Billy Graham

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

But you are arguing from the stance that unbiblical teachers can have salvation.

The term "biblical" is a double edged sword. The doctrine of a Pre-Tribulational rapture is "biblical", in the sense that it is derived from the Bible. But it is derived from a "misinterpretation" of the Bible.

With that in mind, one cannot say that the likes of John Wesley weren't "biblical", we can say that their biblical understanding was mistaken on points, or we can say that their biblical understanding wasn't complete. But we cannot say that they were not "biblical".

The term "Trinity" isn't "biblical", meaning the term isn't in Scripture. However, the concepts that they use to come to a Trinitarian conclusion are "biblical", they just misinterpret those "biblical" concepts.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

But you are arguing from the stance that unbiblical teachers can have salvation.

This discussion has gotten to the point wherein it begs the question:

Can God have mercy on theological misunderstandings?

For example, will God have mercy on those who teach an eschatological false doctrine? After all, false doctrine is false doctrine, is it not?

Will God have mercy on those who teach "soul-sleep" or "Annihilationism"?

Will God have mercy on those who might have a misunderstanding of "Oneness", seeing that there are various interpretations of "Oneness" (Monarchianism) within our movement (predominantly, Modal-Monarchianism and Dynamic Monarchianism)?

I could list dozens more theological differences and misunderstandings within our own movement, but I think you get the point.

How much mercy might God have for a theological misunderstanding?

Or must our understanding be "spot-on" and without any error to be saved???

[RachelRose]

Originally Posted by Aquila

The term "biblical" is a double edged sword. The doctrine of a Pre-Tribulational rapture is "biblical", in the sense that it is derived from the Bible. But it is derived from a "misinterpretation" of the Bible.

With that in mind, one cannot say that the likes of John Wesley weren't "biblical", we can say that their biblical understanding was mistaken on points, or we can say that their biblical understanding wasn't complete. But we cannot say that they were not "biblical".

The term "Trinity" isn't "biblical", meaning the term isn't in Scripture. However, the concepts that they use to come to a Trinitarian conclusion are "biblical", they just misinterpret those "biblical" concepts.

Also interesting points. Since I have found this website I am listening and changing my thoughts on many things! the trinity is obviously not in real because all you have to read is Acts 2:38. As for the rapture it also is not real however it is more difficult to prove.

That said I just feel slightly off balance. The more I hear the more I read the Bible. The more I read the Bible the more I see things I took at face value may not be valuable to God.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Originalist

If you are saying that Jesus is referring to rejection over their baptismal invocation, you are taking his words out of context.

I'm really glad you brought that up, because I have been mentioning the narrow way for some time now Matthew 7:14. The context is very important here, because Jesus is speaking of false prophets which look like those of His flock Matthew 7:15. Jesus then goes on to describe the produce of agriculture, and how certain plants produce certain fruit Matthew 7:16. Grape vines must produce grapes not thorns, fig trees produce figs, not stickers. Jesus describes how these false prophets while looking like fruit producing trees, are really producing razor sharp spikes. Jesus isn't saying that these people didn't help little old ladies across the street, or help Me Maw, bake a pie, or were kind to the chickens in the yard. Jesus is speaking of what a false or real prophet or teacher produces. Therefore when Jesus quotes Psalm 6:8 He is talking about evildoers who vex the body Matthew 7:23. Matthew 7:22 has these false prophets, blind guides, and thorns in the side claiming that they taught "prophesied" in His name. Sadly Jesus rejects them.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Aquila

This discussion has gotten to the point wherein it begs the question:

Can God have mercy on theological misunderstandings?

For example, will God have mercy on those who teach an eschatological false doctrine? After all, false doctrine is false doctrine, is it not?

Will God have mercy on those who teach "soul-sleep" or "Annihilationism"?

Will God have mercy on those who might have a misunderstanding of "Oneness", seeing that there are various interpretations of "Oneness" (Monarchianism) within our movement (predominantly, Modal-Monarchianism and Dynamic Monarchianism)?

I could list dozens more theological differences and misunderstandings within our own movement, but I think you get the point.

How much mercy might God have for a theological misunderstanding?

Or must our understanding be "spot-on" and without any error to be saved???

