A Little Test of Truth

Do you agree or disagree with the following quotes by famous "Christians"? Do you have any ideo who said these? Take the test:

1.“I happen to know people who are followers of Christ in other religions.”



2. One day you will stand before God, and he will do an audit of your life, a final exam, before you enter eternity.… God won’t ask about your religious background or doctrinal views.”

3.I have known many people who believe in the Messiah of Jesus, regardless of what religion they are, because they believe in him. It’s about a relationship, not a religion. You’ve heard this many times.

4. I think it’s possible for a regenerate person to have no conscious beliefs at all.

5. Is it possible to be saved without knowing about the Resurrection of Christ? Sure.

6. Well, Christianity and being a true believer--you know, I think there's the Body of Christ. This comes from all the Christian groups around the world, outside the Christian groups. I think everybody that loves Christ, or knows Christ, whether they're conscious of it or not, they're members of the Body of Christ.

7. They may not even know the name of Jesus but they know in their hearts that they need something that they don't have, and they turn to the only light that they have, and I think that they are saved, and that they're going to be with us in heaven.

8. I've met people in various parts of the world in tribal situations, that they have never seen a Bible or heard about a Bible, and never heard of Jesus, but they've believed in their hearts that there was a God, and they've tried to live a life that was quite apart from the surrounding community in which they lived –Billy Graham to Robert Schuller

9. “Can a person be saved without knowledge of the resurrection of Christ?” “Don’t be shocked by my answer, but yes…to this reason: IF the work of Christ has been explained to someone and they put their faith in Him based upon their faith and trust in that work for his salvation, but is not aware of the resurrection…then, yes. I believe that person can be in a state of grace. Now, can a person know about the resurrection, reject it and be saved? NO! But a person doesn’t have to have a perfect knowledge of the work of Christ to be justified.”

10. Therefore state it most simply thus, that the power, work, profit, fruit, and end of Baptism is this, namely, to save. For no one is baptized in order that he may become a prince, but, as the words declare, that he be saved. But to be saved, we know, is nothing else than to be delivered from sin, death, and the devil, and to enter into the kingdom of Christ, and to live with Him forever.

11. Thus it appears what a great, excellent thing Baptism is, which delivers us from the jaws of the devil and makes us God's own, suppresses and takes away sin, and then daily strengthens the new man; and is and remains ever efficacious until we pass from this estate of misery to eternal glory.

12.Through Baptism we are freed from sin and reborn as sons of God; we become members of Christ, are incorporated into the Church and made sharers in her mission: "Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration through water in the word."

________

The first three are from Rick Warren.
4 &5 are from Dr. John Frame
6-8 are from Billy Graham
#9 is R.C. Sproul's
10-11 are Martin Luther's Larger Catechism
12 is from the Roman Catholic Catechism

Now, are any of these optional to the Truth? Would you be willing to give up any of these men for the sake of God's True? Or will you defend your favorite Christian instead of Truth?

RC Sproul Apparently Thinks Salvation Without the Resurrection Proclaimed is Possible

2Co 11:3 But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ. Rom 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. A few years ago, I had occassion to confront Matt Slick with his view of a Universalist being saved as a Universalist. What was the foundation for his view basically, was that he himself had no idea that Jesus Christ the Resurrected Lord rose from the dead until two full years after he was "saved". So if he could be saved not knowing Jesus was resurrected, then certainly a Universalist could. To support his view he went to man--the Westminister Confession of Faith as well as quoting Dr. John Frame. In an email exchange posted at Reflections, Frame reiterrated that he holds to that view as well. After all, he reasons, Abraham nor any of the O.T. prophets knew that the Christ would be called Jesus and would be resurrected. Therefore its possible and maybe even probably today. Except the little fact that Jesus not only has already come, but indeed died and rose from the dead "according to the Scriptures" as well as the fact we have the completed revelation of the Gospel and salvation and Scripture. All this to say, that Slick and Frame are not the only ones on this horrid, resurrectionless gospel bandwagon. Now it seems RC Sproul's holding to it. Yes, Sproul, the "theologian" Reformers (and some non-Reformers) love to read and quote has decided that a person can be saved not believing in the Resurrected Lord. The article is here. In part it says:

As Pam and I were sitting through the Ministry Partner Q&A session at the Ligonier National Conference last week, listening to various people pose their questions to R.C. Sproul, a gentleman stepped up to one of the microphones and asked the following question:

“Can a person be saved without knowledge of the resurrection of Christ?” To which Dr. Sproul made the following reply: “Don’t be shocked by my answer, but yes…to this reason: IF the work of Christ has been explained to someone and they put their faith in Him based upon their faith and trust in that work for his salvation, but is not aware of the resurrection…then, yes. I believe that person can be in a state of grace. Now, can a person know about the resurrection, reject it and be saved? NO! But a person doesn’t have to have a perfect knowledge of the work of Christ to be justified.”

