Homosexuality Or Legalism--Which Is Worse?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by tv1a

You may have missed an earlier point when I stated legalists consistently change principles to fit their dogma. See how they compare with leglists today. Not much difference. And the homosexual operates the same way the pharisees did but with a lot less religion. Even that may be debatable.

You're just ignoring my points lol. All you have done is post "examples" that anyone can do, things that are NOT exclusive to legalists nor fit the definition found in the dictionary. It really seems more like an attack on your part than anything else.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

... As we sit at this point we have a hodge podge of beliefs within Pentecost concerning eschatology. I have met a great deal of ministers who claim what is termed "Pan-Trib", which is a belief that as time goes on everything will "pan-out" and so they will get a better view of their ever evolving eschatology.
I myself felt that "pan-tribs" really didn't care much about eschatology and never really bothered trying to explain it, hence their title of "Pan-Trib".

I can't tell with you in this forum, but you do understand that "pan-trib" is a joke, right? The guys who say that are just making a joke.

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Still you may want to take a shot at Matthew 16, I think you will see a clear view that your 1000 year spaced out between resurrections both have "works" that both groups MUST be judge for. So whether you are Dispensationalist or non-Dispensationalist futurist you still have both groups having to be judged by works. Calvinism was formulated due to a pendulum swing far off from the Roman Catholic Church; I said that because Calvinism predestination and eternal security of the soul is an extreme from the works based salvation of the Roman Catholics. The truth lies between with balance.

Many Evangelicals would say that Calvin was returning the church to Augustine's teaching on the matter, though Calvin was much more severe than Augustine.

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Wayward? What would wayward mean?
The all are all those who are concerned in avoiding the second death. You mentioned the term wayward, and I would like to deal with that. If they were wayward, what would they have to do to get back in proper standing? They would have to do works of repentance.

This is where we seem to be sliding past each other: "Works of repentence" are not generally considered "works" as in a "legalist doing works to earn salvation." The word doesn't have a concrete theological definition. It's simply a common verb. So when an anti-legalist condemns "works" he's not referring (or should not be referring) to things like repentence, baptism and etc.

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

What Apostolic Pentecostal Bible study were you smoking? Where is that taught? Already judged at Calvary? Search for Truth? Into HIS Marvelous light? My Father's House?

Yes, yes and yes. That is the majority view of Apostolics. Again, I mistakenly believed that you also held that view; that's why I pointed it out. Now that I understand your Preterism and other aspects of where you are coming from I see what you're saying in a different light.

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Then why is Paul telling the churches that they were not judged yet?

"Judge" and "judgment" are words, like "work" and "works" which do not have the same set technical definition throughout the NT. In this case, they definately do not point exclusively to some future "judgment." Many in the Corinthian church had been "judged" and Paul exhorted them to "judge themselves." If they were successful in this judgment (in this life) then they avoided the condemnation later. 1 Corinthians 11:30-32.

In the original language of the NT, the "Bema" judgment terminology is never used outside of its application to the church, ie: "sinners" are never said to appear before the Bema of Christ. From you statements about the Greek culture, you are probably aware that the "Bema" is not really a "seat" but rather more of a platform or raised dias. In Greek churches today, the raised area where the altar is placed is called the Bema.

Instead of fear and trepidation one might expect before facing judgment, we are told that we shall have "boldness" in the last day of judgment. This is because: "because as He is, so are we in this world" (1 John 4:17). How is "He?" ... He is spotless.

Rev 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
Rev 19:12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. Rev 19:13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
Rev 19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

How do we get to be like that? Back up a couple of verses:

Rev 19:7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.
Rev 19:8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.

How did we become righteous?

1Pe 2:24 Who his own self (Jesus) bare our sins in his own body on the tree (the cross at Calvary), that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.

- - - -

The rest of your post is rather negative in tone. I'm not saying that to find fault with you. I too can be quite negative in tone as well, but it's the end of the month and my work places extra demand upon me. I have to move on for a couple of days.

