Wednesday, May 19, 2010

Does it have to be bad, because I am no good?

Theologians consume words. They are the building blocks of theology. I am no theologian, I do however listen to them and I read what they write. I consider pastors to be professional theologians.

Often I hear some pastors describe the Gospel as "trumping" the Law. Now, I think I know what they are saying, they are implying that mercy triumphs over judgment. Put it this way, let us say they are possibly implying that.

However, trumping sometimes carries the notion of trashing or overriding and a layman might get the impression that the Law is a bad thing, something that must be despised, rejected. When that happens, one has become an antinomian.

Hmmm. Is something bad because it makes me feel no good? How can an evil thing condemn another evil thing?

Reading St. Paul's letters, I could not say that he ever ones hinted that the Law is bad thing. His words do not go there. Read Rom 7:7, 12.

It does not serve well if one gives the impression that since the Gospel has come, the Law must be condemned. Rather St. Paul speaks of sin that is to be condemned, not the Law. St. Paul repeatedly said that the Law is good.

For sure, I am condemned by the Law, but though it condemns me, it is a very very good thing for it makes me run to the Gospel such that Christ might shelter me, cover me with his righteousness and shield me.

So does it have to be bad, because I am no good? Nope.

33 comments:

M.A. Henderson said...

Lito,
Exactly right, the law is a divine doctrine which teaches what is right and pleasing to God; it is my sinfulness which makes it a source of death to me.

Walther is the best one to read on getting Law & Gospel right (seriously!).

There is a tendency towards anti-nomianism in the LCA today, probably in reaction to too much emphasis on the Law a generation or two ago (or so I'm told by people who were there). Soon there will be a reaction the other way, in fact I think I'm already seeing signs of that - cases of people leaving the church and going to the sects because they are law dominated and provide a certain structure for life.
Not coincidentally, I think, it's a generation or two since Walther was read at the seminary. In my time there we did no systematic study of Law and Gospel, it was only mentioned here and there in class and it was assumed that we knew it.

L P said...

Pr. M.

Wow, so they assume the student already knows Law and Gospel? So it becomes a boring subject - I think it should be discussed and a walk through is mandatory, a sort of review then one can move on from there.

It is the fundamentals that must be mastered, my trumpet teacher used to say. So it is also in theology.

Walther's book indeed is useful, I have not chucked nor given away my Law and Gospel book which he authored.

When I start giving a book away, that is a sign I have found the book of no value to me. That means I could not even excuse it as a reference! Some I have placed in our yellow recycle bin.

I have no done that with my copies of Walther - I have 2 copies - one a red paperback version, another a hard bound version. It is sitting on the shelves.

Going back to assuming Law/Gospel, one should never assume. As they say when you ass-ume, it makes and ass out of u.

Hehe LOL

LPC

Gregory L. Jackson said...

There are some good passages in Walther's Law and Gospel but the Formula of Concord is far better. Two sections - The Righteousness of Faith, Law and Gospel. My favorite section is Election.

I find it difficult to commend Walther when he confused justification with the atonement.

Also, he worked backwards through Pietism and orthodoxy to Luther. His teaching method may have been a key reason why Missouri fell into Enthusiasm with such gusto.

L P said...

Pr. Greg,

Indeed. That is why I hold back with glowing praises of Walther.

That confusion of atonement with justification actually will undo the distinction between Law and Gospel. It to me is a fatal blunder.

Walther was a bit reductionistic.

LPC

L P said...

One more time with correct spelling!

Additionally, if Walther was my student, I would hold him for detention and I would make him right on the board "I will not confuse the atonement with justification" 100 times before I would allow him to go home.

I know some are horrified that I would say such a thing, but what is he? The Pope?

I still do not get it why he is such an idol some even calling him their hero!

LPC

Brett Meyer said...

For those who are under the Law, not being under Grace by having the Holy Spirit's faith in Christ alone, the Law convicts them and works wrath in them.

Romans 4:15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

I believe this is the core reason individuals outside of Christ's invisible church, both those inside and outside the visible church, confess by words and actions that the Law is a bad thing, that a Christian's faithful use of the Law is a bad thing, that it's unloving and divisive of the unity "Christ" would have us show. They step on the Law in an attempt to embrace you with their love and by doing so they destroy the reason for the Gospel.

