# A Very Dangerous Book



## SemperFiDawg (Jan 26, 2019)

I am reading John MacArthur’s book The Gospel According To Jesus.  
Don’t go near this book and expect your understanding of the Gospel nor your commitment to Christ to be the same.  It literally wrenched me out of my “comfortable” interpretation of the gospel, into the bare bones reality of just exactly what he meant in those red letters.  Hint: He meant EXACTLY what he said.  Nothing less.  I have not been more convicted of anything since the day I was saved.  The Holy Spirit has beat me black and blue with this book and I’m only finishing Chapter 1.  Without a doubt, my life will never be the same.  

The book adds nothing NEW to the gospel, no special knowledge, no hidden understandings, nothing like that.  What it DOES do it bring a laser focus onto what Christ said and a full understanding of the implications of his words. It is probably going to have profound implications on your life too.  I’ll tell you ahead of time, don’t expect to finish this book unscathed.  It’s brought me to my knees before Christ after only 47 pages and the first 21 were the introduction.  God Bless.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 26, 2019)

I'm assuming it enforced your views on the importance of obedience.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 26, 2019)

What I'd really like is a book to tell me what "I" need to do to be saved. If this book teaches me how to do that, it may be more dangerous than the Bible.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jan 26, 2019)

Artfuldodger said:


> I'm assuming it enforced your views on the importance of obedience.



Nope.  Shattered them.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 26, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Nope.  Shattered them.



Then in that case I may have to read it.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jan 26, 2019)

Artfuldodger said:


> What I'd really like is a book to tell me what "I" need to do to be saved.



There is no book for that other than the Bible, and it couldn’t be clearer. Art I have to be honest.  I  don’t know whether to take you serious or just as someone trolling for attention.  I say that based on the collective history of your post.  There are times you sound like an evangelical conservative well versed Christian, other times when you espouse a liberal Christianity and even others where you lean into atheistic lines of thoughts.  You are like a reed blowing in the wind.  In fact when I think of that expression I’ve come to envision your persona as has been displayed here.  I don’t mean that in a deragatory or denigratory intent nor with any malice.  It’s just my honest interpretation based on what I see.  
    That said, regardless of which my opinions of you are correct, or very well neither, I would recommend this book to you.  It’s not a substitute in any way, shape or form of the Bible nor do I suggest it to be, but it could help clear up some of your confusion.  At the very least, it can’t  hurt.


----------



## LittleDrummerBoy (Jan 26, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Hint: He meant EXACTLY what he said.  Nothing less.




Really, MacArthur has abandoned his cessationist view of spiritual gifts and accepted that Jesus meant exactly what he said here:

John 14:12 Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.

_Mark 16:15-18 He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.” _


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jan 26, 2019)

LittleDrummerBoy said:


> Really, MacArthur has abandoned his cessationist view of spiritual gifts and accepted that Jesus meant exactly what he said here:
> 
> John 14:12 Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.
> 
> _Mark 16:15-18 He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.” _



I do think he is wrong on his cessationalist views to the point I understand where he stands, yet I also understand why he took the stance on it that he did.  That said, he pegged it with this book.
Try to keep in mind, in the end their understanding is not perfect and also, like normal folks, it can lead to mis-steps, misunderstandings, and mistakes.  Martin Luther is credited with bringing a laser focus onto the importance of faith in salvation, yet was openly anti-semantic.  Would you deny he was incorrect about the former, because of the latter?  Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 26, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> There is no book for that other than the Bible, and it couldn’t be clearer. Art I have to be honest.  I  don’t know whether to take you serious or just as someone trolling for attention.  I say that based on the collective history of your post.  There are times you sound like an evangelical conservative well versed Christian, other times when you espouse a liberal Christianity and even others where you lean into atheistic lines of thoughts.  You are like a reed blowing in the wind.  In fact when I think of that expression I’ve come to envision your persona as has been displayed here.  I don’t mean that in a deragatory or denigratory intent nor with any malice.  It’s just my honest interpretation based on what I see.
> That said, regardless of which my opinions of you are correct, or very well neither, I would recommend this book to you.  It’s not a substitute in any way, shape or form of the Bible nor do I suggest it to be, but it could help clear up some of your confusion.  At the very least, it can’t  hurt.


I would agree with your view of myself. I can see where one would think myself "all over the place." It's just I have never been able to commit to one doctrine.

So I guess I'm always seeking and never can find any one doctrine/dogma I totally agree with. I look at a belief system or a certain belief and it sounds interesting and believable.

They show me scriptures that prove their point, election, free will, Zionism, soul sleep, physical resurrection, spiritual resurrection, Torah keeping, grace vs works,  water vs spiritual baptism, the Trinity, Oneness, etc.
Then I find scripture against that certain doctrine or dogma. It's like everyone  picks and chooses to make their beliefs fit and ignore the rest.

Everything looks believable and then sometimes nothing does.
I can see why I appear to be conservative on some things and liberal on others because that's how I actually am.

I would agree with your assumption. I try to check myself and tone it down a bit from time to time.

                                                                Reed


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jan 26, 2019)

Art have you ever actually picked up the New Testament and read it front to back?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 26, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Art have you ever actually picked up the New Testament and read it front to back?



Yes but it was many years ago and it was the King James version. I couldn't tell that it flowed like a regular book. Just a collection of books, the Gospels and Paul's letters, and Revelation.

I'm not sure why God gave us four different accounts of one reality. Then I'm doing pretty good reading the New Testament until Paul arrives. Then it's like a whole new book, a new concept.

One of my biggest hurdles concerns the destruction of Jerusalem. It seems to be physical and in 70AD but then if changes in the middle of the story to the future. It morphs from city to Church in mid-story.

Just one of the puzzles I've tried to resolve. If great teachers and theological students can't figure it out, how can I? I'm so afraid of getting it wrong that I don't choose sides.

It's not just religion either. I have the same problem with politics and everything really. I envy the staunch Democrats and Republicans. I envy the Oneness or Trinity believers. I'm a fence sitter and that is viewed as negative.
I definitely didn't inherit this from my Dad. He is very opinionated and doesn't mind saying his way is right. Even when he is wrong, what he believes is true.

I don't necessarily believe anything I say is true.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 26, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Art have you ever actually picked up the New Testament and read it front to back?


Just the idea of a council of men sitting around discussing what books to put in the New Testament doesn't even sound right to me. Then they voted on it? A group of men? Why didn't God just use one man to assemble the correct books of His Word?

I do like Paul the best. I can identify with him. He isn't always sure of himself. He talks as himself and as the voice of God. He has struggles.
If I was an apostle, I'd be Paul.

I also know that Saul was not seeking. In fact he was against God. It took God to call Saul and make him Paul.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 26, 2019)

Scripture? If God can call Saul and make him understand? Then why not let God's spirit call us to understand? I don't think reading Scripture is the only answer.
It may be the only account we have but Saul still needed his calling. I can't even see me converting myself or convincing myself. I can't do it myself.

I wish that I had not grown up in the Church. I wish that I was just driving down a road and Jesus appeared and made me understand. 