What?! What work of Jesus is ever explained APART from the Resurrection? Rom 4:22 That is why his faith was "counted to him as righteousness." 23 But the words "it was counted to him" were not written for his sake alone, 24 but for ours also. It will be counted to us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, 25 who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification. Jesus clearly taught about His death and resurrection and even used O.T. Scripture to demonstrat He is the fulfillment of them. Paul and Peter did this as well (see verses below). Scripture says there is only ONE (count 'em, ONE) gospel: Rom 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. 2Ti 2:8 Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, the offspring of David, as preached in my gospel, 9 for which I am suffering, bound with chains as a criminal. But the word of God is not bound! 1Co 15:1 Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, 1Co 15:2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you--unless you believed in vain. 1Co 15:3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 1Co 15:4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, 1Co 15:5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 1Co 15:6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 1Co 15:7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 1Co 15:8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. 1Co 15:12 Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 1Co 15:13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 1Co 15:14 And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. 1Co 15:15 We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. 1Co 15:16 For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. 1Co 15:17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. The ONLY Gospel that saves is one which proclaims Christ Jesus as Lord (Master,Owner, Sovereign) and RESURRECTED. Without the resurrection of Christ, He is merely a nice guy who died on a cross, but certainly isn't God nor Lord. One cannot have a Lord without Him being the RESURRECTED Lord. His deity demands BOTH. Jesus continually taught of Himself from the O.T., including His resurrection. See Matt. 22:29-32; John 5:28-29 (about all are resurrected);both Jesus and Moses taught of the resurrection (Luke 20:34-38). In case that wasn't enough to show that its not optional to NOT believe about Jesus Christ as HE taught (and Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms), here's an exchange Jesus had with a dear saint who truly recognized Jesus' Lordship and loved Him dearly (I think she gets way too much of a bad rap): Joh 11:23 Jesus said to her, "Your brother will rise again." Joh 11:24 Martha said to him, "I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day." Joh 11:25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, 26 and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?" So this is the question to all you Reformers out there: Do you? Do you REALLY believe Rom. 10:9-10? Or is that just a mere intellectual philosophical football to throw around as an optional belief? Is Jesus Christ Kurios or NOT? Is what Scripture taught re: salvation OPTIONAL? Act 4:1 And as they were speaking to the people, the priests and the captain of the temple and the Sadducees came upon them, 2greatly annoyed because they were teaching the people and proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection from the dead. Act 4:33 And with great power the apostles were giving their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all. Act 17:30 The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent,31 because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead." It was because of proclaiming the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ, that Paul was put on trial (Acts 23:6;24:14-15).The resurrection proves Jesus to be God the Son. If He is not declared to be such, then people don't know and aren't saved. They might be trusting a "good teacher" but its not the Son of God--God the Son: Rom 1:1 Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, 2 which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, 3 concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh 4 and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, Even in our baptism we proclaim His resurrection, and look to the future of being like the resurrected Lord: Rom 6:4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. Scripturally, all new believers are baptized. So not only was the gospel they believed in one about the Risen Lord, but their baptize also portrayed Him as Resurrected. There is no way a new believer would not know for 6 months or two years after "being saved" that HE is not Risen from the Dead just as HE said. Again, to have a gospel void of the Resurrection of Christ Jesus, is to have NO gospel at all. That means no salvation. I'll end with this: Any Reformer who slams Billy Graham or Rick Warren has no right to do so if they too, hold to this false gospel Frame and Sproul proclaim. The damnable error is in their own camp. It is IMPOSSIBLE to have a gospel nor be saved without hearing of the RESURRECTED LORD Jesus Christ. Period.

AWANA Continues On the Road to Spiritual Disaster

Typical of any movement, the Ecumenical/Emergent Church/New Age Movement is continuing to zero in our children. AWANA is one such avenue.

I reported over a year ago AWANA's loss of biblical theology---now it continues to get worse.

Here is a snippet of the latest report from Lighthousetrailsresearch group on AWANA. TAKE HEED! Do NOT compromise Truth for the sake of keeping little children busy for a couple of hours each week. WE CAN DO BETTER THAN OFFER AWANA TO OUR CHILDREN. God demands purity of doctrine as well as lives, folks!