L P said...

right on the board

LOL.

I meant write on the board.

Brain is not in gear, but fingers are quite typing away on their own.

LPC

L P said...

B.M.

You are quite close to what I am getting at.

Since the Law accuses, some have the tendency to accuse it back. The language used by some ministers (I can detect their UOJness) gives you an impression that the Law is a despicable thing.



LPC

M.A. Henderson said...

I agree Greg, the FC on Law & Gospel is foundational; you may have noticed my opening sentence was essentially a paraphrase of the second affirmative theses from the Epitome V.
Of course, the best teacher of Law and Gospel is our Lord Himself!

Gregory L. Jackson said...

M.A. - I was not aiming that at you. I have seen a general tendency to start and stop with Walther or another Syn Conference leader, as if all of Lutheran doctrine is correctly articulated by the 19th century Germans of the Midwest. I have noticed many Lutheran pastors glib about the Syn Conference but the Book of Concord seems foreign to them.

Coming from the LCA, I learned a lot from Walther and Pieper, but I realized they fueled the UOJ behind the Church Growth Movement. Worst of all, the Syn Conference pastors of today cannot recognized Calvinism or discuss his most basic errors. Nevertheless, they are quick to identify Calvinism with justification by faith, a position that mystifies me. LP has been especially clear on this issue.

I also appreciate Brett Meyer's grasp of all the flim-flam UOJ quotations.

Boaz said...

Walther is great on this. His use of the mortal/venial sin should be brought back to use. Christians need to be reminded that faith cannot exist simultaneously with intentional, knowing sin: one who has faith is dead to sin. The intentional, wilful sinner rejects faith and all the benefits that go with it. The sinner must repent and return to the means of grace. We need the law to convict and return us to God if we stray; and when we receive faith we love the law because it shows us
God's will.

I wonder how walther got law and gospel so right when he got uoj so wrong?

Maybe he was right on both...

Uoj does not deny that those withot faith are damned--by their own rejection of God (hey, mortal sin!), and not by Gods failure to do anything for them on the cross.

Brett Meyer said...

Boaz states, "Uoj does not deny that those withot faith are damned--by their own rejection of God (hey, mortal sin!), and not by Gods failure to do anything for them on the cross."

UOJ teaches that those who have Christ's righteousness for the forgiveness of their sins and stand innocent, guiltless and justified by God's divine verdict are non-the-less damned if they don't believe they're saved.

Walther said, you are saved so that you might believe.

You say they are in mortal sin if they don't have faith in Christ. I agree but UOJ states they, and the whole unbelieving world, had their sins forgiven, and declared justified, by God the Father when Christ said, "It is finished!" You fail to confess your doctrine of UOJ correctly.

Luther, "You cannot extricate yourself from unbelief, nor can the Law do it for you. All your works in intended fulfilment of the Law must remain works of the Law and powerless to justify in the sight of God, who regards as just only believing children."

Brett Meyer said...

I confess that I believe a person cannot condemn false doctrine enough or ever reach the end of the satisfaction that doing so provides.

So I offer these quotes from the Lutheran Confessions, Solid Declaration, which condemn UOJ's distribution of God's grace upon the entire unbelieving world without the Means of Grace working faith.

31] Moreover, neither contrition nor love or any other virtue, but faith alone is the sole means and instrument by which and through which we can receive and accept the grace of God, the merit of Christ, and the forgiveness of sins, which are offered us in the promise of the Gospel.

38] 2. That this remain the office and property of faith alone, that it alone, and nothing else whatever, is the means or instrument by and through which God's grace and the merit of Christ in the promise of the Gospel are received, apprehended, accepted, applied to us, and appropriated; and that from this office and property of such application or appropriation love and all other virtues or works are excluded.

http://www.bookofconcord.org/sd-righteousness.php

L P said...

Boaz,

Maybe he was right on both...

I do not think so. When taken to its logical conclusion which people do anyway, Walther's ideas cut across Scriptural passages.

You can see some over statements he makes in his book.

Thesis XX makes UOJ the orthodox understanding of the faith hence if you do not subscribe to UOJ you ought to be persecuted and be shunned.

