Hi *****, 2 Cor 11:14 says that Satan, and by implication his messengers, transform themselves into angels of light. That is a scriptural description of someone without the truth teaching as if they have the truth. Of course, they are everywhere. 

1. As far as the hardshells are concerned, if you believe that justification in this life is optional you destroy the faith. That believe is unbelief. Period.

2. As far as conversions worldwide, I don't accept them if they fail in two areas. First, if they refuse to allow my point of view I view them as being false. Second, if they have a system of belief that is opposed to THE faith as I believe I understand it, they are false. That is pretty much everyone. That does not mean that a true Christian could not exist in those errors who will escape the false doctrine and walk in the Spirit that he lives in. But I focus on those who make themselves teachers Heidi.

3. I have a brief list of unacceptable doctrinal teachings. Free will, law conviction, covenant theology and all forms of elemental religion, dispensationalism, full preterism, gnosticism, subordination of the Son in any way as to being God (His only subordination was to become man and walk by faith), and there may be a few others. But tell me *****, have you found any big group that claims to be Christian that has not fallen into one of these? Not. :)

4. Your discussion of Jewishness and Romans 11 is worth talking about. I have to go on certain biblical principles here. One is, Paul said not to engage in endless geneologies. That not only applies to hardshell views, but also to my view. I reject the temptation to go down that path.

5. I do not reject the idea that there could be overlap, that there could be Gentiles saved, that some may have Jewish blood and don't know it, all these things. I focus on point 3 as the litmus test of biblical teachers.

Gary

Email Doctrinal Discussions

My first email exchange is with a long time aquaintence who has given me permission to use his name. He really is not into email debates but has allowed this exchange to be public.  My response preceeds his question below:

Geoff Volker, thank you for responding. Please bear with me a moment. I believe that you don't fully understand my position. That is why I must answer. I have been concerned about many folks misunderstanding me.
 
I am simply saying that the 1646 confession and my position is that unbelief is the central sin and that the conviction associated with gospel salvation revolves around unbelief and associated sins, like idol worship, etc. In other words, the gospel makes us aware that we are sinners, but with regards to unbelief, not with regards to adultery or other "results" of unbelief.
 
I don't want to be misunderstood, but in a way, adultery or drunkenness, and  these resultant sins are in a way "lesser" sins than are those sins related to the weighty matters, ie, justice mercy, faith. They are not venial, as the Catholics call some sin, but they are not weighty, or as central to the essence of man's separation from God. Unbelief is the essence of man's separation.
 
That is why the 1646 people could say with confidence that the preaching of the law was "unnecessary", ie unneeded. That is why all Peter had to do in Acts 2 was preach the gospel and they were cut to the heart.  
 
This conclusion interestingly enough, is the opposite position to John Owen, and those who have adopted similar positions to his, including Spurgeon, who has said that where the gospel cannot save, the law must be introduced.
 
Anyway, if you agree with me I rejoice, if you don't I hope you will understand where I am coming from. I believe scripture is on my side in this issue, and I hope the New Covenant community adopts my view. It is not mine alone. Gary 
Geoff Volker wrote: Gary, My position seemed to me to be quite clear. I do not embrace your take on the 1646 confession. But you seem to want to make this a huge issue. Do you really think it is possible for someone to embrace the gospel without understanding their sinfulness/ You need not answer, I was just expressing my thoughts. Bye, Geoff
Please note that Geoff is part of a New Covenant community with a website http://www.ids.org While you can learn some doctrinally accurate information there, it goes without saying that Geoff is a follower of John Reisinger, and that we do not fellowship, although we do have cordial exchanges without animosity.
My second email went to Cliff Bjork and Jon Zens. It is an important one:
 
Hello Cliff and Jon. Johann Agricola apparently debated Luther on whether  to use law preaching or just gospel only preaching. It appears that Luther was then ready to put an obstinate Mr Agricola on trial in criminal court because of his stand for the gospel. So, Cliff in particular, the Reformers had the light. They had the truth, shining them in the face, and they walked away from it!
 
And not only that if you go to my website, http://www.newcovenanttheology.com/spurgeon.html you will see that even Spurgeon was accused of preaching law and he denied it. Of course it was obvious by the sermon that he most certainly was preaching law. Again, Spurgeon had the light and he walked!
 
These encounters are indisputable evidence that in an unbroken chain the Reformers and their offspring knew the correct doctrine of gospel only preaching and rejected it to a man! They rejected it because they did not have the truth inside! If they had Christ revealed they would have known that no law had anything to do with that divine revelation!
 
