HENRY FROM SOUTH CAROLINA:
Chris: I have been enjoying your website for the past week or so. There is lots of good teaching here in my estimation against evolution, holidays and false converts. I have also enjoyed listening to some of your more expositional teachings in the book of acts. I do not agree with your position on repentance. When I read my bible it is extremely hard to limit repentance to your definition of it.
It is godly sorrow that leads one to repentance. In addition you claim that youtr view can be found in the writings of Christians in the past. Where? The small snipit from Charles Spurgeon does not do justice to his full teaching on the subject. I speculate that your position on this point results from your attempt to reconcile God's sovereignty in salvation with man's responsibility to turn from sin for it.
Both are taught clearly and plainly in the bible. They do not contradict each other as some suppose, but both must be held in tension (as man will never understand the thoughts of God). If you would like to discuss salvation further, please contact me.
Thanks again for the articles and audio.
I have been enjoying your website for the past week or so. There is lots of good teaching here in my estimation against evolution, holidays and false converts. I have also enjoyed listening to some of your more expositional teachings in the book of acts. I do not agree with your position on repentance. When I read my bible it is extremely hard to limit repentance to your definition of it.
I understand; it is very difficult for those who have never gone through repentance (i.e. grief and godly sorrow of their sin) to accept it. They need to change the definition of it in order to justify themselves. That's why you do not understand the parables of Christ either, though I'm sure you claim to understand them; only when God gives you that godly sorrow (i.e. repentance) to acknowledge the truth will you understand these things.
It is godly sorrow that leads one to repentance. In addition you claim that youtr view can be found in the writings of Christians in the past. Where? The small snipit from Charles Spurgeon does not do justice to his full teaching on the subject. I speculate that your position on this point results from your attempt to reconcile God's sovereignty in salvation with man's responsibility to turn from sin for it.
I apologize if I did not provide enough examples to satisfy you. Is there something you have found which contradicts that point? If so, I will apologize and correct it.
I am not attempting to reconcile anything; I studied the matter out, and found the truth in His Word. Mankind does have a responsibility to turn from sin, and Christians who listen to me know that I teach that on a regular basis, but repentance is godly sorrow of that sin, which, just as a child, brings them to turn from wrongdoing.
Both are taught clearly and plainly in the bible. They do not contradict each other as some suppose, but both must be held in tension (as man will never understand the thoughts of God). If you would like to discuss salvation further, please contact me.
Thanks again for the articles and audio.
Why would I care to discuss it further with you when you've provided nothing but your personal opinions? Many people, such as yourself, write me and believe that providing their opinions is as good as all the research and Scripture I provide to prove my points. To put it mildly, that's absurd and lazy. In fact, you didn't even say what it is you actually believe (i.e. "godly sorrow that leads one to repentance", but you didn't define what you believe repentance is, likely so you would not have defend your position); you are only scoffing at the truth (with some flattering words sprinkled on top) to cast doubt. I'm sorry, but I have work to do, and I'm not going to spend that time reading someone complain about his personal feelings on the matter. I've received more letters in the past year from people who have testified of being born again in the Lord Jesus Christ after hearing that teaching, than I've received in the past 10 years. You've heard the truth, and you've rejected it. I cannot do anything more for you, but nonetheless I hope you depart in peace, I hope you have a great day, and I hope that God will bless you and your family with all your needs throughout the coming week.
2 Corinthians 7:1010 For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.
Repentance cannot be limited to sorrow over sin to God.
You on the other hand say that godly sorrow worketh godly sorrow to salvation not to be sorry to God about.
Yes, I would be interested in other writings of Christians from the past who also held to your view.
Not trying to be a butt-head. Really do enjoy your site and the teachings. Trying to correct a brother. If your not interested in talking about salvation thats ok.
2 Corinthians 7:1010 For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.
Repentance cannot be limited to sorrow over sin to God.
You on the other hand say that godly sorrow worketh godly sorrow to salvation not to be sorry to God about.