I do not have much time but taken to its height, Walther's UOJ makes Law of none effect. It cannot condemn anymore, even the one who does not have faith! Can you get my drift?

LPC

David Cochrane said...

No matter the subject we just cant resist getting back on the hobby horse can we? Reminds me of our Calvinists who tie every conversation back to Limited Atonement.

L P said...

D.C.

Which hobby horse would that be?

If you are referring to Walther, then I can see why he is a hobby horse by two groups.

a.) Those who bow down to his shrine of infallibility

b.) Those who reject his understanding of BoC's JBFA.

I think I rightfully fall on the latter group.

Walther over stated his case and actually got the proper meaning of JBFA wrong as taught by AC IV.


His reaction to the Revivalism of his day (which glorified faith because they taught it was some volitional thing that man can get glory from ) went the other way of denigrating faith.

On the other hand, the BoC lauds faith because IT IS A GIFT, a creation of God from nothing.

I do not defend Calvin from any one who assails him, I am bound to do the same with Walther on this issue.


LPC

jim said...

Dear Lito,

Hagin and the Pentecostals elevate faith to a new higher law itself. Not only a law of salvation but over the laws of nature of this world. Adam was given faith: to be fruitful and multiply by subduing and dominating the earth. This commandment preceeds for him not to eat of the tree of knowledge. Adam was specifically given domination over the animals like the serpent. Therefore faith is for dominating the tree of knowledge of good and evil (where the serpent was.) Adam should have subdued and dominated the serpent and ate the fruit of the tree of life. The gospel estabilishes the law: it results in knowledge of goodness. But the knowledge of good and evil does not estabilsh life. Augustine said the belief preceedes understanding. So trusting the Lord with all our hearts establishes the goodnesss of understanding but leaning on understanding results in evil. Hagin was superior to Luther. But his salvation was the fruit of Luther's preaching. Cessationists don't walk by faith they walk by sight. Jesus was made sin itself. Forsaking was more than separation: it was impartation of sin onto Christ so that he could defeat satan in hell while in the tomb. Luther and the Reformation don't have any explaination for the mechanics of union with Christ that Hagin understood. Union with Christ occured when Jesus was begotten in hell. Christ took on our nature so that we could take on His. JBFA is fine for salvation from hell but without the new birth it is only mental assent. Pentecostalism is more then mental assent it is obedience. Word of Faith is truly walking by faith not sight. It is not at war against JBFA but it is the promises. We are called to leave the elementary principals. The Theology of The Cross and JBFA is elementary. Signs and Wonders and Adam's domination--the kingdom of God in the Gospels are the promises and they acutally preceed the command not to eat the fruit as belief preceeds understanding. JBFA is only mental assent. Walking by faith requires impartation beyond imputation. Imputation is only mental assent. The confession of the priest "put" the sins on the goat not only sent it into the desert:

Lev 16:21 And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, PUTTING them upon the head of the goat, and shall send [him] away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness:

Likewise, Jesus was made sin itself and became a curse itself and was delivered up through our trespasses themselves not only was separated from God. Then Jesus defeated satan in hell by being born again in hell so that we would be made the righteousness of God in Him.

It is all beyond Luther but it does not jepardize the fact that the goat was sent into the desert and separated from God. Impartation does not jepardize imputation. Love does not jepardize faith. But faith does not work without love. JBFA does not work without impartation and the defeat of the serpent while Christ was in the tomb (in His soul in hell) and the restoration of dominion into our hands that Adam sold out to the sepent. The Theology of the Cross does not bruise the head of the serpent at the Cross. Luther's Mighty Fortres leaves us victims of satan until Jesus speaks the word that fells him at the end of the world. Hagin spoke the one little word that fells satan now: The Word of Faith.

In Christ Jesus,
Jim Cronfel

L P said...

Hagin was superior to Luther

Luther was far superior to Calvin and the rest of them, Hagin included.

He anticipated the enthusiasm of Hagin and the likes of his theology of glory.

Take care.

LPC

jim said...

Dearest Lito,

I said that Luther saved Hagin from hell (and the Roman Catholic church).

But there is no docrine of union in the Theology of the Cross. Union is not "enthusiasm" it is joy.