You cannot say that these peddlers of a false gospel had anything whatsoever to do with salvation as revealed both by revelation and by scripture. Please, take a stand. Don't turn your back on the Lord and his saints that were persecuted for the gospel! If this gospel is in you you should be outraged by those who have trampled on the truth!
 
Gary Anderson 
 
A discussion with Styles Watson, my response:

Hello Styles. You just made the argument for keeping a Saturday sabbath and restoration of animal sacrifices. That is part of the jot and tittle? Lol. What jot and tittle do you accept and what do you not accept? And how would you know? Clearly, the apostles are the final interpreters and they say that the law of Moses has passed away, that there is a new Law of Christ (Heb. ch 7) and that as James said, faith with works is keeping the new law of LIBERTY rather than the law of Moses which was the law of sin and death, the law which required that you do it and live establishing your very own righteousness. We know only one did so and that was Christ.

The gospel and the law of Christ, the law of faith, was hidden in the law of Moses, and now stands apart from the law of Moses. The law is fulfilled by Christ, and also, as the author of Hebrews says, is rolled away by a better promise.

The idea that not one jot or tittle would pass away is true in that Christ fulfilled the law. But clearly Paul said one man esteems a day and one man views every day the same. If jot and tittle meant sabbath day, then Paul would be in error saying it is ok for a Christian to believe that every day is alike! So then, you are misinterpreting the Lord's words.

The following is a message to one who would like to know the arguments for Predestination in the face of claims that man has free will:
 
 Hello *******. Essentially the doctrine of election (predestination) is the biblical one because of the way that God brings people into His kingdom. On my central webpage that I sent you I make the argument that the gospel is the instrument that God uses to convict, ie cut the hearts of the elect. Obviously, if the law of Moses convicted, someone like Billy Graham could say that there is no election, because the person can refused to be chosen. But if Graham is incorrect, if conviction comes by the sword of the Spirit, the gospel of the savior, then one cut by that conviction cannot refuse to be chosen.
 
The problem with Covenant Theology, the dominant theology of sacral "Christendom", is that it has within it the seeds of capitulation to free will. The Covenant Theologians all stated their belief in election. However, their insistence upon law preaching and use of sacral power (as in Augustines view that men could be compelled to come into the church by force), totally destroys their adherence to the doctrine of predestination. Indeed if you view my websites: http://www.newcovenanttheology.com/calvin.html  http://www.newcovenanttheology.com/bunyan.html  
 
you can see the extent that the Protestants went to great lengths to have these long repentances and also preached in such a way as to make it more likely that the listeners would put themselves in the "way of grace" by mulling over the law, by dredging up their sinfulness regarding particular sins.
 
The examples in the scripture regarding repentance was quite different. The many Jews who heard Peter's message were not asked to introspect regarding this or that sin. It was their unbelief regarding the savior that came under conviction. The gospel cut them to the heart regarding unbelief. Indeed, that is exactly what was predicted by Christ in John 16:8-9. The Spirit was sent to convict the world of sin because they do NOT BELIEVE.
 
The listeners to Peter had no choice but to ask how to be saved. They could not, having had their hearts circumcised by the spirt, refuse to enter His Kingdom! Could a child who was circumcised refuse to enter the economy of Moses? That physical example teaches us of the spiritual, as Christ always had done in His ministry on earth.
 
So, we see that the elect must be convicted of the Spirit, and indeed, we know from the book of Ephesians that these were chosen in Christ from before the foundation of the world. In Romans chapter 9 we see that clearly, God had mercy on whom He chose, and did so before the people in question had done either good or bad. And of course, Jesus, speaking to the pharisees said that the reason, the cause of them not believing was because they were not His sheep. He also said He had sheep of another fold, ie the Gentiles who had not yet even heard the gospel!
 
I hope these thoughts help.
 