As I said in a previous post in this thread, I wanted to back out of this particular thread because of the unfortunate title it bears and the offense that has caused with others. I appreciate your posts and admire your enthusiasm. I am especially glad that I understand a bit more clearly where you are coming from and I apologize that my own presumptions caused me to fail to communicate more clearly earlier on. Let's do this again, but under a different lable.

God bless.

[tv1a]

Maybe its you don't accept my answers. I did one better and referred to the Bible and gave New Testament Examples. What is the reason you defend a spirit that is obvious contrary to scripture.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

You're just ignoring my points lol. All you have done is post "examples" that anyone can do, things that are NOT exclusive to legalists nor fit the definition found in the dictionary. It really seems more like an attack on your part than anything else.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

The Bible clearly teaches that there are "works of darkness", "works of the flesh", "wicked works", etc. that have their roots in the devil himself. 1John 3:8 says, "For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil."

To destroy the works of the devil that we were involed in during our lives priorly. Now here's the rub. While you will do the Calvanist two step, and claim some loyalty to man having free will, you spin around on your heels and say that of your own power you can be lost. The Calvanist would throw a choke hold on you and say how can you lose the free unmerited gift when you never earned it in the first place, and if you never earned it how can you forfiet it.

You see Brother Curtis, what I have found that is strangly apparent is that their is a group of Baptecostals who are all over the world, in the great endevour to be a nicer and friendly and more mainstream they have adopted Calvanistic soteriology, while it may not be pure Calvanism it still has the same confess and be saved.

Now while they still stand staunch on the platform of water baptism, in filling of the Holy Ghost, speaking in tongues, being moral, and beoming a good nighbor, they don't believe if someone doesn't complete the "steps" of baptism in Jesus name, repentence, Holy Ghost in filling, and speaking in tongues, that the person will be lost eternally.

While they say they don't believe repentence, water baptism, infilling of the Holy Ghost with tongues are works they really betray their own teachings by saying that if someone misses the baptisms, and repentence, they can still be saved?

Works of the flesh you had mentioned in your quote above, let's examine that.

Eph 2:8-10

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus UNTO GOOD WORKS, which God hath before ordained that we SHOULD WALK IN THEM."

Everything is based on our freewill, and we are persuaded through the move of the Holy Ghost to be lead to repentance. Now we can reject that moving of God as He is trying to persuade us even before we ever came to repentance. You said that you see wicked works in scripture, so if wicked works are still able to be done by a Holy Ghost filled saint, to earn them a seat in hell, then the sinner can refuse the move of the Holy Ghost on their heart. Now, the Holy Ghost moves on a soul and they accept to follow Jesus, and I use the word ACCEPT, acceptance is an action through choice, and repentance is not just a change of mind, but a change of behavior.

You don't receive the Holy Ghost and become instantly mature. It takes a "walk" and "growing" through Apostolic ministers "teaching" coupled with the move of the Holy Ghost to bring you UNTO GOOD WORKS, these works were pre ordained by God's goodness and holiness that a saint may walk (action word) in them.

By you agreeing that wicked works can earn you a spot in eternal judgement the opposite must be true.

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

My observation of Scripture is that "works" as mentioned above will result in the person doing them being lost. It is for this reason that we are told to "...cast off the works of darkness..." (Rom.13:12)

However, it seems that while works of darkness will condemn a person to a lost eternity, good works in themselves will not result in eternal life. Our good works identify who we are and constitute the justification of our faith.

Good works is just a by-product of you having eternal life, and you have made that statement yourself. You said that if some one had truly repented that they would WANT to be baptized. Here we have people getting the opportunity and that opportunity is a must, but they will WANT to do it through the LOVE and persuasion of the Holy Ghost. Now if you refuse you're doing WICKED WORKS, and therefore will be lost. So by doing wicked works you are NOT DOING GOOD WORKS. The Calvanist avoids all that be placing the doctrine of eternal security in the slot that the Bapticostal has left open.

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

Jesus said in John 5:36, "But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me."

Again in John 10:25, "Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me."

Works of Jesus was to go and die on the cross; we are not called to that particular GOOD WORK. The works that Jesus did wrought and you and I are to do are lead by His example and we are to BECOME just like HIM.

