When the church started. Pentecost or Israel

[InSeasonOut]

2 hours ago, wretched said:

The latest thread topics I have seen are peripheral issues and not of the "fundamental" variety so it doesn't help the sharing of ideas when a moderator accuses those who don't see things the way you have been taught of being part of this "falling away". To be blunt Jim, if you think these disagreements are the falling away referenced in 2 Thess 2 then you seriously need to get out of the house more. How could you take the abuse one receives when they really preach the Word on the streets to the lost if you can't handle minor disagreement over minor issues from other believers over the internet without getting depressed? If there is a city of any size where you live, spend a Saturday on main street with Gospel signs and you will see first hand what the falling away really is.

I feel this same way.

2 hours ago, Ukulelemike said:

I was going to jump in here too, but like Jim, there's a lot of weird stuff. Regeneration before the sacrifice of Christ? By what power? If one was regenerated without the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, then there was no reason for Him to come and die for sin.  

I just want to make it clear I never said this. ( I know my original post is long and there are becoming many comments on this thread so again, so again I don't even know who said this but it wasn't me)

[InSeasonOut]

2 minutes ago, weary warrior said:

I'm with Brother Coley. I've been on here for a while, but the posts are getting worse and worse these days. If most of what is often taught on here is basic Baptist doctrine, I must not be a true Baptist after all. I don't agree with everything Jim holds, but I do agree that a lot of posts lately have grieved my very soul. If Wretched wants to point his finger in righteouse indignation at me too, so be it. It means nothing. The spirit, much more than the doctrine, is not as it should be. And the doctrine is often ... well...enough of that.

Farewell, Brethren. I don't know what you actually seek, but I truely hope you find it. I do know what I seek, and I just never could find it here. So I'm moving on to where a fight means I'm fighting the actual enemy, not the brethren.

Sincerely,

S. Dewayne Noel

I'm new here so idk what this is all about... I hope ive contributed to some good discussions, but if anyone thinks my posts are the "worse" ones, then it'd be nice for them to let me know ... only one person has reached out and communicated with me. Other than that, i just joined this site for fellowship, and idk if this is what im looking for here....

I'm enjoying the discussions so far... sure we have some disagreements, but that's no reason to be contentious.

[Jim_Alaska]

5 hours ago, InSeasonOut said:

I know about all this. I disagree. Not one of those quotes are from the OT. The Bible shows progressive revelation.

Anyway, I did say this is another thread, and id rather put debates aside, yet for some reason you bring it up?

Plus you never even answered the questions I asked you before ... so I don't know how I should respond to this.

This was in response to your text that said that you strongly believe that the OT Jews were saved by faith and the keeping of the law. That is the only issue I was addressing. I only posted Scripture, not an opinion, so are you saying you disagree with Scripture?

I have never heard of any Baptists that believed that anyone was ever saved by keeping the law. Therefore I posted those Scriptures.
 Rom 4:14 For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: 

[wretched]

Well, I certainly was not fishing for farewell speeches.

What I am talking about is lightening up a little and giving new posters a chance without the attacks.

Maybe some would stick around a while and add some variety to the threads.

[1Timothy115]

On ‎6‎/‎4‎/‎2017 at 7:12 PM, OLD fashioned preacher said:

Jesus didn't "get His inspiration" from the O.T. - He predates it!

He said "Before Abraham was, I am." (John 8:58)

He is the Creator (John 1:1-5,10-14; Colossians  1:14-16)

 

I like your comment. I might add that Jesus Christ, being very God, is inspiration.

[No Nicolaitans]

2 hours ago, Ukulelemike said:

Regeneration before the sacrifice of Christ? By what power? If one was regenerated without the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, then there was no reason for Him to come and die for sin.

Mike,

If regeneration wasn't possible before Christ's sacrifice, then why did Christ tell Nicodemus the following?

John 3:3
Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

John 3:7
Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

This was BEFORE his sacrifice, but he stressed to Nicodemus (and everyone else) that they needed to be born again...right then...present tense. He didn't say, "Soon, a man can be born again." He didn't say, "Soon, ye will be able to be born again." No...he said it in present tense.

Regeneration is a one-time and immediate act done by the Spirit. It doesn't necessitate the Spirit's indwelling.

