 |
| This is mind-boggling indeed - one eye, two pupils. Perfect for double vision!. |
Initially posted here:
https://www.facebook.com/sing.f.lau/posts/10200746383677434
October 7, 2013
A friend, Malcolm Turner, said:
It is mind-boggling to hear men talk of
salvation by grace and in the same breath speak of progressive sanctification.
The two are contradictory and cannot be joined together. Ye are complete in
Christ. We are completely saved, made completely holy, sanctified, and made
righteous by imputation.
Are you trying to add to Christ's completed
work?
I commented:
With all due respect Esquire, it is equally
mind-boggling that you fail to understand the biblical distinction between the
Definitive Sanctification, and the Ongoing Sanctification, both of which are
plainly taught in the Scriptures.
The Definitive Sanctification is by the Divine activities of the triune God once for all effectually calling an elect out of his native state of sin and death to that state of grace and salvation. This sanctification is definitive, once for all, complete and eternal, unrepeatable, and un-improveable. This is the point you have stated correctly.
The Scriptures most certainly speaks of another distinct sanctification that is CONDITIONED upon the activities of those already definitively sanctified... often termed as progressive/ongoing/farther sanctification. The 1689 uses the last term, 13:1 "They who are united to Christ, effectually called, and regenerated, having a new heart and a new spirit created in them through the virtue of Christ's death and resurrection, are also farther sanctified..."
There is the ETERNAL salvation which is
completed by Christ.
There is the TEMPORAL salvation that God's
children (those already bestowed with eternal salvation by God's free grace)
must work out for themselves.
The two are not contradictory, they are
distinct; the former being the cause, and the latter being effect and evidence
of the former.
A biblical distinction is the essence of sound
theology.
Mark Thomas
The distinction between timely applications
and eternal applications run to every major branch of theology. They must be
distinct and separate to be correctly understood. I've tried so many times to
show people this biblical distinction in truth. Most just delete my words or
ignore them or seek to engage in battle of a viewpoint that refuses to embrace
this most basic truth. It seems to me that those that can see together this far
should try hard to live and let live. It would be awesome if a better
understanding can at some point be reached, but if not, then let there be what
peace there can be, for truly, we ought to work to be brothers when we agree
this far.
[Malcolm Turner had written comments but deleted them…]
Mark Thomas
Well, that should leave Bro. Sing free to teach
you. And, if you want to prove the charge of cult, come to my page and bring
your proof. When you come, also come with your proof of actions preceding life.
That should not be too hard a task to one who is facing a 'mindless cult
teaching PB' like me. I approached you as a teacher asking you to think. You
have ridiculed me without proof. Consider your ways.
Sing F Lau
Malcolm, you can't handle the truth, so you
attack the messenger! I have met a few cowards... when shown to be in errors,
they delete the post they have started!
Hey Pommy Esquire, I'm not a primitive
baptist, though I do love them! You are quite mistaken!
You befriended me, then you messed it up, and you defriended me. Then you returned, apologized, and requested my friendship and I accepted it. Now you have defriended me again. Not that I care much... It reveals not a little about you, an elderly Esquire behaving like a little kid!
Sing F Lau
Of course, you are a coward - you have already
proven it. Brother Mark so patiently laboured with you to show you your errors and endeavoured to teach you the truth but you so stubbornly accused him of
setting up a straw man. I followed the exchange very carefully and saw how you
resisted the truth... and you just delete the whole post!
Rayburn Brooks
Those who have a (given) ear can hear, those
who have a (given) eye can see, those who have (given) understanding can
understand. It is not within man's power to give these to other men, as they
must be the gift of God. Malcolm Turner, you have none of these at this time. I
would that you reflect upon your outrage, pray for these gifts that can only be
given from on high by God.
Charles Page
I thought that the bestowing of ethnic
insults was strictly an AmeriKan tactic! <LOL> "Little oriental man"!!! [note: Malcolm called sing that!]
I thought that I had heard it all! after all
I am ameriKan!
[One Michael had also made some comments but deleted them!]
Robert Cook Sr.
Michael, then no one’s faith could be
overthrown by false teaching. God has enabled us to will and to do he does not
make us do we must obey. It is the grace of God we have a mind that is sound a
word that is true and a regenerated spirit enabled to obey. Never the less
there is no joy in disobedience.
Sing F Lau
Michael, very pious shibboleth <LOL>
If ongoing sanctification is monergistic, then the
command to "work out your own salvation" is redundant! No, that
command repudiates your notion!
Sing F Lau
I speak plain and frank... without political
finesse! many prefer "good words and fair speeches"! I'm upfront and
honest.
Allan Turda
Very well explained Bro. Sing. I say Amen to
that.
2 Corinthians 7:1 Having therefore these
promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the
flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.
Linda Lancaster
Agree, Sing. What is the "1689" that
you speak of here, please?
Sing F Lau
It refers to the Second London Confession of
Faith - the doctrinal statement drawn up by the particular baptists and
published in 1689.
Linda Lancaster
Who are these 'particular' baptists. I know of
the Southern Baptists, The Baptists, but......????
Sing F Lau
They were Baptists in Britain who believed in
particular redemption - i.e. Christ died to save His own and no one else, and
all the necessary implications with that doctrine.
Linda Lancaster
And........ is this correct. I think not, sounds
like Calvinism to me!
Sing F Lau
Calvinism and Arminianism are cousins.
Modern Calvinism and Arminianism are
essentially the same.
Old school baptists' beliefs summarized in the 1689 CoF are distinctly different from both.
Robert Cook Sr.
Linda, election is true. Calvin's teaching
was wrong dealing with salvation etc. All true Baptists have embraced Election
and that all for whom Christ Died Are accepted in the beloved and have Been
reconciled to God all by Jesus Christ and not by the creature decision.
