tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post5519402515310648398..comments2023-12-22T08:29:29.230-08:00Comments on WHAT IS TRUTH: The Elephant in the Room of the Separation Discussion Between Conservative Evangelicals and FundamentalistsKent Brandenburghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-80050746161027460092008-07-23T15:14:00.000-07:002008-07-23T15:14:00.000-07:00Sorry about the F. Now question who started the r...Sorry about the F. Now question who started the rumor?CD-Hosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00304535091189153224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-34880814717137477472008-07-23T09:28:00.000-07:002008-07-23T09:28:00.000-07:00CD Host,I removed the offensive MR mention in the ...CD Host,<BR/><BR/>I removed the offensive MR mention in the post that were upset about, if you didn't notice, but speaking of inaccuracies:<BR/><BR/>#1, I'm not IFB. I'm not "F." I'm not. Case Closed.<BR/><BR/>#2, I don't separate with SBC over music, but over support of liberalism in the cooperative program.<BR/><BR/>#3, You didn't meet me on the comments section at Dever's board, because I didn't comment there. I didn't leave one comment there.<BR/><BR/>Thanks.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-35571818992760433052008-07-23T03:03:00.000-07:002008-07-23T03:03:00.000-07:00Spud / Mike --I know this was directed at Kent and...Spud / Mike --<BR/><BR/>I know this was directed at Kent and he can answer for himself but.... What he means is IFB. Those are the guys to the right of the SBC. The big difference is an aggressive application of separation both for core doctrine and secondary issues like use of contemporary music in worship. Which is the reason they seem themselves as being unable to be in the SBC, because the SBC has lots of ministers they disagree with. <BR/><BR/>A good example is I ran into Kent on Mark Dever's board (who is pretty much on the rightmost edge of the SBC) during a discussion on separation. Dever was discussing with Mark Minnick what where the remaining issues between a guy like himself and Minnick that in Minnick's opinion justified separation from Dever. <BR/><BR/>The only point of agreement in the discussion was that Minnick gave a babbling non answer. Kent gave a clear cut well defined answer, and we debated here. I happened to think was absolutely clear and contrary to scripture based on a doctrine I've been calling "tertiary separation" and (IMHO) overly aggressive application of secondary separation. <BR/><BR/>As an aside, I also know Kent somewhat because I read his debate with Frank Turk on KJVonlyism and I guess I'm leading the charge against the new ESVonlyism. I'm starting to think doing a historical retrospective on "what if the KJVonlyist had won" a what if history of the 1980 on without the NIV getting broad acceptance (i.e. if it had been received the same way the RSV was) and where we would be today.CD-Hosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00304535091189153224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-71720927508923438602008-07-22T13:58:00.000-07:002008-07-22T13:58:00.000-07:00Me am indipendint Babtist. 'independent Baptist' ....<I>Me am indipendint Babtist. </I><BR/><BR/>'independent Baptist' ... ain't that kinda redundant?<BR/><BR/>mike rucker<BR/>fairburn, georgia, usa<BR/><A HREF="http://mikerucker.wordpress.com" REL="nofollow">mikerucker.wordpress.com</A>spud tooleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09921322553025339949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-88568861768456122562008-07-22T07:23:00.000-07:002008-07-22T07:23:00.000-07:00in reading my blog you will see that i've moved on...<I> in reading my blog you will see that i've moved on from the pointless "my verse says THIS," "oh yeah? well MY verse says THAT" scripture drills that seem to be the raison d'etre for a number of blog sites - perhaps this one, too, though i haven't read much here yet. </I><BR/><BR/>Well now that is starting to explain why people might think we are the same guy. I attack the verse methodology as well as being little more than a theological mirror. <BR/><BR/>And since you were mentioning the Pyros, I was making the argument in a debate with Frank Turk on his debate blog (<A HREF="http://church-discipline.blogspot.com/2008/07/female-leadership-in-churches-debate.html" REL="nofollow">indexed here</A>). <BR/><BR/>Still you have a better sense of humor than I, and the only place I've been to in Georgia is Atlanta.CD-Hosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00304535091189153224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-10608807471427799002008-07-22T06:58:00.000-07:002008-07-22T06:58:00.000-07:00kent - you're 'about me' reminded me o...kent - you're 'about me' reminded me of cheech & chong's 'evelyn woodhead' commercial...<BR/><BR/>'ever ... since ... i ... took the ev-...ev-...evelyn woodhead sped riddin' course ... my riddin' has ... im ... prahved ... one ... hunnert ... percent."<BR/><BR/>thanks for the early morning laugh.<BR/><BR/>mike r.spud tooleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09921322553025339949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-74651315876311396672008-07-21T21:21:00.000-07:002008-07-21T21:21:00.000-07:00well, blogger choked the first time i tried to com...well, blogger choked the first time i tried to comment ... let's see how good my memory is.<BR/><BR/>first, i am not CD-host. i am not him, he is not me, we are not a happy family, and ian anderson is <I>not</I> jethro tull.<BR/><BR/>however, i am quite flattered to have people thinking that i'm hiding under every rock (along with you-know-who...).