What happens when someone is born again...aka...regenerated?

1. Does regeneration give us sinless perfection? No, yet this seems to be one of the arguments against OT regeneration.

Those people in the OT did a lot of things they shouldn't have done! Murder! Adultery! Why...there's no way that they were regenerated! 

Don't saved people today...do a lot of things they shouldn't do? To hate your brother is murder. To lust after a woman is adultery. We lie, we cheat, we steal. But we're regenerated! Yes, but we still do some pretty stinking, rotten, down-and-dirty sins...DESPITE our having the indwelling Holy Spirit.

2. Does regeneration necessitate the indwelling Holy Spirit? No, yet this seems to be one of the arguments against OT regeneration.

The Holy Spirit only came upon people in the OT, then he left them! There's no way that they were regenerated!

Okay. Granted.

Yet...

What were the circumstances; in which, the Bible specifically records that "the Spirit came upon _____?"

The Old Testament isn't written like the New Testament. Look and see what the circumstances were; in which, the events that were recorded had to do with "the Spirit coming upon _____." 

Those events were things like...

some prophesied after the Spirit came upon them.

some did mighty acts after the Spirit came upon them.

some pronounced judgment after the Spirit came upon them.

one person even got angry when the Spirit came upon them!

These were all "acts of the Spirit" as he moved and empowered men to do things. Don't we often hear that the Book of Acts should be called the Acts of the Spirit rather than the Acts of the Apostles?

What is regeneration? Is it not the creation of a new creature inside of a man? Is it not where old things are passed away and all things become new? Is it not where one has a new desire to do things that please God rather than self?

Who are we to say that Noah wasn't regenerated? He sure seemed to fit the definition to me.

Who are we to say that Abram wasn't regenerated? He sure seemed to fit the definition to me.

Who are we to say that David, Daniel, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, etc. weren't regenerated? They sure seemed to fit the definition to me.

I don't see the problem in regeneration before Christ's sacrifice. At the same time, I don't understand it all either. Certainly the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ was the final part needed. After all, folks from the OT didn't go to heaven until after Christ's death, burial, and resurrection. Yet, the Bible clearly called them saints...

Matthew 27:52-53
52   And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53   And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

Those folks were called saints. What is a saint?

1. holy (set apart by God unto himself and apart from the world).
2. (of a person) a holy one.
3. (physically or ceremonially) clean.
4. (morally) blameless.

Sounds a lot like folks who were regenerated to me...

So, after writing all of this, I realize it probably won't persuade anyone. However, at this point in my understanding, I can't be persuaded otherwise unless someone can show me that regeneration itself requires the permanent indwelling of the Holy Spirit. 

[wretched]

2 hours ago, No Nicolaitans said:

wretched,

I think I "in essence" agree with the idea behind your post. However, I do have one concern...

Unless a post (or thread) is in a section of the forum that's not available for public display, then anyone can read it. Unfortunately, we live in a day and age; in which, many people are searching the internet for answers. So, I see what takes place here as more than a pastime. We often forget that others can also view our interactions...that we're not in a box and secluded from the world.

Then again, even if a post (or thread) is located in a section of the forum that's not available for public display, there are still others who have access to those sections who may not be actively involved...but are still reading and watching. 

We may not realize the importance of what we're doing...or we may forget about it at times (I know I sure do), but our words...whether we realize it or not...are more than just a pastime.

...every idle word will be accounted for.

Good points as usual, I get it

[InSeasonOut]

1 hour ago, Jim_Alaska said:

This was in response to your text that said that you strongly believe that the OT Jews were saved by faith and the keeping of the law. That is the only issue I was addressing. I only posted Scripture, not an opinion, so are you saying you disagree with Scripture?

I have never heard of any Baptists that believed that anyone was ever saved by keeping the law. Therefore I posted those Scriptures.
 Rom 4:14 For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: 

Well first nay i politely ask why didn't you answer my questions? ... And I knew how you were using those scriptures to falsely assume OT Jews were saved by faith and not the law.  (BTW: Baptists are not the final authority. The Bible is. You know that. I know that :)

But dealing with the scriptures you posted in Galatians. I know the context of Galatians, Jews were trying to put Christians back under the law. Christians are not under the law, but Jews were! - Even reference any orthodox Jew today, he will not tell you he is saved by "faith alone". The word faith only appears twice in the OT.

