| Author |
Message |
Nowisee
Registered user
Username: Nowisee
Post Number: 288
Registered: 5-2009
| | Posted on Monday, March 01, 2010 - 12:26 pm: |     |
Oh, yes, Jim, I understand about having nowhere to go (I mean this in a concrete way)--I, because of finding out what Hebrews says that totally destroys the IJ & finding out that EGW stole what she wrote, but being afraid of Sunday churches, went nowhere for a very long time. This may not be what you mean by having nowhere to go, but it is my story. I was so lonely for Christian fellowship, but I didn't fit anywhere. This is totally common for people coming out of JW, LDS, SDA, etc. We had such a comfortable little cocoon, knowing all the 'truth', all the answers, that we were very secure. Security, in my case, but misery as I tried to keep the law. Now I am going to a church where the pastor, knowing Hebrew & Greek very well, teaches out of the Bible every week and I have so much to learn! The thing we as Christians can't budge on is that Jesus paid it all on the cross and that our acceptance of that is the most important thing in all of life. The gospel, defined in 1 Cor. 15, was taught to me as an SDA as being "too simple"--I have found it is everything. Do you know what the old & new covenants are? They are defined real specifically in the Bible and understanding them was one of the keys that opened my eyes to the issue of law & grace. Someone that has helped my husband & me alot is the simple, downhome teachings of Bob George--his illustrations are simple/profound. His website is www.realanswers.net. He clarifies the old & new covenants. (The new covenant is not the 10 c's written on the heart as I was taught--the Bible is very clear on this!) He has a former SDA on his staff. Try listening to his stuff--what do you have to lose? |
Jim02
Registered user
Username: Jim02
Post Number: 939
Registered: 5-2007
| | Posted on Monday, March 01, 2010 - 6:46 pm: | |
Gabriel , I am answering you inline: (Jim)
. Your situation reminds me about the people of my country who had lived a lot of time under the communist regime and who are nostalgic about that epoch.
Jim:
I am reminded of that saying. "there is security in the past"
I think we view the past with a sense of longing because the past represents battles already won.
Warm memories, safe moments.
I had some lively talks with them, showing the benefits of capitalism but to no avail. I cannot see any other solution for them to regain contact with reality (because they are living in an imaginary world)
Jim: It is culture shock and more.
People learn an operating system for their lives.
Rip that away , and a large part of their lives relate to nothing they are familiar with.
The question is if the fruits are according to their claims.
Jim: We often recall our past experience with rose colored glasses.
I can recall many times where I felt things were as they should be. That my faith was in a safe place. However, I have not forgotten the problems either. The cyclical burnouts, the endless rule keeping, the stewardship demands that read like a federal govt tax bill.
The blinders and talk to the hand feedback when a premise was questioned.
I have not forgotten.
While I don't recommend you to go back in adventism, God told us that we should know false teachers and prophets according to their fruits. Maybe you should go back, at least in your memory, if not physically, to an adventist church and try to taste the fruit of those teachings.
Jim: I have considered it a hundred times.
But I realize at the same time. I would be expected to tow the line and knwoing that I would have more questions and challenges than ever before. Very likely I would only cause suspicion and strife and the whole endeavor would be pointless. This is why , it is more important to me to settle some basics matters so that wherever I go to fellowship, I will not be there to create arguments or to appear rebellious, mixed up , or in duality.
If I settle things , I will come across more at peace with myself and far less likely to be jerked around by all the theories out there.
Ask yourself if indeed the adventist teachings about law, obedience, assurance of salvation produce a good or o bad fruit.
J: I have . And it is a mixed result.
From a distance, the adventist God is more loving than the christianity's God, and also they are more faithful and obedient to God than the other groups. That's how things appear, but does the impression remains in place at close distance?
Jim: It does from person to person appear genuine and of good fruits, but not institutionaly. The SDA system is a top heavy bureaucracy. Policy driven and virtually mindless when questioned about issues.
Their Review and Herald World edition that they send out once a month is almost completely void of anything useful in the aid of understanding and Spiritual helps.
They also produce an Alumni magazine that is a categoric waste of paper.
