:44 pm | Reply Larry A. Cochran

    Slavery has been a part of a lot of history, from Genesis to Revelation. At the time they were converted they were slave holders, and it was culturally acceptable. No one questioned this on the part of their religion except for a few abolishionist whom I found to not all be Christian themselves. It was a movement like that we see not different from these days. Again, I believe slavery to be wrong, but even Paul had told a runaway slave to return to his bondage. I can’t understand why God’s soveriegn grace has had some groups rule over others with rigor and hard bondage, but now under the covenant of grace we have been cleared of these charges not because we stop doing them, but because we are cleared we stop doing them. They were examples of men who did that. They started off believing nothing was wrong with a Christian holding a slave like this, but after the Holy Spirit beat up on them for years, they caved in. I wish it were not so, but they were who they were, and don’t think it takes away from who they became in Christ later on.

    
    
47. on September 13, 2008 at 10:56 pm | Reply lionelwoods7

    Larry,

    When Homosexuality becomes dominant and shaking up becomes dominant will you say the same thing? Will you give the same pass that you give for men-stealers as 1 Timothy 1:10 says is sin clearly?

    
    
48. on September 13, 2008 at 11:11 pm | Reply Larry A. Cochran

    Yes, sin is sin. And all commission must be repented of.

    
    
49. on September 14, 2008 at 3:07 am | Reply Bro. Lawrence D.

    Q you typed:

    “One can easily observe if a garden produces fruit or not. One can easily observe what a person “practices” as a way of life. This practice is ongoing, but it is progressive.”

    (BLD) Really? How so? What kind of fruit does my garden produce Q? What sin am I struggling with right now? What about your closet friend/relative? Come on Q tell me, who’s saved and who’s not saved? I mean, as you said, this should be an easy couple of questions to answer!

    You also typed:

    “Preaching “examine yourself” (which we are commanded to do) must be done carefully in order to not be misunderstood that our works are the basis of our salvation. ”

    (BLD) Can you please show me where we are to preach “examine yourself”? (Don’t go to II Corinthians 13:5, that’s a field of land mines that you wont survive) Secondly, can you please explain how examining ME can lead to anything other than misunderstanding on what my salvation is based? Q, you have got to rethink this!

    Okay, I’ll wait for your responses. This may be considered sand-bagging or piling on.

    
    
50. on September 14, 2008 at 3:13 am | Reply Bro. Lawrence D.

    Larry,

    Please do not make the mistake of comparing the biblical form of slavery (which was more like indentured servitude) with what happened to Africans in this country! God had strick rules as to how the Hebrews were to treat their slaves which were gained in war. However, in the New Testament the slavery was a result of debt and again Paul laid down strict rules for treatment of them as “brothers”. What 17th, 18th or 19th century slave holder treated his/her slaves like brothers? Please! And also, please don’t appeal to cultural norms which never supercede the word of God! If that is to be the standard of Christian living, then we will have no dividing line!

    
    
51. on September 14, 2008 at 2:39 pm | Reply Larry A. Cochran

    I apologize for the offence, but facts are facts. What about the slavery that hebrews faced under the pharoahs. What about the slavery that nehimiah argued against from amongst his own brothers against one another. Slavery had rules when it came to hebrews under Gods commandments. It had nothing to do with gentiles. Although some claiming Christ used the bible to condone what they did, it had nothing to do with that of course, but as a Christian, we have different rules to follow. Paul did not clarify if it was good or bad, but said to return. There is no historical evidence saying it was good. What about jews who owned foreigners as slaves their entire lives? What about slavery and bondage to sin itself?

    Let me set it straight, I am african american, but I understand two things historically, business with economics, and history with its cultures. I am not one to defend anything I disagree with so I am not defending slavery of any form.

    Here are some aften ignored forms of inhumane acts of slavery:
    What of the human trafficking that is taking place right now?
    What about the holocaust?
    What about the working poor?
    What about cults?

    Growing up as a black militant and one who believed “by all means necessary”, black pride and all that mumbo jumbo. I have realized how deeply affected (infected) my thoughts were by the times rather than actual facts. The most horrific event in history was not the over 400 years of african slavery. What about the aparthied? What about the sudan issue? What about the issues in the middle east with the oppression still being fought against? What about brainwashing going on by cults in this country? I have released my personal vandetta against those who oppressed my ancetors, it was a road leading to nowhere. Unfortunately, that slavery was not the worst ever. Bad yes, but nothing compared to events like what happened to native americans in this country as well.

