Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

I am saying NOT ONE person from Pentecost UNTIL the Lord comes does NOT have remission of sins without being baptized in Jesus Name. Yes that is what I am saying.:thumbsup

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Every action their is in the third person

be baptized
having his name invoked see Acts 15:17, James 2:7.

Baptism in water is where it occurs the calling of the Name invokes the power of the blood that remits sins.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Thank you for not saying what most people say on this topic: that Pharaoh hardened his own heart first! Unless all the English translations I've ever read are terribly wrong (Nahkoe, where are you? ;)), the Bible doesn't say that. In fact, it's very explicit even in talking about why God "had to" do the hardening: if He hadn't, Pharaoh would have said yes! And that wasn't God's plan! God had to make Pharaoh say no, so He could prove that He could do lots of amazing things. He wanted to make a name for Himself. That's what it says.

Furthermore, Moses had to lie, per God's instructions, in order for Pharaoh's "no" to ostensibly deserve such horrible punishments. If Moses had told him the true plan, for his people to leave forever, Pharaoh saying no to that request would seem quite reasonable. So, instead, Moses asked to go on a 3-day journey into the wilderness to offer sacrifices. The obvious implication is that they'd be back in 6 days or so. This is underscored by Pharaoh's and Moses's negotiating whether to leave the old folks behind, etc. Now it seems like Pharaoh is being unreasonable, hence the plagues aren't quite so insanely over to top. (Never mind that is was the people, not just Pharaoh, that took the brunt of the punishment.)

Now who would ever do such a horrible thing? :whistle

Actually, I do not. I question the accuracy of the account in Exodus. The most likely explanation, if the story is based on true events, is that some natural plagues hit Egypt in fairly quick succession (there are theories involving algae in the river etc.), and someone made up a fable (complete with a moral: don't mess with God's people!) to explain it.

So, everything He is ever purported to have done is, by definition, just and true. It doesn't matter how horrible a thing it is -- tell someone to kill his own son only to stop his hand at the last second, command His army to slaughter entire populations except for the virgin girls (you can keep them for yourselves, fellas!), burn billions of people for the "sin" of not believing certain people (and guessing correctly which people to believe) in what they say about God's plan for man (or for not even being lucky enough to have heard that plan!), not healing someone if they haven't dotted every i and crossed every t in the prerequisites, etc.

To believe that God is just no matter what He does is pointless. There is no way He could negate the claim, even if He tried!

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

WRONG Pharoah hardened his own heart then God hardened his heart. Did God KNOW what would happen absolutely. Did He MAKE him do it absolutely NOT!
Consider this the hardening of Pharoah did NOT make him wicked he was already wicked however Pharoah's choices made him the canidate God needed for His purpose thus after Pharoah's rejection then he himself became rejected and used for God's glory.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

A few times, in the course of the plagues, we read that Pharaoh hardened his own heart. Usually not, and not the first few times. And yes it does say that the reason God did this is so that Pharaoh would say no:

"but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go. "

"And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt."

"And he hardened Pharaoh's heart, that he hearkened not unto them; as the LORD had said."

"And the LORD hardened the heart of Pharaoh, and he hearkened not unto them; as the LORD had spoken unto Moses."

"And the LORD said unto Moses, Go in unto Pharaoh: for I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, that I might shew these my signs before him: And that thou mayest tell in the ears of thy son, and of thy son's son, what things I have wrought in Egypt, and my signs which I have done among them; that ye may know how that I am the LORD. "

"But the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart, so that he would not let the children of Israel go."

"And Moses and Aaron did all these wonders before Pharaoh: and the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart, so that he would not let the children of Israel go out of his land."

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Romans 9:19 - 24 speak to this situation, though some may not like the implications of it, which again, makes me grateful for the Grace of God!



19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?




Timmy,
For the question as to how one can believe that GOD is JUST and RIGHTEOUS in ALL HE does, refer to verses 23 & 24 specifically, then read the rest of the chapter as St. Paul ties the Sovereignty of GOD into the SALVATION made available to the Gentiles, by faith!!

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Cool, God believes and has went about giving eternal torment to those who never had a choice in anything! :thumbsup

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

That is exactly what I don't believe, Luke.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Let's continue this all the way down to the thought process it is in that Free-will is a lie. We can't choose anything and are totaly depraved. We don't repent God does itfor us. We can't even believe but God forces faith down our throats and is basically him believing/having faith for us.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Well Good! hmmm sure did not sound like it! Sounded like the sound off board of a Calvinist to me. Where you commenting to someone else who is a calvinist?

