Increasing in the Knowledge of Him, by David Bishop

Colossians 1:9 reads, “And so, from the day we heard, we have not ceased to pray for you, asking that you may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding, so as to walk in a manner worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing to Him, bearing fruit in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of Him.”

We don’t begin as Christians in the lie, and then increase to the truth. We begin in knowledge and then increase in that knowledge.

According to John 6, God’s will is than Christ shall lose none of those the Father has given Him. The gospel includes the news that all Christ has accomplished He has accomplished solely for the elect. According to John 6 then, eternal security is a propositional truth inherent in the gospel. It is also a propositional truth that Arminians reject.

The rejection of eternal security constitutes a full rejection of the gospel, for the word of truth is not the word of truth without it. The disagreement between the gospel haters and the justified elect centers on the how and the when of salvation. They think some are saved even though they’ve been led to believe a lie about God.

No Arminian is saved. Not one. Some of the elect are led out of Armianism before they are saved, but no one is saved through an Arminian gospel. Gordon Clark assumes far too much and reads far too much into the text when he makes the claim that the thief on the cross knew nothing of the atonement.

How exactly did Clark know this? After all, the thief says some very peculiar things. For instance, he calls Jesus Lord. Now why would he do that? The Jews called Him Rabbi and teacher, but aside from the thief, Peter was the only other one to call Him Lord, and he did this after the Father had revealed it to him. Also, this thief tells the other thief that Jesus was innocent. How did he know that?

Explore posts in the same categories: arminians

Tags: , ,

You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.

5 Comments on “Increasing in the Knowledge of Him, by David Bishop”

  1. markmcculley Says:

    . . There is a widely prevalent theory, that truth may be of the feelings as well as of the intellect; that it may not only come thus from two independent sources, but may be contradictory so that what is true to the feelings may be false to the intellect and visa versa; and that as moral character and so Christian life are rooted in the voluntary nature, of which the feelings are an expression, the Christian life may be developed and, some say, would better be developed, without reference to such intellectual conceptions as doctrinal statements.

    This theory is radically false. Feeling can give knowledge no more than can excitement. As Prof. Bowen has well said, “Feeling is a state of mind consequent on the reception of some idea.” That is, it does not give knowledge; it presupposes it.

    Our Lord said, “It is only he who wills to obey God, whose heart is right toward Him, who shall know the doctrine whether it be of Him.” On the other hand, zeal in Christ’s cause will be strong and abiding in proportion as the faith from which it springs and by which it is nourished is intelligent. Zeal without knowledge is dangerous and short-lived.

    William Brenton Greene, Jr.
    “Broad Churchism and the Christian Life,” Princeton Theological Review, 4 (July 1906), pp. 311-13.

  2. markmcculley Says:

    … the Scriptures make no distinction between the head and the heart, as if mathematics came from the head and faith from the heart. The Old Testament frequently contrasts the heart and the lips – sincerity versus hypocrisy – but the term heart, at least seventy-five percent of the time in the Old Testament, means the mind or intellect.

    Gordon Haddon Clark
    What Is Saving Faith — p. 55

  3. markmcculley Says:

    p223, “Sola Fide and the Roman Catholic Church”, Faith Alone, Zondervan, 2015, Thomas Schreiner—“Someone may be saved by faith alone, even if they deny faith alone. In humility,.we must acknowledge that this matter is complex…On the other hand, if someone understands what he or she is rejecting in turning away from justification by faith alone, then such a person will not be delivered from the wrath of God. …Roman Catholics who share Augustine’s understanding of justification as transformation by grace belong to the people of God. However, matters are more complex than they first appear, for we cannot ignore the fact that 1600 years have passed since Augustine wrote…and the Roman Catholic Church has become less and Augustinian and espouse a view of free will.”
    Better then not to share any knowledge with all those in the Southern Baptist Convention who believe in “freewill”. If they are never told anything about election or faith alone or justification, then they won’t be able to be condemned for rejecting the truth. Since so many of them teach that the only sin God now counts is “rejecting Jesus”, surely we should not disturb their ignorant bliss by teaching them other doctrines for them to possibly reject. Don’t ask, and certainly, don’t tell…

  4. markmcculley Says:

    Giovanni Camacho—–If you don’t understand something, then you can’t really agree with it. If you agree with something without understanding it, that is foolishness. To say yes to something you don’t understand is foolish. It’s like signing a document in Japanese when you can’t read Japanese. What if you just agreed to have your family killed? Did you just shake your head, assuming you would agree and sign the document?

    Those who have been taught false gospels (but have not yet been granted repentance from dead works) are familiar with certain historical facts about Jesus while not yet believing His gospel. These are those who say we are conditioning salvation on perfect knowledge. They still think that the gospel is about something the sinner does to get salvation.

    They don’t believe that belief of the gospel is a result of being been placed into Christ’s death and then effectually called. They piously claim that it is “Christ who saves” while denying both His person and His work. In their book, as long as you believe Christ saves, then you’re good.

    Of course, they think their brand of antinomianism is better because they think the sinner only needs a little knowledge (correct or incorrect) in order to be saved. They think that because their version of the gospel (a lie. a falsehood) makes salvation conditionally available to all, that it is better.

    John 10: He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he has brought all his own outside, he goes ahead of them. The sheep follow him because they recognize his voice. They will not follow a stranger.

    Knowledge of the gospel and agreement with the gospel is the result of Christ’s death imputed. When you are justified, you WILL believe certain things and NOT other things about Christ and His death. Not to make Christ’s death work, but as a result of Christ’s death working. Believing the right gospel is something purchased by Christ’s death. Insisting that any gospel will do is the testimony of the natural man who doesn’t care about the glory of God in salvation.

    It is the death of Christ that makes God just in forgiving certain sinners. The question is-how do you know that death was for you? You should NEVER assume that the death was for you until you believe the gospel.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: