Questions about when people get "saved"

[mcq72]

The Bible gives us no evidence of what occurred when Jesus preached to the souls in Abraham’s Bosom

Agreed. And some go further and say He did not preach between Calvary and that great Sunday. For sure He led them out of there , either that Sunday or at His Ascension. For sure Christ, thru prophets etc, preached to the antediluvians and others

If He did preach in hell, it was to those that disobeyed, and not sure that would include those in Paradise, unless one thinks God does remember our sins.

Anyways , this would be a thread unto itself, and not sure if CC has committed that one should believe one of the several views expound by CC theologians over the centuries. What we are required to believe is the Creed, that he did descend, and then victoriously ascend out, suffering no “corruption”.

Seriously??? Where are we taught we can be born again without the Holy Spirit? Not only do you throw out the water now you throw out the Spirit???

This has to be taken in context as in OT vs NT. As you know I am espousing that OT saints were born again (regenerated, born of God, born of the spirit, becoming children of God, saved, etc etc ). This by the grace of God, even also by the Holy Spirit. We know He at times indwelt, even filled, and at times gifted believers, but not in permanent fashion as in NT. I believe the apostles were born of God during the 3 years of ministry or before, for the HS was “with” them , but not in them yet (when Jesus breathed into them the HG after resurrection), nor baptized in power yet (as in Pentecost)

So , OT does not have same dispensation of the HG as in NT, yet folks could be born again, born of the spirit, saved etc.

 

[mcq72]

Sorry my friend this is not how reproduction works. DNA is not the “real nature of the seed”. The seed is from the man and it is called a seed because it implants in the woman.

well, most plant seed contain complete dna, but mammals etc., male has half and female the other half of dna.

No because the verse never says Eve has seed. It says seed of the woman. You are assuming this verse is speaking of Eve when in actuality it is speaking of Mary’s seed (Jesus).

Well, most Jews back then took it as the seed of Eve. Not sure it should matter for either way, for Mary is still part of that lineage, which then gives us the Incarnate One

There’s another very important word in there.

Enmity is a positive, active and typically mutual hatred or ill will toward something or someone.

Now if your definition is right and this verse is saying that there are two kinds of people the born again (seed of the woman) and the not born again (seed of Satan).

Then that would mean their is mutual hatred between these two kinds of people.

So how exactly does a born again believer “Hate” a not born again child of Satan without disobeying Christ when he said…

No one would deny that Satan is at war with us , as we are an extension of God in creation, for which we are placed with His authority to have dominion. So God’s enemies are ours.

We fight not flesh and blood (who may be in league with Darkness, but with the "dark spirits/Satan himself.)

reminds me of those that are against capital punishment for God says thou shalt not kill, totally forgetting the other equal truth , that government is given to punish the evildoers, even by death.

We hate the sin and its kingdom , but love the sinner so to speak.

Even Jesus commended a church for hating the Nicolaitans in such a fashion.

This is a singular HE. I prefer to say the HE in this verse is Jesus but if you want to pick one of Eve’s other offspring you are welcome to do so.

The general Jewish view is that the “he” is general, as one of mankind, with no generation distinction.

of course you and i see it as the final arrival in a manger.

Peace

 

[MT1926]

well, most plant seed contain complete dna, but mammals etc., male has half and female the other half of dna.

You seem to be having a hard time understanding reproduction, so I have no problems moving past this

No one would deny that Satan is at war with us , as we are an extension of God in creation, for which we are placed with His authority to have dominion. So God’s enemies are ours.

You seem to be missing the point I’m trying to make. I’m not saying we are not at war with satan. I’m saying we are not at war with the “non-born again believers”. Who you claim are Satan’s offspring.

I’m saying Satan’s offspring is sin, and the demons could be included here if you want, but it can’t be non-born again believers.

It sure seems like you agree with this here…

We hate the sin and its kingdom , but love the sinner so to speak.

Even Jesus commended a church for hating the Nicolaitans in such a fashion.

but refuse to concede your point about the non-born again believers being Satan’s offspring.

