A bit of grace folks?

[DaveW]

I know this is rich coming from me but here goes anyway...… (In other words, I am talking to myself as well!)

How about we extend each other a bit of grace every now and then?

What I mean is that, especially in the IB section, we all know roughly what we mean - none of the regulars here are going to disagree with the basics of salvation for instance, but sometimes we might say something like "I was saved when I put my trust in Jesus" - and yes that is not technically and theologically correct, but we know we mean when we say such things.

There are absolutely times when the technicalities need to be discussed or pointed out, but when the discussion is a casual one, how about we just roll our eyes to ourselves and say "I know what they mean, even though they said it wrong".

It just makes me laugh when someone says something like "believing in Jesus doesn't save you"...…. Oh really?

Joh 3:16
(16)  For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
 

Who then wants to pick up Jesus for saying that believing in Him means a person will not perish?

If you look at what is involved in being saved, the Bible tells us that some were saved by their faith, some were saved by hope, some received testimony of Christ, some by entering in through the door, some by grace, some by His life, some by calling upon His name, and some by confessing and believing, but the next verse by believing then confessing.....

The point is sometimes we are very quick to jump on someone for something that is not important - it is incomplete maybe, or casually said instead of properly stated, but we all know what is meant.

 

It just gets a bit silly when someone says something and then feels compelled to put in all these qualifiers in an often vain attempt to cover all their bases so that people don't misunderstand them.

 

And I am NOT saying that language is unimportant, and I am NOT saying that we shouldn't correct false doctrine where necessary, and I am NOT saying that it is OK to be imprecise with our words, and I am Not saying that we should let people get away with heresies, and I am NOT saying ………….. I'm not really sure what else I am not saying, but I AM SAYING why don't we cut each other a bit of slack and when someone says "I trusted Jesus as my Saviour when I was 16..." that we just accept that it is an easy way to say I was saved by trusting in the shed blood of the perfect Lamb, Jesus Christ, and in His perfect sacrificial death on the cross, and in His resurrection from the death, which paid for all my sins and that salvation was placed upon me by His grace when I in faith believe all that He, the only son of God, 100% man and yet 100% God, did to pay the penalty of my sin that I could not pay.

 

And we are not all going to agree 100% on all the little details, keep that in mind too.

 

But rip into those who prove themselves to be false teachers and who are revealed to be wolves in sheeps clothing, come in to deceive - yep - Rip into them with all your might.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

Hmmm. Well, I was saved . . .

By receiving the Lord Jesus Christ through believing on His name.

John 1:12 -- "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name."

Edited January 19, 2019 by Pastor Scott Markle

[Baptist_Bible_Believer]

As a young man I believed in the concept of Jesus Christ. I attended a movie presentation by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association at our local theater. I know that he presented the Gospel and as a (I think) 13-year-old kid I believed in what they were saying, but it lasted about three hours and I was back to my old ways . . . which weren't very nice. But had anyone asked me, I would have said, Yeah, I believe in Jesus. In fact, as a "concept" I believed in Jesus as a Catholic (though we Bible Believers that that is not the Jesus of the Bible) . . . but there you have it. I believed.

Those of you that have read my testimony know that I became a Mormon. Thank God that I was eventually, thoroughly, completely saved in 1976. If I would have died in September I'd be in hell right now.

Now, God used that Graham movie to plant a seed, but no one watered it until I heard the Gospel and finally understood it.

Now, 42-years-later. What of discernment? What of sensing doubt in another? What of attempting to clarify the issue? Is that an attack by some people's standard? Peter reminds us that we need to be certain: "Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall" (II Peter 1:10 KJV). (Edited to add that I am not now nor ever have been a Calvinist, even though I used a verse with the word "election" in it. Of course, we understand that election and predestination are solely founded on the foreknowledge of God).

How is it that after years of ministry and preaching the Gospel, some good pastors walk the aisle to be saved?

When a man knows he is saved he KNOWS that he is saved, and no one will convince him that he is lost. But if a man is pretty sure he is saved, at least he remembers a day back when he mentally assented to a historical Jesus, but 100% sure? Well, maybe. We all know that before we can get a man saved we must get him lost first, especially when they are 'religious.'

Did I attack the person that I was working with? No, but I was sure attacked by another that decided he didn't appreciate my approach. It is fairly obvious that I am the subject of this OP.

Edited January 19, 2019 by Baptist_Bible_Believer
clarification

[DaveW]

Ummm…. no, I did not direct this at anyone in any way shape or form.