    The fight is against evil alone, not defending how bad our people may have had it. Even the event of slavery was used by God and in another words ordained by God in His soveriegn will. We are a better people now than what the few who blame slavery, truly believe. I really apologize if it sounds like I support what they did to our people, but I accept it as historical and having its place in God’s soveriegnty in bringing even I to the faith and grace I experience today.

    Please lets not make this seem worst than it really is. Slavery is evil. Jonathon Edwards was not right. But the bible was clear that God did not condone indentured servatude, which believe it or not was still worst than we let off, but God said to give without attachments because it does not belong to anyone but Him. Everything is on loan from God. People died and were horribly treated as a result of “indentured servatude”. There is no line by line comparison to african american slavery, but neither is there in the comparison of african american slavery to the native american wipe out or the jewish holocaust. We all had it bad and fortunate for us all, God’s grace or predestination does not discriminate on the bases of the ugliness of anyones sins, but rather is the glory of God in itself. By forgiving the unforgivable, He shows Himself all the more graceful, merciful, soveriegn, and loving. He is the reason for both sides of the equation.

    
    
52. on September 14, 2008 at 3:22 pm | Reply lionelwoods7

    Larry,

    Sorry brother but you missed me on 99% of your comment. Let me ask some questions:

    1. Who said what happend to the Jews under Hitler was okay? Do you believe Hitler to be a Christian? I am confunsed.

    2. Who said what happened to the Native Americans was not an atrocity? Do you believe those men that took land from the Indians raped their women and pilfered their villages were Christians? I am confused.

    3. Who said that the Hebrews under Pharoh’s regime were treated “fairly”? God judged the Egyptians correct? I am confused.

    4. Now for you to be militant black you haven’t done much research on the two forms of slavery. Endentured Servanthood is a slavery that one submits himself under due to the inability to meet their own needs. African American Slavery were men and women who were kidnapped from their native land, forced to endure the middle passage, where man and women would urinated, do number 2 (don’t want to use the other words) and have menstrual cycles on one another. Many would die and as one sailor said, the sharks would follow these boats at time because many had to be thrown overboard to prevent diseases from decaying humans.

    Larry if you think this is okay and men and women who particpated in such an event were born again, then this cancels out every other statement you including on this post brother and that is for real. 1 Timohty 1:10 is a verse I included and I asked you a slew of question about homosexuality and other such sins that are respected. So are you cool with gay bishops? Do you believe a man can be a practicing homosexaul pastor? Would you say well hey “God predestines”?

    No one said that God was unsure what was transpiring but He no less holds them accountable for such evils. So again you missed me on that one bro. Finally I don’t know if you assumed that I have some issue with whites or anyone else for that matter but that is what it sounds like and if you read my writings you would recognize quite easily that Christ dealt with that during my “militant” days also.

    Its funny that you say God doesn’t discriminate when you said this earlier:

    A man who truly believes does exemplify fruits, but the fruit is a mere result of the faith and grace delivered to them at the point of regeneration. God gives us commandments to live a certain way and then gives us the ability to do it by faith in Him alone. When a nonbeliever is given a false sense of security in their so-called fruit because it may seem to be genuine, they never take time out to do what is said in:

    Slave owners displayed no fruit especially the marqee fruit of love!!!!! So I am confuse what your concern is.

    
    
53. on September 14, 2008 at 4:30 pm | Reply Larry A. Cochran

    again, not that they did right away, but they did eventually as all true believers will.

    I think that we are two sides of the same glass.

    I am not for any evil. They did come around, however later in life, but they did. I will not base their salvation on the beginning in which I myself took time to divert from. I was wicked, the chief of all sinners, and now Christ has conformed me daily more and more to His image. There is a difference in believers and non believers who profess, only Christ will ultimately be able to judge whether or not what we saw was real. We still see through a tainted glass or cultural view.

    Some slave owners were able to show fruit eventually, key word, eventually, not immediately.