Focusing on the fruit will help you in your search for a better foundation for truth.
Jim: I have tried to do that in general but not is a judgemental way. I do my best to be accepting of other ways , other systems. I know other faiths are different.
There are a lot of factors involved in connecting to a church.
I understand how attractive the adventist theology is, but I don't think that they have a high regard for God's love as they pretend.
Jim: I think they do have a high regard for God's love. But they tend towards rigid discipline and accountability to the point they stiffle natural affections at times.
Being SDA comes in all flavors. Lax to rigid.
Jim:
My consternation evolves mostly around settling in my mind the aspects of the law, more than any other issue.
I have studied the topic and in fact have reread much of the material I already have.
I am not even sure what my hesitation is myself.
Mostly , I get a gut reaction that God wrote the 10C on stone tablets. That means something.
Jim:
When He said he would write His laws on our hearts, The mainline is everything but the 10C. Yet it is the only thing we were ever given written by God Himself.
Jim:
I think, God may not be giving me conviction about this because I have yet to learn something I am not ready for or have yet to discover the pieces I need to know.
I cannot defend what I do not believe in. |
Jim02
Registered user
Username: Jim02
Post Number: 940
Registered: 5-2007
| | Posted on Monday, March 01, 2010 - 7:00 pm: | |
Nowisee, Replying inline (Jim)
This may not be what you mean by having nowhere to go, but it is my story. I was so lonely for Christian fellowship, but I didn't fit anywhere.
Jim: I have a sense of nowhere to go because I am not purpose driven in that I am not convicted of why I should be there. It is difficult to fellowship when you don't yet agree on the basic beliefs of a church body. Much less your own baggage of doubts about leaving your own church in the first place.
This is totally common for people coming out of JW, LDS, SDA, etc. We had such a comfortable little cocoon, knowing all the 'truth', all the answers, that we were very secure. Security, in my case, but misery as I tried to keep the law.
Jim: Precisely !
Now I am going to a church where the pastor, knowing Hebrew & Greek very well, teaches out of the Bible every week and I have so much to learn! The thing we as Christians can't budge on is that Jesus paid it all on the cross and that our acceptance of that is the most important thing in all of life.
Jim: I happen to subscribe to the premise that most propsitions are conditional.
Global statements like once saved , always saved seem to ignore conditional passages in scripture, which make it very difficult for me to accept the scope of declarations often put forth when it comes to unconditional salvation.
The gospel, defined in 1 Cor. 15, was taught to me as an SDA as being "too simple"--I have found it is everything. Do you know what the old & new covenants are?
Jim: Yes I do.
But I am at odds as to the interpretations and theories in circulation as to what His laws are and the accountabilities of conditional salvation. The Spiritual angle as expressed in catch phrases is virtually without definition as it can mean anything subjective from one mind to another. It is without definition. Admittedly, works for salvation is without definition as well. You never know when enough is enough. It seems I went from one open ended concept to another.
They are defined real specifically in the Bible and understanding them was one of the keys that opened my eyes to the issue of law & grace. Someone that has helped my husband & me alot is the simple, downhome teachings of Bob George--his illustrations are simple/profound. His website is www.realanswers.net.
Jim: Thank You , I will check into that website. |
Jackob
Registered user
Username: Jackob
Post Number: 538
Registered: 7-2005
| | Posted on Monday, March 01, 2010 - 10:00 pm: | |
Jim, you said
quote:Jim: I happen to subscribe to the premise that most propsitions are conditional.
Global statements like once saved , always saved seem to ignore conditional passages in scripture, which make it very difficult for me to accept the scope of declarations often put forth when it comes to unconditional salvation.
I brought you on another thread some proofs about the way in which conditional statements can be interpreted in such a way as not to jeopardize the full assurance of people's salvation. I have not yet seen you interacting with them, with the defense, but you insist that Bible teaches conditional salvation. Since there is a valid interpretation of those passages that it's not at odds with full assurance of salvation, why are you still clinging to a conditional way of reading them?
Gabriel |
Jim02
Registered user
Username: Jim02
Post Number: 941
Registered: 5-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 02, 2010 - 7:19 pm: | |
Gabriel,
Sometimes I do not catch every ball tossed my way.
