This is exactly the point I was trying to make. If we have true faith, we will do works out of faith. If we say we have faith, yet do nothing, it will be noticed by God. Same goes if we say we have faith, but do works that are not born of that faith, only do works to make us appear to be good, or better then others, that will also be noticed.
Paul was never sure of his own salvation. He always used “I hope” when talking about his own salvation until he knew that his own death was upon him. At that time, he knew he had “preserver-ed till the end [in faith]” and “ran the good race” and knew that salvation was his.
Tom, I ask that you clarify what you mean here about how you won’t know until the minute you die.
And that’s exactly what he is doing, especially amongst the religious.
Hang on - one group clearly believes error and the other truth, since both positions cannot be true.
Rot. The New Testament wasn’t written for decades after Christ’s death. Authority existed before scripture was complete. Indeed, it existed before a word of it was written. Did Noah and Abraham and Jacob not have authority, even though they lived hundreds if not thousands of years before Moses wrote down their stories?
Quite simple, my friend. Here’s the difference between the two you describe:1 Cor 2:12-13 "Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual {thoughts} with spiritual {words.}
Incorrect. One is not saved based on his eschatological beliefs. One is saved based on his soteriological beliefs. What he believes concerning Christ and salvation.
One’s eschatological beliefs reveal how one interprets the prophetic Scriptures, but not his salvation.
Yes, the correct beliefs concerning Christ.
The O.T. prophetic Scriptures literally describe an earthly kingdom ruled by the Messiah in righteousness and peace - not heaven. These Scriptures were finished 400 years before Christ. As for the N.T. Scriptures, they were ALL written within the first century.
What “authority” are you talking about? You and I know nothing of these men except what is recorded of them in the theopneustos Scriptures. They’re there because they each served a definite purpose in salvation history. What the Jews were to know concerning the expectant Messiah was preserved in Scripture for all generations prior to His coming; likewise, what we’re to know concerning the Messiah and the salvation he wrought two thousand years ago through His sacrificial death was preserved in Scripture for all subsequent generations. As well as His expectant return and the future, glorious, Millennial Kingdom He’ll set up at that time on this present earth.
I’m sorry - beliefs about the afterlife, beliefs about what CHRIST will do pre- or post- or during the Last Judgement - beliefs about whether CHRIST will take us off of this earth and put us somewhere else or establish HIS Kingdom on this planet - these all ARE beliefs about Christ!!! Being beliefs about Christ, then, how are they dispensable?
You must not gave read Acts 15. Talk about some distant elders they were good enough for Paul!
I never said they were dispensable, Maria. But one is not saved based on one’s Millennial view/belief, but rather one is saved or not saved based on one’s belief or disbelief in the message (gospel) concerning the Person and finished, once for all, sacrificial work of Jesus Christ on his/her behalf (Acts 16:31; Jn. 3:14-18; 5:24).1 Cor 1:21 “For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not {come to} know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.”
The controversy originated in Jerusalem. It was corrected there.
" The most important topic, among Fundamentalists themselves, is the Second Coming. if there is any agreement, it is only on the point that Christ will physically return to Earth. When that will be is up for grabs. Premillennialists say it will be before the millenium, the thousand year reign. Postmillennialists say it will be after. There is little consensus on just what the the millenium itself will be. There are also disputes about the Rapture and the Tribulation. With respect to the latter, there is widespread disagreement on its nature and its timing with respect to the millenium. Some think it is around the corner, with the Russians playing the role assigned to the northern power in Daniel. Others say it is in the distant future . . . fundamentalists may be termed absorbed in chronicling the Last Days, the only difficulty being that no two major commentators agree on what will happen or when." Thanks to Karl Keating from “Catholicism and Fundamentalism”
In the earliest times there were some who, misled by certain texts in the Apocalypse and by thr strange fancies of Jewish-Christian circles, exemplified in Papias, early in the second century, imagined that after the General Resurection a reign of Christ with the risen Saints would be established here on earth for a thousand years. Only after the expiration of this period would the Saints enter heaven in consummated bliss. At the first resurrection only the just would rise and enter this earthly kingdom, in which they would be prepared by Christ for the final consummation, when they would contemplate the Father in his divine glory. These ideas were held by some in the East and the West. Tertullian, Victorinus, and Lanctantius among the Latin Fathers, St. Irenaeus among the Greeks, were affected by them; but their very words betray that these fancies were not shared by all Christians. In fact, they were strongly opposed by many from the very beginning, and after some intermittent vogue during the first four centuries, were universally and definitely set aside within the Church. They would have been forever relegated to the curiosities of ancient literature, were it not for some revival of them among Protestant sects in recent years.
That Millenarianism is a form of religious dreaming is even older than the Gospels; it is man’s hope of the millennium. It has always been the faith of certain pious people , whom the iniquities of the world have afflicted their souls, that there would be on this earth some day a very magnificent kingdom of God. With the advent of Christianity it was, of course, Christ who would be the King of that happy era of human sanctity. It is not easy to contradict people and prove them to be wrong if they profess a hope in some mighty triumph of Christ here on earth before the final consummation of all things. Such an occurrence is not excluded, is not impossible, it is not at all certain that there may not be a prolonged period of triumphant Christianity before the end. The point of division between legitimate aspirations of devout souls and the aberrations of false millenarism is this: the Chiliasts - as believers in the millennium are called - seem to expect a coming of Christ and a presence of him in glory and majesty on this earthwhich would be the consummation of all things but would still be a portion of the history of mankind. This is not consonant with Catholic dogma. The coming of Christ in the second Advent - the Parousia, as it is called technically - in orthodox Christianity is the consummation of all things, the end of human history.
If before that final end there is to be a period, more or less prolonged, of triumphant sanctity, such a result will be brought about, not by the apparition of the Person of Christ in Majesty but the operation of those powers of sanctification which are now at work, the Holy Spirit and the Sacraments of the Church. The Chiliasts of all times and shades of opinion, and there are many to be found even today, seem to despair, not only of the world, but even of that dispensation of grace which was inaugurated at Pentecost; they expect from the visible presence of Christ a complete conversion of the world, as if such a happy result could not be otherwise brought about. They have still to learn the meaning of Christ’s words to the Apostles: “It is expedient to you that I go. For if I go not, the Paraclete will not come to you: but if I go, I will send him to you.” (John 16:7)
This is a silly statement. Chiliasts rejoice in this dispensation of grace. Tom, have you actually ever read any literary works of Dispensational theologians? If so, who?
Total error. There’s no such expectation. Obviously you haven’t actually studied Dispensationalism.
There’s no great mystery behind this verse. It’s through the Holy Spirit that Christ, now sharing His Father’s throne in heaven functioning there as the believer’s High Priest ever interceding for him, is building His church. The Holy Spirit baptizes each true believer into the body of Christ, which is the church Christ is presently building (1 Cor. 12:13; cf. Eph. 1:22-23; Col. 1:18, 24). And it’s in/through the Spirit who indwells him that the true believer receives power to live a life that glorifies Christ. And by the Spirit the true believer is “sealed unto the day of redemption” (i.e., of his body, Eph. 4:30; cf. 2 Cor. 1;22; Eph. 1:13). That’s an eternal salvation.
Exactly.
As has been shown to you in a previous post, your interpretations of Scripture are fallible (by your own admission) and, therefore, totally untrustworthy. And, as I have also shown in today’s posts, modern day Chiliasts cannot even agree among themselves. Puhleeese.
So ultimately the ones who start the controversy have the power to correct the controversy?
My eschatological position is “accurate” based on a literal interpretation of the prophetic Scriptures. However, no man (save the Son of Man) is infallible. Haven’t we been through this already? Tom, I’d like to see you do some personal study on your own. Read some original sources. Get a real grasp of what’s actually being taught. It’s not good when somebody else does the thinking for you.