What event(s) opened your eyes

[Torrent v.3]

[quote author=Torrent v.3]Let me ask you directly.  And please answer directly. Please do not come back with a string of questions.

Do you believe that regeneration is or is not an act that happens in a point of time?

Yes. Multiple acts. Multiple points in time. Throughout one's life. Ergo, a process.

Are you saying that a person is born again over a period of acts?  Are you denying that at one moment a person is in the kingdom of darkness, and the next they are in the kingdom of light? Are you implying that a person, through what you call multiple acts at multiple points in time is then partially in the kingdom of light and partially in the kingdom of darkness?

I'm saying those that are saved were saved before the foundations of the world, are being saved as they walk on this earth, and will be saved at the consummation of all things.
[/quote]

Do you believe that there is a point in time when an individual experiences a change from existing in the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light?

 

[rsc2a]

Are you saying that a person is born again over a period of acts?  Are you denying that at one moment a person is in the kingdom of darkness, and the next they are in the kingdom of light? Are you implying that a person, through what you call multiple acts at multiple points in time is then partially in the kingdom of light and partially in the kingdom of darkness?

I'm saying those that are saved were saved before the foundations of the world, are being saved as they walk on this earth, and will be saved at the consummation of all things.

Do you believe that there is a point in time when an individual experiences a change from existing in the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light?

I believe what the Bible says. Those who are saved are saved before the foundations of the world, are being saved as they walk this earth, and will be saved at the consummation of all things. Those who are elect have always been elect, even if they aren't aware of it at a particular moment.

 

[Castor Muscular]

When I met several people attending Dallas Theological Seminary.  One of them handed me a cassette tape by Chuck Swindoll or was it Howard Hendricks....can't remember.  Another student referred to my IFB church as legalistic.  I denied that for years and then came to realize they were right.

Chuck Swindoll has done some excellent work on grace. 

 

[Castor Muscular]

Back to the OP...my eyes were opened reading stuff fundies like.....finally a group of tolerant, civil Christians...so unlike the judgemental, condescending fundys......breath of fresh air...in a stale, hypocritical kind of way.

Huh?  I didn't understand that at all.

Maybe one day YOUR eyes will be opened....

I might have had a better chance understanding you if you used complete sentences.  It reads like a mix of truth and sarcasm, and not being raised a fundie, I don't get it. 

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Back to the OP...my eyes were opened reading stuff fundies like.....finally a group of tolerant, civil Christians...so unlike the judgemental, condescending fundys......breath of fresh air...in a stale, hypocritical kind of way.

Huh?  I didn't understand that at all.

Maybe one day YOUR eyes will be opened....

I might have had a better chance understanding you if you used complete sentences.  It reads like a mix of truth and sarcasm, and not being raised a fundie, I don't get it.

Sorry! I'll try to translate.

Many of the critics of fundies, represented bu sfl, have the same attitude and use the same tactics as the fundies they criticize.

And, I was not raised a fundie either....I am not or ever have been a fundie in the technical sense of the word, although I don't believe they are wrong on everything they believe.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

When I met several people attending Dallas Theological Seminary.  One of them handed me a cassette tape by Chuck Swindoll or was it Howard Hendricks....can't remember.  Another student referred to my IFB church as legalistic.  I denied that for years and then came to realize they were right.

Chuck Swindoll has done some excellent work on grace.

Specifically, his excellent book, Grace Awakening.
But the fundies seem to really hate that....

 

[Izdaari]

And, I was not raised a fundie either....I am not or ever have been a fundie in the technical sense of the word, although I don't believe they are wrong on everything they believe.

No, of course they're not wrong on everything they believe. They believe the fundamentals of the Christian faith, which are correct... says the "emergent" Episcopalutheran Anglo-Catholic.  ;D

 

[Binaca Chugger]

When I met several people attending Dallas Theological Seminary.  One of them handed me a cassette tape by Chuck Swindoll or was it Howard Hendricks....can't remember.  Another student referred to my IFB church as legalistic.  I denied that for years and then came to realize they were right.

Chuck Swindoll has done some excellent work on grace.