I am trying to recall what thread you are referring to.
When I have more time I can present some examples. Though as I understand it, we are not allowed to get into a debate on the forum.
(One of thsoe fuzzy rules I never understood)
But I will try to find some examples to share what I mean by conditional salvation.
(Though I think we all already know them)
As an aside thought. It impresses me that it seems rather redundant for scripture to teach so extensively about behavioral modifactions if in fact there is no risk of salvational loss.
I have heard a lot of references here and there, on the Christian radio about rewarsd promised for our works. So I guess that is suppose dto be in part, our incentive?
I am being facetious here.
I think salvation is conditional by the mere fact of so many plain spoken warnings found all through scripture.
What I often see taught is a focus on a key passage that is then used to in effect cancel out many other statements or at minimum used to reinterpret seemingly contradictory language.
Some of these points are likely vbalid and plausible, but others are not.
I am guilty of talking in generalities at times.
I recongnize you want specific examples.
I will bear this in mind.
Jim |
Jrt
Registered user
Username: Jrt
Post Number: 1000
Registered: 10-2008
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 03, 2010 - 4:27 am: | |
Jim,
Please explain to me what you mean by "salvation is conditional"? I need help understanding what you mean.
Keri |
Jim02
Registered user
Username: Jim02
Post Number: 944
Registered: 5-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 03, 2010 - 5:11 am: | |
Keri,
I am working on putting that together so I can present examples.
Basically, it appears to me that even though Salvation is based upon Faith in Christ and is a gift in of itself.
There are many other scriptures that present qualifiers or conditions.
If = Then
There are a number of catch 22's in theology that attempt to say , well if you don't have the if's then you never had Christ in the first place , or some other form of those words.
This then points back to the conditional salvation and that is what all these other passages are pointing out.
We may have the coverage of Christ in our behalf, but if we do not partake and meet the conditions of that participation as demonstrated by the ongoing growth process, repentance and fruits of God's grace in our lives, we lose that coverage by default. Thus , salvation, once saved always saved is untrue. |
River
Registered user
Username: River
Post Number: 6049
Registered: 9-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 03, 2010 - 5:52 am: | |
Jim, All I hear you saying is words like inconclusive, data, contrasting references, mobious, perponderance,randomized, contradictions, interpretations, clarity, proof, intelligence, speculation, hypothesis, contradictory, qualifiers
Why don't you give up the big words, the Mr.Data, Star Trek pretend, and cut to the chase.
If you will quit standing back off and looking at this like it is a great scientific problem, we all might get somewhere.
Get to the nut, to the nitty gritty, where the rubber meets the road.
Lets cut the pretensions of higher education, that is a crutch, a cop out, quit whining and start dining on Gods word, instead of finding fault with it.
Crap, I'd rather talk about road kill! |
Jackob
Registered user
Username: Jackob
Post Number: 539
Registered: 7-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 03, 2010 - 7:52 am: | |
quote:Gabriel,
Sometimes I do not catch every ball tossed my way.
I am trying to recall what thread you are referring to.
It's the thread you started entitled "Salvation :boundries and suppositions". In dealing with Romans 8 I quoted John Owen and explained how a conditional expression is not always intended to express uncertainty but can express the certainty about cause and effect or means and end, or some other things. From my perspective, if you follow this way of looking at the conditional phrases in the Bible you will not come to conclusions that contradict the clear statements of the Bible which tell us that our salvation is in sure hands, God's hands, and no true believer will be lost on the way to heaven.
Gabriel |
Jackob
Registered user
Username: Jackob
Post Number: 540
Registered: 7-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 03, 2010 - 8:33 am: | |
Jim, you said:
quote:We may have the coverage of Christ in our behalf, but if we do not partake and meet the conditions of that participation as demonstrated by the ongoing growth process, repentance and fruits of God's grace in our lives, we lose that coverage by default. Thus , salvation, once saved always saved is untrue.
Have you considered the possibility that lack of fruits proves a lack of grace from the beginning? What if a lack of fruits just proves that the tree is a bad tree and not a good tree, as Jesus said? Putting your thesis in the imagery of trees, you are basically saying that some good tree after it will bring bad fruit will become a bad tree.
