The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Strange view on Assurance

Recently I have gotten involved with a debate with an individual who believes that is someone doubts thier salvation - that they are not a Christian. He also believes that the Psalms do not speak at all of David's experience but are only Christ speaking through David and are therefore 100% speaking about Christ. He also belives that faith is mere intellectual assent to the facts of the Gospel.

The biggest issue I am debating though, right now is the topic of Assurance. I have written a few replies but I am curious to get your thoughts on this issue. Below is one of his notes regarding this topic:

"Does 2 Corinthians 5:6 say that believers are

(a) sometimes confident Christ has saved them

(b) most of the time confident He has saved them

(c) always confident Christ has saved them


Answer: "So we are ALWAYS CONFIDENT, knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord."

The context: "1 For WE KNOW that if our earthly house, this tent, is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. ... 6So we are ALWAYS CONFIDENT, knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord. 7For we walk by faith, not by sight. 8We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord." (2 Cor 5:1-8)

The Greek...

"So we are ALWAYS CONFIDENT [tharrheo]"

tharrheo thar-hreh'-o: to exercise courage -- be bold, boldly, have confidence, be confident.

thatrrheo -- Translated Words
KJV (6) - be bold, 2; be confident, 1; boldly, 1; confident, 1; have confidence, 1;
NAS (6) - bold, 2; confidently, 1; good courage, 2; have confidence, 1;


"So WE ARE ALWAYS CONFIDENT, knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord." (2 Cor 5:6) ... Now, my question is -- If believers are always confident, doesn't that mean they never have doubts about their salvation? The righteousness of Christ is enough to comfort them at all times, right? "

This raises the question...

Why does John Piper think that, "DEMAND FOR A KIND OF ABSOLUTE, mathematical CERTAINTY about [your] right standing with God is ASKING FOR TOO MUCH. (When I Don't Desire God, p217-218)

The Apostles had absolutely certainty that they were justified. And all believers have the same precious faith as the Apostles (2 Pet 1:1). So why does Piper say "certainty about your right standing with God is asking too much"? Isn't that contrary to the whole Bible which says believers "hold fast the beginning of the assurance firm to the end" and "hold fast to the boldness and rejoicing in the hope firm to the end" (Hebrews 3) ?


Could it be that Piper's confusing view of faith means that for him "CERTAINTY about his right standing with God is ASKING FOR TOO MUCH"?

In fact, as you will soon see from quotes provided later in this article,

I) Piper says all men know God deep down, even without the Holy Spirit and he also says "it is possible to believe the promises of God and be lost"
II) So Piper affirms that faith is more than believing the promises of God
III) Indeed Piper says that faith is 1) love, 2) joy, 3) savoring, 4) contentment, 5) confidence, 6) hope and 7) a relationship.
IV) Piper makes faith confusing and complicated and has departed from the Biblical teaching that faith is simply an assurance / conviction of the Gospel (Heb 11).
V) Also, Piper must always suspect his faith is "triggered by innate longings" that all men have without the Holy Spirit. In other words, Piper must suspect his faith has been triggered by his innate longing and not the Holy Spirit.
VI) Moreover, because Piper makes faith complicated and confusing, it is impossible for him to be certain he has faith. He admits this and writes, "DEMAND FOR A KIND OF ABSOLUTE, mathematical CERTAINTY about [your] right standing with God is ASKING FOR TOO MUCH. (When I Don't Desire God, p217-218)

Let's look at some quotations from Piper and let him speak for himself. (Obviously, it would be slander to accuse him of believing ideas that he doesn't believe)

Piper writes,

"Christians in the darkness of depression may ask desperately, How can I know that I am truly a child of God? ... They are asking how they can KNOW THEIR FAITH IS REAL ... (p218, When I Don't Desire God) "What is faith? .. Saving faith is not merely intellectual assent to a body of truths about God." "...there is in all human beings a knowledge of God ... this knowledge of God includes a knowledge of his moral law ... EVERY PERSON WE WILL EVER TALK TO, ALREADY KNOWS GOD, deep down, and knows God's law."

My comment: Piper is very consistent. If all men have the knowledge of the True God in them, then saving faith must be MORE than possessing the knowledge of the True God. And if faith is more than the possessing knowledge of the True God -- IF FAITH IS MYSTICAL -- then "Christians ... may ask desperately, How can I know that I am truly a child of God? ... They are asking how they can KNOW THEIR FAITH IS REAL".

So Piper says all men have the knowledge of God in them, which means faith is MYSTICAL (something MORE than knowing the True God). Therefore, people who share Piper's view that faith is mystical will STRUGGLE to work out whether or not they have this mystical faith he says they should have.

Piper writes,

"...I do know that true saints enter dark seasons ... God has his reasons why he should LEAVE ON OF HIS CHILDREN FEELING SO FORSAKEN ... ." (p232, When I Don't Desire God). "Christians in ...may ask desperately, How can I know that I am truly a child of God? ... They are asking how they can KNOW THEIR FAITH IS REAL ... (p218)

So the reason members of Piper's church, for example, may have "feel forsaken" is because they are not sure if they have WHAT PIPER CALLS "FAITH".

Could it be that Piper's view of faith is confusing and thus people who share his confusing view, are confused about what faith is, and cannot be sure if they have it?

Here is how Piper views faith,

"LOVE to God is the main thing in saving faith ... faith is by NO MEANS ... SEPARATE FROM THE AFFECTIONS" (The Supremacy of God in Preaching, p79) "Belief ... is also an APPETITE for God in the heart." (Future Grace, p86) "What turns believing into saving faith? ... we believe "in a different way"."(Future Grace, p201) "... CONTENTMENT in God is just what faith is." (p222, Future Grace) "faith in Christ is ...but also embracing all that he is for us in Christ ... This "embracing" is LOVING him." (p161, Future Grace) "Faith is ...SAVORING all that God is for us in Jesus. This dramatically shapes what we live for, how we act, how we think and feel. In other words it is a LIVING RELATIONSHIP with a living Savior and Lord." "An essential element in the faith itself is CONFIDENCE and JOY and HOPE ... [they] are part of the warp and woof of faith." (p205, Future Grace)

This is confusing! Piper is saying that faith is 1) love, 2) joy, 3) savoring, 4) contentment, 5) confidence, 6) hope and 7) a relationship.

It's no wonder people who share Piper's view of faith have doubts about their salvation. If faith is that COMPLICATED then we will never be sure if we have it. And thus members of Piper's congregation "ask desperately, How can I know that I am truly a child of God? ... They are asking how they can KNOW THEIR FAITH IS REAL ... (p218)

They simply can never be sure if they have attained to Piper's complicated version of faith. Piper admits this and writes, "DEMAND FOR A KIND OF ABSOLUTE, mathematical CERTAINTY about [your] right standing with God is ASKING FOR TOO MUCH. (When I Don't Desire God, p217-218)

On the other hand, if we say that faith is simply, "the ASSURANCE of things hoped for and the CONVICTION of things not seen" (Heb 11).

Such a clear understandable definition would guarantee assurance of salvation. Believers would simply realise that they are assured and convicted about the Gospel, and thus CONCLUDE THAT THEY HAVE FAITH.

Sadly, Piper has departed from the simple and clear teaching of the Scripture on faith. He cannot say that faith is simply an assurance / conviction of the truthfulness of the Gospel.

Remember -- Piper says all men have the knowledge of God in them, which means faith is MYSTICAL (something MORE than knowing the True God). After all, if all men have the knowledge of the True God in them, then saving faith must be MORE than possessing the knowledge of the True God.

This seems to be why Piper developed such a confusing and complicated view of faith.

He writes,

"...there is in all human beings a knowledge of God ... this knowledge of God includes a knowledge of his moral law ... EVERY PERSON WE WILL EVER TALK TO, ALREADY KNOWS GOD, deep down, and knows God's law." "DEEP WITHIN US WE ALL KNOW THAT IT IS OUR DUTY TO GLORIFY OUR MAKER by thanking him for all we have, trusting him for all we need, and obeying all his revealed will."

Here is the FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM with Piper's theology. He is saying that all people everywhere know God deep down WITHOUT the work of the Holy Spirit. Now, let's assume for a moment that Piper is right and we can know God deep down without the Holy Spirit. This raises the question. How can we be sure, we haven't reasoned our way into the Gospel from our knowledge of God already in us?

Piper sees the problem, and writes,

"we [may] be tempted to think of our thirst and our spiritual drinking and our giving as merely an emotional, religious experience TRIGGERED BY OUR INNATE LONGINGS "

So because Piper thinks he knew God deep down even without the Holy Spirit, he must always suspect that his faith has been "triggered by his innate longing".

To summarise:
I) Piper says all men know God deep down, even without the Holy Spirit and he also says "it is possible to believe the promises of God and be lost"
II) So Piper affirms that faith is more than believing the promises of God
III) Indeed Piper says that faith is 1) love, 2) joy, 3) savoring, 4) contentment, 5) confidence, 6) hope and 7) a relationship.
IV) Piper makes faith confusing and complicated and has departed from the Biblical teaching that faith is simply an assurance / conviction of the Gospel (Heb 11).
V) Also, Piper must always suspect his faith is "triggered by innate longings" that all men have without the Holy Spirit. In other words, Piper must suspect his faith has been triggered by his innate longing and not the Holy Spirit.
VI) Moreover, because Piper makes faith complicated and confusing, it is impossible for him to be certain he has faith. He admits this and writes, "DEMAND FOR A KIND OF ABSOLUTE, mathematical CERTAINTY about [your] right standing with God is ASKING FOR TOO MUCH. (When I Don't Desire God, p217-218)

Now, Piper has refuted himself and admitted his whole theology is flawed. "Certainty about [your] right standing with God"? That's "asking too much" of his view of faith. If you hold to Piper's complicated and confusing view of faith you will NEVER be certain about your standing with God (as Piper admits). Also, if you hold to his view that it's possible to know God deep down without the Holy Spirit, how can you be sure your faith hasn't been "triggered by innate longings" and is not the work of the Holy Spirit? Can you be sure you haven't reasoned your way from your "innate knowledge" of God into the Gospel?

You can't be sure you have faith (because you make it so complicated). Piper admits it, "Certainty about [your] right standing with God"? Piper says that's "asking too much" of his view of faith.


If faith is mystical and undefinable -- "more than belief" -- than how can we ever know we have it ? And if the unregenerate already 1) believe in the True God, 2) believe in God's Law, 3) believe the Bible is God's Word, then, CAN WE BE SURE WE ARE NOT UNREGENERATE? Even if we believe the gospel, Reformed theologian Louis Berkhof says that it's possible to "temporarily" believe and then fall away!! How can there be any assurance of salvation when it's possible to believe and be condemned?

I have mentioned before I longer doubt my salvation. Now, I have full assurance of salvation (that the righteousness of God is mine). I've realised that the unregenerate -- according to the Bible -- have NO KNOWLEDGE of God, so my understanding of the truth proves to me I am regenerate. "The fool says in his heart there is no God", but I believe in Jehovah -- the Just God and Savior -- then I am not a fool, but regenerate. Anyone who believes in the existence of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is a BELIEVER and is justified by Christ's righteousness. See John 17. Simply knowing the True God and Christ is everlasting life. We must DENY the unregenerate any knowledge of God, and this means in order to answer the question "Am I saved?" we simply think "Yes, I have the knowledge of the True God, therefore I am saved." Only the good soil "understood" the Word (see the parable of the soils). In other words, the other soils had no "root", that is understanding. The difference between the unregenerate and the regenerate is UNDERSTANDING.

Indeed, the Bible says that...

I) All men do NOT know God deep down, they "say in their hearts, there is no God", "know not God," "know nothing... of the Just God,"
II) So faith is simply coming to know / understand who the True God is, "this is everlasting life to KNOW the one true God, and Jesus Christ."
III) faith is simply an assurance / conviction of the Gospel (Heb 11).
V) Faith cannot be "triggered by innate longings" for God because man innately believes in idols, not God.
VI) Therefore, believers will be assured at all times that they are saved, i.e. "have peace and joy IN BELIEVING" (Rom 15)

"So WE ARE ALWAYS CONFIDENT, knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord." (2 Cor 5:6) ... Now, my question is -- If believers are always confident, doesn't that mean they never have doubts about their salvation? The righteousness of Christ is enough to comfort them at all times, right? "

Isaiah 1:3 says that oxen know their master, but unregenerate Israel did not know God. So the unregenerate have NO knowledge of God at all! Animals have more knowledge of their masters, than the unregenerate do about God. By implication, if we DO understand God's gospel -- that He imputes righteousness to the elect and declares them righteous -- then we must be regenerate! We are not unregenerate like the unbelievers (who are just FLESH, Genesis 6:3, and have completely lost the image of God for "EVERY thought of their heart is evil continually"). The unregenerate do not have God in their knowledge (Romans 1). And this is why Jeremiah 31 says God HAS TO write His laws on a man's heart when he is converted. Before conversion, a man does NOT have God's law on His heart but "his conscience is seared as with a hot iron" and he "calls good evil and evil good ... light darkness and darkness light". Unregenerate man is so confused, he doesn't even know the difference between good and evil!

Paul says to the Galatians, "not knowing God, you served as slaves to the ones by nature not being gods. But now, knowing God..." (Gal 4:8-9)

Isn't Paul saying that when the Galatians were lost, they didn't know who God was? So they didn't have any knowledge of God in them, did they?

And if the lost do not have the knowledge of God in them, then shouldn't the knowledge of God be proof to a man that he is saved?

Piper is wrong -- the lost cannot believe the promises of God, so belief in the promises of God would be infallible proof to a man he is saved.


Consider the fact that Hebrews 11 says it is BY FAITH we know the Word of God created the worlds. That implies that those without faith -- lost people -- don't even know the True God created the worlds. Now, if they don't know that fact, surely it's not possible for them to have the knowledge of the Gospel in them either.

Also Isaiah 45:20 says that people who pray to a god that cannot save "know nothing" or "have no knowledge". So the lost have no knowledge of God in them. Clearly, they cannot believe the promises of God. So belief in the promises of God is infallible proof to a man he is saved.


So, if you understand and believe in God's Law and Gospel you must be regenerate (the Law teaches that God demands PERFECTION, and condemns those without Christ's perfect righteousness. The Gospel says that Christ IMPUTES the righteousness and ATONES for His sheep).

You can imagine what a radical change of mind conversion must be, if the unconverted have absolutely no idea who the True God is. Romans 10 says when a man is called by God, His voice COMES FROM BEHIND the man and saying "this is the way". 2 Corinthians 4:6 says believers are as PASSIVE in perceiving the truth, as we are in seeing the sun. It's up to God to manifest His authority in a man's conscience and convert the man to the Gospel of Imputed Righteousness. Because natural man is intellectually dead, and God must give him the understanding (1 John) and shine the light of Christ into his mind.

Now, ask yourself. When God does convict a man for the first time of His existence, can the man ever doubt he has been converted? Could a man go from complete darkness into the light, and ever doubt he is in the light? It is possible to go from having NO knowledge of God at one point, to KNOWING THE TRUTH, and not realise you have been converted?

Or, "Do you not perceive that Christ is in you, UNLESS YOU ARE REPROBATES?" (2 Corinthians 13:5). For "He that DOUBTS is doubled minded in all his ways, ... let NOT that man expect anything from God." (James 1). Believers "NEVER thirst for ... everlasting life" they ALWAYS have full assurance of salvation (John 4:14) and at all times can cry "abba father".

"So WE ARE ALWAYS CONFIDENT, knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord." (2 Cor 5:6) ... Now, my question is -- If believers are always confident, doesn't that mean they never have doubts about their salvation? The righteousness of Christ is enough to comfort them at all times, right? "

God says ALL believers are JUSTIFIED. To think "I am believe but I am not justified" is to call God a liar. To say, "I believe but am not sure if I am saved", is to accuse God of LYING. It is saying God lied when He said, "EVERYONE believing in this One IS JUSTIFIED".

He that believes God has the testimony in Himself. He that believes not has called God a liar because He has not believed the testimony. And this is the testimony -- God has given us (believers) -- everlasting life. And this life is IN HIS SON (that is, in His righteousness which he established by his obedience to the Law)


Should I look at my works for evidence that I am saved? Then how can I be sure I have done enough works? Have I loved the brethren enough? Do I really obey God's Law as I should? Will I not be led into despair by looking at my works - for aren't all my righteousness, filthy rags?

Paul says,

"And the life I now live in the flesh, I live BY FAITH toward the Son of God, the One loving me and giving Himself over on my behalf."

What kept Paul going? How did he know he was saved? Did he look to his works as the evidence of his salvation? No! He encouraged by HIS FAITH TOWARD THE SON.

The Apostle also said to the Roman believers,

"may the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace IN BELIEVING" Rom 15:13

Why did the Romans have peace and joy? How did they know they were saved? What evidence proved to them, they were saved? It was their belief of the truth!! They were to have their peace and joy "IN BELIEVING". Paul says NOTHING about finding their peace and joy in their good works. He does NOT tell them to look at their works. Instead, they were to find their peace and joy IN BELIEVING, right?

And to the Hebrews, he said,

""let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance OF FAITH, our hearts having been sprinkled from an evil conscience" Heb 10:22

Why were Hebrews to draw near to God? Was it because they looked at their works? No!!! The reason they knew they were saved was by their BELIEF. They were assured because of their FAITH. And their faith pacified their conscience. When they thought "Am I saved?" Their conscience was "sprinkled", that is, calmed and purified by their faith! They would have thought, "I believe, so I must be saved"! We are assured and we know we are saved, by OUR FAITH, not our works. Our works prove to OTHERS we are saved, but not to ourselves. After all, we must judge our works by OUR FAITH. And the only reason we love God and obey him out of thanks, is because we already know we are saved!

To the Colossians, Paul says,

"that their hearts may be COMFORTED being joined together in love, and to all riches of the full assurance of the UNDERSTANDING to the full knowledge of the mystery of God" Col 2:2

Why were these believers comforted? And what joined them together in love? Were they assured by their works? Did their obedience comfort them? No!! It was their UNDERSTANDING and KNOWLEDGE that proved to them that they were saved. Ask yourself. Why am I comforted? Am I looking at my works? I shouldn't be!! We can only be comforted by our UNDERSTANDING and KNOWLEDGE!! After all, we obey God out of THANKS and GRATITUDE.

And in order to be thankful, we need to already know we are saved, before doing a good work. We love God, because we know we are elect. We draw near to him because we know we are believers. All our good works happen because we know we are saved!

Sadly, if you do not have this assurance, you are NOT a believer.

"but Christ as Son over His house, whose house we are, IF TRULY WE HOLD FAST THE BOLDNESS and rejoicing of the hope firm to the end." Heb 3:6

If you are not fully persuaded that you are justified by Christ's righteousness, Christ is NOT dwelling in you by faith!

"For we have become partakers of Christ, if truly we hold the BEGINNING OF THE ASSURANCE FIRM TO THE END" Heb 3:14

Ask yourself. Have I had apostolic assurance from the BEGINNING of my life as a Christian? If you have doubted your salvation in the past you are NOT a partaker of Christ!

"he reconciled [you] ... if indeed you continue in the faith GROUNDED and SETTLED and not being moved away from the HOPE of the gospel" (Col 1:21-23)

Believers are not moved from the hope of the Gospel!

In summary:

I) All men do NOT know God deep down, they "say in their hearts, there is no God", "know not God," "know nothing... of the Just God,"
II) So faith is simply coming to know / understand who the True God is, "this is everlasting life to KNOW the one true God, and Jesus Christ."
III) faith is simply an assurance / conviction of the Gospel (Heb 11).
V) Faith cannot be "triggered by innate longings" for God because man innately believes in idols, not God.
VI) Therefore, believers will be assured at all times that they are saved, i.e. "have peace and joy IN BELIEVING" (Rom 15)

Further Reading

What is the Gospel? http://Godnoliar.com/gospel.htm
What about Romans 1 http://Godnoliar.com/biblealone.htm
What about Romans 2? http://Godnoliar.com/rom2.htm
Don't the demons believe? http://Godnoliar.com/demons.htm
Didn't the disciples have doubts? http://Godnoliar.com/john_the_baptist.ht...

"So WE ARE ALWAYS CONFIDENT, knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord." (2 Cor 5:6) ... Now, my question is -- If believers are always confident, doesn't that mean they never have doubts about their salvation? The righteousness of Christ is enough to comfort them at all times, right? ""

Ok, this is finally Tracy again - I know this is long and there's a lot of stuff there but I would love some comments. If you want I can tell you what I think (I don't agree) in another post.

So, Thoughts?

Tracy,

Wow.... yes there is a lot of material there which one would need more space and time to reply to than is prudent on this Board. But I would like to make just a few brief comments which hopefully will provide some salient rebuttals of this person's views, re: faith and assurance.

1. His view of faith is not biblically sound, i.e., simple assent to the promises of God. This view was made popular by Robert Sandeman (1718-1771) and latter retained his name to describe it; "Sandemanianism". Today, it is more popularly known as "Easy Believism". For more details as to its history, development and rebuttal, see this article by Michael Haykin: Andrew Fuller and the Sandemanians.

2. For one to have a "full" assurance, i.e., one which is unassailable and undoubted, it would require one possess a perfect faith, which from my reading of Scripture only the Lord Christ owned. The rest of us yet to be perfected sinners are in the process of being sanctified and thus we experience "lows and highs" in our relationship with God. When we sin, our objectively secure union with Christ is effected subjectively, i.e., it becomes "blurred" and results in doubts, fears, etc. This is not only documented in the lives of biblical characters but also in the lives of countless saints throughout recorded history. Peter knew of this experience also and counseled readers of his epistles to therefore, "make your calling and election sure" (cf. 2Pet 1:10). Briefly put, there is a vast difference between the impregnable salvation merited for the elect by Christ and the vacillating experience of that salvation in the life of a believer due to myriad factors.

3. Lastly, the author has a faulty hermeneutic re: interpreting the experience of David in the Psalms. The biblical model for interpreting the Scriptures is: "Historico-Grammatico"; i.e., one must take into account the history of when and where it was written and the language/grammar used. It seems this author has either ignored or rejected the historical aspect in his interpretive method. What I mean is that he has totally rejected the FACT that the Psalms have a real-life aspect to them and apply first to David (or any of the other authors) and then they may be applicable in a spiritual sense, if warranted, to someone or place elsewhere in the future. Thus David's trials, tribulations, joys, etc., were his actual experiences.

In His grace,

Tracy,

I believe your primary question was "Can a person who doubts their salvation still be a Christian?"

A similar question might as well be, "Can a person who sins still be a Christian?" None of us live a sinless life nor have perfect faith. Even though the Bible tells us that "the just shall live by faith" we all have doubts from time to time. Sometimes our feelings get in the way of our faith. But this does not mean that we are lost. Even Christians struggle with doubts and some struggle more than others. As Pilgrim has pointed out the Bible is full of godly men who have struggled with doubts too.

Of course there are some who do not have saving faith and they will fall away.


Wes

We might also add that there are those who do not have saving faith but contend that they have a "full and undoubted assurance" within themselves, aka: self-deception.

In His grace,

Hey, I just wanted to say thanks for your replies. I really enjoyed the article on Sandemanianism. You both had really good points.
I did respond to this person with about a ten page rebuttal re: his view on assurance - and now I am working on some replies regarding his view of the Psalms.
I did have another question - what are your thoughts on the meaning of 2 Pet 1:20-21? knowing this first, that every prophecy of Scripture did not come into being of its own interpretation; for prophecy was not at any time borne by the will of man, but being borne along by the Holy Spirit, holy men of God spoke.
This person I'm debating thinks that this verse means that the Psalms are not to be interpreted as David's "private" experiences.
He Writes:"The Apostle Peter rejects the idea of original author intent. The prophecies had NOTHING to do with the private experiences of the prophets.

"knowing this first, that every prophecy of Scripture did not come into being of its own interpretation; for prophecy was not at any time borne by the will of man, but being borne along by the Holy Spirit, holy men of God spoke." (2 Pet 1:20-21)

Peter is not merely saying the prophets were infallible. He is saying that there was NO involvment of their wills.
Now, Tracy also objects to this view and wrote me, "Of COURSE there is prophecy in the Psalms – and some so much so that they are called “Messianic” Psalms. You have also overlooked the possibility that even the verses that are mentioned in the NT – could be talking about BOTH Christ and David." (Tracy Figard, Northwestern)

Are you sure about that, Tracy?

For example, is Psalm 63 about "both Christ and David"? The final verse of the Psalm says...

"But the king shall rejoice in God; everyone who swears by Him shall glory" (Psa 63:11)

Now, which "king" is this Psalm about? The King over all Jesus Christ! And this Psalm has absolutely NO application to David, because men were only to swear by God's name.

"You shall fear the Lord your GOD, and serve Him, and shall SWEAR BY HIS NAME". (Deut 6:13)

So here we see that David merely a mouthpiece of the Holy Spirit prophesying about Christ."

Ok, this is Tracy again - after a while this can just get exasperating, b/c there is so much error here. Yes, it's true that there is a lot about Chirst here, and that many verses are spoken as the "words of the Lord" - as David was God's penman, just as all the other writers of the Bible were. - But to say that every single word withotu a single exception in the Psalms is a messianic prophecy or Christ speaking through David is gonig too far. I think I need to pray that he would just understand.
Anyways,
Do you have any other thoughts on this?

Tracy,

Yes, this person you are communicating with is fraught with errors, many of which contradict the historic views of the Church universal in regard to the inspiration of the Scriptures.

Re: 2Pet 1:20, 21, see here: The Human Writers of the Scriptures, by E.J. Young.

For more articles on the Inspiration, transmission and/or authority of the Scriptures see here: Sola Scriptura.

In His grace,

Tracy,

The prophecies of David and Paul are much more than private experiences but both wrote about their own lives in their writings as well. In fact their personal experiences had a lot to do with who they were and how they wrote. Just because the Holy Spirit used them to write a portion of the Bible doesn't mean He took their personality away. In fact we can see quite a contrast between one writer and another's personality and writing style without endangering the end product.

God used men to write the Bible and He not only inspired them, He shaped them for the task. The experiences of their lives were training to equip them for the job God had for them to do. If you read the link Pilgrim has provided your find the paragraphs below which explain this....


The Bible is the book the Holy Spirit wrote. The more I read my Bible the more impressed I am that the Holy Spirit not only authored the Bible but prepared the men who penned it and assists us who read it.


Wes <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/BigThumbUp.gif" alt="" />