dermdoc said:

---

TheGreatEscape said:

---

The religious leaders…So if it applies to the religious leaders, then it applies to all of those to whom will not be given the free gift of grace.

---

So you think Titus 2:11that I posted above is false Scripture?

Because you just directly contradicted what it says.

---

All kinds of men…

Let's look at the immediate context in chapter two of Titus.

Young women, husbands, and children are mentioned in verse 4. Young men addressed in verse 6. Slaves or bondservants are mentioned in verse 9 and 10.

Then you have verse 11.

All men in the New Testament certainly doesn't mean every individual who has ever existed.

TheGreatEscape said:

---

The religious leaders…So if it applies to the religious leaders, then it definitely must apply to all of those to whom will not be given the free gift of grace.

---

And I respectfully disagree with that interpretation.

There is a theme throughout the Gospels that Jesus repeatedly singles out the religious leaders as "vipers", etc.

He talked to them in a completely different way than He did common Jews

TheGreatEscape said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

TheGreatEscape said:

---

The religious leaders…So if it applies to the religious leaders, then it applies to all of those to whom will not be given the free gift of grace.

---

So you think Titus 2:11that I posted above is false Scripture?

Because you just directly contradicted what it says.

---

All kinds of men…

Let's look at the immediate context in chapter two of Titus.

Young women, husbands, and children are mentioned in verse 4. Young men addressed in verse 6. Slaves or bondservants are mentioned in verse 9 and 10.

Then you have verse 11.

All men in the New Testament certainly doesn't mean every individual who has ever existed.

---

Disagree. When the plain Scripture says "all" I think it means all.

And so you do not believe God loves all men?

I tell people that God's love is there for them to receive if they repent and believe. And if they repent and believe, then the Holy Spirit has truly assured them and has taken out the heart of stone and put in a heart of flesh.

Ezekiel 36:26

"I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh."

TheGreatEscape said:

---

I tell people that God's love is there for them to receive if they repent and believe. And if they repent and believe, then the Holy Spirit has truly assured them and has taken out the heart of stone and put in a heart of flesh.

Ezekiel 36:26

"I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh."

---

So then they have a choice?

dermdoc said:

---

TheGreatEscape said:

---

I tell people that God's love is there for them to receive if they repent and believe. And if they repent and believe, then the Holy Spirit has truly assured them and has taken out the heart of stone and put in a heart of flesh.

Ezekiel 36:26

"I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh."

---

So then they have a choice?

---

If you read Jesus in Matthew 5, then you see that the New Testament, nor any of its writers, came to abolish the law but to fulfill it. All of these commands by Saint Paul were based on the Torah, prophets, and writings, for example.

The law, explicitly revealed in the New Testament, is that every single individual who has ever lived must repent and believe. They must obey the Gospel and we must as well.
The Gospel and the law work hand in hand.

There is a general call for everyone in the world and there is an effectual call in the Scriptures as well.

But we know from Ephesians 1, John 6, and Romans 8:29-30 that belief is something God does in and to an individual by his sovereign plan.

We don't know who is elected and who is not. It's not like we can lift up everyone's shirt tails to see if they are elect or
not…as C.H. Spurgeon wrote.

And after Ephesians 1, we have Ephesians 2.

Ephesians 2:8-9

"8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast."

Notice the antecedent "it"refers to grace and faith. And why is it that some Christian brothers and sisters can't accept "this is not of our own doing."

TheGreatEscape said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

TheGreatEscape said:

---

I tell people that God's love is there for them to receive if they repent and believe. And if they repent and believe, then the Holy Spirit has truly assured them and has taken out the heart of stone and put in a heart of flesh.

Ezekiel 36:26

"I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh."

---

So then they have a choice?

---

If you read Jesus in Matthew 5, then you see that the New Testament, nor any of its writers, came to abolish the law but to fulfill it. All of these commands by Saint Paul were based on the Torah, prophets, and writings, for example.

The law, explicitly revealed in the New Testament, is that every single individual who has ever lived must repent and believe. They must obey the Gospel and we must as well.
The Gospel and the law work hand in hand.

There is a general call for everyone in the world and there is an effectual call in the Scriptures as well.

But we know from Ephesians 1, John 6, and Romans 8:29-30 that belief is something God does in and to an individual by his sovereign plan.

We don't know who is elected and who is not. It's not like we can lift up everyone's shirt tails to see if they are elect or
not…as C.H. Spurgeon wrote.

And after Ephesians 1, we have Ephesians 2.

Ephesians 2:8-9

"8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast."

Notice the antecedent "it"refers to grace and faith. And why is it that some Christian brothers and sisters can't accept "this is not of our own doing."

---

So we are back to square one my friend. To me, it all comes down to the character of God. The God as revealed through the person of Jesus is not about double pre destination.

We will never agree on this so I am bowing out.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Happy Thanksgiving to you as well.

I really am glad that you are around.
You've encouraged us so much and me personally.
God has done wonders in your life and you truly are a testimony and example of persistence that we all cherish on this board.

