Phil Robertson's testimony (Duck Dynasty)

[4everfsu]

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1621986699001?bckey=AQ~~%2CAAABCkUiSsE~%2CKvzYjcKbAcvXNRoK08QmmGXh981yXxF2&bclid=2212959832001&bctid=2219203804001]http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1621986699001?bckey=AQ~~%2CAAABCkUiSsE~%2CKvzYjcKbAcvXNRoK08QmmGXh981yXxF2&bclid=2212959832001&bctid=2219203804001[/url]]http://link.brightcove.com/services/player

Sorry looks like I cannot add the videos and have them play here. So copy and paste the first http

link.brightcove.com

 

[Sherryh]

I don't watch alot of TV .........but this program has me laughing my head off(southern term).........I love the 2 older men who are way tooo funny. When I'm watching it my husband always says are you watching the duck people LOL!

4ever you're the best!!

 

[ALAYMAN]

I thoroughly enjoy their wholesome breath of fresh air Duck Dynasty.  The snippet of his salvation seems compelling.  But at the end of the day, he preaches ANOTHER GOSPEL.  The church of Christ folk hinge salvation on those baptismal waters.  It's soul-damning doctrine brought to us in the most recent evolution by Alexander Campbell (a former Baptist).  I wish I could endorse his message, but cannot wish godspeed to that which is a lie which places he efficacious work of salvation in the hands of sinful man.

 

[ALAYMAN]

my dads wife can;t stand it when he watches that... . coz it brings out the old southerner in him and he starts talking the same way they do... ... .we all think it;s funny but she;s like... "stop it!.. you sound like a redneck!.. "...  .. .. it was the same way with that other tv show king of the hill.. .. . but on the bright side dad could always interpret boomhauer for us and tell us what he said...  ...  then other times he told us it;s better we don;t know..  ??? ...

lol, ALAYboy has commenced to regularly saying "happy, happy, happy". 


There's far worse lingo on TV that he could start parroting. 

 

[ChuckBob]

I thoroughly enjoy their wholesome breath of fresh air Duck Dynasty.  The snippet of his salvation seems compelling.  But at the end of the day, he preaches ANOTHER GOSPEL.  The church of Christ folk hinge salvation on those baptismal waters.  It's soul-damning doctrine brought to us in the most recent evolution by Alexander Campbell (a former Baptist).  I wish I could endorse his message, but cannot wish godspeed to that which is a lie which places he efficacious work of salvation in the hands of sinful man.

Being from and in middle TN you can't sling a dead cat without hitting a Church of Christ member upside the head. They take a strict literal interpretation of the Bible and ger their requirements for baptism from the following:

John 3:5  Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


I'm just curious how you deal with their take on those verses.


ChuckBob

 

[ALAYMAN]

John 3:5  Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


I'm just curious how you deal with their take on those verses.


ChuckBob

The John passage baptism is referring to the spiritual element that water often represents. 

The Acts passage hinges on the preposition "for" <the remission of sins.  For can mean "in order to" or it can mean "because of ".  The Church of Christ folk see the former meaning, that baptism is in order to receive remission of sins, but a simple understanding that we ought to be baptized out of obedience and gratitude because our sins have been remitted (paid for) by Christ on the cross, which we receive in the atonement via faith at the moment we become born again.

Like I say, I think the show is a welcome change from most trash on TV, but I don't want people thinking that Phil's testimony indicates he believes in salvation by faith alone, because he doesn't.  Many people sound like Christians on first glance, but upon closer inspection, their faith is in Christ plus something else.

 

[Just John]

Many people sound like Christians on first glance, but upon closer inspection, their faith is in Christ plus something else.

Would you say this guy isn't a Christian based on that alone?  I mean, some people think you have to say the magic words to "come into my heart" which could be considered "works" and isn't any more of a biblical "step" of salvation than baptism is. That's where I think "God looks on the heart". I think many of you have screwed up theology but God might let you in anyway. I'll at least put a good word in for some of you.

 

[ALAYMAN]

Would you say this guy isn't a Christian based on that alone?

You'll be glad I don't get the final say on who gets in and who don't. 


Seriously, I'm sure that there are many people from all walks of religious life (in "Christendom") that have screwed-up theology but are nonetheless trusting Christ.  Intellectual info alone is not the basis for salvation.  Having said that, *if* Phil is trusting his obedience to the ordinance of baptism to save him, then ultimately he's not trusting in Christ alone.  Jesus gets to decide that, not me. 

 

[Just John]

Would you say this guy isn't a Christian based on that alone?

You'll be glad I don't get the final say on who gets in and who don't. 


Seriously, I'm sure that there are many people from all walks of religious life (in "Christendom") that have screwed-up theology but are nonetheless trusting Christ.  Intellectual info alone is not the basis for salvation.  Having said that, *if* Phil is trusting his obedience to the ordinance of baptism to save him, then ultimately he's not trusting in Christ alone.  Jesus gets to decide that, not me.