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

1) Remember God chose us, we did not and could not ever choose God-- not without His Grace.

2) Scripture states that it is the kindness of God that leads us to repentance.

Romans 2:4
Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

2 Timothy 2:25
In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;



3) My response:

Isaiah 43:25
I, even I, am he that blots out your transgressions for my own sake, and will not remember your sins.


4) I consider myself to be Calvinist.

God stands at the door and knocks and I am glad that He gave me the will to open the door.




An attitude different from this puts emphasis on my response, my actions, as if there is something that I have done to save myself.

Clearly it is the blood of Jesus that saves and His blood alone.

I am not saved because I spoke in tongues.
I am not saved because I repented.
I am saved because it is the will of God that I be saved. He saved us when we were incapable of saving ourselves and for this I am grateful.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Again, if we cannot judge the actions of God as either just or unjust, then there is no point in asserting that He is just (or unjust).

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

HE is Just because HIS WORD says HE IS.

I declare HE is Just because I am mortal and NOT nearly as just as HE IS.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Yeah, got that. :)

Another argument some use is this: who are we to say whether what God does is good or not? We are finite, and our minds are puny. And we don't see the big picture like He does. We simply aren't capable of passing judgment on God's actions.

And that's a good point, except for one small problem: it goes both ways! We are likewise incapable of saying (with any certainty) that God's action is good! And yet we do it all the time. Someone recovers from a sickness and we say "God is so good". Someone lands a great job, someone narrowly misses a car crash, etc. etc. Who are we to say (even assuming God made that thing happen, which in itself is a tricky question) that it was good?

Again, you could argue that everything God does is good because it says so in "His" word. And we're back where we started. ;)

Huh?

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Luke,

I have thought about this and I ask you, how would you describe your salvation in terms that leaves you out of the mix, so to speak?


I believe we play a role in our salvation, but I don't know how to put it to words in a way that does not ooze, "I got saved when I spoke in tongues."


I flatly reject that notion.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

But BY and because of His grace we DO choose Him.

Yep....and it is we who repent

He did not give you the will. He informed your will. He worked on your will. You willingly obeyed

No it does not. Just because pme recognizes our response does not mean that is where the EMPHASIS goes

Not even the hardest die hard Ultra Con would deny that.

Consider our example in Abraham. It was grace of God first. It was Abraham's faith second. It was God's command third and it was Abraham's obedience fourth.

Had the Grace of God not been there Abraham would have had no God to have faith in. God justified Abraham because of Abraham's faith. Had Abraham not obeyed, though he had faith, he would not have received the promise God promised him of a better land.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

So how can we apply this Biblical concept to our salvation experience and to how we preach and teach salvation to the world?

If Abraham was made righteous and justified by faith, how can we say anything other than that? We have Jesus to go through and He was obedient. By His obedience, many are made the righteousness of God-- a righteousness we only have access to through faith in the One who was obedient.


Furthermore, Abraham's justification happened before he ever received the Promise. His justification happened at faith. He did obey. he did receive the promise of God.

Those who are saved by faith will obey (or should) the leading of the scriptures and will experience the Promise of God-- Christ Jesus formed in us, the Hope of Glory.

But the attaining of that Promise doesn't establish our salvation.


Biblical faith in Jesus, the Christ, the Son of the Living God, established our salvation and that faith WILL NEVER HAPPEN outside of GOD'S GRACE.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Did you get saved at turning from sin/repentance? It's something you chose to do. Do works in themselves save you or are works the result of salvation in which we will ultimately be judged by? Works are just as much part of salvation as anything else but they are not the source. The utterance of the Spirit is only a confirmation of the divine making his presence known. Tongues though are not the source of salvation but the Spirit which is Christ in you the hope of glory when you are united in him and you partake of his Spirit.

I also deny we are saved by "tongues" as would any knowledgeable Apostolic. I am also not "saved" at receiving the Spirit as covenant is not brought into fulness until baptism.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

THough I agree with much of this. James is very clear that "believed" is not about a moment in time but the fulness of Abraham's walk. "

Jas 2:22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works;
Jas 2:23 and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness"--and he was called a friend of God.
Jas 2:24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Thus the fulness of faith cannot be recognized until it is completed which is defined by the "specfic" utterance of God. Are we saved by works? Yes and No! Are good works in themselves salvational? No! Until they are relational they mean nothing. Are we saved unto good/God's works? Yes! Are we in the end judged by works and not by faith alone/mental agreement? Yes! Did Jesus base his relationship with you on works? Yes!