    I am not protecting those who went on unrepented. No, no, no, they are not forgiven. I am talking about the thousands upon thousands who God has elected and called them onto sanctification from these atrocities. They were part of that group from my observation of their lives historically.

    
    
54. on September 14, 2008 at 4:48 pm | Reply Larry A. Cochran

    There is no humanly fair way to say slavery. Hitler was not good, but there are his followers who actually participated in the holocaust who are now saved and repented, should they not be accepted? Paul was a killer of Christians and was converted on the way to another killing crusade. He was not easily accepted, but eventually he was. I don’t think that any of you are antiwhite, but we all have to be realistic in that we have a cultural bias when comes to deciding which events in history were worst. Even after being born again, I still struggle with wanting to retaliate economically, which is why I hold an MBA and was working toward a DBA.

    The fact is that we as African Americans and especially Christian African Americans have cultural issues that play out in our acceptance or non acceptance of events in history. I mean, those we listen to and those we don’t.

    We are brothers on the same side of the fence. We are both fighting to bring light to a dark world. I accept whom Christ accepts and I reject whom Christ rejects. His word lays out the guidelines to know what that means. Fruit is the key to knowing, but it is not always easy to know aside from a careful display of them ourselves. Love is the key. When we love the unloveable we show Christ. These men where bad once and if I not to challange peoples false profession now that I see them, how can I judge these men historically as only proof that I have is secondary. I don’t know about them, but I know what I see and read from the scripture. There is a problem with a person who does not change and claims that Christ has changed them. We are to be diligent in examping fruit for our own benefit, not for deciding whether or not a person is elect or not. I look to the fruit of a person to decide whether or not I would genuinely benifit from hangng with them or conversating with them.

    As I have gained much insight from your blog, but have no clue as to your fruit other than your words. If i was to see that your life does not line up with your actions, I would plead with you, I would work with you, and then eventually if there is not repentance, I would break from you. If you repent, regardless of what you have done, I would accept you as Christ does. You will still suffer consequences, partly your reputaion will be varnished by some, but with me, you are as Christ sees you, clean.

    When I compare things, I am dealing with them on a historical level only, not a spiritual or moral level. I am sure that God will deal as He pleases with the great sins as in the small sins. These men have historical records that say they changed and repented of their works in slavery.

    Please forgive me for believing that they were repented, if they were not I would things proving that every bit of historical documentation i have read was incorrect.

    
    
55. on September 14, 2008 at 5:02 pm | Reply Larry A. Cochran

    a man cannot be a practicing homosexual pastor. No Hitler was not a christian, but formed his own brand of christianity. No those who killed blacks were actively repented. Yes there is a difference in voluntary indentured servatude and unvoluntary slavery. But history proves that the line was very thin in the treatment of each.

    Ask yourself this, if I wanted to defend an ideology, how would it look if I gave you all the information pertaining to both sides of the story. Don’t look at it from the eyes of the slave alone. Look at if from the slave holder.

    Ask yourself how did these slave really get into the hands of the slave holders? They were properties of war. They were kidnapped by other village rivals. They were kidnapped on the coast by english slave traders, cuban slave traders, spanish slave traders, and strangley african slave traders. Even Africans benefitted from slavery in Africa. I know people don’t want to see that part, but we are African American and have a tainted history. We must go far beyond the slave ships to see it. No matter how horrific the event, there is more to the story that has not ben told . I have studied the African American slave trade and can tell you from my great grand parents who were cotton pickers that there is a lot that was not told. When I heard from first hand indviduals about slave trades and slavery in america, I realized that all the people involved were to blame, but the handful of leaders who would not allow it to end because of the economic advantage it had. If you are to keep them out of salvation, then america is doomed as well since the practice of slavery is what built this great nation, without it, there was no america in which we enjoy the fruits of slavery. What does that say about all of us?

    
    
56. on September 15, 2008 at 3:01 am | Reply Q

    Bro Lawrence,

    I apologize for getting back to you this late – my life is very busy. I want to say upfront that I am not replying to you because I feel it necessary to have your approval or to change your mind about what I am saying – your approval of what I teach means nothing to me. However, after reading your post and the nature of your statements, I thought it necessitated a response as I am far from preaching a works based soteriology…this is a very strong accusation. So, for the sake of those who are reading – I think clarity is in order.

