A dear Jewish friend tells me I should no longer call myself “Christian.”
I was shocked and concerned that my Christian witness had been less than loving and kind to my non-believing friend until I realized what he was saying.
The RCC call themselves “Christian,” - he remembers the Crusades. Joel Osteen, Ken Copeland T.D Jakes…call themselves Christian yet teach another gospel than that found in scripture. The non-believing among us know these movers and shakers in the evangelical world and they want no part of Christianity or Christians. Mormons, JW consider themselves “Christian” yet clearly their beliefs are far from the teachings of Paul. My friend read of Senator Ted Cruz being booed “by Christians.” He watches the “Christian” world acting less than Christian and grows ever and ever more apprehensive toward Christians. My friend knows scripture, perhaps better than many professing "Christians." To say he does not trust Christians would be an understatement. My vain attempts at shedding light into his darkness seem to have gone nowhere. Quoting scripture, lengthy discussions have been ineffective in changing his mind. His mind is made up and there is nothing “I” can do.
It breaks my heart when I realize that it is those called by His Name who are the greatest hindrance to the spreading of the gospel message. For every true Bible believing Blood bought believer, for every follower of Jesus Christ there are scores that are Christian in name only.
But we are not without hope:
There are upwards of two billion professing Christians in the world, but the true church is minuscule compared to the number professing a biblical faith with little or no evidence to back up their claims. But the church does exist - Jesus promised in Matthew 16:18 “I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.”
We must keep witnessing, sharing and standing on the promises of God.
I Am A Follower Of Jesus Christ. - this will be my response as well from this point forward. Thx Lyn!!
ReplyDeleteMy only problem with the new tag of "Christ followers" is that many followed Him yet never accepted him as their Savior.
ReplyDeleteI will stand firm on the name "Christian." As I have told many people, don't blame the true faith for the acts of those who are not true Christians, nor should you blame the faith for those true Christians who sin and act out of the Christian character.
It is quite easy to explain the difference between true Christians and the cults, and I consider Romanism to be quite cultish.
Excuse me?!?!? We do indeed find that in Scripture. People followed Christ all around just for the miracles, etc. How many of the same ones turned on Him at the end? Just "following" Christ does not make one a believer.
DeleteLyn,
DeletePerhaps your grammar needs to be better. You said:
My problem with this statement -"is that many followed Him yet never accepted him as their Savior." is that it isn't found in the Bible.
My understanding of this statement is that you are saying that people following Jesus yet never accepting him "as their savior” is not something found in Scripture. The fact that people followed Jesus and yet did not accept the fact that he was the Messiah, the Son of God who could save them from their sins, is everywhere found in the Gospels. To either accept that Christ is the Savior or deny that He is the savior are the only two choices. There is no in between.
Now, many complain, as do I, that nowhere in the Bible is there such a thing as “accepting Christ in one’s heart,” but that isn’t the context of my statement. You must accept the fact that Jesus is your savior. But you don’t “accept” him “into your heart.” You accept the reality and place your faith in Christ as the one who paid for your sin. And, by the way, to accept something can also be synonymous with receiving something - another use of the word “accept.” We are told by John that “as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name.”
Lynn,
DeleteI guess your problem is you are looking at it from Calvinist glasses. You reject the plain teaching of Scripture which says we CAN accept that Christ is the Messiah or we can deny that he is the messiah. We can accept his teachings as true or we can deny them. We can accept that God provided a way of salvation or we can deny it. That choice is plainly there no matter how much you want to deny it.
Lyn,
DeleteOnly those born again, by God, will believe. This is Calvinist - the cart before the horse. The claim that God chooses who to regenerate with the Holy Spirit so they are able to believe - special election.
The Bible says the person believes and is THEN born again. Faith comes first.
You seem to be having a problem with my use of the word "accept" because you are not understanding what I am saying and you go right back to the idea of "accepting Jesus" in the vein of "accepting Jesus into your heart" nonsense. Look at what I am writing, not what you think.
Do you "accept" the Bible as the Word of God or do you "deny" that the Bible is the Word of God? This statement is analogous to saying one can either accept that Jesus is the Savior, the Messiah, the Son of God, or they can deny that he is the savior, the Messiah, the Son of God. This acceptance of a fact is possible and is demonstrated as possible throughout the Bible, and yet you argue that it isn't because you go back with your idea that I'm saying someone can "accept Christ" as in "accepting Christ into your heart" nonsense rather than just accepting the fact of his identity.
