The Narrow Path Ministries

Hello
You seem to be a covenant believer? Is that correct?
You don't believe that God made a covenant that HE will NOT break with Israel and His servant David?
If you read the OT you find that God made a promise to Israel and
"His promises are YEAH and AMEN" Just because Israel as a whole rebelled against God doesnt mean that God gave up His promises to His servant David.

At this time, God is dealing in the dispensation of grace to ALL mankind---both to the Jew and Gentile but after the rapture scripture is clear that He will full fill His promises to Abraham and other OT Saints.
Scripture is clear that God has not given up on His promises to Israel and many Jews will be His witnesses ( like the 144,000 ) as Revelations speaks about.
Sarah

Hi Sarah,

I don't know if I am a Covenant believer (I am not sure what all that label involves). I am a believer in Jesus. Therefore, I affirm all that He and His apostles affirmed. I also believe everything the Old Testament teaches. It certainly does not teach that there are any unconditional covenants that God has made with any ethnic group or political entity. I would recommend reading Jeremiah 18:7-10 where God states this principle emphatically. There are many other places that make this plain, such as Exodus 19:5-6; Lev.18:24-28; Deut.28:15ff; etc.). When I stopped letting dispensational teachers tell me what to read into the scriptures, and simply read the scriptures for myself, I changed from believing as you do to believing as I now do. God bless you, Sister!

In Jesus,

Steve

Steve,
I have to admit that when you are on, I'm usually not home. I truly hope that you are "born again" washed in the precious blood "saint of God"

By covenant I meant that you dont believe in the pre trib rapture? Is that correct?

Sir, God acts in grace ---if it was "conditional" all of us would end in hell. Salvation is a gift and there is absolutely nothing we can add to it or make it more "complete"

HE chose Israel in all their "stiff neckness" in all their depravity in PURE grace. Like the Bible says -- Israel wasnt any better then anyone else but God in PURE grace chose to "place His name and His hand on them'"

We, as humans, like to think that in our "fairness" and our "goodness" -- God could NOT be so unfair to "choose". However, HE HAD to choose or NONE of us would come to HIM. The Bible tells us that there is NONE that seeketh after God. The Bible tells us NOT to think we have the right to question God's ways because they are NOT our ways. HE chooses whom He will and if we think that is unfair then that is our own rebellion. He knows it is hard for us in our poor weak minds to accept His thoughts and ways but that is why when we are "saved" He gives us "the mind of Christ"

Dont you see in Romans where Paul rejoices that God has NOT cast away His people and that the "putting aside" of them will be their "reestablishing" when God turns back to them----

Steve, explain HOW God could give up on His servant David. He called David a "man after His own heart" (David, a man who murdered but God acted in grace to him)

God will not give up on the Abrahamic covenant and He does NOT give that covenant to us "saved" Christians of Jews and Gentiles now in the dispensation of grace.

But God will turn back to His covenant with Israel because He cannot go back on His promises to them. Think about what you are saying when you say that God does things "conditionally". If he acts to you and me "conditionally' then you might as well resign yourself to an eternity of hell.

Sarah

PS I hope you will try to "hear' what Iam saying and answer me again

Hi Sarah,
I have no trouble "hearing" you. In fact, I used to say many of the same things back when I let dispensational teachers tell me what the Bible means. I prefer these days to believe what the Bible actually says.

For example, you wrote:

" God acts in grace ---if it was "conditional" all of us would endin hell."

and,

"Think about what you are saying when you say that God does things "conditionally". If he acts to you and me "conditionally' then you might as well resign yourself to an eternity of hell."

If you would like for me to hear you, do you place the same requirement on yourself to hear what I say? I am afraid you did not read the scriptures I gave you in my last email, where God clearly stated that His covenant with Israel at Sinai was conditional. If you believe what the Bible says, you must believe it when it says these things—not only when it says the things you want it to say.

Our salvation is indeed conditional. It requires that we believe in Christ. This is everywhere in the New Testament given as the condition for salvation. If someone does not believe, they will not be saved. This is what the scripture says. Therefore, savation is conditional upon believing in Christ. Why should such a position condemn us all to hell? I believe in Christ, and you probably do also. These conditions, then, have been met in our case, as they have been in all Christian people of all times. Your statement does not make biblical sense.

You wrote:

"By covenant I meant that you dont believe in the pre trib rapture? Is that correct?"

I am glad I asked what you meant, since your definition is not that of anyone I have ever read or heard speak about "Covenant Theology." Actually, no one believed in a pre-trib rapture prior to the nineteenth century, as near as historical records can reveal. This is because the doctrine is not found in the Bible. That is why I abandoned the doctrine after having taught it for many years. There is no verse of the Bible stating that there will be a pre-tribulational rapture. Every relevant passage in scripture places the rapture at the second coming of Christ—not before.

You wrote:

"We, as humans, like to think that in our "fairness" and our "goodness" -- God could NOT be so unfair to "choose""

I am human, and I do not think the way you describe. I believe that God has the right to choose whatever it may please Him to choose—and for whatever reason. However, what God has the right to do does not in itself tell us what God does do. The Bible tells us what God does do, what He does choose, and on what basis He makes His choices.