It's a shame that due to the great swing of the pendulum that those who were raised in holiness churches make the great leap towards Calvinism to make an adjustment from where they use to be.

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

No where in Scripture do I remember it said that works would save us. Contrariwise Paul said to Timothy, "Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,"(2Tim.1:9)

In Titus 3:5 we read, "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;"

So, even when the works that one does are righteous works they cannot save him. We have to distinguish in Scripture the difference between "acts of obedience" done in response to the Spirit's promptings and "works", which do earn us rewards, but not salvation.

While works cannot save us, we are called unto good works because these good works prove the genuineness of our faith. "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." (Eph.2:8-10)

To say that wicked works can put you in hell the opposite must be true.

Ponder that TB.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

Sometimes people get so caught up in legalism that they are no longer effective Christians. This would also keep them from being a proper witness to someone who was a homosexual. Though it’s not an answer to the question it’s just something I was thinking on.
I honestly don't know which is worse.
I think sometimes the legalism makes even the best Christians question their walk with Christ.

Says me.

TMC

Originally Posted by RandyWayne

I see Amos is great generator of deep thoughts.

For ME it is like asking, would you rather see your son sitting in the court of King Herod or sitting under the teachings of a Pharisee? Neither are good, constructive, or desirable by any stretch, so the question is, What is worse?
Well, again it goes back to the point made many times in the New Testament that the pharisees were the only ones that Jesus got truly angry with. Most likely because they were supposed to know better!

Would you rather your son have a chance to be redeemed or just play church and still end up in the same place as if he was a homosexual? Atleast the homosexual son may realize that he is living in sin and come back to the fold. The legalist may be so puffed up in thinking up right that he may not see that he is doing wrong and putting his soul in jepordy the same as the gay son. :sshhh

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by tv1a

Maybe its you don't accept my answers. I did one better and referred to the Bible and gave New Testament Examples. What is the reason you defend a spirit that is obvious contrary to scripture.

You gave examples of pharisees...not all the pharisees were like that. Pharisees also obeyed all the law of moses...do homosexuals obey the law of moses? Do even legalists obey it? Again you are NOT defining the word Legalist nor are you using the actual agreed upon definition. All you are doing is giving examples that even non-legalists can do and then going "Look Look! Homosexuals do this too". That's not a correlation or causation, that's coincidence

[RandyWayne]

Originally Posted by tmc

Would you rather your son have a chance to be redeemed or just play church and still end up in the same place as if he was a homosexual? Atleast the homosexual son may realize that he is living in sin and come back to the fold. The legalist may be so puffed up in thinking up right that he may not see that he is doing wrong and putting his soul in jepordy the same as the gay son. :sshhh

Thats actually one of the points I was trying to make. A true legalist is blinded by their own ambitions and have truly "rejected reality and substituted their own". Their pride is what keeps them trapped in it.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by RandyWayne

Thats actually one of the points I was trying to make. A true legalist is blinded by their own ambitions and have truly "rejected reality and substituted their own". Their pride is what keeps them trapped in it.

Again, that's NOT legalism. That's a judgement on your part and a sweeping generalization. Even a non-legalist can be blinded by their own ambition and reject reality to substitute their own...in fact that part about reality and substitution fits a schizophrenic....are schizophrenics legalists? Drawing comparisons like that are not evidences of correlation. That's a logical fallacy Im surprised so many seem blind to. Similarities....do not equal correlation or causation.

Muslims believe in One God...so do Christians. It's also a form of the no true scottsman fallacy.

A legalist is simply someone that believes in a strict adherence to the letter of a or the law and in the religious case that would be the bible and that their salvation is based on how well they are able to keep it. Legalism then in a religious based context is a performance based belief system where a persons salvation is based on their own personal merits and works. That has nothing to do with reality. Misguided? Yes. Pride? Who here does not have any pride?

[Truly Blessed]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

To destroy the works of the devil that we were involed in during our lives priorly. Now here's the rub. While you will do the Calvanist two step, and claim some loyalty to man having free will, you spin around on your heels and say that of your own power you can be lost. The Calvanist would throw a choke hold on you and say how can you lose the free unmerited gift when you never earned it in the first place, and if you never earned it how can you forfiet it.

