Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

The Little Word “If” Proves Salvation Is Conditional

June 23, 2017

The word “if” means – “on condition that … a condition, requirement, or stipulation” (Random House College Dictionary)

Illustrations:

Bobby, if you eat your carrots, Mommy will let you have some ice cream.

If you finish your homework, you may go out and play.

If you take this medicine, it should make you feel better.

Now notice some verses that use the word “if” to show our salvation is conditional:

Matt 6:14-15 if ye forgive men their trespasses, your … Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

I John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

I John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

Rom 10:9 if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

I Cor 15:1-2 … the gospel … By which also ye are saved if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you

II Peter 1:10 … for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall

Conclusion: Salvation/Election is “if” (conditional)

hear Bible Crossfire every Sunday night at 8:05 central on SiriusXM radio Family Talk 131

non-subscribers can listen live at www.BibleDebates.info

II Cor 5:21a – For He Hath Made Him To Be Sin For Us

June 16, 2017

II Corinthians 5:21a (“For he hath made him to be sin for us”) is saying the same thing as Isaiah 53:6c. God “made him to be sin for us” is the same as God “hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.”

Suppose a Mob boss ordered a small potatoes underling to take the rap for a crime some more important mobsters did. The mobsters let off the hook could accurately say – “For the Boss hath made him to be dirty for us.” Wouldn’t that mean the low man on the totem-pole substituted for the big wigs, he took their penalty for them?

In a similar way, Jesus was “made … to be sin” means he was literally treated like a sinner by God:

· not in the sense that Jesus sinned or was made guilty of sin – not in any shape, form, or fashion – He was the most innocent lamb that ever lived

· we see this in Isaiah 53:5 – Jesus took our chastisement so we could have peace with God

· I like the way David Lipscomb put it on page 81 of his Gospel Advocate commentary on II Corinthians – “God had made Jesus who committed no sin to suffer as though he had sinned.”

Jesus made to be sin for us = took our sins in our place = Substitute

Where Were People Being Baptized Ever Told To Get Out Of Their Unscriptural Marriage?

June 9, 2017

Several times in debate I have been asked where the Bible ever tells those being baptized to get out of an unscriptural marriage? My response (in part) has gone something like this …

· Where were homosexuals ever told specifically to get out of that relationship when they were baptized (Rom 1:26-27)? Does that mean God allows them to continue to be a practicing homosexual even after they become a Christian?

· Where were thieves ever told specifically to quit stealing when they were baptized (Eph 4:28)?

· Where were polygamists ever told specifically to get out of their extra marriages when they were baptized (I Cor 7:2)?

It’s all right there in the important command to “repent” in Acts 2:38. When a person repents before he is baptized to become a Christian, he will quit being a homosexual, thief, polygamist, … and adulterer (Matt 19:9) – as the case may be.

I Cor 6:9-11 does show people got out of adulterous marriages when they were converted – “adulterers … and such were (past tense) some of you” – meaning they had quit being an adulterer when they obeyed the gospel. And Mark 6:17-18 shows in principle it is unlawful to stay in an unscriptural marriage. Read it in your Bible.

Salvation Passages – Taking Them From Where They Are

June 3, 2017

In answer to the question, “How do you get to Atlanta from here?,” someone from Birmingham would answer differently from his house than I would from my house in north Alabama. The question is correctly answered based upon where you are.

It sometimes happens this way in the Bible when a person is told what to do to be saved:

· In Acts 16:31, unbelievers were told to “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ” to be saved. (they were baptized 2 verses later)

· In Acts 2:38, believers were told to “repent, and be baptized” for the remission of sins.

· In Acts 22:16, a penitent believer was told to “be baptized” to get his sins washed away.

What should we conclude? That all conditions stated as necessary by God for salvation should be obeyed. They don’t all have to be in one verse.

We Ought To Say ‘If The Lord Will’

May 26, 2017

Instead of just assuming certain things will happen in the future, James 4:15 instructs that we “ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that.” Notice this verse is talking about an “ought” (requirement), not just a suggestion. And the text says we ought to say, not just that we ought to think. There’s a difference you know.

Paul made a practice of doing this very thing – actually saying “if the Lord will” (Acts 18:21, I Cor 4:19, I Cor 16:7, Heb 6:3). We should follow those approved examples, shouldn’t we (Phil 4:9)? There’s more than just one New Testament approved example you know.

When the Oneness Pentecostals incorrectly insist in debate that we must orally pronounce a “baptismal formula” over the baptismal candidate that includes the word “Jesus” (so that “Father, Son, and Holy Ghost” is considered unscriptural), we respond that if they can find even one verse that tells us what the baptizer “said,” we will say and bind that. Aren’t we being disingenuous if we don’t follow through on that claim with James 4:15?

I think this would be like when our parents told us to say “You’re welcome” whenever someone said “Thank you” – they meant for it to be voiced, not just thought.  If God says we “ought to say” something, why don’t we teach we ought to say it?