Deu 12:3 You shall tear down their altars and dash in pieces their pillars and burn their Asherim with fire. You shall chop down the carved images of their gods and destroy their name out of that place. 4 You shall not worship the LORD your God in that way.

Exo 34:13 You shall tear down their altars and break their pillars and cut down their Asherim14 (for you shall worship no other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God),

The report says in part:

For Awana to include Ken Blanchard's teachings into its organization, shows that the situation is quite serious. Blanchard has been promoting eastern-style meditators for over twenty years, and to this day is still doing so. In addition, he is a board member for the occultic Hoffman [Quadrinity] Institute. Blanchard participated in the Hoffman Process and said it made his spirituality come alive. We believe this experience he had through Hoffman is similar to what Blanchard refers to in his Lead Like Jesus book, when he says people who "quiet their mind[s]" during the Lead Like Jesus Encounter have "powerful experience[s]." This means that now children and families in Awana could possibly wind up with the same experience.

Blanchard, who has been a professing Christian since the 1980s, wrote the foreword for a 2001 book titled What Would Buddha Do at Work?. In the book, Blanchard said:
"Buddha points to the path and invites us to begin our journey to enlightenment. I ... invite you to begin your journey to enlightened work."

Some people may not understand why we write this report about Awana. After all, they have done some wonderful things for children. But that is the very reason we do issue this report - we do not want to see Awana sell out to the fast growing apostasy of contemplative spirituality and the New Age; and because we care about children, we speak up. With more and more public schools teaching kids to meditate and do yoga, and with more and more Christian schools bringing in emerging leaders like Rob Bell (through his Noomas and his book Velvet Elvis), millions of children are now placed in harm's way by learning meditative techniques that will possibly take them into altered states and demonic realms. We hope Awana leadership will reconsider their position on contemplative/spiritual formation for the sake of children and their parents. And if you have children in the program, please use extreme caution in light of these new developments.

Let us leave you with this sobering thought: Sue Monk Kidd was at one time a conservative Southern Baptist Sunday school teacher. She was led down the road to apostasy (i.e., worshiping the goddess Sophia) through the practice of contemplative prayer after someone handed her a book by Thomas Merton, the same Thomas Merton who is endorsed and quoted in the Awana book, Perspectives on Children's Spiritual Formation.

Full article here.

Psychology Debunked --Scripture and the Holy Spirit Are Enough for Mental and Spiritual Health

I just discovered a website dealing with the myths of Psychology called "Psychology Debunked." From what I can tell, it seems pretty solid, although I would like to see what they believe specifically about Jesus Christ and Scripture. It appears most of the site is showing the lack of any evidence of the claims of psychology and its medications, providing reports, studies, and news articles to read. Interesting information to begin with:


Did You Know...

Mental disorders are NOT medical/physical conditions like cancer or diabetes? Every mental disorder is merely a list of observable behaviors given a label and voted into existence by the APA Board.

No one can objectively prove you have a mental disorder? Even the APA President admits that no lab test exists to prove the existence of depression, ADHD, bipolar, and every other mental disorder--no brain scan, no blood test, nothing.

There is no reason to take a pill for a mental disorder, like you would for true medical/physical conditions? The chemical-imbalance-in-the-brain theory has never been proven to cause mental disorders, despite popular belief and drug company marketing. See the News page.

Psychiatric drugs CAUSE chemical imbalances in the brain by disrupting normal brain chemicals? Long-term use can cause permanent brain and organ damage.

The FDA now admits antidepressants and ADHD drugs can CAUSE violent and suicidal behavior in children and adults? It is well-documented that most school shooters and baby killers over the last two decades were on psychiatric drugs. See the News page.

Mental health screening, labeling and drugging of children is in almost every state in America? School screening programs like TeenScreen label normal children with mental disorders, leading to dangerous psychiatric drugging.

Over time, more people improve without psychotherapy than with it?

Every major psychological theory is anti-Christian at its core?

Unquote.

I would highly recommend an out-of-print book, "The Danger of Self Love" by Paul Brownback to get you started on the dangers of psychology and where it came from. Its a wonderful small book, still timely for today, thirty-odd years after its original publication.

Too many professing Christians have a low view of Scripture and therefore they have a low view of God, and have instead elevated man's wordly "wisdom" in Its place. In short, professing Christians (including pastors) have exchange the Truth for a lie, believing that the Holy Spirit and Scripture are NOT sufficient for all things pertaining to life and godliness.