You see Brother Curtis, what I have found that is strangly apparent is that their is a group of Baptecostals who are all over the world, in the great endevour to be a nicer and friendly and more mainstream they have adopted Calvanistic soteriology, while it may not be pure Calvanism it still has the same confess and be saved.

Now while they still stand staunch on the platform of water baptism, in filling of the Holy Ghost, speaking in tongues, being moral, and beoming a good nighbor, they don't believe if someone doesn't complete the "steps" of baptism in Jesus name, repentence, Holy Ghost in filling, and speaking in tongues, that the person will be lost eternally.

While they say they don't believe repentence, water baptism, infilling of the Holy Ghost with tongues are works they really betray their own teachings by saying that if someone misses the baptisms, and repentence, they can still be saved?

Works of the flesh you had mentioned in your quote above, let's examine that.

Eph 2:8-10

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus UNTO GOOD WORKS, which God hath before ordained that we SHOULD WALK IN THEM."

Everything is based on our freewill, and we are persuaded through the move of the Holy Ghost to be lead to repentance. Now we can reject that moving of God as He is trying to persuade us even before we ever came to repentance. You said that you see wicked works in scripture, so if wicked works are still able to be done by a Holy Ghost filled saint, to earn them a seat in hell, then the sinner can refuse the move of the Holy Ghost on their heart. Now, the Holy Ghost moves on a soul and they accept to follow Jesus, and I use the word ACCEPT, acceptance is an action through choice, and repentance is not just a change of mind, but a change of behavior.

You don't receive the Holy Ghost and become instantly mature. It takes a "walk" and "growing" through Apostolic ministers "teaching" coupled with the move of the Holy Ghost to bring you UNTO GOOD WORKS, these works were pre ordained by God's goodness and holiness that a saint may walk (action word) in them.

By you agreeing that wicked works can earn you a spot in eternal judgement the opposite must be true.



Good works is just a by-product of you having eternal life, and you have made that statement yourself. You said that if some one had truly repented that they would WANT to be baptized. Here we have people getting the opportunity and that opportunity is a must, but they will WANT to do it through the LOVE and persuasion of the Holy Ghost. Now if you refuse you're doing WICKED WORKS, and therefore will be lost. So by doing wicked works you are NOT DOING GOOD WORKS. The Calvanist avoids all that be placing the doctrine of eternal security in the slot that the Bapticostal has left open.




Works of Jesus was to go and die on the cross; we are not called to that particular GOOD WORK. The works that Jesus did wrought and you and I are to do are lead by His example and we are to BECOME just like HIM.

It's a shame that due to the great swing of the pendulum that those who were raised in holiness churches make the great leap towards Calvinism to make an adjustment from where they use to be.



To say that wicked works can put you in hell the opposite must be true.

Ponder that TB.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

First of all, I'm not a Calvinist, so what a Calvinist would think of my view of salvation is of no concern to me at all.

Secondly, it's interesting to me that you totally ignore the weight of Scripture that clearly states no one is saved by works, not even righteous works. Apparently you don't believe the Word of God on this point.

Thirdly, I guess we will simply have to agree to disagree on your deduction that if wicked works will result in someone being lost, then the opposite is true. As I have pointed out, Scripture doesn't support this conclusion. Wouldn't that be like saying the opposite of Jesus Christ is Satan?

I will simply restate what Titus 3:5 teaches us, "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;"

So, are you saying that you believe we ARE saved by our works, even though the Bible refutes this? It seems to me at times that you are agreeing with me that works are the response of the believer to the work of the Spirit in our lives, yet in the next breath you are saying that it's works that save us. Do you disagree with me when I say there is a distinction between "acts of obedience" and "works"?

I find it amazing that while PAJCers place so much emphasis on the need for someone to speak with other tongues, they minimize the role of the Spirit in favor of man's role in the salvation process. It's true that we have a free will, but once we have been born again by the Spirit, the Spirit is to be in control of our lives, not our will.