"Imagination" in the Greek #1261 is not signs and wonders but REASON:

Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

Reason (what the Bible calls imagination) says the gifts have ceased. Joy (what you call enthusiasm) says they continue.

You don't comment on:

"made sin"
"became a curse"
"died unto sin" (not unto God)
"in the likeness of sinful human flesh"
"delivered up for(through) our trespasses"

Luther justifies Hagin but Hagin went on further to justify God. Hagin preached a God that does not afflict:

Job 37:23 [Touching] the Almighty, we cannot find him out: [he is] excellent in power, and in judgment, and in plenty of justice: he will not afflict.

As Divinity does not suffer nor does He afflict. The god of this world afflicts when we follow reason.

Salvation from the wrath of God is the elementary principals (Heb 6:2). We are called to leave behind the elementary principals to inherit the promises--to be saved from the wrath of satan:

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high [places]. Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. (Eph 6:12-13)

"The evil day" is from the rulers of the darkness of this world not God. We are not supposed to "withstand" God.

But imputation alone has no doctrine of what union -- the armour of God is or where it comes from.

Your accusation of enthusiasm is imaginary reason.

In Christ Jesus,
Jim

L P said...

Dear Jim,

I said that Luther saved Hagin from hell (and the Roman Catholic church).

But there is no docrine of union in the Theology of the Cross. Union is not "enthusiasm" it is joy.

I cannot say where Hagin is today considering he preached false doctrine.

By Enthusiasm, we mean the philosophy, the attitude of separating the Spirit of God from the literal Word of God. That is to say, the theory that HS deals and approaches man without means, without God's Holy Word.

On the Theology of Cross of which you say has no union: To the contrary that is the main point of St Paul in - Phil 3:10, Gal 2:20, 5:24, Rom 6:3.

God does not afflict? For sure he does not afflict those who are NOT his children. I do not discipline someone else's children, I discipline mine for that is how I show I love them for through it I teach them what is right and wrong.
See Heb 12:5-6.

Luther spoke of this discipline and how the flesh must be drowned daily.

re: Jesus becoming sin of which Hagin spoke about - first off, Hagin read the KJV as it is without taking care of the Greek usage of Words. Also he does not respect the figurative language used by the authors of the NT. He interpreted "making to sin" metaphysically and so he concluded that Jesus was the first man to be born again. But where is this in Scripture?



As far as I know, there is only one person who ever lived a victorious life - Christ Jesus the Lord. Even at that he triumphed BY enduring the Cross, despising the shame. Heb 12:2.

Theology of Glory which is espoused by Pentecostalism is a recipe for depression.

LPC

jim said...

Dearest Lito,

I LOVE YOU!

The Theology of the Cross saves you from the wrath fo the Father but not from satans power of death. Hence you don't get your prayers answers. Satans still has you worried about the Fathers wrath so he can affict and tempt you. The word "gave" in John 3:16 DOES NOT REFER TO SACRIFICE! It refers to new birth! It refers to the resurrected Jesus bringing us to the Father. The object of belief is the love of the Father in resurrecting Jesus over against the pincipalities and powers not the substituionary wrath of the Father against Christ. THE LIGHTNING BOLT THAT STRUCK LUTHER WAS FROM SATAN NOT GOD. "My people perish for lack of knowledge" -Hosea. The Theology of the Cross may somtimes be alieviating your cowardice of the false (because I know you are elect) wrath of God against you but it is not getting your prayers answered. The wrath of God is only against the unsaved not the elect. "Imputation" is not in a court of law -- it is religious not judicial. Because it is religious not judicial the priest -- not the judge -- imparted (and imputed) the sins upon the goat BEFORE it sent it into the desert. Imputation is a primarily religious confession and secondarilly a judicial edict:

He is to lay both hands on the head of the live goat and confess OVER it all the wickedness and rebellion of the Israelites—all their sins—and PUT them on the goat’s head. He shall send the goat away into the desert in the care of a man appointed for the task. (Lev 6:21)

The "desert" is power of death:

Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death–that is, the devil– (Heb 2:14)

God the Father raised Jesus out of the grave over against the devil and imparted new birth to us:

Seeing what was ahead, he spoke of
the resurrection of the Christ,* that he was not abandoned to the grave, nor did his body see decay. (acts 2:31)

AS I said "gave" in John 3:16 is positive not negative. It is aboout love not wrath. Jesus did not die to the Father but he died unto sin (the devils grave) but the Father made Him and us alive:

The death he died, he died TO SIN sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives TO GOD. (Rom 6:10)

BECAUSE YOU ARE ELECT your fear of God's wrath is cowardice not reverence. Your forgiveness is self-pity. But you are still under the devils power because he still has you "depressed" as you put it about your election. John 3:16 is about Jesus Christ triumph over the devils power of perishing not the Father's wrath-- but by the Fathers love. This is what John 3:16 is about:

We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. (Rom 6:4)

Notivce the word "buried" above! It refers to the TOMB not the Cross. You need a Theology of the Tomb! The sign of Jonah is about the word "buried" in the tomb (belly of whale) for 3 1/2 days. The Theology of the Cross does not last 3 1/2 days. It is becuase the devil has you "depressed" and stuck on the elemetary principals -- the ELEMENTARY WRATH OF THE FATHER (Heb 6:1) -- that you dont believe in the LOVE of the Father and are not alive with the resurrected Christ. Becuase you are not alive with the resurrrected Christ you think that the Father only blesses the unsaved. You are still working agianst satan by the law. You are walking by sight and not faith. THE THEOLOGY OF THE CROSS IS FAITH AGAINST THE FATHER BUT NOT FAITH AGAINST SATAN. HAGIN FULLY UNDERSTOOD LUTHER BUT HE UNDERSTOOD THAT AN IMPUTATION IS PRIMARILTY AN IMPARTATIONAL RELIGIOUS CONFESSION AND SECONDARILY A SUBSTITUTIONAL JUDICIAL EDICT. You don't understand Word of Faith. Word of Faith understands you.

In Christ Jesus,
Jim Cronfel

jim said...

Dearest Lito,

You asked about Jesus being born in hell. This entire section is about the resurrection:

Heb 1: 3The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. 4So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs. 5For to which of the angels did God ever say, "You are my Son; today I have become your Father"? Or again, "I will be his Father, and he will be my Son"? 6And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, "Let all God's angels worship him."

Here again it is from Acts 13:33--

33has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is written in the second Psalm:
" 'You are my Son; today I have become your Father.

Deal with this verse:

Colossians 1:18
And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy.

Deal with this verse:

Revelation 1:5
Grace and peace to you from him who is, and who was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits before his throne, and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.

THESE VERSES ARE ABOUT BEING FIRSTBORN OUT OF THE SIGN OF JONAH BELLY OF HELL.

This verse is about new birth:

Romans 8:29
For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.

See all of the above verses that say that Jesus was "firstborn from the dead"! Among many brothers.

Love ya!

In Christ Jesus,
Jim Cronfel





JESUS WAS NOT BEGOTTEN IN THE VIRGIN! He was only born in the Virgin!

L P said...

Dear Jim,

Who is greater God or Satan? Hagin thinks Satan has still power over you so you must win victory over him.

If God is on my side which he is because I have Jesus the God who is for me, then what is the problem?

The greatest problem of man is not Satan, it is God and to this Luther saw the Gospel. Jesus said no one has power to take his life except what is granted by God, hence it is God who over rules.

Hagin was a dualist. He believed there are two equally opposing powers competing for man. God is of equal terms with Satan so Hagin taught.

Jesus - said do not fear him who has power to kill the body (satan), but rather fear him who after the body is dead has the power to cast a person to hell - this is God.

If you have a problem with Satan, that is not a problem, for God can deliver you from him,.

However, if you have a problem with God, you are stuffed. No one can deliver from his hands, only God himself. That is why Jesus is there.

Focus on Jesus, Satan always wants your attention. He wants you pre-occupied with him.

May God guide you.

LPC

jim said...

Dearest Lito,

A Mighty Fortress is Our God is about the fear not resistance of satan.

Hagin understood the fear of the LORD. Hagin preached a spoiled and destroyed satan. Hagin preached against fearing satan. Hagin preached making satan FLEE AND FEAR YOU you by faith. He did NOT preach fleeing from satan.