    Please understand: I do not take your statements personally – meaning I have no animosity or ill will towards you. My tone is polemic not personal. (Also, I am only responding to your statements on 1 John…I have said enough about fruit bearing that can be understood from my response to Lionel…I have no more time for this discussion because it is now becoming endless and fruitless talk.)

    Regarding your comments about my comments on the Letter of John – let me be clear (and please read me carefully and in context)…

    1) Regarding the purpose of the letter – I did say in my initial statement that it was written to provide assurance to the hearers because of the false teaching of the gnostics.

    2) When I say necessary and sufficient conditions – I did not mean to convey something else – it does not seem you understand what it is I am saying. This is a term in logic to basically say that for something to be true it requires a necessary (Y only if X) condition or a sufficient conditions (Y if X). What I am basically observing in John is that he is making conditional statements to say for someone to truly have fellowship (saving relationship) there are certain things that will be present (such as the acknowledgement and confession of sin – 1:8-10) if not then they are liars or children of the devil. Therefore, X (fellowship with God, born of God) if Y (believe that Jesus is the Christ, obey His commandments). Basically – there is a genuine work of God in salvation and those who are truly BORN OF GOD (a work of God by the way) will show these things. (John does not make perfection as the mark and that’s not what I am suggesting as continual recognition and confession of sin and trust in the propitiatory work of Christ are marks of a true believer, 1:8-2:2). To not see that John is giving clear marks of authentic Christianity is to miss the point. This has been a traditional and historic understanding of 1 John.

    3) I never said that John did not know his hearers or believe they were not saved. But, John does write so that they will know that they have eternal life – so that they themselves will be assured. John also does not speak in the 3rd person (“them”) about the Gnostics to make his case but speaks in the 1st person plural – “If WE”. And also uses terms such as “Whoever”, “anyone”, etc. These clearly point that these statements don’t merely apply to the Gnostics. While John seemed to be confident in their salvation it seems in his manner of speaking he was also cautious – the fact that the letter was written to them is in effect for them to read this and apply these things to themselves as well.

    4) The sections you quote from Chapter 2 are pointing to the work of Christ for them and within them…these are the necessary and sufficient conditions they are to observe – not that they meet them of themselves but they are met in Christ and the work of Christ within them. Christ Himself is our only hope (which I never stated the contrary) and His work has secured the work of the Spirit in us – which is a genuine and observable work. If not, John could not make the statements that he did.

    5) No, I will no way let you read my curriculum because of your awful ability to assume that the content of my writing is unsound (and have essentially called me a heretic) because of two paragraphs you think you have read and understood. (And also because you have assumed you are faithfully expositing the text of 1 John). So, I beg you to let God be my judge and trust that I will be wise enough to allow my work to be sifted through better theologians than myself to ensure the soundness of my teaching.

    6) And NO, I in NO WAY preach or teach a works based salvation – if you believe otherwise resign yourself to be my friendly foe until the end. However, I do preach that true salvation (the sovereign monergistic work of God) produces good works – for which I will never apologize.

    Grace and peace to you from our Lord Jesus Christ – who Himself is our righteousness, sanctification, and redemption….and who came to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds.

    Q

    
    
57. on September 15, 2008 at 3:06 am | Reply Bro. Lawrence D.

    Bro. Larry,

    Okay, let’s say I grant the full truth of your history lesson. That still does not explain Edwards or Whitfield. How did we start chasing this rabbit into the history books? History does not obsolve either of these men any more than being molested/abused as a child would obsolve a person who now did it to other children even though it may be attributed to their personal history. These men claimed to be Christians. These men wrote and preached extensively concerning biblical doctrine. But these men owned slaves against those slaves’ wills. History does not obsolve either man!

    
    
58. on September 15, 2008 at 12:35 pm | Reply Bro. Lawrence D.

    Q,

    Will you at least answer the questions I posed? Please!

    
    
59. on September 15, 2008 at 1:12 pm | Reply Q

    Lawrence,

    I did – you need to read my post again. I did not do it in detailed fashion (BLD said, I say, etc., etc., etc.,). But the answers to your questions are found in the statements of my last response.

    I am sorry if you are not satisfied.