How about I reference a verse in Galatians... 5:3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

Why couldn't an OT Jew only keep part of the law? Why was he a debtor to do the whole law? Wasn't he saved by his faith? (im speaking if OT Jews - not NT)

If you want me to start a thread on this topic, I will. But in the meantime look up the words / phrase "sin offering" and "law of Moses".

Your concordance works just like mine.

[No Nicolaitans]

46 minutes ago, InSeasonOut said:

Well first nay i politely ask why didn't you answer my questions? ... And I knew how you were using those scriptures to falsely assume OT Jews were saved by faith and not the law.  (BTW: Baptists are not the final authority. The Bible is. You know that. I know that :)

But dealing with the scriptures you posted in Galatians. I know the context of Galatians, Jews were trying to put Christians back under the law. Christians are not under the law, but Jews were! - Even reference any orthodox Jew today, he will not tell you he is saved by "faith alone". The word faith only appears twice in the OT.

How about I reference a verse in Galatians... 5:3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

Why couldn't an OT Jew only keep part of the law? Why was he a debtor to do the whole law? Wasn't he saved by his faith? (im speaking if OT Jews - not NT)

If you want me to start a thread on this topic, I will. But in the meantime look up the words / phrase "sin offering" and "law of Moses".

Your concordance works just like mine.

Have you read Deuteronomy chapters 28-30 yet?

If so, did you see the the only listed benefits of their keeping the law?

Did you see the only listed repercussions if they didn't keep the law?

Did you see any indication whatsoever that keeping the law had anything to do whatsoever with their salvation?

Again I humbly ask, why do you believe OT Jews had to keep the law and have faith? Where is the biblical support that Jews were saved by both keeping the law and faith?

When you find the answers to these questions, it will help you...

1. Why did God give them the law?
2. Why did God only give the law to the Jews and not the world?

Finally, what does it matter what an Orthodox Jew believes today?

 

[swathdiver]

9 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

I have never heard of any Baptists that believed that anyone was ever saved by keeping the law. 

Ruckmanites!  Ruckmanism is his version of protestant heresies repackaged for the KJV.  Same garbage I was taught at Calvary Chapel but that guy took it even further.  These fellas have taken the simplicity of the gospel and salvation and made it complex and confusing and wrong.  It's no wonder so few get saved these days.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

Well, this discussion has suddenly gone "all over the map."

As for myself, I am happy to engage in Biblical discussions with thoroughness and depth (even when that discussion leads to intense disagreement).  However, I am not interested to engage in personal infighting.  Speak against me if you will (not that any are doing so in this particular discussion), and I will generally choose to ignore such and continue to focus patiently upon the Biblical or doctrinal matter itself.  If others choose to defend my character (as has occurred in the past), such is appreciated.  However, I generally will avoid any engagement in direct "self-defense."  I would much rather engage in doctrinal defense.

Even so, if and when this discussion returns more fully unto the doctrinal matter of regeneration before the crucifixion, resurrection, ascension, and outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, I will likely reengage (for I DO have much "opinion" on that matter).  By the way, a great book for consideration on the matter is the Gospel of John, since one of its primary themes IS spiritual regeneration.

[Ukulelemike]

15 hours ago, InSeasonOut said:

I just want to make it clear I never said this. ( I know my original post is long and there are becoming many comments on this thread so again, so again I don't even know who said this but it wasn't me)

Actually I thought someone else said that. Maybe something is getting lost in translation.  After a few quotes and quotes of quotes it becomes hard to follow sometime. 

23 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

No where in my above posting did I make any reference whatsoever at all unto the existence of the church during the time of the Old Testament.  In fact, no where in my above posting did I make any reference whatsoever unto the church at all.  Rather, in my above posting I dealt ONLY with the two matters of being regenerated by the Holy Spirit and of being baptized (indwelt) with the Holy Spirit.  In fact, I do NOT believe that the church of our Lord Jesus Christ existed during the time of the Old Testament.  However, I DO believe that Old Testament believers were INDEED regenerated by the Holy Spirit.  The doctrinal issue upon which I set my focus in my above posting was not the doctrine of the church, but was the doctrine of regeneration.

