Tuesday, July 24, 2007

More of the fruit of Lordship Salvation with Jim W.

I am really getting tired of this... but Jim W. wanted to let me know more of his love for me.

So here is an update here: I errored that this was James White (who has his own issues) and that this is the mysterious Jim W. It seems with this last comment he still thinks himself of some kind of superior Christian than me and others.

Here is the final comment toward me it is on the same link as above.


Jim W on July 24th, 2007
iggy, you just dont learn, do you? Now you claim
that I am “James White”. I wish I had half his Biblical knowledge. Shoot, I’d
settle for 1/4.
So, once again, you twist and slander someone who points out
your error by slandering someone else.
I have no idea how you arrive that
producing good fruit is works salvation. We produce good fruit by the grace of
God. Unless we are born again, all our works as as filthy rags. Once we are born
again, we do the will of God which is to grow in His Word, His grace, His
knowledge and by doing what He wills, we produce good fruit. That has nothing to
do with our salvation. Faith without works is dead. Remember that verse? It’s
popular with the emergent crowd. Usually used to say that we must do good works
to be saved. That’s works righteousness, which is false, and neither John Mac,
nor I, nor Jim B, nor Tony (here) believe that line of thought. Instead, our
faith in God produces good works (fruit).
And again, you claim I’m spitting
on you in my denunciation of you. How sad that you need to see correction as
people spitting on you. Do you accuse God of spitting on you when He chastens
you as He would a wayward child? Only if you are truly saved will God do this,
if you are still unregenerate, God could care less. So, maybe, just maybe,
you’re relying on your human understanding too far, relying on your sad
“friends”, MacLaren and Jones and their twisted lore for your faith and perhaps
God is using people like Tony and Jim B to show you the errors of your way.
When you learn how to read and comprehend, maybe we can talk. Until then, I
have nothing further to say to you.



Jim W's understanding of fruit is a bit off from the biblical teachings.. yet in the core we agree... yet for some reason as the same with Tony Rose and Jim Bublitz Jim W. cannot see this or admit it... notice he seems to also equate his chastisement of me with the chastisement of God... as if he is God at that point here to correct me in the things we agree on... and I can't read and comprehend! LOL!

He truly furthers my conviction to stay away from divisive people like him... If this is conforming to the image of Chirst, God have mercy on us all! I think this further shows the condition of his heart and why people need to beware of Lordship Salvation and its fruit. You see even when he agrees with me, I am wrong... and am lesser than him.

Before someone criticizes me over this please realize that I was defending Biblical truth over "absolute truth" which definition would mean that Jesus and the Bible are "just an abstract thought". This is the position Jim W. was defending. I was standing on the Biblical definition which is that Truth is the Person of Jesus Christ and from Him all Truth comes... remember it was through Jesus Christ all things were created... and He was full of Grace and Truth. (John 1)

I only am showing this to show what kind of people these are and how they treat others in the Name of Jesus... and how sad it is.

Blessed?
iggy


Here is part one

3 comments:

James said...

Greetings:

Your blog post just came up on my Google Blog Search widget. Just wondering...what "issues" do I (James White) have? Just wondering! Always interesting to see what folks say about me on the net.

James>>>
www.aomin.org

iggy said...

James,

First welcome and I am a bit honored.

This sadly was coming out of another debate where some wanted to let me know that I was wrong in standing on the Bibles definition of truth rather that accepting Platonist realism and Froege's absolute truth.

Unfortunately I thought it was you and so do apologize to you since you are here...

Yet, to answer your question I will note and I do state the respectfully... so please notice this...

I disagree with your stand on KJVonly...

I also realized by reading your debates that I cannot accept Calvinism for it many logical leaps...


Now, please I ask in all respect that I do not want to debate you on these topics as.

1. KJVonlyism is not relevant to me and where I am in my faith.

2. I have great friends who are Calvinist... so I do not hate Calvinist... I just disagree... but do not assume I am of Arminian persuasion.

I hope you can see that this is not about you and that I do respect your views though I do disagree.

I will add that I do not see you as anything like this Jim W… and I was relieved to find out that he was not you! :)

I do not know what you believe about the Lordship Salvation debate, but I am interested in your views on that.

Blessings,
iggy

iggy said...

James,

I wanted to state here that I confused you again with David Cloud... sorry!

I agree with your view on KJV onlyism yet still see it as not relevant to my faith...

Meaning, I see it really a matter of preference and rather ludicrous to state that there is an "anointed" translation.

Be Blessed,
iggy