Now, the Scripture also says that a sinner can come to faith in Christ as his savior, while the Calvinist says he can't unless the Holy Spirit first regenerates him. That is a different subject and I don't want to pursue it here, but I'm trying to show you the contrast between what you are saying I am saying and what I am really saying.
We live in difficult times. His remnant WILL shine and bring glory to His Name regardless of the tag(s) attached to us.
ReplyDeleteIn total agreement about the RCC as well as JW, LDS and many others. Often hard to distinguish the wheat from the chaff, especially for a non-believer like my friend.
Lyn,
ReplyDeleteYou are still not understanding, NOT comprehending and not reading what I said. You are reading what you want to read. Again, you are having a problem with the word "accept," like someone has burned you with it. The Bible certainly points from O.T. to N.T. that people can either accept the God of the Bible as their God or reject him, that they can either accept that Christ is the Son of God or reject Him as such. That choice is possible.
Jesus told Nicodemus that he must be born again to enter the kingdom - placing one's faith in Christ as the Savior, the Messiah, is what regenerates the person to make them born again.
In Ephesians 2:8-9, it is salvation which is the gift through God's mercy because of our faith. Our faith is not the gift. Faith is not works or else Paul would not have contrasted the two so often.
You are indeed preaching Calvinism. But it has nothing to do with my statement that people can either accept that Christ is who he claims to be or they can reject that.
As for the rest of your Calvinistic interpretation of the Bible, my response is here: http://watchmansbagpipes.blogspot.com/2013/02/i-am-not-calvinist.html
I demonstrate from Scripture that people, i.e., sinners, can indeed make the choice to choose for Christ or not. God didn't make pre-programmed robots. I'm finished with this conversation; it is not going anywhere.
Lyn,
ReplyDelete"Doctrines of Grace" is Calvinist. Actually they came from Augustine. You are parroting Calvinism whether you know it or not.
My article gives you all the passages you requested. If you won't look at it, then don't accuse me of not providing the passages.
Spoken like a true Calvinist/Augustinian. Make the scriptures say what you want rather than what they say. It was indeed first Augustine who taught this way, and Calvin just parroted it. Welcome to Reformed theology. I'll stick to Bible theology, thank you.
DeleteLyn,
ReplyDeleteI made my argument from Scripture in my article, demonstrating that your "doctrines of grace" (a name made up by the Calvinists) are not what the Bible says. Your whole argument is virtually word-for-word the same as every Calvinist I have encountered. It isn't "name-calling" to identify your specific doctrinal stance. There is no way you can come to the conclusions, with the specific argument you make, without having studied Calvinist material. You won't find it in Scripture, nor will you find it in the writings of the Ante-Nicene fathers who were around prior to Augustine. Augustine is the origin of your particular theological view, which makes man incapable of any moral choices, incapable of deciding to choose to follow Christ or not. You don't have to read Calvin to study "Reformed" theology. You demonstrated by your argument that you have indeed studied/read Calvinist teachers. Free will choices is the difference between being a human or being a robot. God didn't make robots. If you want to believe so, more power to you. I will stick to what the Bible says.
Ali,
ReplyDeleteIt is sad, but your Jewish friend is more right than most would care to consider. Christendom has become a huge gray blob that includes all comers. Confusion rules the day in nearly all churches and especially their pulpits. The good thing is that God is not confused, He knows whom He has chosen and will keep them-no matter what. Today's fantasy theology includes the nonsense exhibited on this thread by Mr. Chatfield. Somehow the will of man has escaped the ravages and death of the fall and is said to be left intact, viable, and able to determine one's own fate. This teaching is put forth by those who, in willful rebellion, have chosen to ignore the command of God to repent (because that is all an unregenerate will can do-rebel); ignore the clear teaching of the Scriptures; all the while not realizing that their own words will used against them in the judgment pronounced on them. It is popular to preach this free-will fantasy doctrine because it gives man the illusion of having the upper hand over God Himself. It leads to further nonsense that Christ died for all men, everywhere, of all time. If that be the case then His "plan of salvation" is a miserable failure. It eventually ends up that all of humanity is forever in heaven after all is said and done. Wow! Not only have these deluded ones redacted all of the Scriptures that don't fir their fantasies, but they have rewritten the rest of the Bible to their liking. Shame on you, Glenn E. Chatfield, you are supposed to know better. Today is a good day to repent. Has your stoney heart been replaced with one of flesh or will you continue to be in open rebellion against the One whom you claim to love and serve?