Maybe I'm confused. Isn't regeneration that same as being born-again? According to Strongs, it is the same as the new birth, ie, Salvation? The New Birth? There must be a shedding of blood for regeneration to occur, but there could be NO salvation, ergo, no regeneration in the blood of bulls and goats, only in the blood of Christ. Not even by keeping the law and having faith: 

"Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.  But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster." (Gal 3:21-25) 

Even faith could not save BEFORE Christ came, nor could the law save, because none could keep the law. The law pointed us to Christ, SO we could be justified by faith. Before Christ, we could not be justified even by faith, so there was no regeneration, no salvation, no new birth, before Christ's death, burial and resurrection.

Therefore, the "two compartment" view, as you call it, of Hades, or Hell, MUST be the case, because the so-called righteous dead went somewhere. If it was heaven why is Abraham the one comforting Lazarus and not Christ? If heaven is in a totally different place than Hell, why is Baraham able to speak with the rich man, over a mere chasm?

[InSeasonOut]

13 hours ago, No Nicolaitans said:

Have you read Deuteronomy chapters 28-30 yet?

If so, did you see the the only listed benefits of their keeping the law?

Did you see the only listed repercussions if they didn't keep the law?

Did you see any indication whatsoever that keeping the law had anything to do whatsoever with their salvation?

Again I humbly ask, why do you believe OT Jews had to keep the law and have faith? Where is the biblical support that Jews were saved by both keeping the law and faith?

When you find the answers to these questions, it will help you...

1. Why did God give them the law?
2. Why did God only give the law to the Jews and not the world?

Finally, what does it matter what an Orthodox Jew believes today?

 

Sure, thanks for asking the way you did. Quick question though which will determine how I respond..

Do you believe that OT Jews were saved by looking forward to the cross ? Or are you saying they were just saved by faith?

[No Nicolaitans]

25 minutes ago, InSeasonOut said:

Sure, thanks for asking the way you did. Quick question though which will determine how I respond..

Do you believe that OT Jews were saved by looking forward to the cross ? Or are you saying they were just saved by faith?

I believe you will find my answer below (from a previous post in this thread); in which, I originally asked you about Deuteronomy 28-30, and I also responded to Joe Corley and Jim_Alaska. I will insert who each section applies to.

Your question (to me) should be answered in my response to him; in which, I was responding to him saying that no one in the Old Testament looked forward to the cross.

On 6/6/2017 at 0:38 PM, No Nicolaitans said:

Response to InSeasonOut:

If I may ask, why do you believe this? I ask this sincerely; where does the Bible say that their salvation resulted from faith and keeping the law? 

If one reads Deuteronomy chapters 28-30 (just to keep it short), one will see both the blessings for keeping the law...and the curses for not keeping the law. Both of them (blessings and curses) are physical...not spiritual. They would be blessed physically or cursed physically dependent upon their obedience or disobedience to the law. Salvation is never mentioned in any way as having to do with keeping the law.

Response to Joe Corley:

The cross itself? Perhaps not. The work of Christ? Yes.

Luke 24:25-27
25   Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26   Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27   And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Luke 24:44
And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

Like many today, the Jews stumbled at the stone of stumbling. They fixed their eyes upon the law rather than the law-giver. The knowledge and work of Christ was right there for them to see and read...but they missed it. They sought to attain righteousness through works (the law) rather than faith...and many today still try to ascribe law-keeping as a means of (or part of) their salvation.

Romans 9:31-33
31   But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
32   Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
33   As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

Response to Jim_Alaska:

I think everyone here knows that I'm always willing to admit if I'm wrong about something; I often say that I reserve the right to be wrong. Still, I feel much the same Bro. Jim. I think that's one reason that I've more or less resorted to posting nonsensical things in the non-doctrinal sections of the forum.
 

 

 

[No Nicolaitans]

7 hours ago, Ukulelemike said:

There must be a shedding of blood for regeneration to occur,

Mike, I'm asking this humbly...I'm not challenging you. Can you show where the shedding of blood is needed for regeneration to occur?

I know that the shedding of blood is required for the remission of sins and redemption, but I can't recall where the shedding of blood was needed for regeneration.