You wrote:

"Dont you see in Romans where Paul rejoices that God has NOT cast away His people and that the "putting aside" of them will be their "reestablishing" when God turns back to them----"

No, I don't see Paul saying that. You are referring to Romans 11, where Paul asks if God has forsaken His people. The answer Paul gives is that God has not forsaken His people "whom He foreknew" (that is, the believers—Romans 8:29-30). I agree with Paul. God has indeed saved His people, just as He promised to do. What Paul goes on to explain is that these people whom God "foreknew" do not include all Jewish people (most of whom have lived and perished without Christ), but rather they are a remnant of that race (Rom.11:5-7) who have been joined by the believing Gentiles in one body (or one "olive tree"), in Christ. If you will read Romans 11 without the dispensational blinders, you will find that this is exactly what Paul says.

You wrote:

"Steve, explain HOW God could give up on His servant David."

God has not given up on David. God made a promise to raise up David's son to rule forever. The New Testament tells us that God has fulfilled this promise, in the enthronement of Christ at the right hand of God (cf., Acts 2:29-36; 13:32-34)

You wrote:

"God will not give up on the Abrahamic covenant and He does NOT give that covenant to us "saved" Christians of Jews and Gentiles now in the dispensation of grace."

Here you give me the choice of believing your words or those of scripture. Your statement is directly contradicted in Galatians 3:29.

You wrote:

"But God will turn back to His covenant with Israel because He cannot go back on His promises to them."

So God must only tell the truth when He makes promises, but must not tell the truth when He makes threats? You should read Deuteronomy 28 (I gave it to you in my last email, but you apparently did not read it). I will post a small portion of what God said to Israel when He made His covenant with them (you really should read the whole context, which I will not bother to post):

“But it shall come to pass, if you do not obey the voice of the LORD your God, to observe carefully all His commandments and His statutes which I command you today, that all these curses will come upon you and overtake you...Moreover all these curses shall come upon you and pursue and overtake you, until you are destroyed, because you did not obey the voice of the LORD your God, to keep His commandments and His statutes which He commanded you. 46 And they shall be upon you for a sign and a wonder, and on your descendants forever...And it shall be, that just as the LORD rejoiced over you to do you good and multiply you, so the LORD will rejoice over you to destroy you and bring you to nothing; and you shall be plucked from off the land which you go to possess." (Deut.28:15, 45-46, 63)

We can discuss this further when you can find a way to harmonize these verses with your position. Feel free to call the program to discuss these matters on the air.

Blessings!
Steve

Steve,

You cant wish "blessings" on me because I do not think that your thoughts of being ''saved" are the same thoughts
as I know the Bible speaks of.

It makes me sad that Christian radio seems to be accepting false doctrine more and more. I know so called "christian "programming on tv is full of false doctrine. Too much of man instead of telling folks how to be "born again". Too much about money !!!!!!

The very FIRST thing that bothers me about you is, that you don't seem to really emphasize the NEED for men and women (in total depravity) to be "born again". You just go on and on about what Steve Gregg has figured out .

You seem to think if someone studies long enough he will give up dispensationalism. I know that those who wrote books on dispensationalism studied most fervantly. They truly were men of God keeping on their face before God. I dont follow ANY man at all but I do KNOW that dispensationalism is absolutely correct by my long time studying and hearing the truths of the Bible.

You might say that one needs to believe in Christ but the question is, are you "saved" by the precious blood of Christ. If one is NOT saved by the precious blood of Christ then all our intellectual figuring on the Bible is satanic.

Steve, when you believed in Christ did you come to Him knowing that you were "dead in trespasses and sins" and that you could not save yourself?

You seem to be so much like so many I speak with---you do not seem to understand the wonderful message of the gospel. You do not seem to know it is an absolute "finished work" and that those who are "saved" are "complete in Him"

You are so full of intellectualism and so full of what Steve Gregg has figured out . I would like to ask you a question:

If you believe your salvation is conditional then what do you do every single day to keep up with all the conditions you think God puts on it.? You know you are putting works as the condition for your salvation, dont you?? IT cannot be any other way. Salvation is either ALL works or ALL grace.

Sarah

Sarah,

You wrote:

'If you believe your salvation is conditional then what do you do every single day to keep up with all the conditions you think God puts on it.?"

However, you are not really responding to my actual position as I stated it. If you are not going to read what I write back to you, why continue this dialogue?

What do you mean by the following: "what do you do every single day to keep up with all the conditions you think God puts on it"? If you read my last post, I said that the condition for salvation is faith in Christ. There are no other conditions. Why do you twist my position? Is it because there is no fault that you can find with my actual statements (since they agree with every relevant scripture on the subject), so that, in order to continue criticizing, you have to misrepresent my view?