Abraham was in the end justified by his works by doing as God asked not simply a moment of time.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

I understand this train of thought, but do you consider repentance a work?

Baptism, full immersion in water, with the Name of Jesus called over you- is that a work?


These are things one must do out of obedience to the scriptures, so I guess it is a "work"-- What do you say?





Speaking in tongues is not something we are commanded to do like repentance from sin and baptism in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Also, stating now that standards are not salvific and have no bearing on one's salvation.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

I'd like to share what I believe...

I believe that a sincere soul who has repented of sin will seek to be obedient to God's Word. The Holy Ghost will reveal to the individual what they must do next through study of the Word. Water baptism in Jesus name is a command, if one refuses to be water baptized they are essentially rebelling against the Gospel. However, if they never knew but repented of sin and got killed on their way to a Bible study about Baptism, God alone is the judge of their soul.

Sometimes the exceptions make the rule.

We serve a God who judges the heart... not the sacrament.

If you want to know that you're saved and you want the fullness of the New Testament Salvation Christ purchased on Calvary, obey the full Gospel of the Apostles.

And just to stir the pot a little... I don't believe one has to be completely immersed to be baptized. The word "baptizo" also means to "wash" as in having water poured over something.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

I didn't say believe was a moment in time

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

If Abraham did not obey, the simple truth is he was not saved/did not have faith. He had faith in obedience, but it was his faith that saved him

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

I know just making a point of clarification!

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Of course it is a work. Is it a work in the sense Paul uses work? no! The work in baptism is done by God as he is the source of judgment not the man. Works of man that attempt to justify is as a banner that man throws before God and says "this act" make me righteous. Baptism is not seen that way. It is man responding to God in faith in that God will do what HE said HE would do. It's man depending on God not himself and that man sees God is the ultimate creator of a new creation not himself. Man has nothing to glorify in as it is all God's work. Does man physically and mentally move a finger to save himself? Yes! Is his moving the source of his salvation in which he can glorify himself? No! The provision of Christ by the grace of God is the source of our salvation.


Again what type of work and how does it relate to the whole. Saying "work" as a across the board term fails and makes scripture contradictory.


No it's not commanded as it is not YOURS TO DO! It is God's moving when he fills you. How can you commaned something you have no control over?

Law is a salvational issue. Always has and always will be. The whole point of Christ coming is about law and our fulfilling of it.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

:popcorn2

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Br Epley your statement contradicts the word of God.

[Rom 9:17] For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

Pharaoh had no choice at all, just as Judas had no choice.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Oh yeah, I forgot to cite that one! Thanks!

Very clearly, God wanted to flex His muscles and make a name for Himself. That was His reason for the plagues, and He needed an excuse for them: make Pharaoh say no to a reasonable request.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

I have a problem with how it is claimed He did things, absolutely. Don't you? You think it's just fine to instruct Moses to deceive Pharaoh (tell him they want to take a 3-day journey to offer sacrifices, not that they wanted to leave forever)? And it's cool to slaughter children because Pharaoh denied that request, even though he couldn't have said yes if he wanted to?

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Light you don't have Timmy figured out yet do ya..LOL

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Does anyone, really? :ursofunny

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Even with all that, would you say God is "just"?

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

At one time I believed as you about these two men and others. Have you noticed in Rom. 9:22....ENDURED WITH MUCH LONGSUFFERING the vessels of wrath fitted for destruction. In other words Pharoah-Esau-Judas(though not named) were NOT initially fitted for destruction only AFTER much longsuffering they were fitted. Did God know? Certainly he is infinite. Did God make them chose the evil and resist the good? NEVER. Knowing and decreeing are not the same. I hope that helps.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Forcing a person to destruction and the ending result saying you deserved hell for eternity is never Justice. You can never have true justice without free will.

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

Br. Pharaoh and the others were made or formed as vessels of dishonor. God endured or put up with these vessels of dishonor until the time was right in his plan.

(Rom 9:21) Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

(Rom 9:22) What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

(Rom 9:23) And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

So God creates vessels simply to be tormented into eternity because he made them that way? So he literally created sinners/defilers of his will?

So this is justice? Seems to me they did the "will of God" and are no different than those who do his will in righteousness.

Sounds to me like you don't believe in free-will!

Re: Pros/Cons of the Three-step doctrine
 

When a Calvinist and an Agnostic is arguing watch out.:thumbsup