I wish that I was a Hindu driving down the road and Jesus elected me to be a Christian.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 26, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I do think he is wrong on his cessationalist views to the point I understand where he stands, yet I also understand why he took the stance on it that he did.  That said, he pegged it with this book.
> Try to keep in mind, in the end their understanding is not perfect and also, like normal folks, it can lead to mis-steps, misunderstandings, and mistakes.  Martin Luther is credited with bringing a laser focus onto the importance of faith in salvation, yet was openly anti-semantic.  Would you deny he wa correct about the former, because of the latter?  Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.



OK  enough about me. Let's look at you and this book. You do know that MacArthur is a Calvinist. I do understand that it doesn't take away from everything you believe. Meaning there are many correct beliefs by Free Will believers, Oneness believers, Torah followers, etc. We all have more in common perhaps or at least enough to learn from each other.

Even someone who thinks God is an alien. Well that may be pushing it but you get my point. Some though believe that if a teacher misses one concept, he has missed them all. They wouldn't even open the book.

I'm encouraged that you did. Still though I wonder how Saul became Paul. I would like to know your views on the Prodigal son in relation to this book and God?

Also MacArthur believes, as I do as well, that God has to call someone. Again Saul comes to mind.

The confusing part to me about it all is, God called Saul. Saul was not seeking.

There may be some truth in the fruit as proof, obedience from love, keeping the Law, or however one wants to view it but God called Saul. The bottom line of Christianity is grace and salvation from faith.

If and when you finish the book and you can explain the gospel in relation to grace, obedience, salvation from faith, and God calling Saul, I may be interested.


----------



## gemcgrew (Jan 27, 2019)

SF, thanks for the reminder. This was the first book that I purchased from a Christian book store in the late 80's or early 90's. I have an appreciation for many of MacArthur's books.


----------



## Israel (Jan 27, 2019)

Artfuldodger said:


> The confusing part to me about it all is, God called Saul. Saul was not seeking.


 
Do you mind if I am able to find the perfection of beauty in what may, for this time only...seem confusing? It is not that "I" can unconfuse it all...it's way too marvelous.

That Paul was indeed seeking...seeking to stamp out all knowledge of Jesus Christ, all and any who confessed this "Jesus Christ", oppose as violently and effectively as all and any means at his disposal would allow "breathing out threatenings and slaughter" against...Jesus Christ.

Oh, what hope this reveals! Oh, what glory! Oh...what joy and mercy! 

God forbid...I fall short!

I believe Paul.

Oh, how small a thing discovered...how slaughter...is turned to laughter.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jan 27, 2019)

Artfuldodger said:


> OK  enough about me. Let's look at you and this book. You do know that MacArthur is a Calvinist. I do understand that it doesn't take away from everything you believe. Meaning there are many correct beliefs by Free Will believers, Oneness believers, Torah followers, etc. We all have more in common perhaps or at least enough to learn from each other.
> 
> Even someone who thinks God is an alien. Well that may be pushing it but you get my point. Some though believe that if a teacher misses one concept, he has missed them all. They wouldn't even open the book.
> 
> ...



Art I’m sorry but I’m not jumping through all those hoops, just so “you may buy the book.”  I wouldn’t do that if it was MY BOOK!  I recommend it because I think it’s a great book.  Read it or not.  I don’t care.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 27, 2019)

If Abraham became acceptable to God because of what he did, then he would have something to brag about. But he would never be able to brag about it to God.
What does Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."

But you cannot make God accept you because of something you do. God accepts sinners only because they have faith in him.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 27, 2019)

Romans 4:13-17

13It was not through the law that Abraham and his offspring received the promise that he would be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that comes by faith. 14 For if those who depend on the law are heirs, faith means nothing and the promise is worthless, 15 because the law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression.

16 Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who have the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all. 17 As it is written: “I have made you a father of many nations.” He is our father in the sight of God, in whom he believed—the God who gives life to the dead and calls into being things that were not.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jan 27, 2019)

Art this thread I’d about a book recommendation.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jan 27, 2019)

gemcgrew said:


> SF, thanks for the reminder. This was the first book that I purchased from a Christian book store in the late 80's or early 90's. I have an appreciation for many of MacArthur's books.



From what I gather this is maybe the 3 edition, I think in which he’s  clarified some points realized missing from the first and added a new chapter.  Might be worth a re-read.  I already know it’s gonna go on my top shelf where I keep books that I like to reread and reference frequently.  It’s already obvious it’s gonna fit that category.


----------



## gemcgrew (Jan 27, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> From what I gather this is maybe the 3 edition, I think in which he’s  clarified some points realized missing from the first and added a new chapter.  Might be worth a re-read.  I already know it’s gonna go on my top shelf where I keep books that I like to reread and reference frequently.  It’s already obvious it’s gonna fit that category.


Is this the latest? If so, I am going to order it.

https://www.amazon.com/Gospel-According-Jesus-Authentic-Faith/dp/0310287294


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jan 28, 2019)

That's it, but Gem I'm thinking,.... thinking, and I may be wrong, but I'm thinking that I got mine off the Grace To You website and it was cheaper. Checking...
https://www.gty.org/store/products/featured-products/none/1/40

Yep, it's 5 dollars cheaper at GTY than amazon.  That's a heck of a mark-up, 25%, Amazon has got going for it.  I'm gonna have to watch their prices a lot closer from now on.


----------



## gemcgrew (Jan 28, 2019)

Order placed. Probably be here in about a week. Looking forward to discussing it more with you.

Thanks!


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jan 28, 2019)

gemcgrew said:


> Order placed. Probably be here in about a week. Looking forward to discussing it more with you.
> 
> Thanks!



Good.  Look forward to it also


----------



## hawglips (Feb 7, 2019)

Artfuldodger said:


> Just the idea of a council of men sitting around discussing what books to put in the New Testament doesn't even sound right to me. Then they voted on it? A group of men? Why didn't God just use one man to assemble the correct books of His Word?



Why limit God in this way?  We only have a small fraction of the words that Jesus spoke and the things that He did in his 33 years in mortality.  Why assume the things that a few decided are God's word is all God has spoken?  He always has worked through actual prophets.  And his prophets were never well received by the religious elite of the day.  Always been that way, always will - till He comes again and cleans the slate...

But I agree with your view of the council of Nice... 



Artfuldodger said:


> I do like Paul the best. I can identify with him. He isn't always sure of himself. He talks as himself and as the voice of God. He has struggles.
> If I was an apostle, I'd be Paul.
> 
> I also know that Saul was not seeking. In fact he was against God. It took God to call Saul and make him Paul.



When Paul was fighting against God, he apparently thought he was serving God, going about doing good.  Same as the religious elite that fight God today.  

But we don't know if his conscious was pricked after Steven.  There's no record of it. We don't know what was going on in Paul's heart or what he was thinking when the Lord came to him on the road to Damascus.  All we know is Paul responded and was changed and born again and sought to right the damage he'd done for the rest of his life.  He put his hands on the plow and never looked back.  He suffered and was persecuted and reportedly died a gruesome death for the glory of his Redeemer - once he was shown his mistake.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 7, 2019)

hawglips said:


> Why limit God in this way?  We only have a small fraction of the words that Jesus spoke and the things that He did in his 33 years in mortality.  Why assume the things that a few decided are God's word is all God has spoken?  He always has worked through actual prophets.  And his prophets were never well received by the religious elite of the day.  Always been that way, always will - till He comes again and cleans the slate...
> 
> But I agree with your view of the council of Nice...
> 
> ...