The epistle of James speaks about faith without works and qualifies this faith as being dead. A dead faith cannot save anybody. James isn't saying that faith, living faith, authentic faith is dying or dies because somebody who has this true faith fails to accomplish the condition of obedience. James is clear that such a kind of faith without works is not a living, authentic faith. While we surely see a language denoting conditionality, this conditionality is not seen in the terms you presented it, as true faith that must meet some conditions in order to retain salvation, but in terms that emphasize the contrast between true/false faith, as Jesus contrasted the good tree producing good fruit with the bad tree and its bad fruit. You either have an authentic faith that is living and produces good works or you don't and have a dead faith, which is a false faith. That perspective is much better than seeing yourself under the obligation to produce fruit in order to preserve your salvation, in order to remain a good tree and have a living faith.
Gabriel |
Jrt
Registered user
Username: Jrt
Post Number: 1001
Registered: 10-2008
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 03, 2010 - 7:32 pm: | |
Jim,
Thanks for sharing a bit more about your use of the words, "salvation is conditional".
You know, I wrestled with salvation being conditional or unconditional for some time.
May I share a little of what happened for me?
A friend, who is definitely connected with the Lord, emailed me about salvation and this idea of "once saved, always saved" awhile back that seemed to help me.
I emailed her back with every possible scriptural text I could find in regards to salvation being conditional - everything that I had known from my background in SDA.
Her original response to me - in which I let her "have it" ... was amazingly logical to me - after I thought about it for some time. Her reasoning totally made sense ... It "held" together ...
Let me post her original response to me and then I have a last thought for you.
quote:you are moving to have that truth be real for you. I had one thought as I read your e-mail....If Christians believe that it is by grace that we are saved... thru faith...not by works (Ephesians 2)...in other words if we don't DO anything to earn it, how can we DO anything to lose it? It is a gift...even that faith to believe is a gift...it is ALL of Him. The response to His great salvation is such that I DO what pleases Him as testimony to the fact that I am His and He is mine. Being born again is like physical birth..we don't DO anything, we are actively involved in just receiving it...life eternal that begins at that moment of stepping from death to life. Why do you think Jesus said that we have to be born again...first, by water (physically), then by the spirit. One favorite Scripture regarding this is I John 5:11,12 And this is the testimony God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He who has the Son has llfe; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. I think it sounds pretty clear about either we have spiritual life in Christ or we don't...and that we can know...it is His work. The next verse John writes states that very thing...in fact, he wrote the letter so that we may KNOW that you have eternal life. If it was based on anything but Him, we might be liable to lose it...but it is based on Him...the unchanging, faithful, perfect, unfailing God that He is.
Jim, what struck me is that I can't believe that salvation is all of God - but then lose it by my behavior ... then salvation is dependent on me in some way. You can't have both - they are incompatible. You either believe salvation is through grace alone, by faith alone, by Christ alone ... or it is not. You can't have salvation through Christ - but lose it based on ourselves. If it were ... salvation at some level would be based on us. Find me a scripture that says salvation is based on me?
My last thought and sharing of my experience ... I finally gave up my previous understanding of salvation and decided that this belief in salvation in Christ alone (so no one can boast; Eph. 2) I would choose to believe in - and that I did not lose my salvation based on anything of me. This would be my foundation on which to build all other beliefs from scripture. And then I asked my friend if we could pray together - so that she could be a witness of my decision in case I should ever waver again. We did pray together and my confusion and thinking began to clear up. Scripture began to make sense in ways I never though of ... the Bible - which I had read many times before - it was like a new book.
I know some very godly men that would be willing to pray with you, Jim, on the phone, if this is a decision you would like to make - choosing to believe that salvation is in Christ alone - and can not be lost - based on anything of ourselves. Infact, I think you know one of them already - who comes on this forum once in a very great while - but you would feel very "at home" with this man. And in case you want to talk further - he could be a "live" resource for you. I mention this - because sometimes "live" is nice and men tend to relate best with men, and women with women (its a good practice anyways).
Keri |
|