Likewise, when you say, "You know you are putting works as the condition for your salvation, dont you?" you similarly misrepresent my position. I stated clearly that the condition is faith, not works. Teaching that salvation is by faith is the opposite of saying that salvation is by works. Why do you say that I am teaching the opposite of what I actually teach? Obviously, you cannot argue against my actual beliefs (since they are scriptural). Instead, you have to pretend I said something else that is unscriptural, so that you can continue to find fault. This is not the way honest people discuss the things of God.

It seems that you are not interested in scripture, since you do not read, or do not interact with the scriptures that I have sent to you. Perhaps they simply don't agree with "what Sarah has figured out," so you wish to ignore them. If this is so, there certainly can be no value in continuing our dialogue. I am interested in the teaching of scripture. By contrast, so far as can be determined your emails, you only have a great confidence in your opinions, but not the slightest interest in the actual statements in the Bible.

You judge people by whether they conform to your ideas of "total depravity" (a term not found in scripture, and therefore not given in scripture as a belief necessary for salvation). You apparently judge (as the Pharisees did) by the traditions of men, so that you reject the Word of God. Look at our correspondence. Which of us is using scripture and which is ignoring it?

Enough said.

Steve

Jason wrote:To her credit, I actually believe her when she says she didn't learn her doctrines from men because I've never read a Calvinist who was Dispensational.

mattrose wrote:I've seen calvinism and dispensationalism combined often amongst Christians (Though, I agree, not many scholarly Christians).

I have a theory as to why this combination is attractive to a certain kind of person. I think it's attractive to a person who craves certainty and dislikes unanswered questions. Both calvinism and dispensationalism may be viewed as theologies that explain everything. They put doctrines in neat little packages and on fancy little charts that everything fits on. Even a non-scholar can somewhat master these and feel like they have an answer to every question or argument posed against them (calvinist's can rely on 2 or 3 doctrines to get them out of any apparent jam, "total depravity, God's sovereignty"

Steve
So you honestly believe that when one is "saved" they are eternally saved? I honor you for that if you do because salvation is ALL about HIM.

Also, if you do not believe in TD then what does it mean to you where scripture says "all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags"? Also, that we are "dead in trespasses and sins" before we are "born again" If that is not TD then I dont know what is.
Sarah

Yes, I believe in eternal salvation. Is there any other kind? I simply agree with scripture that this salvation is conditioned upon faith. A person without faith cannot participate in salvation—that would include a person who once did have faith, but has it no more (e.g., Luke 8:13/1 Tim.4:1).

I am sorry that you have no more ability than you have to look at Isaiah and Ephesians in context, but that you have been trained by human teachers to see in them what is not there.

The "filthy rags" of Isaiah 64:6 are the religious works (temple ceremonies, etc.) of the apostate Jews. It is not "our righteousness" that Isaiah speaks of, but "our righteousnesses." In the context of Isaiah's message to his people, the complaint is that the people are themselves "unclean" which makes their worship activities unclean as well. We see the same theme in Isaiah 1:13-15; 58:3-4 and 66:3-4 (among other places).

Isaiah is not teaching a theology lesson about the nature of mankind. He is making a prophetic denunciation against an apostate nation who have continued to pretend to be righteous by perpetuating their ritual worship practices. Thus, their "righteousnesses" (that is, their religious practices, upon which they depend for their status of being righteous), are foul and putrid in God's sight. That is Isaiah's message to his people. To take this comment as a theological teaching about the nature of all mankind goes far beyond the scope of Isaiah's intended meaning. He does not even say that their uncleanness is a birth condition. Elsewhere, Jeremiah says that this corruption is an acquired state, brought about by their continual habits of disobedience:

"Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard its spots? Then may you also do good who are accustomed to do evil." ( Jer.13:23)

This is also the case with the Ephesians, whom Paul says were once "dead in trespasses and sins" (Eph.2:1). This condition is not said to have been their condition from birth. He says that it was the state they were in when they "once walked according to the course of this world" (2:2), a walk which was "as the rest of the Gentiles walk...who being past feeling, have given themselves over to licentiousness..." (3:17, 19).

In other words, these Christian Gentiles had formerly been in the spiritually dead condition of other unsaved Gentiles, who, having "given themselves over" to sinful practices, were "past feeling" (suggesting they had once had feeling, but were beyond that point now).

There is no suggestion that people are born "dead in sin." In fact, in speaking of his own case, Paul says that, in his earliest life, he "was alive once without the law" (Romans 7:9), but had been "slain" and made "dead" when he had reached a point of moral awareness that made him culpable of sin (Rom.7:9, 11).

In any case, those who are said to be "dead," in this sense, are quite capable of repenting and availing themselves of the grace of life, as Paul says in Colossians 2:13:

"And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses."

Notice that the making alive took place after the forgiving. The latter occurs when we have faith in Christ (Rom.4:3/Gal.3:6/James 2:23). Therefore, this is the order of events, according to Paul: Faith, forgiveness, regeneration.

We see the same in the story of the prodigal son. Jesus describes a boy who "was dead" (Luke 15:24), but who "came to himself" and repented (Luke 15:17).

I have little expectation that you will give open minded consideration to the meaning of these verses, since you have already shown a pattern in not responding to the several verses I presented earlier.