What about oneness "one-steppers" who baptize invoking the name of Jesus and receive the Holy Ghost with tongues, but feel salvation happens at repentance? I guess they are going to hell as well.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

I'm really glad you brought that up, because I have been mentioning the narrow way for some time now Matthew 7:14. The context is very important here, because Jesus is speaking of false prophets which look like those of His flock Matthew 7:15. Jesus then goes on to describe the produce of agriculture, and how certain plants produce certain fruit Matthew 7:16. Grape vines must produce grapes not thorns, fig trees produce figs, not stickers. Jesus describes how these false prophets while looking like fruit producing trees, are really producing razor sharp spikes. Jesus isn't saying that these people didn't help little old ladies across the street, or help Me Maw, bake a pie, or were kind to the chickens in the yard. Jesus is speaking of what a false or real prophet or teacher produces. Therefore when Jesus quotes Psalm 6:8 He is talking about evildoers who vex the body Matthew 7:23. Matthew 7:22 has these false prophets, blind guides, and thorns in the side claiming that they taught "prophesied" in His name. Sadly Jesus rejects them.

And since they did everything else "in his name", they most likely baptized in his name as well.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Originalist

What about oneness "one-steppers" who baptize invoking the name of Jesus and receive the Holy Ghost with tongues, but feel salvation happens at repentance? I guess they are going to hell as well.

Bringing up the "one-stepper" is a very interesting point. The "one-stepper" argument hinges upon when one experiences "justification" by faith.

Justification in this context is the state of having received the imputed sinless righteousness of Christ. Scripture continually declares that this form of justification is received by faith and by faith alone. One-steppers point out that this happens at repentance, when one turns from sin and unbelief and turns to the Lord. And so, one is "justified" in the single step of genuine repentance.

Of course, one-steppers also believe in being identified with Christ through Jesus name baptism, and being regenerated through the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

They argue that if one isn't justified by faith alone, then they couldn't be able to receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit prior to water baptism. And, if one is only justified after the fullness of Acts 2:38, it would make Acts 2:38 impossible to receive and experience. Because one must be "justified" in God's sight to be identified with Christ and filled with the Spirit.

So the question becomes...

When does one receive justification by faith?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Originalist

And since they did everything else "in his name", they most likely baptized in his name as well.

Thank you for your understanding, therefore it would make it real bad for those who would sway further of the path. Everyone was baptizing in Jesus name during the first century, that was a given. Yet, what we have now is something so unrecognizable to the first century believer? That those living today cannot say they earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints? Because after all they can't decide what is the Truth? No one has it right. Great outlook. What's that I'm hearing? Somewhere Hank Hanegraaff is laughing.

[RachelRose]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Thank you for your understanding, therefore it would make it real bad for those who would sway further of the path. Everyone was baptizing in Jesus name during the first century, that was a given. Yet, what we have now is something so unrecognizable to the first century believer? That those living today cannot say they earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints? Because after all they can't decide what is the Truth? No one has it right. Great outlook. What's that I'm hearing? Somewhere Hank Hanegraaff is laughing.

I already see this is a can of worms but I signed up for it. This is such a great thread I wish we could all get into a Debate Room and "content for the faith."

That said I have always had a question; how can the Holy Spirit fill a person BEFORE the remission of sins?

There are scriptures that indicate this. How can you clean yourself up enough to have your sins remitted but be an earthen vessel filled with the God of the universe? I thought we could never be cleaned up enough yet it seems the "formal" is in many orders as Aquila has pointed out in another thread.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Thank you for your understanding, therefore it would make it real bad for those who would sway further of the path. Everyone was baptizing in Jesus name during the first century, that was a given. Yet, what we have now is something so unrecognizable to the first century believer? That those living today cannot say they earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints? Because after all they can't decide what is the Truth? No one has it right. Great outlook. What's that I'm hearing? Somewhere Hank Hanegraaff is laughing.

I think there must be some intellectual honesty here.

No one is denying that Acts 2:38 with Jesus name baptism and the Holy Ghost is indeed the original practice of the church.

No one is saying that other traditional Christians aren't in error.

The question is, might God have mercy on such error? Might we see a number of souls in Heaven who were spared in accordance to God's sovereign mercy, predicated upon their sincere faith and the justification which is only received by faith?