    Blessings,

    Q

    
    
60. on September 15, 2008 at 3:07 pm | Reply Bro. Lawrence D.

    Well Q, since you seem to have given me the last word……

    Originally I saw you as someone who would be willing to intellectually engage this topic. Since it was such an important matter, one of soteriology, I believed that the patience of anyone involved would willingly be stretched as far as necessary. I guess I was wrong. (I do find it interesting that someone who was arguing for the testing of others is not willing to be tested himself, hmmm) And this is in no way about my approval of your teaching. It is about the bible’s approval and ultimately Christ’ approval of your teaching. I am saying that your usage of I John fails the test.

    (By the way Lionel, this happens to be the second subject in a row when my questions led to the end of another discussion. Maybe I ought to rethink my participation.)

    Q, I addressed some statements that you made and you’ve failed to either further explain them, because you believe you were correct, or to denounce them, because you don’t want to admit you were wrong. Whatever the reason may be, you need to know that I’m not the only one who noticed. Here’s one of them and my response:

    (Q) “But, John’s intention to provide assurance for his hearers are given in the form of conditional statements that provide neccessary and sufficient conditions for having genuine “fellowship” with God or “having the Son/life” or being “born of God.”

    (BLD) Did you intend to use the word or phrase “sufficient conditions”? If so, then that my friend is the purest example of a works based system I’ve ever seen. Was John telling them in order to have “genuine fellowship with God”, or “having the Son/life”, or “being born of God was to first meet these “sufficient conditions”? NO he was not! My brother, Christ has met ALL THE CONDITIONS for those of us who have genuine fellowship with God and have the Son/life, and are born of God. Christ met them. WE CAN’T MEET THEM!

    Now Q, your explanation in comment #56 is unsatisfactory. Here’s a plain either/or question. Was John or you saying that these conditions were a “prerequisite” or a “result”?

    Also, I asked some very important questions which you didn’t answer. Here they are:

    (BLD) Can you please show me where we are to preach “examine yourself”? (Don’t go to II Corinthians 13:5, that’s a field of land mines that you wont survive) Secondly, can you please explain how examining ME can lead to anything other than misunderstanding on what my salvation is based? Q, you have got to rethink this!

    And…

    (BLD) Really? How so? What kind of fruit does my garden produce Q? What sin am I struggling with right now? What about your closet friend/relative? Come on Q tell me, who’s saved and who’s not saved? I mean, as you said, this should be an easy couple of questions to answer!

    Which I asked in response to this:

    Q you typed:

    “One can easily observe if a garden produces fruit or not. One can easily observe what a person “practices” as a way of life. This practice is ongoing, but it is progressive.”

    Also Q, you basically dismissed my citations of I John 2 and the purpose for which I posted them. Oh no, I wont accuse you of not understanding why I cited them. I only accuse you of dismissing them because they destroy your usage of I John in a pulpit as a self-appointed “fruit inspector”.

    You also really missed it in “3)” in your above comment, #56. Let me give you a quick scenario of the usage of “If we” used by one group but that would specifically point to another group of people:

    Football team A is ahead by 21 at half time over football team B because of team B’s lack of focus and turnovers. In the halftime speech, the coach of football team A says, “If we lack focus and commit turnovers, we will not maintain the lead in this game.” Now Q, they are ahead by 21. They have focus and haven’t committed any turnovers. So who is the coach talking about? He’s talking about team B! Now, is he telling them this because he’s afraid that they’re going to suddenly turn in to team B or to give them assurance that they’re already doing the right thing? And Q, the score in a game of football is no where near as solid as the salvation that the Holy Spirit seals in us when we believe! John being cautious? Please!

    I just really wish that you would revisit my comments, #35 and #49, and honestly before God and these witnesses ask yourself if you truly answered my questions.

    But I accept your unwillingness to engage.

    
    
61. on September 15, 2008 at 3:26 pm | Reply Q

    Lawrence,

    Again, my answers are in my last post.

    It is not that I am unwilling to engage – or am dismissing, denouncing, unwilling to test myself, etc., etc., etc. I have no more time for this discussion. I believe what I have written is a sufficient defense of my position at this time.

    God will judge me if I be wrong, God help me if I am. Pray for me if you feel so.

    This will be the last time I correspond on this issue.

    Jude 2,

    Q