I'll agree with you on the prophets. I'd rather put my faith in them. Even the one's whose prophesy were not chosen by those councils of men.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 7, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Good.  Look forward to it also



Gem!  Did your book come in?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 7, 2019)

hawglips said:


> Why limit God in this way?  We only have a small fraction of the words that Jesus spoke and the things that He did in his 33 years in mortality.  Why assume the things that a few decided are God's word is all God has spoken?  He always has worked through actual prophets.  And his prophets were never well received by the religious elite of the day.  Always been that way, always will - till He comes again and cleans the slate...
> 
> But I agree with your view of the council of Nice...
> 
> ...



Just a simple question for the both of you.  If even the hairs of your head are numbered, and God is sovern over everything from when a sparrow falls dead, to the decisions of ALL the rulers of the earth, do you really, really, really suggest that the Bible we have today, his revelation of himself and his plan for humanity,  was somehow corrupted? Think about it.

hawg, you ask “why limit God in this way?”  Have you even considered the ramifications of that?  Are YOU the one who frees God?  Come on Brother!


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 7, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Just a simple question for the both of you.  If even the hairs of your head are numbered, and God is sovern over everything from when a sparrow falls dead, to the decisions of ALL the rulers of the earth, do you really, really, really suggest that the Bible we have today, his revelation of himself and his plan for humanity,  was somehow corrupted? Think about it.
> 
> hawg, you ask “why limit God in this way?”  Have you even considered the ramifications of that?  Are YOU the one who frees God?  Come on Brother!



I don't think the Bible is corrupted. I just think it's only a part of who God is and what he can do. Can he not use his Spirit to call those who've never heard or read the Bible? Just one example.

Then there were more prophets and books that weren't chosen. Those are even quoted in scripture. In that way they must be inspired by God.

John MacArthur’s book The Gospel According To Jesus? If it's the blessing that you say it is, wouldn't God have to at least in some way provided MacArthur with the inspiration to write it?  Another example.

We have many resources from God, some through physical means and others through spiritual means.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 7, 2019)

Artfuldodger said:


> I don't think the Bible is corrupted. I just think it's only a part of who God is and what he can do. Can he not use his Spirit to call those who've never heard or read the Bible? Just one example.
> 
> Then there were more prophets and books that weren't chosen. Those are even quoted in scripture. In that way they must be inspired by God.
> 
> ...



Like a reed in the wind.


----------



## StriperAddict (Feb 7, 2019)

Well, many of you know that the grace of God is everything to me it is change my perspective and giving me new eyes to see through the entirety of the scriptures. It is been such a wonderful freeing revelation that I can't stop being joyful over it, giddy perhaps! That said I'd look very carefully at any book that causes us to feel as if the holy spirit is beating us up.  He is our comforter, Bringing us into all truth.  It is the WORLD (unbelievers) He "convicts of sin, righteousness and judgement."  
Now having said that, I agree that at any time the spirit of God reveals flesh patterns in our thoughts/beliefs, or any old ways of self effort that need to be cast aside and replaced with faith and dependency on Christ's finished work, then that is right on. 

MacArthur doesn't sit too well with me with his extreme Calvinism.  I find the scriptures give us more Breathing Room For Life in faith and understanding our Union with Jesus Christ.

That's all, because I haven't read the book, but may do so. Thanks for sharing this.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 7, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Gem!  Did your book come in?


Yes it did. I have read through the intros and just started the 1st chapter. It is difficult for me not to jump ahead to his added chapter on Justification, but I will read it in order.

I hope to be able to make significant progress over the weekend.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 7, 2019)

StriperAddict said:


> MacArthur doesn't sit too well with me with his extreme Calvinism.


I can't imagine anybody who has studied historical Calvinism at all, would label him as extreme.

He is known as a soft Calvinist among the studied.

"When the true Gospel of Grace is preached, the believers will be glad, the rebels will get mad, and the pharisees will be confused." Rolfe Barnard


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 10, 2019)

With reference to the book and the red letters: "What it DOES do it bring a laser focus onto what Christ said and a full understanding of the implications of his words."

Evangelicals have not  focused on what Jesus said? Since Luther was haunted on his salvation he was not focused on what Jesus said? Since the many dissenter refugee groups of Europe colonized North America with bible  and interpretation-doctrine in hand and heart they have not focused on what Jesus said?  Since Tomas Jefferson collected what Jesus said into a personal scrapbook and all the citizens of the Republic were made to know it?  And what Jesus says today, no, what God says today,  a book focus with "full understanding" is a shake up for the evangelical? If this is strength, what is weakness?



The experience of God supposedly in our hearts, in our mind, in our sufferings, in joys  and in our limbs would the halter and a bridle be cut loose of this ever seeking of knowledge to "full understanding" of what God says and meant and disregarded rather to graze in the full view and shepherded daily? No. Let us form and re-form on red letters. Let us  right and fight to run our race. And so it goes... to the beginning again.


https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/80-53/the-lordship-controversy

Quote:"What is there to say about the gospel according to Jesus? I mean He died on the cross and rose again, and you believe in Him, and you receive eternal life.

But there is a tremendous amount of confusion* about this subject. And people are polarizing on different views. And I think that it’s time to make a clear statement about what Jesus taught about the gospel and go back to the beginning." un quote

"Quote: "So, apparently a person who claims to know the Lord, but who has a pattern of life of working iniquity, will not be admitted to heaven. And we’ve got to be consistent about taking what Jesus said and building our theology of the gospel on that. " un quote

(Do evangelicals suffer and benefit  for the spirits of confusion and competition? I wonder why if so?)


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 10, 2019)

gordon 2 said:


> (Do evangelicals suffer and benefit  for the spirits of confusion and competition? I wonder why if so?)



I see no benefits.  We suffer because we are afflicted with sin.  What you see in evangelism, is the same thing the you see in The Fall: man making himself Lord.
Today, the evangelistic church in America is the Laodician church.  We pay tribute to Christ with our lips, while chasing that American Dream, again making ourselves Lord.

Luke 6:46
"Why do you call me, 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say?"


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 10, 2019)

Unfortunately I think you are correct and not only Lord we make ourselves but are at home calling good evil and evil good in his name like it's just another day of chewing gum. ( And I don't say this to be negative or mean or to troll.  I think if the truth must set us free, then it is all the truth, all the time; for the dressers of the North American nations, from the beginnings to the present  are for the most part the spawn of dissenters ---from Puritans to Levelers, Diggers to Quakers. Americans are fighters. It is of their spiritual heritage to fight and not only to fight against national and international spiritual institutions, but within their own ranks. To fight the good fight is honored. To be a peacemaker less so. Yet we can ask, " What is God's view on it." And I think simply said this is what MacArthur sets himself to do... in the long run.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Dissenters

I think MacArthur is coming round in his own spiritual walk to laying bare what his spiritual heritage is and has been and where he might go from now. His focus on Jesus is spot on. I find him mealy mouthed sometimes, especially that he takes himself as called to be a great communicator.  Never the less, I think he is genuine considering where he comes from. And we must be, I must be, patient, because we all come from somewhere.)

I am not much, but I live this as MacArthur importantly points out: I love God and this love so makes my garments fall when to Him. Of this love I dare no shame. And find myself mindful of all who struggle.