Hagin was NOT a dualist. He preached an eternal God that spoiled and detroyed a finite satan. These are all Biblcal doctirnes that you are unaware of! (Both about Hagin and yourself.)

Satan does not want believers to know that he is tempting them! Satan (god of this world) thinks and pretends to be God to the elect. (He transforms himself into an angel of light not darkness.)

We are required to do more than believe that we are saved from The Father's wrath. We must go on to bear fruit (3 John 2) by the power of The Father's love.

God never gave Luther the Sign of Jonah. The Theology of the Cross never makes it to the Tomb. The Sign of Jonah was not the Cross. It was the Reurrection. Anselm destroyed signs and wonders by his earthly wisdom.

Sanctification is not a process of destruction. It is a process of dominance. The command not to eat of the tree of knowlege of good and evil was preceeded by the command to be fruitful and multiply and subdue and dominate the earth.

It is good that you are forgiven for Original Sin. Hagin was also. Now you must move on to Original Dominance. It preceeds the command not to die in the the garden. The resurrection from the grave restores both favor and power.

The Theology of the Cross only restores powerless favor. Hagin was saved by Luther's powerless favor but he went on to the original power given to Adam: the promises: "be fruitful and multiply and subdue and dominate the earth."

Satan temps you to COWARDLY fear God instead of you RESISTING satan. Cowardly fearing God's wrath holds you in bondage to satan's power. Hagin did not preach fearing satan but resisting him. Resisting satan is faith in God to move mountains. (Mark 11:22-24) But if all you do is alieviate yor fear of God's wrath you will never graduate unto believeing in His fruitful love. You will be saved but only as by fire.

Luther only believed in being saved from His wrath and that is the limits of your spirituality. Hagin understood the wrath of God as well as Luther. Cessationism (fearing of satan) is straw. Continuationism (resisting satan) is gold.

I love you.

In Christ Jesus,
Jim

jim said...

Dear Lito,

Thanks for letting come on your blog.

God gave me some more insight on your contentions and questions. I have struggled with them my entire walk with you.

Here is the verse that I myself struggled with as a protestant:

Luk12: 4"I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. 5But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him. 6Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies[a]? Yet not one of them is forgotten by God. 7Indeed, the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Don't be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.

If you look at verse 5 that says that God kills and throws into hell in the context of verse 6 and verse 7 what I think verse 5 is about is NOT fearing God throwing the believers in hell but satan. In other words don't fear satan that can kill but fear the God that can kill and burn satan on your behalf. Hence, God goes on to give reassurance and love in the next two verse about his folowers being more valuble than sparows. If God was saying that believers should continue in the fear that God will throw them in hell then God would have gone on to perhaps write about how sin destroys our value. But instead he imediately says in verse 7 "Don't be afraid". There God is threatening to kill and burn satan in verse 5 not us because we are more valuble to Him.

I love you.

In Christ Jesus,
Jim Cronfel

jim said...

Dear Lito,

God has revealed this to me:

What Protestantism does not know is that God's wrath does not begin after death.

The curse of the law begins at birth not death.

You don't believe in miracles because you don't understand that Cessationism is the wrath of God.

The Theology of The Cross saves from the wrath of God after death but not from the wrath of God through satan now.

Satan is the "problem of evil" or C.S. Lewis's "problem of pain." Poverty and sickness and tradegy against Protestants is the wrath of God. God turned us over to satan when we commited original sin:

Rom 1: 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. 24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.


The "gave them over" of verse 24 is the wrath of God. The sin nature and spritual death is the wrath of God. Wrath does not begin after death. It begins now. Because you don't understand present day wrath you don't believe in miracles.

The Pentecostal "Full Gospel" has "Full Wrath" behind it. The Theology of The Cross only preaches half wrath. Wrath after death is only half wrath.

Love ya!

In Christ Jesus,
Jim Cronfel

jim said...

Dear Lito,

What Protestantism does not know is that God's wrath does not begin after death.

The curse of the law begins at birth not death.

You don't believe in miracles because you don't understand that Cessationism is the wrath of God.

The Theology of The Cross saves from the wrath of God after death but not from the wrath of God through satan now.