TheGreatEscape said:

---

Happy Thanksgiving to you as well.

I really am glad that you are around.
You've encouraged us so much and me personally.
God has done wonders in your life and you truly are a testimony and example of persistence that we all cherish on this board.

---

Thanks and I enjoy the discussions.

If you choose life over death and believe the Gospel of Christ for the forgiveness of sins and life everlasting, then no Christian ever gives glory to themselves for that happening.

So don't give the devil, the flesh, and world philosophy an inch. Don't reserve a little bit for yourselves that made you a little wiser than your fellow man.

TheGreatEscape said:

---

Agreed. Some Anglican Churches hold to the 39 Articles and others stopped last century. It's a confession of faith which defines historic Anglicanism and what they believe the Bible teaches.

---

Going back to this, I hope we're not holding predestination as a part of the articles. We just discussed all articles over the course of six months or so and many of them exist less to define what is 'proper' theology rather than to address issues present at the time of the reformation. You'll find few that firmly come down on one side or another; we have little desire to put scripture against itself.

Even in our confirmation classes, while we have our belief about baptism, we view it as obeying what God commanded of his followers rather than a rule to apply to every baptized person to determine salvation (i.e. thief on the cross theology).

AGC said:

---

TheGreatEscape said:

---

Agreed. Some Anglican Churches hold to the 39 Articles and others stopped last century. It's a confession of faith which defines historic Anglicanism and what they believe the Bible teaches.

---

Going back to this, I hope we're not holding predestination as a part of the articles. We just discussed all articles over the course of six months or so and many of them exist less to define what is 'proper' theology rather than to address issues present at the time of the reformation. You'll find few that firmly come down on one side or another; we have little desire to put scripture against itself.

Even in our confirmation classes, while we have our belief about baptism, we view it as obeying what God commanded of his followers rather than a rule to apply to every baptized person to determine salvation (i.e. thief on the cross theology).

---

I've asked all of these questions with my Rector (Pastor).
It really depends on each Diocese and how the Rector (Priest) approaches the discussion. Mine holds to a strictly literal interpretation of the 39 Articles.

It's not a requirement for membership. It is, however, required for the clergy.

The Westminster Confession of Faith adherence, for example, is required by officers of the church in the PCA and OPC. But is not required for membership.

TheGreatEscape said:

---

AGC said:

---

TheGreatEscape said:

---

Agreed. Some Anglican Churches hold to the 39 Articles and others stopped last century. It's a confession of faith which defines historic Anglicanism and what they believe the Bible teaches.

---

Going back to this, I hope we're not holding predestination as a part of the articles. We just discussed all articles over the course of six months or so and many of them exist less to define what is 'proper' theology rather than to address issues present at the time of the reformation. You'll find few that firmly come down on one side or another; we have little desire to put scripture against itself.

Even in our confirmation classes, while we have our belief about baptism, we view it as obeying what God commanded of his followers rather than a rule to apply to every baptized person to determine salvation (i.e. thief on the cross theology).

---

It really depends on each Diocese and how the Rector (Priest) approaches the discussion. Mine holds to a strictly literal interpretation of the 39 Articles.

It's not a requirement for membership. It is, however, required for the clergy.

The Westminster Confession of Faith adherence, for example, is required by officers of the church in the PCA and OPC. But is not required for membership.

---

Right, we're not TEC so I'm confident saying we're pretty orthodox in our view, even among our priests, but you won't find them going extremely literal to conflate that article with explicit doctrine.

Edit: I am Anglican so you don't have to keep defining what a rector is.

Edit: It really depends on the diocese in the Anglican Church in North America. I realize there are others. My fault.

I disagree that we are conflating the 39 Articles of Religion. They are our confession of Faith.

I know. I was doing that for the readers from different backgrounds.

Not only is "all men" to be understood in the greater context of the NT, it is also shown as meaning all kinds of men in immediate contexts.

Here is an example of Gospel language being applicable to all men.

King James Bible Colossians 1:16

"Which is come unto you, as it is in all the world; and bringeth forth fruit, as it doth also in you, since the day ye heard of it, and knew the grace of God in truth:"

ESV Colossians 1:16

"Which has come to you, as indeed in the whole world it is bearing fruit and increasingas it also does among you, since the day you heard it and understood the grace of God in truth"

"As in the whole world and is bearing fruit and increasing"

When Saint Paul stated this, had the Gospel really come
unto the whole world?

Do you think it went to England, Ireland, Scotland, Asia, Australia, North America and South America?

How I wish Anglicans believed this

TrailerTrash said:

---

How I wish Anglicans believed this

---

Me, too.

Anglicans of certain dioceses do in the ACNA.

And we are not in communion with the Church of England, by the way.

J. I. Packer did. Our Priest does and our church does.

And so did everyone of the English Reformers…

C.S. Lewis was an Anglican who held to the 39 Articles.

And I also highly recommend the PCA and the OPC.

If you're in the general area of Rockwall, then we'd love you to come visit. Great expository sermons…line by line and precept upon precept…

https://christchurchrockwall.org/