If We Deny God, He Will Deny Us

May 19, 2017

II Timothy 2:12b says about God “if we deny Him, he also will deny us.” This verse absolutely and conclusively refutes the Once Saved Always Saved doctrine. A little grammar tells us that “we” and “us” include the writer and his audience. The “we” and “us” in this verse then most definitely includes Christians as Paul the apostle is the writer (II Tim 1:1) and Timothy the preacher (II Tim 1:2,4:2) is the one being written to. God will deny Christians (will not save them) if they deny Him.

Some might retort that a true Christian would never deny God, but why would Paul warn Christians against denying God if that were impossible?  Many scriptures show it is possible for a Christian to change his mind. Let’s take as one example Hebrews 3:1a,12 which reads “Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling …Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.” So it is very possible for a brother in Christ, one who has partaken of the heavenly calling (a true Christian), to change to become an unbeliever and depart from God.

Is short, it is possible for a Christian to deny God, and if he does, God will deny him. He forfeits his salvation (Matt 10:32-33). The Old Testament teaches the same in II Chron 15:2 – “If You Forsake Him, He Will Forsake You.”

If Mark 11:24 Doesn’t Mean “Faith Only” Then Why Would John 3:16?

May 11, 2017

Jesus said in Mark 11:24 “What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them.” Even though the only condition stated in the verse for receiving what you pray for is “believe” that your will receive them, nobody thinks that is the only condition for such.

We all know other passages state other conditions for our prayers being answered, for example:

· I Pet 3:12 “For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers: but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil.”

· James 4:3 “Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.”

· I John 5:14 “And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us:”

So if everybody can see Mark 11:24 doesn’t mean “believe only,” then everybody ought to also be able to see that passages like John 3:16 don’t mean “believe only.” Both Mark 11:24 and John 3:16 state a required condition (believe) for the benefit under consideration, but do not state all the required conditions. They are exactly the same in the respect we are talking about. We must take all the Bible says on both prayer and salvation to get a complete picture.

Matt 27:46 Means The Obvious – Jesus Was Forsaken

May 5, 2017

Jesus said in Matthew 27:46 “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” You would think from that statement it would be pretty easy to understand that the Father forsook Jesus on the cross. But as an affront to the critical “take the plain meaning of the Bible when possible” rule (Eph 3:4), some Christians deny such. They say Jesus didn’t really mean what He appeared to be saying, but was only calling attention to Psalms 22 for the benefit of those at the foot of the cross. But that clearly won’t work because Jesus didn’t even bother to make himself clear enough to keep that “audience” from mistakenly thinking He was calling for Elias (verse 47). If He was only trying to make a point to those below, Jesus miserably failed at what He was intending to accomplish. No way Jose.

How could one deny the Father forsook Jesus when Jesus is plainly asking the Father why He did just that? I count 31 times in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John where Jesus asked why someone did something, and every single time, in all 31 cases, that someone had actually done what Jesus was asking why about. I am confident that stat doesn’t surprise you in the least – because we all inherently know …

If Jack asks a friend John “why did you forsake me?” – that means one of three things:

· Jack is lying

· Jack is mistaken

· Jack was forsaken

Which was it for Jesus?

Caiaphas’ Prophecy – Jesus Should Die Instead Of The Jews

April 28, 2017

John 11:50-52 reads “… Caiaphas … said … consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.”

Caiaphas was advising that Jesus should die for the Jewish nation. Not just for their benefit, but instead of them. He was thinking that if Jesus caused too much of an uproar, the Romans would come down hard on the occupied nation and there would be much Jewish bloodshed. Caiaphas reasoned it is better that one man die instead of the nation as a whole perish. As Bob Myhan said in his article on “Penal Substitution” (2-24-14) – “…Caiaphas wanted Jesus to die instead of or in place of Israel ….”

Now Caiaphas meant Jesus should die for the physical salvation of the Jews, but “this spake he not of himself” – God was prophesying through him to mean the Jews’ spiritual salvation. So putting 2 and 2 together, Jesus was to die instead of, in the place of the Jewish nation (and the Gentiles, verse 52) – for their spiritual salvation.

See the proof of the Substitutionary death of Christ?

Gen 22 – Type And Antitype – Offering Isaac

April 21, 2017

In Genesis 22:8 Abraham said to Isaac “My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering.” Isn’t that such an amazingly wonderful statement because it also describes how God himself would eventually provide the ultimate / effectual sacrifice for us? I like how Louis Berkhof put it: “God might have demanded a personal atonement of the sinner, but the latter would not have been able to render it.”

Verse 13 says Abraham “offered him (the ram) up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.” Doesn’t “in the stead of” mean “in place of” or “substituting for”? My friend and brother Maurice Barnett agreed in Gospel Truths (June 2012) – “Certainly, the ram was killed on the altar in the place of Isaac because the text says so.” Believers have always taught correctly that this story of Abraham and Isaac is a type pointing to Jesus’ sacrifice (John 1:29, Isaiah 53:5-7, I Pet 1:18-19, Rev 14:4, etc.). Surely we’re not going to backtrack now?

Conclusion: The ram dying in the place of Isaac is a type of Christ – therefore Christ died in place of us. See the proof?