 

[MT1926]

If He did preach in hell, it was to those that disobeyed, and not sure that would include those in Paradise, unless one thinks God does remember our sins.

Jesus did not descend into HELL, as we know it today.

Jesus descended into hell, which is Sheol in Hebrew of Hades in Greek. This is were the OT dead, whether evil or righteous, went and awaited the Redeemer.

We also know from Jesus story of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31) that the evil were in the abode of the damned and the righteous were in the abode of the just. The same word hell is used for both places. Jesus descended to the abode of the just (Paradise) not the abode of the damned. We can see this from the good thief on the cross when Jesus told him today you will be with me in Paradise. We both agree Jesus did not go to straight to heaven so Paradise can’t be heaven and we both agree that Jesus descended into hell, THAT DAY, which is the same day the thief would be with him in Paradise.

Anyways , this would be a thread unto itself, and not sure if CC has committed that one should believe one of the several views expound by CC theologians over the centuries. What we are required to believe is the Creed, that he did descend, and then victoriously ascend out, suffering no “corruption”.

No that is not what we are required to believe. The CC does not teach that Jesus descended into what we in this time period refer to as HELL …

CCC 633 Scripture calls the abode of the dead, to which the dead Christ went down, “hell”—Sheol in Hebrew or Hades in Greek— because those who are there are deprived of the vision of God.480 Such is the case for all the dead, whether evil or righteous, while they await the redeemer: which does not mean that their lot is identical, as Jesus shows through the parable of the poor man Lazarus who was received into “Abraham’s bosom”:481 “It is precisely these holy souls, who awaited their Savior in Abraham’s bosom, whom Christ the Lord delivered when he descended into hell.”482 Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him. 483

As you know I am espousing that OT saints were born again (regenerated, born of God, born of the spirit, becoming children of God, saved, etc etc ).

Yes of course I known this, this is what I would like you to explain FROM SCRIPTURE.

So , OT does not have same dispensation of the HG as in NT, yet folks could be born again, born of the spirit, saved etc.

Don’t agree. As I pointed out above Jesus teaching on the Rich man and Lazarus proves the people in the OT were not saved until after Jesus preached to them in Paradise.

God Bless

 

[mcq72]

The seed is from the man and it is called a seed because it implants in the woman

Then why do you say in a previous post “the seed of Mary”?

 

[MT1926]

Then why do you say in a previous post “the seed of Mary”?

As I already said it is the seed of Mary because, which I hope you can agree to, Jesus had no human father to provide the seed.

Let me try to explain by what you said here…

well, in terms of dna, the real nature of a seed, i thought both man and woman contribute pretty much equally.

You are partially correct. Yes DNA is contributed equally from the man and woman. However, 50% of the DNA comes from the SEED of man and 50% comes from the EGG(not seed) of woman.

However, in Jesus case 100% of the DNA came from Mary, thus the proclamation the SEED of the woman.

In either case this is not the point I was trying to make. The point of all of this was to show you that the non-born again are not the children of Satan. We are all children of Satan, born again or not, when we SIN MORTALLY, because the seed of Satan is SIN.

 

[FloridaAngler]

1, Depends on the church. Typically, there’s some sort of counselling. It’s assumed he will join that church, but he isn’t required to. He may just be visiting and have another church in mind. Or, he could already be a member.

1. I don’t like the term “saved”, only because it’s so misused and is kind of vague. I prefer the Biblical term, born again. But that’s just me. Being saved means one has repented of their sins and trusted in Christ for their salvation.
2. People can walk the aisle many times. I did. But the problem is that walking the aisle doesn’t mean you’re saved. For me, it was all about moralism. That is, if I just said the prayer again, I could start over and, this time, I’d just try to do better. That just led to a lot of frustration.
3. I’m sure there are people who are sincere, but, mostly, they’re just in an emotional state. I won’t say they’re manipulated, although some churches and preachers do that. They think if they just repeat a prayer, that they’ll be saved and Jesus will solve all their problems.