Jam 3:13 Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom.
Jam 3:14 But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast and be false to the truth.
Jam 3:15 This is not the wisdom that comes down from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic.
Jam 3:16 For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice.
Jam 3:17 But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.

Anyone struggling with worry/anxiety, depression, etc. should avail themselves of the Bible which speaks on how to have a healthy spiritual life:


Phi 4:5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand;
Phi 4:6 do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God.
Phi 4:7 And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.
Phi 4:8 Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.

This is the surest way to having the peace of God which WILL guard our hearts and MINDS in Christ Jesus.

If Scripture is perfect and all true, and it is, then these commands WILL benefit the believer and glorify the Lord Jesus Christ.


2Pe 1:3 His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence, 2Pe 1:4 by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire.
2Pe 1:5 For this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge,
2Pe 1:6 and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness,
2Pe 1:7 and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love.
2Pe 1:8 For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.
2Pe 1:9 For whoever lacks these qualities is so nearsighted that he is blind, having forgotten that he was cleansed from his former sins.

Better late than never: confronting the errors of C. Michael Patton, TTP, and Reclaiming The Mind

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

1Co 1:23 but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles,

1Co 1:25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

1Co 1:27 But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong;

1Co 2:1 And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. 2 For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.


1Co 1:17 For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

*****************

Back in March 2007, both Debi and I did some research on C. Michael Patton and his Reclaiming The Mind/The Theological Program programs (they are under Chuck Swindoll's church, Stonebriar Community Church where apparently Patton used to be a pastor). He and his group open up rooms on Paltalk (a widely used voice/chat program online) where they discusse topics and talk to so-called "scholars". There is a lot wrong with Patton's theology/methodology and we have discussed that here.

For some reason, James White recently caught wind of Patton and commented on some things he has said, specifically about how Patton does not believe we can be certain about Truth nor can we be totally confident in it. (For the Dividing Line discussion by James White and C Michael Patton calling in to talk with White go here.)In fact Patton sounds a lot like Joel Osteen who was on Larry King Live, saying 48 times withint 15 minutes how he "didn't know" or "doesn't know" or "I don't know". Patton also admits his lack of knowing much. Makes one wonder why he even bothers with his "Parchment and Pen" blog or Paltalk rooms.

James White takes several of the points Patton made here. There's much to be concerned about Patton, but nothing new if one has read any of Patton's other musings.

Patton was invited to called into the show, which he did.

While denouncing (sort of) post-modernism, he turns right around and uses that very "we can't REALLY know truth" thinking, hence the several times he says he doesn't know something (both in his blog and in the phone conversation).

Patton repeats VERY often "the fullness of the gospel" but never really clearly defines it.

He contradicts himself left and right, making little sense, trying to find agreement with White, yet one is left wondering what exactly he DOES believe. Considering Patton's view and use of the "Irenic method of apologetics" (supposedly "peaceful" whatever that means), as well as his view that Truth isn't clearly knowable so we can't be so arrogant as to think we CAN say we know it, Patton's claim that he's in line with most of what White believes seems to be untrue.

What I did appreciate about White's comments (and there are things I really do disagree with him on), he starts off with the correct belief that we cannot rely on philosophy to proclaim truth, which is what Patton does. White says its through the declaration of the Gospel that God saves.

Col 2:8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.

1Ti 6:20 O Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called "knowledge," 21 for by professing it some have swerved from the faith. Grace be with you.

Patton believes in "building planks" one at a time with unbelievers. Scripture is replete with outright "in your face" proclamations of "your sinning against a Holy God and earning hell" type of messages---not very pagan-friendly. Patton wants to steer us away from Paul's example of exhortation in Galatians and rather wants us to use a Mars Hill approach (interesting how that in itself is quite Po-Mo/Emergent of him). Except that Paul again unwaveringly addresses their idolatory and need for a savior--the Gospel --and some ended up believing. James White clearly demonstrated this point well by noting how Paul talked about turning from idols to the Living God--this is called repentance. Patton does not call for repentance. He calls for gradual change that won't hurt the Flesh.

Patton believes in the infalliblilty of the apostles.:

"Paul was an Apostle who carried the authority of an Apostle. This included infallibility in certain areas. Both of these you and I don’t have. Therefore, we cannot approach these issues with the degree of certainty that Paul had. Even if we can have a high degree of certainty about certain passages and theological issues, this does not mean that we are infallible and authoritative as an Apostle."

It appears he's already fallen for Rome's first lie: infallibility of leaders.