I think a lot of us have a works-oriented salvation, it just varies on the amount and type of works. And no, not just the work of Christ. I'm often guilty. You can take the kid out of the fundy but it's hard to take the fundy out of the kid.  :-\

 

[ALAYMAN]

I think a lot of us have a works-oriented salvation, it just varies on the amount and type of works. And no, not just the work of Christ. I'm often guilty. You can take the kid out of the fundy but it's hard to take the fundy out of the kid.  :-\

When I first trusted Christ I essentially believed an unorthodox (even heretical) view of the Trinity.  I thought Christ was a created being (ala Mormonism, Jehovahs Witness, etc), but it was in ignorance of what Scripture taught.  When confronted with the truth of the word, I repented of that idolatry and agreed with Scripture.  I see baptismal regeneration in that same light.  I have no issue with a new convert holding to such errors (assuming they are regenerate), but Phil is not a novice by any stretch.  He's a CoC teaching/preaching elder.  He is propagating "another gospel" for sure.  That sort of heresy is to be named and rejected.

 

[4everfsu]

Jase's testimony

http://www.godtube.com/watch/?v=0F9BJCNU&fb_action_ids=10151344158483176&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map={%2210151344158483176%22%3A588223914538805}&action_type_map={%2210151344158483176%22%3A%22og.likes%22}&action_ref_map=[]

 

[Sherryh]

Amen!!

Good interview about children...

 

[4everfsu]

Per Phil's testimony if he believed that Christ was who he said he was, and who did what he did for him, paid for his sins, rose and conquered death, then to me he is born again. Now if wants to add something to it afterward I could care less. It is like which came first the chicken or the egg.

 

[graceandtruth]

Per Phil's testimony if he believed that Christ was who he said he was, and who did what he did for him, paid for his sins, rose and conquered death, then to me he is born again. Now if wants to add something to it afterward I could care less. It is like which came first the chicken or the egg.

Galatians argues that adding anything to the gospel creates another gospel which is not a gospel.

 

[rsc2a]

Per Phil's testimony if he believed that Christ was who he said he was, and who did what he did for him, paid for his sins, rose and conquered death, then to me he is born again. Now if wants to add something to it afterward I could care less. It is like which came first the chicken or the egg.

Galatians argues that adding anything to the gospel creates another gospel which is not a gospel.

Galatians also argues that one can believe this stuff and still be a part of the Church.

 

[Sherryh]

Per Phil's testimony if he believed that Christ was who he said he was, and who did what he did for him, paid for his sins, rose and conquered death, then to me he is born again. Now if wants to add something to it afterward I could care less. It is like which came first the chicken or the egg.

I'm not going to get into what someone believes if they have trusted Christ that's it for me.........4ever you said it best!!

 

[graceandtruth]

Per Phil's testimony if he believed that Christ was who he said he was, and who did what he did for him, paid for his sins, rose and conquered death, then to me he is born again. Now if wants to add something to it afterward I could care less. It is like which came first the chicken or the egg.

Galatians argues that adding anything to the gospel creates another gospel which is not a gospel.

Galatians also argues that one can believe this stuff and still be a part of the Church.

What part of Galatians prompts you to arrive at that conclusion?  The usage of terms like "in vain", "accursed", "cursed", "fallen from grace", etc. that appear throughout Galatians describing those who have believed "this stuff" seems to indicate differently.  I realize EVERYONE believes some wacky things when they come to faith in Christ but with growth and maturity these are lessened.

 

[ALAYMAN]

I'm not going to get into what someone believes if they have trusted Christ that's it for me.........4ever you said it best!!

The video interview is conducted at Oklahoma Christian University, a Church of Christ affiliate.  Per their own teachings, baptism is essential to salvation.  That is another gospel.  Galatians speaks in no uncertain terms about those that would add to the grace in Christ.  Further, in the video, he acknowledges, as Phil and Willie did in their "testimonies", that they baptize people into Christ (by water). 

Is it the gospel of Christ that speaks of people coming to faith in him via water baptism?

Plain and simple, that's heresy, and those who preach it are said to be "accursed" (condemned).

 

[rsc2a]

Per Phil's testimony if he believed that Christ was who he said he was, and who did what he did for him, paid for his sins, rose and conquered death, then to me he is born again. Now if wants to add something to it afterward I could care less. It is like which came first the chicken or the egg.

Galatians argues that adding anything to the gospel creates another gospel which is not a gospel.

Galatians also argues that one can believe this stuff and still be a part of the Church.

What part of Galatians prompts you to arrive at that conclusion?  The usage of terms like "in vain", "accursed", "cursed", "fallen from grace", etc. that appear throughout Galatians describing those who have believed "this stuff" seems to indicate differently.  I realize EVERYONE believes some wacky things when they come to faith in Christ but with growth and maturity these are lessened.

Paul, an apostle

 

[graceandtruth]

Per Phil's testimony if he believed that Christ was who he said he was, and who did what he did for him, paid for his sins, rose and conquered death, then to me he is born again. Now if wants to add something to it afterward I could care less. It is like which came first the chicken or the egg.

Galatians argues that adding anything to the gospel creates another gospel which is not a gospel.

Galatians also argues that one can believe this stuff and still be a part of the Church.

What part of Galatians prompts you to arrive at that conclusion?  The usage of terms like "in vain", "accursed", "cursed", "fallen from grace", etc. that appear throughout Galatians describing those who have believed "this stuff" seems to indicate differently.  I realize EVERYONE believes some wacky things when they come to faith in Christ but with growth and maturity these are lessened.

Paul, an apostle