And of this love it was not raised out of definitions of ideas and sure meanings in scripture. It was when he gave me to bask in the fragrance of his son. And on Him I do not believe and that I would continue to do so as is MacArthur's new find,( if I understand him, as I find him difficult) for how can one believe on Him and with grace who visited me? How can I believe what is as if it might not be or had never been.

If any man denies Christ and having lived with God, then he denies the Holy Spirit.  Or he is ill. His/Her challenges were not met with patience. Or the sins of fathers have muddied his walk and hope becomes hopelessness... and depression. Unable to overcome the world with the love of God we give up... Not on God, but on his love. And the mountains are ( continue as) high ground to fight over and not delights marveled at by peacemakers united in Him.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 10, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I see no benefits.  We suffer because we are afflicted with sin.  What you see in evangelism, is the same thing the you see in The Fall: man making himself Lord.
> Today, the evangelistic church in America is the Laodician church.  We pay tribute to Christ with our lips, while chasing that American Dream, again making ourselves Lord.
> 
> Luke 6:46
> "Why do you call me, 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say?"



This brings us all back to "Obedience." We all know it is asked of us by Christ. We just all have different beliefs on exactly what that obedience is.

I don't think many of us know exactly what we are suppose to do to "obey God."


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 10, 2019)

Artfuldodger said:


> This brings us all back to "Obedience." We all know it is asked of us by Christ. We just all have different beliefs on exactly what that obedience is.
> 
> I don't think many of us know exactly what we are suppose to do to "obey God."



I think you are mistaken on every point you just made.

Obedience is not "asked" of us by Christ.  It's demanded.  Always has been, always will be, from Adam and Eve, through Moses and the first Commandment, through Christ all the way down through Revelations.

We do not "all just have different beliefs on what exactly obedience is."  What obedience entails is spelled out exactly and precisely in the Bible.  What "we" have is people pretending that they don't comprehend what is written in RED, and then pretending it means something less, something more comfortable.

Sooooo, if you are literate, you can't pretend you don't know "exactly what we are supposed to do to obey God."  Do you really think that is gonna fly when you stand before him.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 10, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I think you are mistaken on every point you just made.
> 
> Obedience is not "asked" of us by Christ.  It's demanded.  Always has been, always will be, from Adam and Eve, through Moses and the first Commandment, through Christ all the way down through Revelations.
> 
> ...



I think most Christians agree they are suppose to obedient to God. I Don't see many Christians as trying to deny that.  I don't think that, as individuals, we/they are not showing obedience on purpose. 

They may be being mislead by Church leaders. They may just really don't know. I think maybe it's not so easy to see exactly what scripture tells us concerning obedience to God.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 10, 2019)

Artfuldodger said:


> I think most Christians agree they are suppose to obedient to God. I Don't see many Christians as trying to deny that.  I don't think that, as individuals, we/they are not showing obedience on purpose.
> 
> They may be being mislead by Church leaders. They may just really don't know. I think maybe it's not so easy to see exactly what scripture tells us concerning obedience to God.





> I think maybe it's not so easy to see exactly what scripture tells us concerning obedience to God



Like a lead balloon.


----------



## Israel (Feb 11, 2019)

gordon 2 said:


> With reference to the book and the red letters: "What it DOES do it bring a laser focus onto what Christ said and a full understanding of the implications of his words."
> 
> Evangelicals have not  focused on what Jesus said? Since Luther was haunted on his salvation he was not focused on what Jesus said? Since the many dissenter refugee groups of Europe colonized North America with bible  and interpretation-doctrine in hand and heart they have not focused on what Jesus said?  Since Tomas Jefferson collected what Jesus said into a personal scrapbook and all the citizens of the Republic were made to know it?  And what Jesus says today, no, what God says today,  a book focus with "full understanding" is a shake up for the evangelical? If this is strength, what is weakness?
> 
> ...





> The experience of God supposedly in our hearts, in our mind, in our sufferings, in joys  and in our limbs would the halter and a bridle be cut loose of this ever seeking of knowledge to "full understanding" of what God says and meant and disregarded rather to graze in the full view and shepherded daily? No. Let us form and re-form on red letters. Let us  right and fight to run our race. And so it goes... to the beginning again.




LOL. Not at you, but with you, if I am allowed.
"I am debtor..." Paul wrote, not vainly, not in duplicity, but surely until I made my steps of approach...as words in darkness to me. How often did Paul rise from rest to labor in some matter, pressed as it were by the same love that had delivered to him such rest?
Questions about this, questions about that...almost as though prodded...observations made or coming to his eye or ear somewhat askew in their forming...that demanded from him response. Things to him plain (perhaps) that made him, forced him, provoked him to look again at the path (that was seemingly plain to him) and ask...at what point, at what place was a juncture seen that has led these little ones down such a path now needing reproval? How could they hear what was presented and come to a place as:

"Well, I am of Paul"

...what got inserted, what was (if anything) insufficiently presented that would allow this? Did "I" fail...in what I once thought was the "whole council of God...to them?" Do we hear this?

_And_ lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and _that_ I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed.

I make no claim to "correctly" conclude anything about these things. But, do we at least see them...? And here I cannot at all (LOL...for my own skill at "communicating" is made amply clear to me daily...and most clearly by those to whom I am _most_ indebted) make any claim to a _more_ right seeing.

But...what do..._we see_?

"His letters are weighty...but..."
2 Cor 10:10

Yes. But "why don't we see his presence...as such?"

LOLOL. Who hasn't...in some way, at some time touched this thing:
"If someone like Paul we had here, now...such confusion would be banished?"

If only "I" or we could summon Paul for personal conversation and explanation...O! how much better might I/we...see?"

and not dis similarly

"If only Jesus would appear to us and speak to us as he did amongst John, Peter, James...and show us such things!" Then...ahhh, then!

But I do not hear this from you. The "Holy Spirit" you are very careful to not deny.

There are visits, revisits, more revisits...and revisits...again.

The question becomes for any (and perhaps all)...are we not also debtors for their necessity? And debtors to those who cause us to seek? To not only speak...but truly be established, beyond a way once assumed...to further establishment?

Yes, I revisit (of necessity) the red words. But that is just my necessity...I cannot despise what is given in the grace of God as allowance...even if it be I must admit plainly "yes, I am the most dense of all". I need...such allowance...for such as myself cannot be saved without it! The one who continually must be shown "you do not yet know as you aught". OK! Hallelujah!...keep on Lord! Keep on!

Yet, here we all occupy a very much stranger place than Paul in relationship. None of us has been begotten...even if we use Paul's words as ( so called father) amongst one another...nevertheless we might all find a consistency if we agree, at all, to any worthy lessons he may teach. None of us has been given right to "slide into his slippers" and start, with deeper voice affected...to pretend as though we are "a daddy". But, we can as children remind one another..."weren't we told not to jump on the couch?"

This guy...this guy Paul!

"Henceforth let no man trouble me for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus Christ"
Aha!