Patton says in his blog: "While I do find some egg on our face with regards to the Pope’s recent declaration (or redeclaration) of the illegitimacy of the Protestant churches, I still contend that Catholicism can be interpreted differently and the situation can progress."

That's probably one thing I agree with, but not for his reasons. He still sees Rome as legitimate but without the "full gospel" apparently. I believe Rome and those who came from her and still hold to some of her dogmas are not biblical at all and should be avoided.

Other notes I made when Patton called in:

Patton :

*denies Solo Scriptura. He said: To say "if its not in the Bible then I just won't believe it" is just not true. (51:10). We all have authorities outside the Bible. He's going against what he just said though, about misrepresenting ourselves and the otherside when we get so confident or overly confident.

*can't anathamatize a whole gospel...people and churches like RCC have parts of the true gospel.(57:24)

More....this is a close transcript I wrote as I was listening. Hear the actual conversation, though:

W - how does Rome's gospel differ from the Judaizers since Paul anathamatized them as a group, not just elements? Mary, eucharist, --can hold to these whole-heartedly and yet there's enough gospel there to get them saved? Is that what you are saying?

P - Well, in a sense. Again, its an issue of perspective; how much can a person be wrong and still fall at the feet of Christ and beg forgiveness? They can embrace falsehoods (we need to educate them on the "fulness of the gospel")--look at the Corinthians. There were some brothers who thought there were some idols that were still something and Paul said treat them as weaker brothers. They need to grow.

W - Is there a diff. between having some wrong notions about some things and a outright rejection, knowingly deny core parts of the Gospel? The Judaizers were denying faith alone to save. They clearly believed in Christ to save (Gal. 5:2). They fell at the foot of the God-man. But they added to it. Paul said if they do, they are anathama. If they did, then do you see Rome doing this? They after all knew the Gospel proclaimed to them.

P - Yes there's a diff. Its much worse. Rebellion. Doubting your salvation is falling from grace--from the fullness of the gospel, not actual salvation. We're all at different spectrums on this. In heaven we will know. Don't broad brush everyone. Not defending RCC. We can learn from their ecclesiology and its intentions. We can learn from EO's view on redemption. (1:04) We all to some degree lack the fullness of the gospel.

W - How can Rome's gospel can save and Judiazer's did not?
P - I don't know. Judaizer's couldn't save. He's not sure about a lot of these things. Not sure. Parable between the sinner and pharisee. The sinner didn't know his status before God when he left. We are outside looking in.
Keeping on with our works after being justified is what many of us do, that's why we need someone to bring the fullness of the Gospel.
W - the sinner threw self solely on Christ. the Pharisee was "righteous" but was by works. That was the point....God sees the heart. Gal. 3 Paul says you add one thing, circum,. Christ will be of no benefit to you. What does that mean?
P- you have fallen from grace. We pick up the burden again.
W - so in both situations they are both forgiven??
P - paul is correcting. He might not know they are saved either (the Judaizers).
W - So you don't see a contrast between Gal. 5 where Paul says you have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by the law, you have fallen from grace, but WE ?
P - yes a radical contrast. Fallen from grace is radical. He's assuming the Judiazers are believers, but might not be (see Hebrews). If you question your salvation maybe you aren't.
W - back to Rome to apply, a person fully knowlegable of what it teaches in denying sola fide, complete work of Christ and eucharist, temporal punishments, purgatory, etc, treasury of merit....because they can know this and hold to this gospel, but still be saved by that gospel or in spite of it?
P - saved in spite of it. What's the bare essential? Protestanism lacks the fullness of the gospel in re: to eschatology. Not in the sense of pre-mil etc. but in the sense we are very gnostic in our understanding of salvation. Want to escape this body and float in the clouds. Lack of understanding the full gospel. EO has this to a greater degree.
W - deny an essential part of the gospel, can your faith be a saving faith?
P - no, not at all
W- Sola Fide is not essential part of the gospel?
P - in and of itself it is not.
W - An RCer rejecting sola fide, as Rome has not only denied but taught works, does that person have eternal life?
P - I would say yes they do, but they have a much harder, like the Corinthians. They were polytheist Christians (1:15:40). They need the full gospel. They can, though.I'm not saying anybody does.
W - should we call them out of Rome?
P- yes we should be calling them out of Roman doctrine of soteriology. Our 'free church mentality" = no authoritative structure like they have, we end up with Benny Hinn.
W - My church would not recognize Hinn as a brother nor let him in. We HAVE authoritative structure. The only type is what is given is the church leaders.