Specifically, his excellent book, Grace Awakening.
But the fundies seem to really hate that....

yep.  sure do.  So much misuse of Scripture it reminded me of some fundy preachers.  I had to put it down.

I rather enjoyed Steve McVey's Grace Walk.

 

[Binaca Chugger]

And, I was not raised a fundie either....I am not or ever have been a fundie in the technical sense of the word, although I don't believe they are wrong on everything they believe.

No, of course they're not wrong on everything they believe. They believe the fundamentals of the Christian faith, which are correct... says the "emergent" Episcopalutheran Anglo-Catholic.  ;D

The title of your denomination cracks me up (No offense intended).  Is that your own term, or an actual thing?  I remember seeing a church whose sign read: "First Grace Pentecostal Holiness Fire Baptized Baptist Church."

 

[Izdaari]

The eunuch? He became a God-fearer, he started studying Isaiah, he requested teaching when he realized his ignorance, he asked for clarification when he didn't understand, and he was baptized...

...and that's just what we know about in Scripture. (You'll notice that this passage explicitly mentions baptism and doesn't mention confession or faith at all.  ) As far as what happened to the eunuch before or after the particular passage in question, I have no idea, but I'm sure it didn't stop there.

It doesn't explicitly say so, but my guess is he went home to Ethiopia and founded the church there.

 

[Izdaari]

And, I was not raised a fundie either....I am not or ever have been a fundie in the technical sense of the word, although I don't believe they are wrong on everything they believe.

No, of course they're not wrong on everything they believe. They believe the fundamentals of the Christian faith, which are correct... says the "emergent" Episcopalutheran Anglo-Catholic.  ;D

The title of your denomination cracks me up (No offense intended).  Is that your own term, or an actual thing?  I remember seeing a church whose sign read: "First Grace Pentecostal Holiness Fire Baptized Baptist Church."

"Emergent" and "Anglo-Catholic" are terms the church uses to describe itself. "Episcopalutheran" is my own invention, but accurate in that we have both TEC and ELCA affiliations. I'm glad it's amusing. That was my intent.

 

[Binaca Chugger]

The thief? Very little after...after all, he died a few hours later. Beforehand, I have no idea.

The eunuch? He became a God-fearer, he started studying Isaiah, he requested teaching when he realized his ignorance, he asked for clarification when he didn't understand, and he was baptized...

...and that's just what we know about in Scripture. (You'll notice that this passage explicitly mentions baptism and doesn't mention confession or faith at all. ) As far as what happened to the eunuch before or after the particular passage in question, I have no idea, but I'm sure it didn't stop there.

Here, I thought I would help you out:

Act 8:35-38  Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

 

[rsc2a]

The thief? Very little after...after all, he died a few hours later. Beforehand, I have no idea.

The eunuch? He became a God-fearer, he started studying Isaiah, he requested teaching when he realized his ignorance, he asked for clarification when he didn't understand, and he was baptized...

...and that's just what we know about in Scripture. (You'll notice that this passage explicitly mentions baptism and doesn't mention confession or faith at all. ) As far as what happened to the eunuch before or after the particular passage in question, I have no idea, but I'm sure it didn't stop there.

Here, I thought I would help you out:

Act 8:35-38  Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

And I'll repeat...

"Guess that depends on what manuscripts you're basing your translation on."

 

[Binaca Chugger]

The thief? Very little after...after all, he died a few hours later. Beforehand, I have no idea.

The eunuch? He became a God-fearer, he started studying Isaiah, he requested teaching when he realized his ignorance, he asked for clarification when he didn't understand, and he was baptized...

...and that's just what we know about in Scripture. (You'll notice that this passage explicitly mentions baptism and doesn't mention confession or faith at all. ) As far as what happened to the eunuch before or after the particular passage in question, I have no idea, but I'm sure it didn't stop there.

Here, I thought I would help you out:

Act 8:35-38  Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

And I'll repeat...

"Guess that depends on what manuscripts you're basing your translation on."

So.....  Which manuscript felt a need to eliminate a statement of belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God?

 

[rsc2a]

The thief? Very little after...after all, he died a few hours later. Beforehand, I have no idea.

The eunuch? He became a God-fearer, he started studying Isaiah, he requested teaching when he realized his ignorance, he asked for clarification when he didn't understand, and he was baptized...