When I have fed the great grands, made every provision (I can think of) for their feeding, diversion and entertainment and whatever else I may think sufficient to their "occupation"...there's something they seem to find irresistible to provoking me off the couch. Oh, how many times I have had answer less than kind, full of reproof and shouted directions that their attentions be focused on what has already been made in provision of their "right occupation". I "set them up with all they need". (Or so I have thought)

But, now I see a bit differently. They are asking, in a way they hardly know of themselves, and I am convinced is never of conscious plan..."Is there anything about us, of that which we are in our necessity....of more value to you...than your rest?"
Will you "rise"...just for us...and because of who we are? Will you "come to us"?

Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. To write the same things to you, to me indeed _is_ not grievous, but for you _it is_ safe.

Remind, remind, remind, remind. (Eventually learning to whom all benefit of reminding...is given!)



Do I believe Jesus ever needed reproval? Ahhh,...can I revisit these red words?

And wheresoever he taketh him, he teareth him: and he foameth, and gnasheth with his teeth, and pineth away: and I spake to thy disciples that they should cast him out; and they could not. 

He answereth him, and saith, O faithless generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I suffer you? bring him unto me. 

No. Jesus did not need reproval. But he did walk in a way confessed by Him:

"For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself is doing; and the Father will show Him greater works than these, so that you will marvel.

I marvel...at the patience the Son saw. It is what saves the likes of me.

Lest I fall behind in neglect, may I add this?

 “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?”

I have preached this among those glad to be reminded, among those who would show more gladness in (at the time) putting me in a dumpster. I have needed both...and no less than I have needed the very Lord himself!

For it is then, in that mix of what appears only to onlookers as _what might_ constitute joy or sorrow...I hear again an opportunity given (of necessity) to response by "Do you believe this?"

I need the speaker of the red letters...to revisit me again, and again and again in such gracious opportunity to allow an answer be given. He knows, surely, who He is. I benefit in all, from needing to be reminded, and such grace as provides for it. I need to be probed again and again by the Lord...not so he will know "what's in there"...but that I might be as convinced, and know the joy of it...as He is. He allows me to "stick my hand in" to a surety...as the very densest of all. Can I deny him His right to poke around?

Dare I lie if vinegar, and not sweet wine I taste in the flow be found?

But there find such poking is not done for His sake...as it is for mine.

Yes. Abide in the light. Just don't be shocked when it seems to lead to what _may appear_ "dark places". Be ...convinced. By any and all means necessary.


----------



## Israel (Feb 11, 2019)

PS Gordon...you may decide whether your appraisal of certain "American" heritage is unreceived. Yes, I think we love to view ourselves in a certain light as victorious rebels. I took a light hearted romp in the political section and was not shocked to find what seems a continuing (and residual) battle from 1776. I so rarely know anymore when tears or laughter are better called for. LOL...sometimes I wonder how and if, what may be so given to "love it or leave it"...such would respond to an angel preaching Jesus Christ to utter perfection could bear hearing the same. I can't condemn the Maccabees, but only wonder if I see what I see as plainly as I claim...as "the better way".

http://forum.gon.com/threads/dear-president-trump.936801/#post-11582376


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 11, 2019)

Israel said:


> PS Gordon...you may decide whether your appraisal of certain "American" heritage is unreceived. Yes, I think we love to view ourselves in a certain light as victorious rebels. I took a light hearted romp in the political section and was not shocked to find what seems a continuing (and residual) battle from 1776. I so rarely know anymore when tears or laughter are better called for. LOL...sometimes I wonder how and if, what may be so given to "love it or leave it"...such would respond to an angel preaching Jesus Christ to utter perfection could bear hearing the same. I can't condemn the Maccabees, but only wonder if I see what I see as plainly as I claim...as "the better way".
> 
> http://forum.gon.com/threads/dear-president-trump.936801/#post-11582376



You stirred up a hornets nest over there.  They don’t seem to like you very much.  Better stay indoors for s few days.  BTW.  Bravo!  Well played.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 13, 2019)

There is a firmer footing in "religion" than "politics" for me. The white of the eye is far more plain in a person's religion and the fire here friendly  is generally these days  with no loss of life.

So Isreal, due your adventures, I am reminded for some reason(s) of one Thomas Paine, who rallied the ranks to liberty, equality and the pursuits of happiness when morale could have wasted the efforts to independence. Have you ever considered what rallied Thomas Paine to his convictions? ( He was a Brit. after all and his influences were European.)

I myself, for better or for worse, found a vein perhaps out of the mine that spit him out. You might like this fellow ( a man of the cloth) and (he is another Brit. of the time 1700s) and also those  who took to him  and  the religious-political issues surrounding him. They are essential to Paine's inspiration and motivation in my view.

My friend we do not see into the hearts of men, but we do see what and how they do with what hearts they have, as if the white of their eyes shift to the greatness in their friends--especially the religious ones. Even the non-believing pick up though the motives all their own...

  Have a look at the non-conformist-dissenter minister Richard Price. He may well be THE originator of the american people, if indeed Thomas Pain's contribution was essential. And so it is for me that politics is sand and that religion is crusted clay and a bit more solid as to motivations and movements and ideas...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richa...--7yDfr5K0TrRSCqOq2aLo2ycO8Rvur7zeS32i7PDHS6o


----------



## welderguy (Feb 14, 2019)

I perceive that Joel Osteen knows more about the kingdom than John MacArthur.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 14, 2019)

I perceive that Joel Osteen knows more about the kingdom than John MacArthur. --Welderguy
-------------------

I also spy with my little eye. : )

https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/80-53/the-lordship-controversy

"I’m not saying that everyone, at the point of salvation, fully understands all the implications of Christ’s lordship." John MacArther

Your perception pre-perceived.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 14, 2019)

welderguy said:


> I perceive that Joel Osteen knows more about the kingdom than John MacArthur.



Geez.  Joel Osteen???????  Really?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 14, 2019)

gordon 2 said:


> I perceive that Joel Osteen knows more about the kingdom than John MacArthur. --Welderguy
> -------------------
> 
> I also spy with my little eye. : )
> ...



You know.  If you read the book you would understand that ....................ahhh never mind.  It's not worth trying to explain to a mind already made up.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 14, 2019)

Yes mine is a mind already made up. ( I can't get my hands on a copy just yet, but  there are reviews...   And to J.M. I was not born yesterday. ( Nor to Osteen whom J.M. is said to label a near pagan.)


----------



## welderguy (Feb 15, 2019)

John MacArthur quotes:

quote "So, apparently a person who claims to know the Lord, but who has a pattern of life of working iniquity, will not be admitted to heaven."quote

He thinks it's all about entering into heaven. He missed it, like so many do.
It's about entering into the kingdom.


----------



## Israel (Feb 15, 2019)

Only hope I stocked plenty of beer if these clubs show up at my next BBQ


----------



## welderguy (Feb 15, 2019)

Thief on the cross="pattern of life of working inquity"
...but
"This day thou shalt be with me in paradise"


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 16, 2019)

gordon 2 said:


> Yes mine is a mind already made up. ( I can't get my hands on a copy just yet, but  there are reviews...   And to J.M. I was not born yesterday. ( Nor to Osteen whom J.M. is said to label a near pagan.)