Satan is the "problem of evil" or C.S. Lewis's "problem of pain." Poverty and sickness and tradegy against Protestants is the wrath of God now. God turned us over to satan when we commited original sin:

Rom 1: 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. 24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.


Satan is the "reptiles" that Adam worshipped in verse 23. God then "gave them over" to the reptile satan in verse 24. The sin nature and spritual death is the wrath of God. Wrath does not begin after death. It begins now. Because you don't understand present day wrath you don't believe in miracles.

The Pentecostal "Full Gospel" has "Full Wrath" behind it. The Theology of The Cross only preaches half wrath. Wrath after death is only half wrath.

You are still under the wrath of unsanctification.

Jesus was made sin itself through identification. He died and suffered in hell unto satan while in the tomb. And God the Father reurrected Him and spoiled satan and we were rasied with Him. The same gospel then also saves from the lake of fire in the aftfer life. The lake of fire is only for those who worship satan.

The Full Gospel saved Job from satan's wrath. He was sacrificing for his children out of Lutheran God-fearing piety not Biblical faith at the begining of the book.

The second half of Romans 4 is about Abraham giving birth to Isaac by faith not works. True justification is in this life. The Theology of the Cross does not explain the second half of Romans 4becuase it is about impartation and the resurrection. Hagin understood Romans 4 better than Luther.

God is love. Satan want you to believe that you are under condemnation from the Father. But you are truly only turned over to satan by the Father because of the doubt of miracles.

Wrath against the elect is a red-herring. It is a satanic diversion.

In Christ Jesus,
Jim Cronfel

L P said...

Jim,

Sorry for the delay of my response. As I confess, I am not taking the Hagin line of thought seriously and I make no apologies for this.

The verses you alluded to proving the Jesus was born again carry no such direct evidence for the theory. Being born again is being born from above. The verses you alluded to spoke of Jesus' resurrection, physically not spiritually. He rose bodily from the dead.

Jesus was the first to experience the resurrection of the body hence, first among us, hence firstborn. The word 'firstborn" does not mean being born again. That is the rationalistic conclusion that Hagin is trying to make you believe, though he is now long dead.

Put it this way, from the Chalcedonian principle, once the Son of God took on Humanity into Himself, there was never nor ever will be the separation of these two natures. Hagin separates these two natures of Christ.

Hagin thought that HS left Jesus when he became the sin for us humans. If that happened, then Hagin has separated the Godhood of Christ from the Humanity of Christ. This is a heresy as it violates the axioms found in Chalcedon.

To be born again is to have the HS come down and create faith in the Gospel in the person. Since Hagin says Jesus got born again, then it means there was a time when the HS was not with Jesus. Hence violates the safety rule which orthodox Christians of long ago have formulated for our doctrinal well being.

Jesus did not have to be born again, because he is both God and Man at the same time, that Godhood never left him even while he was suffering at the Cross. John 8:29.

Lastly, from the Pentecostal perspective, they might look at the Theology of the Cross as defeatist.

I tell you why I believe the Theology of the Cross is more inline with the Biblical witness than anything I know. It is because the Theology of the Cross is not intuitive, that is the reason I believe it the more. For the Gospel is foolishness to pagans, so is the Theology of the Cross, it is not natural for what is more natural for man is for Christ as King to be born in a palace rather than in a stable, to have his people die for him as a King rather than the King dying for his people. The Theology of the Cross is not obvious and not intuitive, you do not get this by human reason, you get this by seeing how Christ came and suffered.

Yet in the end, the Theology of the Cross spells victory in eternity.

I hope you reconsider.


LPC

jim said...

Dearest Lito,

I love you.

A. Original Sin:
1) When Adam sinned he worshiped the serpent "reptile":
Romans 1:23 "and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles."

2) As a result God "forsook" or mankind "gave them over" unto the reptile's sin nature:
Romans 1:24 "Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another."

3) The consequence of the sin nature was death:
Romans 1:32 "Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them."

B: Atonement:
1) Hence, the goat is firstly forsaken or "confessed" unto the sataninc sin nature:
Lev 16:21 "He is to lay both hands on the head of the live goat and confess over it all the wickedness and rebellion of the Israelites—all their sins—and put them on the goat’s head. He shall send the goat away into the desert in the care of a man appointed for the task."