 

[mcq72]

Hi MT,

Thank you for seeing the DNA part…I had to read up on it to double check myself and forgot terms like chromosomes, and zygote, and one place even called the enveloped embryo/zygote a “seed”. Saw one article that mentioned that only the female had the essential mitochondria dna necessary for life (apart from the 23 paired chromosomes)…it even went on to say that perhaps at the fall man lost the ability to “contribute” these, like a death, so that now the race continuing owes more to the woman (Sperm have mitochondria , but in tail, which is eventually lost or used up just prior to fertilization…so only the female contributes this essential dna.

One article did stem from the question of Jesus’s dna. It said it is half Mary , her ovum and mitochondria, and the “male” part specially created by the Holy Ghost(possibly with male mitochondria, as before the fall.

Either way 50/50 , or as you say 100% Mary, it is supernatural.

I thought Jesus was like fallen man, like “you and I”, that he aged and would eventually die, with no super genes or pre fall genes. His perfection was in “spirit” , as man, in thought, deed ect.

Had to look up the hebrew word for “seed” also (zera), and it can be the male sperm , and also mean "offspring’’ just as well, which would fit for “Eve”, a female.

Of course Satan only has seed spiritually speaking. Don’t see “sin” as seed , but for sure the fruit of it. People sin because they are sinners, by nature, and I would say by nature then we are born into the kingdom of darkness (original sin), and only by supernature (divine) do we become children of the Light, of the promise, by a regeneration of spirit.

 

[mcq72]

Don’t agree. As I pointed out above Jesus teaching on the Rich man and Lazarus proves the people in the OT were not saved until after Jesus preached to them in Paradise.

I think “saved” needs to be defined. Of course if saved has a past , present, and future connotation, then of course no one is saved until the Final Judgement. I have been using saved as in past and present, signifying rebirth, regeneration , born again etc… That is to say, those saints in the Paradise/Abraham’s Bosom part of hades or sheol prior to gates of heaven opening up with Calvary/Ascension were saved in the past , and present (still remaining in Paradise), awaiting future “salvation”, of being taken out of Paradise into heaven, but not future rebirth etc.

 

[MT1926]

I thought Jesus was like fallen man, like “you and I”, that he aged and would eventually die, with no super genes or pre fall genes. His perfection was in “spirit” , as man, in thought, deed ect.

Jesus was like man in every way but sin, which would include original sin and personal sin.

Of course Satan only has seed spiritually speaking. Don’t see “sin” as seed , but for sure the fruit of it.

I’m surprised you can use the word fruit here and not realize Jesus referred to our good deeds as good fruit and our bad deeds (sins) as bad fruit.

People sin because they are sinners, by nature, and I would say by nature then we are born into the kingdom of darkness (original sin), and only by supernature (divine) do we become children of the Light, of the promise, by a regeneration of spirit.

I don’t totally follow what you are saying here, but if we are all born into darkness (original sin) wouldn’t that mean by your definition we are all children of Satan?

 

[MT1926]

That is to say, those saints in the Paradise/Abraham’s Bosom part of hades or sheol prior to gates of heaven opening up with Calvary/Ascension were saved in the past , and present (still remaining in Paradise), awaiting future “salvation”, of being taken out of Paradise into heaven, but not future rebirth etc.

If they were already saved, in the past, before Jesus came and preached to them, how exactly did this occur without Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross?

I have no problems with the righteous dead awaiting their salvation, to equate this to them being born again without Jesus would mean there was no need for Jesus to die on the cross

 

[tgGodsway]

Think about it. You can’t have it both ways. If Jesus says we need to be born again to enter the kingdom of God and the claims made here is this only occurs with belief and/or repentance (depending who I am talking with) and not Baptism then you have to admit the fact that you believe no child can be born again. Making the logical conclusion that they can not enter the kingdom of God

A few thoughts here.

New birth results in baptism INTO Christ body. New Birth is a baptism. These are two distinct metaphors yet describe the same action.

“For by one Spirit we were baptized into ONE body… we were all made to drink of one Spirit.”

or

“for John baptized with WATER but YOU will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” Act. 1:5.