Joel Osteen is worse than any pagan.  True pagans are ignorant to the gospel.  Joel Osteen isn’t.  He denies the very spirit of it.  Anyone who believes Osteen hasn’t and doesn’t read their Bible,  because it’s inconceivable that one can read the Gospels, Acts, and Romans’ and not be diametrically opposed to what Osteen spews


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 16, 2019)

welderguy said:


> John MacArthur quotes:
> 
> quote "So, apparently a person who claims to know the Lord, but who has a pattern of life of working iniquity, will not be admitted to heaven."quote
> 
> ...



So let me get this straight.  You think a person can be saved and continue to lead a life of inequity?

As far as differentiating between the Kingdom and Heaven.  They are synomous.  Kingdom of ________?   Heaven.

Welder.  It’s obvious you haven’t read the book.  If you had, I honesty don’t think you would be making such statements, because
It’s obvious you have McArrhur wrong.  Instead of me trying to correct you, why don’t you read the book.  If you will pm me your address I will buy you a copy and have it mailed to you.  At the very least, you will have concrete evidence on which to disagree, but as it stands now you are denigrating another on falacies.  I don’t care what your beliefs on doctrine  are, as a Christian, that should trouble you.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 16, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Thief on the cross="pattern of life of working inquity"
> ...but
> "This day thou shalt be with me in paradise"



Luke 23:39

Excellent example.  I can think of no better one that illustrates the point McArthur makes in his book.





> 39 And one of the evil-doers who were hanged, was speaking evil of him, saying, `If thou be the Christ, save thyself and us.'
> 
> 40 And the other answering, was rebuking him, saying, `Dost thou not even fear God, that thou art in the same judgment?
> 
> ...



The repentant thief recognized his sin, Christ’s innocence, and Christ’s sovern Lordship and that is the entire thesis of McArthur’s book; that you can’t obtain salvation from sin without recognizing Christ as Lord, and that  “recognition of Christ’s Lordship” has consequences and repercussions on one’s life.  If it doesn’t, you aren’t saved


----------



## welderguy (Feb 16, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> So let me get this straight.  You think a person can be saved and continue to lead a life of inequity?
> 
> As far as differentiating between the Kingdom and Heaven.  They are synomous.  Kingdom of ________?   Heaven.
> 
> ...



Let me just present this for your consideration. 
David was an adulterer and a murderer in his later life, yet he was obviously a saved man(regenerated). And I think we can agree that David surely went to heaven.
But, read this.

Gal.5:19-21
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies.
21Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

So, if it's like you say, "the Kingdom and heaven are synonymous", why doesn't David's case jive with Galatians 5?
I say it's because they are not completely synonymous. They each have distinct definitions.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 16, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Let me just present this for your consideration.
> David was an adulterer and a murderer in his later life, yet he was obviously a saved man(regenerated). And I think we can agree that David surely went to heaven.
> But, read this.
> 
> ...



I agree with your points on David.  I would only add that although he sinned, he also sought forgiveness, and he never forsook the Lord’s actual lordship.  

This is going off the rails and headed towards a once saved/always saved debate, at least it appears that way to me.  I do believe in OSAS.  That’s not the point McArthur raises.  He never gets past the once saved.  The point of the book is IF one is saved, there should be evidence.
Surely you don’t disagree with that.  

One point, in which I strongly agree with him is that, evangelism has become so watered down that people think all they have to do is say “I accept Christ.” to be saved, taking care of the eternal aspect, and freeing them up to go right back sinning without worry of consequences.  And the preachers are quick to accept even a nod of the head as an admission of faith, giving no heed to the seriousness and gravity of the matter.  They just want that admission, and never counsel on the cost of discipleship.  Salvation IS free, but it’s cost is the death of the sin seeking, natural man.  Even the truely reborn man will sin, and sometimes sin grievously on occasion, (as in davids case), yet he will always confess and turn back to his Lord.  If he doesn’t, he was never saved to begin with, just an imposter.  Judas wasn’t identified by the others up until Christ was arrested.


----------



## welderguy (Feb 16, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I agree with your points on David.  I would only add that although he sinned, he also sought forgiveness, and he never forsook the Lord’s actual lordship.
> 
> This is going off the rails and headed towards a once saved/always saved debate, at least it appears that way to me.  I do believe in OSAS.  That’s not the point McArthur raises.  He never gets past the once saved.  The point of the book is IF one is saved, there should be evidence.
> Surely you don’t disagree with that.
> ...



Do you agree that the kingdom is within?
If so, how could it be heaven, as you are referring to it as?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 16, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Do you agree that the kingdom is within?
> If so, how could it be heaven, as you are referring to it as?



Within what?


----------



## welderguy (Feb 16, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Within what?



Luke 17
20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 17, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Luke 17
> 20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
> 21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you



Does the Holy Spirit exist inside you or within the realm of the Kingdom of Heaven.  I find the premise of your question wrong.  You seem to be saying the Kingdom either exists inside of you OR external to you.  It misses the mark entirely.  The Kingdom exists now in part known, and in part yet to be revealed and unknown.  Here and now it’s a spiritual Kingdom composed of those WITHIN whom the Holy Spirit resides.  When Christ comes back to reign as King over all, the fully glory of his kingdom will become manifest in all its fullness. 

Now what does that have to do with this.

quote "So, apparently a person who claims to know the Lord, but who has a pattern of life of working iniquity, will not be admitted to heaven."quote

Can one have a pattern of life of iniquity and have the Holy Spirit living within them.  Is iniquity a fruit of the Spirit?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 17, 2019)

John MacArthur quotes:

quote "So, apparently a person who claims to know the Lord, but who has a pattern of life of working iniquity, will not be admitted to heaven."quote

He thinks it's all about entering into heaven. He missed it, like so many do.
It's about entering into the kingdom.[/QUOTE]

Ok.  Sorry. I just went back and tried to make sense of this and I can’t.  Can you explain to me the difference between the Kingdom and Heaven, because that is a distinction I have not heard made and I’m completely at a loss to understand it.  Thanks.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 17, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Luke 17
> 20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
> 21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you



I'm a little lost too, are you saying a man can sin in the Kingdom, which is here or within, but won't sin in Heaven? Heaven being the future.

Then Paul who gives us the sin list that  keeps one out of the Kingdom is talking about something different than Heaven?

I can't say that I agree with that. I think the list was to show what would keep someone out of God's Kingdom, regardless of where it is, without the washing.

I thought Paul was just showing us what the washing did. I don't think he was showing us sins that would keep us out of the Kingdom vs a washing that lets us into Heaven.


----------



## welderguy (Feb 17, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Does the Holy Spirit exist inside you or within the realm of the Kingdom of Heaven.  I find the premise of your question wrong.  You seem to be saying the Kingdom either exists inside of you OR external to you.  It misses the mark entirely.  The Kingdom exists now in part known, and in part yet to be revealed and unknown.  Here and now it’s a spiritual Kingdom composed of those WITHIN whom the Holy Spirit resides.  When Christ comes back to reign as King over all, the fully glory of his kingdom will become manifest in all its fullness.
> 
> Now what does that have to do with this.
> 
> ...



Go to 2 Peter 1 and see if it's possible for a person ,who was purged from his sins, to still be unfruitful. 
Then, in the same chapter, see what Peter says about entering the kingdom.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 17, 2019)

We’ll Gem, I just finished the book.  Ready to talk about it whenever you are.  Couple of things just from my personal viewpoint.

1) JM just “comes across” better in his book than he does on the radio.  Just my personal opinion.