Darrel,
ReplyDeleteSo the will of man is totally depraved? I wonder why so many Bible verses demand that mankind make a free will choice about God and Christ, that man must seek God, etc
Does man have the ability to make free-will moral choices for God? The Bible makes it plain that man does indeed have this ability:
Josh. 24:15: Choose to serve God or not to serve God
2 Chron. 15:2 – “If you seek him…but if you forsake him” indicates choice
Ezra 8:22 – “everyone who looks to him” vs “all who forsake him” indicates choice
Ps. 10:4 – “does not” indicates choice not to seek God.
Ps. 86:5 – one chooses whether to call on God
Jeremiah 29:13 – choice of seeking God
Mark 16:16 – “whoever believes” and “whoever will not believe” indicates choice between the two
Luke 8:12 - The devil must prevent them from believing
John 1:12 – choice to receive or not
John 3:16-18 – “whoever believes” vs “whoever does not believe” indicates choice
John 3:36 – “whoever believes” vs “whoever rejects” indicates choice
John 5:24 – “whoever…believes” is a choice
John 5:40 – “you refuse to come to me”; refusal is a choice
John 20:31 – “by believing” indicates choice
Acts 16:31 – “Believe…” is choice
Acts 17:30 – choice of repenting
Rom. 1:16 – “to everyone who believes” makes it a matter of choice
1 Cor. 15:1-2 – the Gospel was received and taken a stand for, i.e. choice
2 Cor. 4:4 – Unbelievers must be blinded so they can’t choose
1 Tim. 1:16 – “those who would believe” vs those who wouldn’t is choice
Heb. 11:6 – must believe God exists, which means he must have the ability to believe or not
1 Pet. 3:1 – the husband has a choice to become a believer
Rev. 22:17 – “whoever wishes” indicates choice
Can man seek God on his own? The Bible says he can:
Deut. 4:29 - "But if from thence thou shalt seek the LORD thy God, thou shalt find him,
if thou seek him with all thy heart and with all thy soul."
1 Chron. 16:11 – “seek his face”
1 Chron. 28:9 - “If you seek Him, He will be found by you”
2 Chron. 15:2 – “If you seek him…” Many more in 2 Chron.
Ps. 9:10 – “those who seek you”
Ps. 22:26 – “they who seek the Lord”
Ps. 34:10 – “those who seek the Lord”
Ps. 40:16 – “all who seek you”
Ps. 69:6 – “may those who seek you”
Ps. 119:10 – “I seek you with all my heart”
Is. 55:6 - “Seek the Lord while He may be found”
Jer. 29:13 - "And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me
with all your heart."
Hos. 10:12 – “it is time to seek the Lord”
Zeph. 2:3 - “Seek the Lord”
Acts 17:27 - “so that they should seek the Lord”
2 Cor. 3:12-18 - “Whoever turns to the Lord”
Heb. 11:6 - “He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him”
Shame on you Darrel, and your ilk, who make God out to be a puppet-master or robot builder.
No Lyn,
ReplyDeleteThey are all in context. It is YOUR theology which takes them out of context. Man is only regenerated by the Holy Spirit who comes to reside in Him the moment he places his faith in Christ as the Savior. That is what the Bible says. Not one iota of my citations are out of context. You and those who practice the Augustinian theology have to re-interpet all of them.
If Christ says that the one who hears and believes shall have everlasting life, that implies first that one has to choose to listen. THAT IS A CHOICE! And I never even intimated that I thought English was the original language - how DARE you make such a suggestion, which borders on false witness.
I don't follow Finney, not even close to his teachings. I follow just what the Bible says. My theology was formed strictly from Scripture before I ever heard of Reformed theology, Calvin, Arminius, et al. Funny how when I later studied the ante-nicene fathers that they seemed to agree with me, and not with the Johnny-come-lately theologies such as Augustine, Calvin, Luther, et al.
I have been studying the Word of God for over 40 years, and have studies hundreds of top-notch scholars - including hordes of Calvinists - so I am very familiar with all the various view points. I have interlinear Bibles with the original languages and study the with Bible dictionaries, and lexicons and a whole ton of commentaries. I have over 1000 volumes in my personal library of theological and apologetic studies and have read every one of them. Don't treat me like an idiot.