Again,

“I didn’t know Him, but he who sent me to baptize with WATER told me, 'The one you see the Spirit descending and resting on, He is the One who baptizes in the Holy Spirit.” John 1:33.

In the John 1:33 passage Jesus becomes the baptizer, who baptizes US into the Spirit. Notice how water is not in the equation, again.

These are cases of The Spirit’s regeneration using the term baptize.= to soak with/in the Spirit.

 

[MT1926]

A few thoughts here.

New birth results in baptism INTO Christ body. New Birth is a baptism. These are two distinct metaphors yet describe the same action.

“For by one Spirit we were baptized into ONE body… we were all made to drink of one Spirit.”

or

“for John baptized with WATER but YOU will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” Act. 1:5.

Again,

“I didn’t know Him, but he who sent me to baptize with WATER told me, 'The one you see the Spirit descending and resting on, He is the One who baptizes in the Holy Spirit.” John 1:33.

In the John 1:33 passage Jesus becomes the baptizer, who baptizes US into the Spirit. Notice how water is not in the equation, again.

These are cases of The Spirit’s regeneration using the term baptize.= to soak with/in the Spirit.

Ok. But how do any of these verses prove a child in your church, before the age of reason, is either already born again or doesn’t need to be born again to enter the kingdom of God?

 

[mcq72]

I don’t totally follow what you are saying here, but if we are all born into darkness (original sin) wouldn’t that mean by your definition we are all children of Satan?

Well I certainly was not born believing…I needed to be born again…have we not been adopted…again there is a child by “nature” and later becoming a child by "super " nature (divine)

 

[mcq72]

If they were already saved, in the past, before Jesus came and preached to them, how exactly did this occur without Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross?

I have no problems with the righteous dead awaiting their salvation, to equate this to them being born again without Jesus would mean there was no need for Jesus to die on the cross

or then why did He Incarnate if indeed there were righteous dead (implying a means of righteousness already) before Calvary (besides opening up the gates) ?

 

[guanophore]

These are cases of The Spirit’s regeneration using the term baptize.= to soak with/in the Spirit.

Baptize means to soak or dunk. The Spirit was not separated from the water since Christ joined the two. When He commanded baptism, He was referring to a baptism of water and Spirit, the trinitarian baptism practiced by the Church since that time.

 

[guanophore]

then why did He Incarnate if indeed there were righteous dead (implying a means of righteousness already) before Calvary (besides opening up the gates) ?

Of course there were righteous dead. The nature of salvation has never changed. All are saved by grace, through faith.

Dont’ you think opening the gates is pretty important to our salvation?

 

[mcq72]

Of course there were righteous dead. The nature of salvation has never changed. All are saved by grace, through faith.

Dont’ you think opening the gates is pretty important to our salvation?

Amen to your first notation. And I propose a few other things have not changed, that led to the question raised. Are the righteous born again? Is born again the same as “born of the spirit”, “born of God”, being made a child of God, being “adopted”, “justified”, “saved “, having a “new heart”, a” new man”, a"new spirit" (all biblical terms, old and new testament)…both in NT and OT?

Yes, saved by grace through faith in His promises, from those received by Adam, Noah, Abraham, David, centering around an ever more revealed Messiah, from those looking forward as in OT , and we backwards.

And yes unlike OT saints today, we look forward to an even clearer sight of our Messiah, just past the pearly gates He opened with His shed blood.

 

[tgGodsway]

. But how do any of these verses prove a child in your church, before the age of reason, is either already born again or doesn’t need to be born again to enter the kingdom of God?

Sinless people, those who do not understand what is right and wrong, including retarded people of any age, if they die have no sin against them to forbid them entrance to eternal life. As to entering the kingdom I have made no comments.

 

[guanophore]

Sinless people, those who do not understand what is right and wrong, including retarded people of any age, if they die have no sin against them to forbid them entrance to eternal life.

Such a statement, which seems to disregard the consequences of original sin, would be contrary to the teachings of the Apostles.