2) It’s the first book of his I’ve read and I don’t know if all his books are this well argued with scriptural backing for every single point, referenced, cross-referenced and annotated, but it was impressive.  I would have been impressed even if I disagreed with him on every point.  On that front it was exemplary, so much so I’m going to purchase Strange Fire.  I disagreed with him after listening to his radio broadcast, and I’m intrigued if he has laid out a better case in the book with such extensive scriptural backing.  If so, who knows?  I like to think I’m open to the scriptural truth no matter where it leads.

3)He seems to have the moniker as a “Hard Calvinist/ Predeterminist/whatever.  I didn’t find that to the extent I understand exactly what exactly that means.  I really try to stay out of those debates.  As far as where God’s sovereignty ends and man’s free will begins I simply believe man has enough free will to make him culpable for his sins.  That’s all I need to know.

Anyway, fire away.


----------



## welderguy (Feb 17, 2019)

Consider this text.

Matthew 23:13
13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

It states that there is something that certain ones are "entering into"(see 2 Pet.1). But they are being influenced negativity against it. 
You and I both know that our eternal life in heaven cannot be altered in any way by man. Agree?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 17, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Go to 2 Peter 1 and see if it's possible for a person ,who was purged from his sins, to still be unfruitful.
> Then, in the same chapter, see what Peter says about entering the kingdom.



You know, instead of keeping me guessing, it would be a whole lot simpler to just come out and say what you mean/meant and we could go from there.  My gift of misinterpretation knows no bounds, especially guessing at what point you may or may not be driving at through this musical chiars of scriptures you keep tossing out.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 17, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Ok.  Sorry. I just went back and tried to make sense of this and I can’t.  Can you explain to me the difference between the Kingdom and Heaven, because that is a distinction I have not heard made and I’m completely at a loss to understand it.  Thanks.



Consider this text.

Matthew 23:13
13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

It states that there is something that certain ones are "entering into"(see 2 Pet.1). But they are being influenced negativity against it.
You and I both know that our eternal life in heaven cannot be altered in any way by man. Agree?[/QUOTE]

Again, it would be nice if you laid out you point/points, or just summed them up.   If you want to back it up with scripture, even better.  No offense, but I don’t have the time or patience to keep playing Simon Says.


----------



## welderguy (Feb 17, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> You know, instead of keeping me guessing, it would be a whole lot simpler to just come out and say what you mean/meant and we could go from there.  My gift of misinterpretation knows no bounds, especially guessing at what point you may or may not be driving at through this musical chiars of scriptures you keep tossing out.



Why do you suppose Jesus only intended for some to know the things of the kingdom, hense His teaching through parables?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 18, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Why do you suppose Jesus only intended for some to know the things of the kingdom, hense His teaching through parables?



Okeeee Dokeee then.


----------



## welderguy (Feb 18, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Okeeee Dokeee then.



You seem, to me, to be one of these.

Matt.13:19
 When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.


----------



## Madman (Feb 18, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Luke 17
> 20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
> 21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you


The kingdom of God is a spiritual reality present within the Christian believer and within the community of the church.  "Within you" can also be translated "among you" or "in your midst".


----------



## welderguy (Feb 18, 2019)

Madman said:


> The kingdom of God is a spiritual reality present within the Christian believer and within the community of the church.  "Within you" can also be translated "among you" or "in your midst".



I agree, but it's not something that comes to a believer through passiveness. It must be "pressed into" diligently, and through faith.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 18, 2019)

welderguy said:


> You seem, to me, to be one of these.
> 
> Matt.13:19
> When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.



Sorry, but I’m afraid this is going nowhere good.  I’ll just abstain from replying to you.  Best for all.


----------



## welderguy (Feb 18, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Sorry, but I’m afraid this is going nowhere good.  I’ll just abstain from replying to you.  Best for all.



Thanks for sparing me your wrath. You're very kind and merciful for that.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 18, 2019)

welderguy said:


> You seem, to me, to be one of these.
> 
> Matt.13:19
> When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.



Then one's eyes can be opened for salvation(eternal life/Heaven) but closed to the Kingdom?
What is your explanation of the seed which was sown?

It's sounds like you are trying to justify, one of the elect losing salvation scriptures, by saying that the Kingdom is different. Are you saying if I received the seed of knowledge about the Kingdom, the wicked one can snatch it but he can't snatch my salvation from eternal death which is something totally different?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 18, 2019)

welderguy said:


> I agree, but it's not something that comes to a believer through passiveness. It must be "pressed into" diligently, and through faith.



Then salvation is a free gift of grace but to be in the Kingdom requires works. Maybe?
You have to work to stay in the Kingdom. You can be lead out of the Kingdom. You can fall from the Kingdom.

But salvation? No. It's free and from grace. If it's in fact two different themes. Maybe the Kingdom is physical and the eternal life is spiritual. One is now and the other is later. 

How we act in the one now doesn't remove us from the one we'll be in later. We can gain things or lose things in the Kingdom but not lose our place in the other one. 

How does this explain our judgement between the two themes?


----------



## hummerpoo (Feb 18, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> We’ll Gem, I just finished the book.  Ready to talk about it whenever you are.  Couple of things just from my personal viewpoint.
> 
> 1) JM just “comes across” better in his book than he does on the radio.  Just my personal opinion.
> 
> ...




I haven’t read MacArthur’s book, so I don’t want to interrupt, or sidetrack, your conversation; rather, to simply make a comment for future consideration.


On your point #3: I highly recommend that you make a note to read Augustine’s “A Treatise on Grace and Free Will” — not to be confused with “On Free Choice of the Will”, which was written many years earlier; and was written from a philosophical perspective rather than theological perspective; and is often quoted by those who oppose his theology (an error which is addressed in his “Reconsiderations, 1.9”).  It is short book but must be read very carefully to make all of the connection of the argument.  If the translation/publication that you read does not include them, get a copy of his letters #214 and #215 which relate to the occasion of writing the book.  Personally, I see a strong relationship between Augustine’s position and Romans Ch. 1 (“without excuse”).  You will like the exposition of scripture style he adopts for this book.  I hope you find the book beneficial to your relationship with God.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 23, 2019)

SemperFiDawg said:


> We’ll Gem, I just finished the book.  Ready to talk about it whenever you are.  Couple of things just from my personal viewpoint.
> 
> 1) JM just “comes across” better in his book than he does on the radio.  Just my personal opinion.
> 
> ...


I have not yet finished. I am thoroughly enjoying it. I intended to read through it quickly, but providence would have none of that.
A young man approached me at work the other day and asked if he could speak with me privately. He was in a state of panic and very distraught. He was being shown his sinfulness and being, I believe, worked over by the Holy Spirit. I have been able to spend some time with him. I am careful to provide the Scripture that comes to mind, yet at the same time, I am careful to keep my hands out of the matter.

Christ lives! The Kingdom is where Christ is.

SF, in response to your 3 points,

1) I agree.
2) I have several of his books in storage and he is consistent in all of them. I have not read Strange Fire, but I have read Charismatic Chaos.
3) I am not opposed to labels. I would label JM as a Soft Calvinist/Partial Determinist/Compatabalist.

Man is culpable for his sins because he is not free.