If you think that this applies to you, then maybe you should ask the Lord to help you with that aspect of your current place, but I did not have you in mind when I wrote the original post.

As I mentioned in the first line, I was talking to myself as much as others.

The basic fact is that it has happened time and time again on OLB, where someone has stated something in a very simple, but technically insufficient way, and ahs been pounced on by one or more members. I can think of at least two member who are not you who have done something like this in very recent times, and if I go back a little further in my mind I can find remember post of my own doing just this - I would venture to say that some on this site took one look at the OP and thought PRECISELY OF ONE OF MY POSTS.

I would counsel any other posters, rather than accuse me and thereby your own self, if you think I am posting directly at you, do not expose yourself, but take it to the Lord.

I assure you all, that I did not have any one single poster in mind when I posted the original post.

If I thought you had overstepped the mark in such a way that I needed to address it, I would PM you about it, or openly post in the particular relevant thread.

Many things I am, but cowardly is not one of them. Dumb absolutely is...…. but cowardly - not so much.

[Jordan Kurecki]

Bro Dave, respectfully, I think of all issues to be precise with language, the things of the Gospel and eternal life are most important. I cannot tell you how many people I have met who doubt their salvation, all because of well meaning preachers who were not precise and careful with what they said.

 

I have made a few threads on this issue:

 

 

 

https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27152-rethinking-evangelism/?tab=comments#comment-438652

[Baptist_Bible_Believer]

10 minutes ago, DaveW said:

Ummm…. no, I did not direct this at anyone in any way shape or form.

I take you at your word. That is sufficient. Then your other thread posted recently about salvation in the New Testament as opposed to the Old Testament is also not referencing some of the things that I have posted recently - where I stated that there is no New Testament salvation until after the death, burial and resurrection of Christ?

[DaveW]

Brother Jordan, I think I tried to address that in my "I am not" section..... 

I absolutely agree that there are times for precision in language - I am talking about in casual conversations where we, instead of being complete in our wording, we take the "easy way out" knowing that the people we are talking to will understand.

Where I might say "I trusted the Lord when I was 16 years old" - you know me well enough to know that I mean the Lord Jesus Christ, that I mean with regard to His death, burial, and resurrection, to know that I mean I confessed my sins and my sinful nature to Him and asked Him to save me, and whatever other details we may have discussed over the years.

The kind of thing you are talking about is in regard to the teaching of salvation, which needs to be clear and concise.

This is precisely what I am talking about - teaching threads - go for it - investigate every detail and make sure that whoever is leading that thread is totally biblically on track. But if someone causally mentions a point in passing in conversation, then we might let it slide - only because we know that it was not appropriate to go into minute detail in that instance.

And I was not referring only to the matter of salvation - that was just the immediate subject that was on my mind.

 

[DaveW]

15 minutes ago, Baptist_Bible_Believer said:

I take you at your word. That is sufficient. Then your other thread posted recently about salvation in the New Testament as opposed to the Old Testament is also not referencing some of the things that I have posted recently - where I stated that there is no New Testament salvation until after the death, burial and resurrection of Christ?

Well, that is another subject isn't it...

I didn't think it was appropriate to address that particular subject in that thread, and I didn't do anything for some time, because I didn't consider it worthy of my time then. I have found the time now, but I did not direct it specifically at you, because I was not actually certain that you position was contrary to what I have posted. I have actually had discussions elsewhere round this subject specifically, and I thought I would introduce the discussion here. I have not however, included any discussion in that thread regarding the Holy Spirit, which I believe is more where your contention on that matter lies - so, no, not specifically directed at your post, but shall we say partially influenced by it. I would not have posted it if it were not for other discussions I have been having recently. It is for discussion, not for animosity.

If you wish to discuss that other thread, I respectfully ask you to do so in that thread so that we do not get everything mixed up in two threads.

 

note: I just went back and had a look at that thread - embarrassingly, I obviously didn't read your posts very well - there is a much closer alignment than I realised between your posts and my new thread - I apologise, for it does seem that I am targeting you in it - It was not my intention - I thought your posts were far more wrapped up in the issue of the Holy Spirit. I would not have posted that thread if I had realised the level of alignment. I will remove it if you like, but please accept my apology for the accidental appearance of attack. It was unintentional. I did say I was a dumb bloke - sometime dumber than others I am afraid......

Edited January 19, 2019 by DaveW
apology.

[Baptist_Bible_Believer]

Not a problem, brother! We are all dumb block sinners saved by God's grace. You should hear the disagreements and arguments that I have with myself! I don't think I could post them.