2) The goat is then released unto the wild animals in the desert to die.

3) The priest does not directly sacrifice the goat! The wild animals sacrifice the goat! The priest only forsook the goat by IMPUTING it with sin.

4) An imputation is not judicial declaration! An impuation is a spiritual confession or spiritual declaration! The Bible is not court law book. It is a religion. The end of the world is not a court room but a temple! Jesus is a priestly judge not a court judge! Israel was a theocracy with a king not a kingdom with a religion!

5) Luther and Calvin have God the Father or the priest killing the goat at the moment of the forsaking with His own hands instead of releasing it into the desert to be killed by the wild bulls of bashan. Luther and Calvin identify the priest with the wild animals.

C: The Sign of Jonah.
1) Here are the wild animals inflicting "agony" while Jesus is in the desert-tomb long after the Cross:
Acts 2:24 "But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him."

2) Jesus is not "dead" when He cries "My God, My GOd why have you forsaken me!" That is because the priest did not kill the goat but only forsook it. Likewise, God did not put Jesus to death in the flesh but forsook or "confessed Him over" to the satan's tomb with our sins on His back.

2) Luther and Calvin confuse the forsaking with the fleshly death; God with satan; the priest with the wild animals.

3) The Father and the priest do not have the power of death (for the elect). The goat did not come to destroy the priest. Jesus did not come to destroy the Father. The devil had the power of the agony of death in the desert tomb. The devil had the power of death after the forsaking:
Heb 12:4 "Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death–that is, the devil–"

D: Made sin, Made God:

1) Your accusation of "figurative language" pervades all of Holy Writ. Notice the perfect indentification in these next two verses from nto sin (not God) and to God (not sin) for both Jesus and man. It does not say from to God (or the priest) and to sin:

Romans 6:10-11 "The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God. In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus."


I was healed of incurable (never gone into remission in the history of oncology) blood cancer through Word of Faith preaching in 2001. I was teased by three hemotologists.

In Christ Jesus,
Jim

jim said...

Dear Lito,

I love you.

Do you agree that there is a distinction between the priest and the desert? A distinction between "carrying the sins" and dying:

Lev 16:21 "He is to lay both hands on the head of the live goat and confess over it all the wickedness and rebellion of the Israelites—all their sins—and put them on the goat's head. He shall send the goat away into the desert in the care of a man appointed for the task. 22 The goat will carry on itself all their sins to a solitary place; and the man shall release it in the desert."


Do you agree that there is a similar distinction between the forsaking and the giving up of the spirit?

Mat 27:45From the sixth hour until the ninth hour darkness came over all the land. 46About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"—which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" 47When some of those standing there heard this, they said, "He's calling Elijah." 48Immediately one of them ran and got a sponge. He filled it with wine vinegar, put it on a stick, and offered it to Jesus to drink. The rest said, "Now leave him alone. Let's see if Elijah comes to save him." 50And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit."


The confesion of the sin on the goat is the forsaking of Jesus. Dying in the desert is Jesus' giving up of the spirit. They are two distinct events! They preist does not directly sacrifice the goat! God does not take Jesus' spirit when he cries "why have you forsaken me?" The goat is then sacrficed by wild animals not thr priest. Likewise, Christ "gave" up his spirit to the devil's power of death not God's power of death!

Luther is the opne using "figurative language" to associate the priest with the wild animals and God's forsaking with Christ's giving up of the spirit! There are three separate charaters:

1) The priest.
2) The goat.
3) The wild animals.

1) God.
2) Christ.
3) The devil's power of death.

Luther associates the priest with the wild animals and God with the devil! Luther not Hagin is being "figurative" to unite God and devil! Hagin is calling it as it is written!

Luther is appeasing the devil not God!

Hence, you don't believe in miracles because you are praying to an appeased devil.

In Christ Jesus,
Jim

jim said...

Dear Lito,


Pelaganism is "For God so hated hell..."

Arminianism is "For God so hated the world..."

Luther said "For God so loved heaven..."

Hagin said "For God so loved the world..."

In Christ Jesus,
Jim

L P said...

LPC

jim said...

Dear Lito,

Cessationism is a figment of your imagination.

Love, Jim