----------



## Israel (Feb 25, 2019)

Man in Christ is in every way advantaged, yet working out that relationship in which he has no advantage _over _any other man.

It is not unusual to marvel at how large God is, but just as necessary to see how small He is willing to appear.


Give that which is inside the cup to the poor.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 26, 2019)

Israel said:


> Man in Christ is in every way advantaged, yet working out that relationship in which he has no advantage _over _any other man.


Because that relationship is not dependent... in any way... upon the man.


----------



## welderguy (Feb 26, 2019)

So what would be the difference for a man then, in striving to enter the strait gate, as opposed to him just running headlong through the wide gate?


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 26, 2019)

welderguy said:


> So what would be the difference for a man then, in striving to enter the strait gate, as opposed to him just running headlong through the wide gate?


God


----------



## welderguy (Feb 27, 2019)

gemcgrew said:


> God



Man is culpable for his sins, because he has been set at liberty from those sins, if he has been born again.

James 4:17 
17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 27, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Man is culpable for his sins, because he has been set at liberty from those sins, if he has been born again.
> 
> James 4:17
> 17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.


Can you clarify the point you are trying to make?


----------



## welderguy (Feb 27, 2019)

gemcgrew said:


> Can you clarify the point you are trying to make?



Man does all the sinning. God does all the saving.

Hosea 13
9 O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself; but in me is thine help.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 27, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Man does all the sinning. God does all the saving.
> 
> Hosea 13
> 9 O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself; but in me is thine help.


Yes. And all the sinning that man does is determined by God. God has a good purpose in all the sinning that man does.

"But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive." Genesis 50:20


----------



## welderguy (Feb 27, 2019)

gemcgrew said:


> Yes. And all the sinning that man does is determined by God. God has a good purpose in all the sinning that man does.
> 
> "But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive." Genesis 50:20



I don't believe, as you do, that God determines that we commit certain sins to bring to pass certain things. He can do that without the sin, just as easily. He tells us that for every temptation, He has given us a way of escape. Joseph's brothers didn't have to do what they did. God could have taken care of Israel regardless. His outcome is what is determined in every case.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 27, 2019)

welderguy said:


> I don't believe, as you do, that God determines that we commit certain sins to bring to pass certain things. He can do that without the sin, just as easily. He tells us that for every temptation, He has given us a way of escape. Joseph's brothers didn't have to do what they did. God could have taken care of Israel regardless. His outcome is what is determined in every case.



Concerning Joseph's brothers, you see God basing his actions on those of man. To include Pharoah, God based his plan on Pharoah's actions. concerning Israel, God based his redemption plan on the actions of Israel.


----------



## welderguy (Feb 27, 2019)

Artfuldodger said:


> Concerning Joseph's brothers, you see God basing his actions on those of man. To include Pharoah, God based his plan on Pharoah's actions. concerning Israel, God based his redemption plan on the actions of Israel.



Nope. You missed it. I'm stating that God's outcomes are dependant upon nothing outside of Himself.

Isaiah 46
10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:
11 Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it.
12 Hearken unto me, ye stouthearted, that are far from righteousness:
13 I bring near my righteousness; it shall not be far off, and my salvation shall not tarry: and I will place salvation in Zion for Israel my glory.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 27, 2019)

welderguy said:


> I don't believe, as you do, that God determines that we commit certain sins to bring to pass certain things. He can do that without the sin, just as easily.


I believe that God is God.

"The LORD of hosts hath sworn, saying, Surely as I have thought, so shall it come to pass; and as I have purposed, so shall it stand." Isaiah 14:24


welderguy said:


> He tells us that for every temptation, He has given us a way of escape.


Not relevant.


welderguy said:


> Joseph's brothers didn't have to do what they did.


They had to do what they did because God really meant it.


welderguy said:


> His outcome is what is determined in every case.


He determines everything in every case.

Samson sinned in taking a Philistine(Gentile, unclean) woman to wife.

"And Samson went down to Timnath, and saw a woman in Timnath of the daughters of the Philistines. And he came up, and told his father and his mother, and said, I have seen a woman in Timnath of the daughters of the Philistines: now therefore get her for me to wife. Then his father and his mother said unto him, _Is there_ never a woman among the daughters of thy brethren, or among all my people, that thou goest to take a wife of the uncircumcised Philistines? And Samson said unto his father, Get her for me; for she pleaseth me well. *But his father and his mother knew not that it was of the LORD*, that he sought an occasion against the Philistines: for at that time the Philistines had dominion over Israel." Judges 14:1-4


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 27, 2019)

Artfuldodger said:


> Concerning Joseph's brothers, you see God basing his actions on those of man. To include Pharoah, God based his plan on Pharoah's actions. concerning Israel, God based his redemption plan on the actions of Israel.


God is not subject to the actions of man.


----------



## welderguy (Feb 27, 2019)

gemcgrew said:


> I believe that God is God.
> 
> "The LORD of hosts hath sworn, saying, Surely as I have thought, so shall it come to pass; and as I have purposed, so shall it stand." Isaiah 14:24
> 
> ...



God was bringing salvation to Israel IN SPITE of Sampson's sinful lust. God never condoned this sin, yet, His purpose still came to pass. 
James explains pretty clearly that when we sin, it's because of the lust that is in our heart.
Here's a glimpse of what I'm saying:

Gal.5
7 Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?
8 This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.

In other words, they were led by the flesh, not by the Spirit. (Rom. 7 also supports this)

According to your position, God determines everything, even our sin. But here, their disobedience was not from "him that calleth". How's that work?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 27, 2019)

welderguy said:


> Nope. You missed it. I'm stating that God's outcomes are dependant upon nothing outside of Himself.
> 
> Isaiah 46
> 10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:
> ...



The in agreement with Gem, Joseph's brothers did have to do what they did. God is not subject to the actions of man.


----------



## gemcgrew (Feb 28, 2019)

welderguy said:


> God was bringing salvation to Israel IN SPITE of Sampson's sinful lust.


"But his father and his mother knew not that it _was_ of the LORD, that he sought an occasion against the Philistines". "Samson's sinful lust" was part of the "it".


welderguy said:


> God never condoned this sin, yet, His purpose still came to pass.


Determining is not the same as condoning. There are decrees and there are precepts.


welderguy said:


> James explains pretty clearly that when we sin, it's because of the lust that is in our heart.


The lust that is in our heart is not God. Are you Pantheist?


welderguy said:


> Here's a glimpse of what I'm saying:
> 
> Gal.5
> 7 Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?
> ...


False teachers persuaded them. False teachers are not God. Are you Pantheist?



welderguy said:


> According to your position, God determines everything, even our sin. But here, their disobedience was not from "him that calleth". How's that work?


By rejecting your Pantheism.


----------



## welderguy (Feb 28, 2019)

gemcgrew said:


> "But his father and his mother knew not that it _was_ of the LORD, that he sought an occasion against the Philistines". "Samson's sinful lust" was part of the "it".
> Determining is not the same as condoning. There are decrees and there are precepts.
> The lust that is in our heart is not God. Are you Pantheist?
> 
> ...



When we are led by our flesh, in effect, we do have one too many gods. I am guilty of being led by the flesh all too often. And if you're honest, I believe you probably are too.
Does this make us pantheists? I guess technically yes. But that is really not what we are discussing here.


----------