Now, this is the last comment from me on this topic. You have taken this string way off the topic of the article. You can continue all you want but I am unsubscribing from the comment string.
Have a nice day.
Darn, I didn't get to the unsubscribe and this popped into my inbox, and it irritated me enough to respond.
ReplyDeleteThe word "Trinity" isn't in the Bible either, but we use it. Choice is implied every time you are told to do this or that - that means a choice. And all those passages which I posted gives a person a choice between two things. And, by the way, just a quick scan shows that the very 1st verse I gave uses the word "choose." "Choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve." And the choice is between God or false gods/idols. Every command given to us entails a moral choice between what God says and what man says. And yet you say we have no ability to choose to follow God. So I guess God lies when he tells us to do so while at the same time withholding the ability to do so. Nice trickery with your God.
And just how did I treat you wrongly - by labeling you a Calvinist because you spew the Augustinian/Calvinist teaching?
And I wasn't "bragging" - my point was to refute your treatment of me as if I'm an ignorant idiot. I was demonstrating that I am far from being ignorant of the subject. But rather than actually understand the point I was making you immediately jumped to the conclusion I that I was bragging.
You've NEVER proven anything I've said to be wrong - you merely assert that the meanings you apply to the passages are the correct ones, and yet that meaning has been rebutted by many, many scholars who have debated Calvinists long before you or I were born.
2 Thes 2:13 says that God chose us - i.e. Christians - from the beginning. God chose the way of salvation and gave the condition of such salvation - i.e. faith in Christ - and in his foreknowledge (Rom. 8:29; 1 Pet. 1:2) as to who would choose to follow His conditions, he chose them to be saved.
I am indeed teachable, but I refuse to accept a God who is so fickle as to be a puppeteer who gives no choices - and if you can't choose then you can't love unless God forces you to love Him. And that isn't love. Then he withholds the ability to choose for Him and yet holds you responsible for not choosing Him. What kind of love is this?!?!
No, God didn't teach us this. Augustine taught it and Calvin regurgitated it. And with that theology, if you have no choice as to whether to accept or reject God, how do you know you are saved? You might just think you are but God didn't elect you so it doesn't matter how you believe. THAT is where your theology takes you.
You blaspheme God by making Him into a fickle ogre playing with his puppets.
Now we've both had our say. How about leaving this comment string to the topic of the article before you attacked my statement about people accepting Christ as their savior rather than as a mere prophet.
The whole point of this thread is to delineate between the real and the fake "Christian". It does not seem to matter to you, Glenn, how a person arrives there, just so long as he makes some sort of statement claiming salvation. Well, the pope makes that claim, so does Glen Beck, Rick Warren, Billy Graham, etc., can we assume you do also? The proof, however, is in the pudding. But your pudding is rancid, not fit for human consumption, you would rather hold the hand of your friends Arminius and Pelagius than the hand of the One you claim to love and serve. Scripture is not complicated, but your fantasies are. Since you are above responding to questions, I'll not try it again, but simply state how desperately wrong all of your thoughts are in relation to the Word of God. John 1:12 & 13 how simply, plain and straight forward does it need to be for you to understand just how wrong you are. "You did not choose Me, but I chose you..." is that too complicated for you? This whole exercise is nothing more than one big parable to you, a conundrum, a riddle, impossible to reconcile your "version" with the Word. Would you later tell us that the reason why a lost man can choose God is because there is still a spark of God within him and if he wants to find God he can? (oops, another pesky question you can't/won't answer). If you did you would be parroting Alice Baily, now there's a "go-to gal" for Biblical advise. By the way, you sound exactly like Finney. One more pesky question, if you really believed all that you have said here then how can you ever sleep again? You have the message of salvation and the power of persuasion at your finger tips and the fate of billions of souls lies in you action or lack thereof, so what will you do? Preach and persuade men to choose Christ, or defend your untenable, unbiblical nonsense that you have unleashed here? There must be thousands of people in your own home town who have not heard the Gospel from your lips, WHY? If you don't want people to talk to you like you are an "ignorant idiot" then don't talk like one. You have proven nothing but your ignorance of the Scriptures, will you prove the 'idiot' part also by continuing in rebellion?
ReplyDelete