To address something discussed at about the 33:00 mark. “Repent” means to turn. The context doesn’t change the meaning of “repent”, it determines what is being repented from or to. So in the same way it’s not correct to lump in sins every time “repent” is mentioned, it’s not correct to always lump in unbelief too. The argument is brought up that God repents to expose the fallacy above. But yes, neither side should be making the fallacy.
Enjoyable cordial conversation. I hope you discuss those who believe salvation is trusting in Jesus and repentance after rather than salvation is repentance and faith.
30:00 is a misstatement of what Calvinists generally believe. We believe repentance is a part of the process of salvation, granted by God through regeneration. The regenerate heart will repent unto salvation. It will also continue, naturally, in an attitude of repentance, in the process of sanctification.
So right. I had a New Testament at 12 years old and never fell for the Roman Catholic indoctrination of my family. Much later on, my sister in law got saved and it took her 8 years before her eyes opened to the RCC and she left for a Baptist church. We really can't judge anyone outside of their confession that Jesus is their Savior.
Charlie keeps using the strawman that those of us who teach that fruit is not evidence of salvation are somehow teaching people that sin is fine. Hypothetically, you are still saved regardless of any change but all the churches that teach salvation is by faith alone also do preach hard against sin. They just do it correctly and keep it separate from salvation. Although I agree that not everyone that says "you have to repent of your sins" is unsaved and just have bad terminology, but Charlie just muddies the gospel message by causing confusion, making people think that changing their lives plays part in salvation. Note: I am from Australia and personally know people who have attended Charlie's church who all have the same testimony that he preaches a fruit based salvation.
James 2 teaches us that our beliefs should affect our behavior and that our fruit is evidence of the root within us. This then justifies us in the sight of our fellow man, so to say "works are a fruit and evidence of salvation" is not contradictory to Scripture in anyway.
@@CDaniel1996James 2 is not about a salvation faith. James 2 is referring to a general faith we should have going through life. The example in James 2:14-17 is about having faith that a brother or sister will be okay even though they are naked and destitute of daily food. The message is to add works to that faith and be the one to help them. Faith in the bible is not always in reference to faith in Jesus. Example: Having faith that God will providing for you has nothing to do with salvation, but is still a faith.
@@matthewhorsfall4159 James is writing his epistle to saved believers, admonishing them to exercise true religion, rather than vain religion of hypocrisy. James 2:14 KJV What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? By asking the question can faith save him, the writer is implying that a faith akin to the devils, like a mental assent, does not save a person. God is acknowledging man’s desire to see something with his own eyes, because unlike God, we cannot see other men’s hearts where faith may or may not reside. Therefore, works serve to justify, not before God, but in the sight of other men, just like Abraham did when he offered up Isaac. Just because we can’t see a person’s works doesn’t automatically mean we should declare them unsaved, because they could just simply be carnal. As Haddad said, we are talking about people who pay lip service to God but NEVER display anything, not even a love for the brethren or even the slightest interest in the things of God, but show complete and total indifference toward their own “salvation” their entire life. I’m not interested in carrying water for a “free grace” or “Lordship” crowd. I just want to get to the bottom of a balanced historical position. You cannot divorce faith from Christ, the definition of faith according to Hebrews 12 is “looking unto Jesus.” The man in the example who did nothing to help his brother when it was in his own power to do so is not an example of a person who has faith, but rather lacks it outright. Our faith in Christ SHOULD absolutely affect our behavior and that is evident all throughout the New Testament.
@ I agree that a "mental assent" doesn't save you. Free grace does not suggest that you have to agree to some facts and you're saved, otherwise most Christians would be saved. What the bible teaches is that believing on Jesus means putting 100% of your faith/trust on the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ as full atonement for your sins. That means you cannot trust Jesus 99% and 1% in your works, because that is not complete trust, which is why most Christians are not saved. We can dispute over James 2 until Christ returns, but I truly believe it has nothing to do with salvation. I think that remains consistent with the rest of the bible as there are hundreds of passage that declare salvation is by faith without works, then we get to James 2 and mistakenly infer that faith includes works. James 2 doesn't make sense from a salvation standpoint, which is why James 2 cannot have anything to do with salvation. Faith is not something that necessarily prompts action. If I had faith the prime minister/president was to do a great job for my country, it doesn't mean I am going to go and vote, campaign or even bring up my support for them. But I am trusting in them to make a good change to my nation. Yet somehow faith doesn't work that way with resting on Jesus for salvation...
Actually, people that teach fruit is not an evidence of salvation are unregenerate people, heretics and false teachers, for its a "damnable heresy" (2 Pet 2:1; Gal 1:6-9; Rom 16:17; Ti 3:10-11). Repeatedly the Bible indicates that salvation ALWAYS produces fruit and evidence without exception (Ezk. 36:25-27; Jer. 23:3; Ps. 1:1-3; Pr. 11:30; 12:12b; Matt. 3:1-12; 7:15-20; 13:8-23; 21:28-32, 41-44; Mk. 4:20-29; Lk. 8:15-16; Jn. 4:35-38; 15:1-16; Rom. 11:16; 2 Cor. 5:18-20; 9:10; Col. 1:4-6; Jam. 1:18; 2:14-26; 3:17; etc - which is how we know we are truly saved and those that we fellowship with), and those that don’t have it, are false believers (the entire epistle of 1 John, James, Parable of the sower and seed: the wayward, stony and thorny soils, etc). It is by the outcome that we know we are saved. True faith always produces something. What you are advocating for is in fact dead faith (Jam 2:14-26). Without repenting of your sins for salvation, you will remain unsaved. Period. Arguing against this clear biblical truth is both ridiculous and foolish to begin with, but it dovetails with the fruitless “salvation.” Throwing our invective logical fallacies by changing the meaning of this by implying that someone has to change their life first, also doesn’t help your cause but only further condemns your guilty estate. Every person in the world that is actually truly born again knows you have to turn from your sins in order to be saved and that fruit/evidence of salvation starts at the very moment of the new birth (e.g., Col 1:4-6; Matt 13:23). But true repentance is much more than just turning from your sins. True repentance involves all three faculties of man: the intellect, the emotions, and the volition (will), noted in the three Hebrew words and four Greek words translated as repentance or its principles. These truth are found in hundreds of passages of scripture, and then on top of that, the many examples of salvation throughout Scripture. It appears to me that you have been thoroughly corrupted by the wolf in sheep’s clothing Steven Anderson, your mentor in the faith according to your TH-cam page. There seems to be a very big problem in Australia with many professing “believers” so easily deceived and blown about by all winds of doctrine (Eph 4), following after strange and diverse doctrines (Heb 13:9), such as Steven Anderson, Pentecostals, Keswick heresy, Big IFB Revivalist Camp, and many more, a list as long as a book. When you slam into a Christless eternity in the fires of the eternal inferno, you will fully come to sadly realize that you believed a lie and a false gospel and that it had dire consequences. But I believe you know it already, only your pride and stubbornness prevents you from humbling yourself with a poor and broken and contrite heart to Jesus Christ as Lord, for He is Lord and He must be submitted and surrendered to, to be saved (cf. . Or maybe it’s that sin that you don’t want to turn from, hence the push for the false gospel? On our 2020 Scriptural Vision dot come website we have a gospel tract (“ARE YOU SAVED?”) that you need to read and then genuinely, truly Repent or you will surely perish! We also have a number of reports on this subject of repentance, true faith and gospel, and even one that exposes Steven Anderson. Or will Pr 18:2 be true of you? “A fool hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself.”
I'm only 33 minutes in but I'm going to hazard a guess. Based on what I've heard so far, I'm going to suggest that everything Charlie says to the end of this video could be expressed very simply like this. "You know there's a lot of nominal Christians out there and I'm very concerned about that!" Now for the rest of the video.😁
The deification of feelings as a standard of Truth has been taught for a long time now. That's why we have an epidemic of spoiled brat narcissist ingrates. Those who determine that their experience and their feelings regarding salvation are now the required standard for any authentic salvation, make a grave error. An individual's emotional state at the time of salvation or any other time is completely irrelevant when it comes to anyone else. The idea seems to be, if you're not reduced to a blubbering pile of sorrow you're probably not saved. Making my feelings and my experience the standard for everyone else is egotistical and narcissistic, and I've been reduced to a blubbering pile of sorrow many times! 😁
It's as if there's a whole religion built around the word "repent", based on the particular emotional connection the individual has with that word, with various schools of thought, but all of them making way too much out of a simple word. It seems the basic definition for repent (change your mind) is not enough for many.
Pastor McMurtry do you believe repentance is Godly sorrow and believe? I wish you would have Christopher Johnson on your podcast to discuss this topic. I talked with him and he said if he was invited he will do it.
@@luckekjv9516 Two things: 1. In that verse, it is not defining repentance as godly sorrow. Rather, godly sorrow led the Corinthian church to repentance. 2. Read the verses before and after verse 10. The godly sorrow the church experienced was due to the rebuke they received in the previous letter (1st Corinthians), they repented from their errors as a church, and saved their church as a result. This is not about the salvation of their individual souls, they saved their church from falling apart.
That is literally not the definition of the word repent. The modern definitions for the word repent are wrong. Simply check the Greek word and it's definition.
Suggestion: Please invite Leighton Flowers who has a youtube channel (soteriology101) that deals with PROVISIONISM which is an alternative of Calvinism and different from Free Grace theology.
![Fall Asleep Listening to Genesis: Bedtime Scripture for Deep Sleep [Holy Bible Audio]](/img/n.gif)
To address something discussed at about the 33:00 mark. “Repent” means to turn. The context doesn’t change the meaning of “repent”, it determines what is being repented from or to. So in the same way it’s not correct to lump in sins every time “repent” is mentioned, it’s not correct to always lump in unbelief too.
The argument is brought up that God repents to expose the fallacy above. But yes, neither side should be making the fallacy.
I really enjoyed this discussion! I do agree with Pastor McMurtry on this
OOOOO! Looking forward to this. I hate the misconceptions.
"Repent" = Change your mind.
Enjoyable cordial conversation. I hope you discuss those who believe salvation is trusting in Jesus and repentance after rather than salvation is repentance and faith.
30:00 is a misstatement of what Calvinists generally believe. We believe repentance is a part of the process of salvation, granted by God through regeneration. The regenerate heart will repent unto salvation. It will also continue, naturally, in an attitude of repentance, in the process of sanctification.
You must repent of self righteousness
So right. I had a New Testament at 12 years old and never fell for the Roman Catholic indoctrination of my family. Much later on, my sister in law got saved and it took her 8 years before her eyes opened to the RCC and she left for a Baptist church. We really can't judge anyone outside of their confession that Jesus is their Savior.
Charlie keeps using the strawman that those of us who teach that fruit is not evidence of salvation are somehow teaching people that sin is fine.
Hypothetically, you are still saved regardless of any change but all the churches that teach salvation is by faith alone also do preach hard against sin. They just do it correctly and keep it separate from salvation.
Although I agree that not everyone that says "you have to repent of your sins" is unsaved and just have bad terminology, but Charlie just muddies the gospel message by causing confusion, making people think that changing their lives plays part in salvation.
Note: I am from Australia and personally know people who have attended Charlie's church who all have the same testimony that he preaches a fruit based salvation.
James 2 teaches us that our beliefs should affect our behavior and that our fruit is evidence of the root within us. This then justifies us in the sight of our fellow man, so to say "works are a fruit and evidence of salvation" is not contradictory to Scripture in anyway.
@@CDaniel1996James 2 is not about a salvation faith. James 2 is referring to a general faith we should have going through life.
The example in James 2:14-17 is about having faith that a brother or sister will be okay even though they are naked and destitute of daily food. The message is to add works to that faith and be the one to help them.
Faith in the bible is not always in reference to faith in Jesus. Example: Having faith that God will providing for you has nothing to do with salvation, but is still a faith.
@@matthewhorsfall4159 James is writing his epistle to saved believers, admonishing them to exercise true religion, rather than vain religion of hypocrisy.
James 2:14 KJV
What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
By asking the question can faith save him, the writer is implying that a faith akin to the devils, like a mental assent, does not save a person. God is acknowledging man’s desire to see something with his own eyes, because unlike God, we cannot see other men’s hearts where faith may or may not reside. Therefore, works serve to justify, not before God, but in the sight of other men, just like Abraham did when he offered up Isaac.
Just because we can’t see a person’s works doesn’t automatically mean we should declare them unsaved, because they could just simply be carnal. As Haddad said, we are talking about people who pay lip service to God but NEVER display anything, not even a love for the brethren or even the slightest interest in the things of God, but show complete and total indifference toward their own “salvation” their entire life.
I’m not interested in carrying water for a “free grace” or “Lordship” crowd. I just want to get to the bottom of a balanced historical position. You cannot divorce faith from Christ, the definition of faith according to Hebrews 12 is “looking unto Jesus.” The man in the example who did nothing to help his brother when it was in his own power to do so is not an example of a person who has faith, but rather lacks it outright. Our faith in Christ SHOULD absolutely affect our behavior and that is evident all throughout the New Testament.
@ I agree that a "mental assent" doesn't save you. Free grace does not suggest that you have to agree to some facts and you're saved, otherwise most Christians would be saved.
What the bible teaches is that believing on Jesus means putting 100% of your faith/trust on the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ as full atonement for your sins. That means you cannot trust Jesus 99% and 1% in your works, because that is not complete trust, which is why most Christians are not saved.
We can dispute over James 2 until Christ returns, but I truly believe it has nothing to do with salvation. I think that remains consistent with the rest of the bible as there are hundreds of passage that declare salvation is by faith without works, then we get to James 2 and mistakenly infer that faith includes works. James 2 doesn't make sense from a salvation standpoint, which is why James 2 cannot have anything to do with salvation.
Faith is not something that necessarily prompts action. If I had faith the prime minister/president was to do a great job for my country, it doesn't mean I am going to go and vote, campaign or even bring up my support for them. But I am trusting in them to make a good change to my nation. Yet somehow faith doesn't work that way with resting on Jesus for salvation...
Actually, people that teach fruit is not an evidence of salvation are unregenerate people, heretics and false teachers, for its a "damnable heresy" (2 Pet 2:1; Gal 1:6-9; Rom 16:17; Ti 3:10-11). Repeatedly the Bible indicates that salvation ALWAYS produces fruit and evidence without exception (Ezk. 36:25-27; Jer. 23:3; Ps. 1:1-3; Pr. 11:30; 12:12b; Matt. 3:1-12; 7:15-20; 13:8-23; 21:28-32, 41-44; Mk. 4:20-29; Lk. 8:15-16; Jn. 4:35-38; 15:1-16; Rom. 11:16; 2 Cor. 5:18-20; 9:10; Col. 1:4-6; Jam. 1:18; 2:14-26; 3:17; etc - which is how we know we are truly saved and those that we fellowship with), and those that don’t have it, are false believers (the entire epistle of 1 John, James, Parable of the sower and seed: the wayward, stony and thorny soils, etc).
It is by the outcome that we know we are saved. True faith always produces something. What you are advocating for is in fact dead faith (Jam 2:14-26).
Without repenting of your sins for salvation, you will remain unsaved. Period. Arguing against this clear biblical truth is both ridiculous and foolish to begin with, but it dovetails with the fruitless “salvation.” Throwing our invective logical fallacies by changing the meaning of this by implying that someone has to change their life first, also doesn’t help your cause but only further condemns your guilty estate. Every person in the world that is actually truly born again knows you have to turn from your sins in order to be saved and that fruit/evidence of salvation starts at the very moment of the new birth (e.g., Col 1:4-6; Matt 13:23). But true repentance is much more than just turning from your sins. True repentance involves all three faculties of man: the intellect, the emotions, and the volition (will), noted in the three Hebrew words and four Greek words translated as repentance or its principles. These truth are found in hundreds of passages of scripture, and then on top of that, the many examples of salvation throughout Scripture.
It appears to me that you have been thoroughly corrupted by the wolf in sheep’s clothing Steven Anderson, your mentor in the faith according to your TH-cam page. There seems to be a very big problem in Australia with many professing “believers” so easily deceived and blown about by all winds of doctrine (Eph 4), following after strange and diverse doctrines (Heb 13:9), such as Steven Anderson, Pentecostals, Keswick heresy, Big IFB Revivalist Camp, and many more, a list as long as a book.
When you slam into a Christless eternity in the fires of the eternal inferno, you will fully come to sadly realize that you believed a lie and a false gospel and that it had dire consequences. But I believe you know it already, only your pride and stubbornness prevents you from humbling yourself with a poor and broken and contrite heart to Jesus Christ as Lord, for He is Lord and He must be submitted and surrendered to, to be saved (cf. . Or maybe it’s that sin that you don’t want to turn from, hence the push for the false gospel?
On our 2020 Scriptural Vision dot come website we have a gospel tract (“ARE YOU SAVED?”) that you need to read and then genuinely, truly Repent or you will surely perish! We also have a number of reports on this subject of repentance, true faith and gospel, and even one that exposes Steven Anderson.
Or will Pr 18:2 be true of you? “A fool hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself.”
I'm only 33 minutes in but I'm going to hazard a guess. Based on what I've heard so far, I'm going to suggest that everything Charlie says to the end of this video could be expressed very simply like this. "You know there's a lot of nominal Christians out there and I'm very concerned about that!" Now for the rest of the video.😁
The deification of feelings as a standard of Truth has been taught for a long time now. That's why we have an epidemic of spoiled brat narcissist ingrates. Those who determine that their experience and their feelings regarding salvation are now the required standard for any authentic salvation, make a grave error. An individual's emotional state at the time of salvation or any other time is completely irrelevant when it comes to anyone else. The idea seems to be, if you're not reduced to a blubbering pile of sorrow you're probably not saved. Making my feelings and my experience the standard for everyone else is egotistical and narcissistic, and I've been reduced to a blubbering pile of sorrow many times! 😁
It's as if there's a whole religion built around the word "repent", based on the particular emotional connection the individual has with that word, with various schools of thought, but all of them making way too much out of a simple word. It seems the basic definition for repent (change your mind) is not enough for many.
This Charlie guy brings in confusion!!
Dud you ever notice the RCC "sign of the cross" is an upside down cross?
Wow I just did then
What is the "RCC" if I may ask?
Pastor McMurtry do you believe repentance is Godly sorrow and believe? I wish you would have Christopher Johnson on your podcast to discuss this topic. I talked with him and he said if he was invited he will do it.
Where does it say in the KJV Bible that "repentance" is "Godly sorrow and belief"?
2 corithains 7:10
@@luckekjv9516 Two things:
1. In that verse, it is not defining repentance as godly sorrow. Rather, godly sorrow led the Corinthian church to repentance.
2. Read the verses before and after verse 10. The godly sorrow the church experienced was due to the rebuke they received in the previous letter (1st Corinthians), they repented from their errors as a church, and saved their church as a result. This is not about the salvation of their individual souls, they saved their church from falling apart.
@ Try again
Look Godly sorrow causes us to turn to Christ that's what repentance means.
Repentance is sorrow of the soul and hatred for the sin committed together with a resolution not to sin again.
Try again
@@rockchalk9078 What is wrong with my answer ?
That is literally not the definition of the word repent. The modern definitions for the word repent are wrong. Simply check the Greek word and it's definition.
Suggestion: Please invite Leighton Flowers who has a youtube channel (soteriology101) that deals with PROVISIONISM which is an alternative of Calvinism and different from Free Grace theology.