And that demonstrates to me that you did not read the teaching. You went to verse 10, and skipped verse 9, in which Paul defines what he's talking about.
Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance: for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing.
-2Co 7:9
Notice, that Paul says that they "sorrowed to repentance," and then there's a colon. The colon means that he is going to continue to give details about what he's talking about, that is, what does "sorrow to repentance" mean?
Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance: for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing.
-2Co 7:9
Thus, being made sorry after a godly manner is the definition of "sorrow to repentance." Notice that turning from sin was not mentioned here because turning from sin happens after repentance, which is conversion (i.e. conversion means "to turn" and "to change"). Therefore, he continues to define the phrase "repentance to salvation," and how it is achieved in verse 10, by which he said it is godly sorrow.
That is why God said He saves the "contrite spirit," which is the same as the repentant heart, one who is broken-hearted of his wrongdoing.
The LORD is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart; and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit.
-Psa 34:18
You are incorrect in your doctrine, you are in need of correction, and I can already tell from your letters, you have no intention of hearing the truth because you have never come to repentance. Once again, you didn't bother to define what you think repentance means, so once again, you're wasting my time.
Really do enjoy your site and the teachings.
It doesn't matter what you enjoy; what matters is the truth. Did you think saying "I like your teachings" was going to convince me to just ignore the Word of God and trust in your personal opinion? Again, that's absurd.
Trying to correct a brother.
Well, you have not given any testimony that you have repentance, and therefore, if you did not lay that foundation of godly sorrow, you are not my brethren. You can claim "brother" all you want, but it's vanity. I've corrected you, if you don't like it, then depart in peace.
If your not interested in talking about salvation thats ok.
See, that's the deception I'm talking about in your letters. I never said I was not interested in talking about salvation (in fact, I talk about it all the time in my teachings), I said I was not going to waste my time with someone who was just going to whine about his personal opinions, and now you've written me a second letter in which all you did was express your personal opinion about the matter, and in your laziness (without checking the context of Scripture), acted like you've "corrected" someone. Let me be clear: I'm not interested in your personal opinion and justifications; I'm trying to get work done, and I don't have a time for that. Depart in peace, and have a good day.
And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.
-Luke 16:15
The reason I was firm with this man was because, as he stated, he's only been listening for a week, and the first thing he immediately writes me about is to make sure I change what I'm teaching to match his opinions. It doesn't matter that I've been doing this for the past decade, he has been listening to a few teachings over the past week, so he obviously knows everything there is to know, right? He did not write to learn anything, nor did he write me to have a discussion. He wrote me because he realized that if what I taught about repentance was true, then he was never born again in Christ, and so justify himself, he wrote me with some flattering lips and thought it would be openly accepted. My brethren know that I don't accept flattering lips, and that such things irritate me more than anything.
If he truly wanted to have a discussion with me, the first thing he would have done was introduce himself and then tell me what it was he believed. I guarantee he believed that 'repent' meant "to turn," but he would not even say that, and so he's doing nothing but wasting my time. He probably sat down for 60 seconds and typed out that letter and thought he had done a good service to God, but in reality, he was lazy, and didn't care. After all, if he thought I was teaching false doctrine (which he did), then why would he have not loved me enough to spend the time to write out everything and pull up Scripture to give me examples of my alleged error? Again, his purpose in writing me was to justify himself, and I do hope he departs in peace, and I hope he will receive as much longsuffering and mercy from God and the Lord has shown to me.
The point of me posting this letter is to show Christians that you need to watch out for flattering lips and not be distracted by such things. As HE did to those that spoke to Him in error, Christ addressed WHY they are saying those things, and the "why" for this man was that he was trying to justify himself, not have discussion about doctrine. In our church, we have discussions about doctrine all the time, and I'm not always correct, but we have received discernment by the wisdom and grace of God to tell the difference between someone who wants to discuss doctrine and someone who wants to justify his personal beliefs.