Sincerely,
Gary D Anderson
       
 

 

 

 

Hello *****. It is good to hear from you. You have gone > over a lot of complex subject matter in a short letter. I > would like to have a give and take with you, as so few > really care to take the time to communicate with me. I am > not scholar, but neither were the apostles, were they? Even > Paul the most learned of them all said people would come as > angels of light, and they would be even better at speaking > than he was. > > What set the apostles and true Christians apart is the > Son revealed in them, at the time of God's choosing. > > It is interesting that the hard-shells believed in many > good things, like the equality of the Son to the Father. > They rejected eternal generation. However, my understanding > of their belief system is that they do not believe that > justification is revealed in this life. That is, they > believe that eternal justification before the world was made > does not play out in this life, so that there is no need to > preach the gospel. At least some of them believe that. It is > almost like they do not apply the knowledge they have to > their own salvation. I don't believe that they even know > the Lord at all! {edit:Hardshells believe justification is optional but this is a false gospel that rejects the need for Christ revealed by faith in all the elect in this life!} > > When I write that the gospel is the power of God, the > sword of the Spirit, I mean what scripture has said, that > this gospel is applied to the hearts of the elect at the > appointed time. The gospel is ignored by most, hated by > some, embraced by very very few, and is modified into a > false gospel by thousands. I happen to believe that very few > will be saved, and that it appears that the Gentiles are not > embracing the gospel at all. I am not saying no gentile can > be saved because there may be an overlap, but I believe this > power of God is for those descended from the Jews, *****, > and God is speaking to us now. > > I don't believe that many with Jewish descent will be > saved either, but that it is our time. I have testified to > Messianic Jews and have come away with great disappointment. > If you take the gospel to the Jews you will not necessarily > have a dime of success, but certainly it is a worthy cause. > > I want you to know that I have been shunned even by folks > who claim to believe as I do, so I am pretty much a loner, > hoping to find some people to communicate with who stand for > what I stand for. John Piper is someone I don't know > personally, but he has not even embraced New Covenant > Theology as opposed to Covenant Theology. How can he be a > teacher when he doesn't even make a choice about that > !!!?? > > As far as his view of the gospel, I am not certain what > he believes fully, however I would say that the gospel is > the truth applied to the heart which brings about true > repentance and faith. In my case, I had heard the gospel > prior to my conversion at age 21. But one day my soul was > overshadowed by darkness, and my sense was as one who was > lost and falling and in great distress. The need for a > savior immediately came to mind and the darkness and > distress was lifted. > > Soon after I was filled with joy not from this world. I > have since checked out almost every belief system under the > sun, and have come to New Covenant Theology with an > understanding that most who teach it are not willing to come > outside the camp to stand with me. ***** you must understand > that most are trying to make money off the gospel, and they > are trying to do what Paul refused to do. The gospel simply > is not for sale, and those who wish to sell it want to say > they are Protestant because those are the people willing to > buy their publications. > > Regarding question 2 if you remember the parable, the > seeds take root in different kinds of soil. It is my view > that the Spirit comes upon man, and that the Spirit makes > the elect receptive to the gospel message. It is not as if > the gospel words have some sort of mysterious power in and > of themselves. I don't believe that. I believe that the > soil is prepared in the elect for that gospel. Look at Paul > on the road to Damascus. He had heard and ignored the > gospel. But the Spirit of God overshadowed him and blinded > him and put him in great distress. Likewise in Acts, 2 > Peter's words of gospel were used to cut the hearts of > the hearers, and their soil was prepared by the Spirit so > they were cut by those words. > > If the concept of the words of the gospel as sort of a > magic power is Piper's position I would like to read > more. I would consider that to be beyond the parable which > says many are called and few are chosen, which says that > many hear but don't hear and clearly what sets apart > those who do hear is the state of the soil that receives the > words. Please correspond to me at ********** for > quicker response. Thanks again, **** for the email. Gary
StumbleUpon My StumbleUpon Page

The gospel is free according to the Apostle Paul. There is never any charge here at this site for the gospel. 2 Cor 2:17. I have added content of a free Bible search which is shown in KJV but can be switched to NIV etc. I believe it is valuable to use various reputable translations, and now it is free as well!

 



This following scripture from the Apostle Paul devastates the theology, Covenant Theology, that has resulted in church state abuse, wars in the name of Christ, persecution of Jews by Martin Luther (See the Luther/Menno link) and the murder of men in the name of Christ by both Catholics and Protestants historically:

"To the Jews I became a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law, THOUGH I AM NOT FREE FROM GOD'S LAW BUT AM UNDER CHRIST'S LAW."  (1 Cor. 9:20-21)

This website rejects Theonomy, or the belief that nations of the world can be "Christian" and therefore can become the keeper of true religion. If this were true Jesus would not have said that His kingdom was NOT OF THIS WORLD. The leaders of the church would not have been the Apostles but rather men who controlled government. It is not wrong for a Christian to serve in government, but the only holy people are the believers in Christ. Any other view is evil.