well... I would say for the most part your atonement theology is right in the middle of it from what I have seen.
Luke2447 if you mean that believe that the plan salvation is grace through faith, then guilty as charged.
__________________
Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. (Romans 14:4)
Scripture is its own interpreter. Nothing can cut a diamond but a diamond. Nothing can interpret Scripture but Scripture" Thomas Watson.
everyone believe that. It is how you view that and what that consists of.
Bro I don't tie salvation to baptism or speaking tongues and our outward holiness per the standards and such silliness.
I don't believe that you can just say the sinners prayer and be saved, your life must bear the fruit of repentance.
I don't believe in OSAS.
I don't believe that one can lose their salvation but I believe that one can walk away from it..
So what does this make me???
__________________
Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. (Romans 14:4)
Scripture is its own interpreter. Nothing can cut a diamond but a diamond. Nothing can interpret Scripture but Scripture" Thomas Watson.
Ferd I submit to you that the Book of Galatians was written to the Church from Paul warning them about legalism.
Paul taught justification by faith and not to add anything to the Cross towards Salvation.
He went as far as to say that if you live by the Law and you break one law you are guilty of breaking all the the law.
...and yet Paul spent a great deal of time telling people how to live as Christians. Some of it was offered as his own opinion as to a better way to be (like marriage, and/or staying single). Others was dealing with very specific problems in a particular congregation (like "women be silent). and others was addressed to everyone who is a christian (like can you sin? God FORBID and 1 Cor 11 the hair chapter).
No, Paul was not a legalist. Paul understood a balance between living by the letter of the law, and placing restrictions on the behavior of christians which is what the OP world does when it is right.
Paul was not doing as you suggest.... as for justification...."how were you baptised?" "Have you recieved the Holy Ghost since you believed?"
His words, not mine...
peace my friend.
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
I would submit that Paul taught a LOT of things that are not empasized in our churches today, such as "by grace you are saved thru faith, and that not of yourselves".....and "Not by works of righteousness that we are done, it is the gift of God"....that is the very antithesis of the doctrine of many Apostolic churches.
Paul also spoke about principles, and not specifics......there was no multi paged manual of all the things one could and couldn't do......the Pharisees created such drivel, but Paul spoke of being led of the Spirit...and talked of the weaker saints, and the obligation of the stronger saints to not create offense......he admitted that many things weren't sin, but they weren't expedient......but, he never put anyone in hell who did them.....
So, I would hve to say, to use the Apostle Paul as the example of legalism is misguided.
First, I would agree that Paul was not a legalist. But not in agreement with you. Paul certainly did teach a LOT of very narrow very clear things where there was no "wiggle room"
Second, I TEACH "by grace you are saved thru faith, and that not of yourselves".....and "Not by works of righteousness that we are done, it is the gift of God".... on a very regular bases as the adult Sunday School teacher.
I have regular meetings with my UPCI pastor to insure that these things are being taught. We are absolutly Water/Spirit in doctrine. These are very compatible things.
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
...and yet Paul spent a great deal of time telling people how to live as Christians. Some of it was offered as his own opinion as to a better way to be (like marriage, and/or staying single). Others was dealing with very specific problems in a particular congregation (like "women be silent). and others was addressed to everyone who is a christian (like can you sin? God FORBID and 1 Cor 11 the hair chapter).
No, Paul was not a legalist. Paul understood a balance between living by the letter of the law, and placing restrictions on the behavior of christians which is what the OP world does when it is right.
Paul was not doing as you suggest.... as for justification...."how were you baptised?" "Have you recieved the Holy Ghost since you believed?"
His words, not mine...
peace my friend.
Fred I will come back to this, going to the church to get ready for a special service this weekend.
__________________
Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. (Romans 14:4)
Scripture is its own interpreter. Nothing can cut a diamond but a diamond. Nothing can interpret Scripture but Scripture" Thomas Watson.
Bro I don't tie salvation to baptism or speaking tongues and our outward holiness per the standards and such silliness.
outward holiness is a rather vague way of saying things. As outward is all expressions of the heart whether in clothing or conversation etc... Baptism not being a salvational aspect is based on what? Baptism is seen as a work? I won't put words in your mouth.
Quote:
I don't believe that you can just say the sinners prayer and be saved, your life must bear the fruit of repentance.
Do you believe you are saved AT the sinners prayer? Life of repentance vs that initial salvation or coming in to covenant are two different things. Also do you believe you are judged by that fruit unto eternal life?
Quote:
I don't believe in OSAS.
good
Quote:
I don't believe that one can lose their salvation but I believe that one can walk away from it..
walking away is relative and vague. Lukewarm is not walking away completely. Which even then depends as I could argue it is walking away in part.
First, I would agree that Paul was not a legalist. But not in agreement with you. Paul certainly did teach a LOT of very narrow very clear things where there was no "wiggle room"
Second, I TEACH "by grace you are saved thru faith, and that not of yourselves".....and "Not by works of righteousness that we are done, it is the gift of God".... on a very regular bases as the adult Sunday School teacher.
I have regular meetings with my UPCI pastor to insure that these things are being taught. We are absolutly Water/Spirit in doctrine. These are very compatible things.
I hear what you're saying, and I get that.......I have no beef with you personally, but you say that your church doesn't teach a doctrine of "salvation by works"....but, I guarantee there are a list of standards, that if a person violates, they are no longer considered saved.......and there's no scriptural backing for it.
Just my guess........
__________________ "Many people view their relationship with God like a "color by number" picture. It's easier to let someone else define the boundaries, tell them which blanks to fill in, and what color to use than it is for them to take a blank canvas and seek inspiration from the Source in order to paint their own masterpiece"
Linear Mode