...and that's just what we know about in Scripture. (You'll notice that this passage explicitly mentions baptism and doesn't mention confession or faith at all. ) As far as what happened to the eunuch before or after the particular passage in question, I have no idea, but I'm sure it didn't stop there.

Here, I thought I would help you out:

Act 8:35-38  Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

And I'll repeat...

"Guess that depends on what manuscripts you're basing your translation on."

So.....  Which manuscript felt a need to eliminate a statement of belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God?

None of them...now which ones eliminated what they felt was an erroneous verse in this particular passage? Quite a few.

 

[Binaca Chugger]

The thief? Very little after...after all, he died a few hours later. Beforehand, I have no idea.

The eunuch? He became a God-fearer, he started studying Isaiah, he requested teaching when he realized his ignorance, he asked for clarification when he didn't understand, and he was baptized...

...and that's just what we know about in Scripture. (You'll notice that this passage explicitly mentions baptism and doesn't mention confession or faith at all. ) As far as what happened to the eunuch before or after the particular passage in question, I have no idea, but I'm sure it didn't stop there.

Here, I thought I would help you out:

Act 8:35-38  Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

And I'll repeat...

"Guess that depends on what manuscripts you're basing your translation on."

So.....  Which manuscript felt a need to eliminate a statement of belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God?

None of them...now which ones eliminated what they felt was an erroneous verse in this particular passage? Quite a few.

Personally, I would choose to avoid manuscripts that felt a statement of belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God is erroneous.

 

[Castor Muscular]

yep.  sure do.  So much misuse of Scripture it reminded me of some fundy preachers.  I had to put it down.

It's been a really long time since I read it, but I don't recall misuse of scripture.  Then again, the first thing to go when you get older is memory.  And the second thing to go is memory. 

Could you cite an example or two? 

 

[Izdaari]

The thief? Very little after...after all, he died a few hours later. Beforehand, I have no idea.

The eunuch? He became a God-fearer, he started studying Isaiah, he requested teaching when he realized his ignorance, he asked for clarification when he didn't understand, and he was baptized...

...and that's just what we know about in Scripture. (You'll notice that this passage explicitly mentions baptism and doesn't mention confession or faith at all. ) As far as what happened to the eunuch before or after the particular passage in question, I have no idea, but I'm sure it didn't stop there.

Here, I thought I would help you out:

Act 8:35-38  Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

And I'll repeat...

"Guess that depends on what manuscripts you're basing your translation on."

So.....  Which manuscript felt a need to eliminate a statement of belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God?

None of them...now which ones eliminated what they felt was an erroneous verse in this particular passage? Quite a few.

Personally, I would choose to avoid manuscripts that felt a statement of belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God is erroneous.

I don't know about that. A statement can be correct, and yet not put there by the original author.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=rsc2a]None of them...now which ones eliminated what they felt was an erroneous verse in this particular passage? Quite a few.

Personally, I would choose to avoid manuscripts that felt a statement of belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God is erroneous.[/quote]

I would too. Luckily, these manuscripts state nothing of the kind.

 

[Binaca Chugger]

yep.  sure do.  So much misuse of Scripture it reminded me of some fundy preachers.  I had to put it down.

It's been a really long time since I read it, but I don't recall misuse of scripture.  Then again, the first thing to go when you get older is memory.  And the second thing to go is memory. 

Could you cite an example or two?

Just grabbed the book from my shelf and found notes I had written

on page 72 - This liberty allows crime to be pleasing to God.

on page 77 - Galatians 3 is speaking of reliance of works vs. faith for salvation.  The author is using text for salvation to teach Christian living and assuming that the law has no place in the believer's life.  BUT, the Law shows us our sin that we may find grace in Christ for victory over sin.  Hence, the Law is still needed.

on page 78 - NO - they returned to a works salvation.  This is extremely different.

This is where the bookmark was, so where I quit reading.

Don't get me wrong - I believe in living the Christian life by grace through faith.  I recently stated that to attempt to earn God's favor is to deny His unmerited favor.  I just think that Swindoll uses much of the tactic he did not approve of from his former fundy lifetstyle to promote an anti-fundy view.