<BR/><BR/>feel free to read my blog (url below) to see who i really am. and, when you find out, please let me know: i've found that i can no longer trust some of the voices in my head...<BR/><BR/>in reading my blog you will see that i've moved on from the pointless "my verse says THIS," "oh yeah? well MY verse says THAT" scripture drills that seem to be the raison d'etre for a number of blog sites - perhaps this one, too, though i haven't read much here yet.<BR/><BR/>here's a secret: <I>neither side will ever convince the other of the error in their position.</I> sorry - won't happen.<BR/><BR/>here's the reason: <I>neither side, on its own, is right.</I><BR/><BR/>so if you're looking for absolute truth, try the preceding two sentences.<BR/><BR/>however, if you still believe that, after 2,000 years of church history, someone has finally come along (that would be you) with all the answers, you must be a poor student of history.<BR/><BR/>or you must be Jesus.<BR/><BR/>if the latter, head on over to the Pyros website and collect your birthday presents from the three wise as-, uh, sorry, wise <I>men</I> over there.<BR/><BR/>find a joseph, invite cross-eyed mary, and put on 'a passion play' for today.<BR/><BR/>me? i'll be waiting for you in the wilderness - already got those 40 days booked on my calendar.<BR/><BR/>mike rucker<BR/>fairburn, georgia, usa<BR/><A HREF="http://mikerucker.wordpress.com" REL="nofollow">mikerucker.wordpress.com</A>spud tooleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09921322553025339949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-56924017668713276782008-07-21T19:28:00.000-07:002008-07-21T19:28:00.000-07:00i second cd-host's previous comment; i am not him,...i second cd-host's previous comment; i am not him, he is not me, we are not us, and ian anderson is not jethro tull.<BR/><BR/>but i cannot begin to tell you how flattered i am to have a reference like this posted outside my sphere of (waning) influence.<BR/><BR/>feel free to read my blog (url below) and see who i am. then, please tell me, because i'm dying to find out.<BR/><BR/>what you'll find is that i've moved on from these pointless "well, my verse says THIS" and "oh yeah? well MY verse says THAT" scripture drills that seem to be the raison d'etre of this post, if not this blog. <BR/><BR/>here's a secret: one side will never convince the other. period.<BR/><BR/>here's the reason: neither side, on its own, is right.<BR/><BR/>but, feel free to continue wasting the internet's precious bandwidth. if you REALLY think you're going to make the other side say, "you know what? you're exactly right! how come i didn't see this before?", then you're obviously ignorant of 2,000 years of church history.<BR/><BR/>or perhaps you just think you're Jesus.<BR/><BR/>in that case, go over to the Pyros site, where the three wise as-, uh, wise <I>men</I> daily waste bandwidth, too.<BR/><BR/>find a joseph, play 'cross-eyed mary,' and start 'a passion play' all over again.<BR/><BR/>me? i'll be waiting for you in the wilderness... already have the 40 days marked out on my calendar.<BR/><BR/>see you then.<BR/><BR/>mike rucker<BR/>fairburn, georgia, usa<BR/><A HREF="http://mikerucker.wordpress.com" REL="nofollow">mikerucker.wordpress.com</A>spud tooleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09921322553025339949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-49171776673597368182008-07-21T16:09:00.000-07:002008-07-21T16:09:00.000-07:00For the record:1) I am not Mike Rucker2) To the b...For the record:<BR/><BR/>1) I am not Mike Rucker<BR/>2) To the best of my knowledge I have never conversed with Mike Rucker, prior to seeing this post and notifying him.<BR/>3) Glancing at his blog we don't seem to share interests. <BR/><BR/>You apparently are repeating something you heard elsewhere. I'm not sure if you have any interest in truth at all, but I would have hoped you would have at least asked Mike or myself that before posting it. <BR/><BR/>-- CD-HostCD-Hosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00304535091189153224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-78500345906166348112008-06-27T12:47:00.000-07:002008-06-27T12:47:00.000-07:00DT,I'm glad you think I talk nice. Sometimes peop...DT,<BR/><BR/>I'm glad you think I talk nice. Sometimes people read not nice, but when they talk to me in person, they're surprised I'm nice. When I'm not as good at it as I'd like, I think "testy" would be the word. I become testy at times. But I do like some passion. For instance, in a few recent threads, a guy named Jason has come one and it has been somewhat heated, and I like some heat. Thanks for coming on. You were nice too.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-83976257479522414922008-06-27T12:27:00.000-07:002008-06-27T12:27:00.000-07:00Kent,Thank you for taking time to respond. Also, t...Kent,<BR/><BR/>Thank you for taking time to respond. Also, thanks for doing it in a Christian spirit. Asking questions doesn't always warrant such appropriate reaction, as I'm sure you're aware, and your attitude really distances you from some of the vitriol that comes through the Internet from a fundamentalist perspective. We need more people like you. <BR/><BR/>Anywho, I'll be looking around your site more to understand your position. What you said about KJVO being historical and biblical is interesting, but to open up that can of worms now would not be appropriate.<BR/><BR/>God blessAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-71662976752623669682008-06-27T11:57:00.000-07:002008-06-27T11:57:00.000-07:00Charles,When you look at even all the OT passages ...Charles,<BR/><BR/>When you look at even all the OT passages combined, you don't get "only unbelievers." Look at David in Psalm 101. Perhaps those were unbelievers, but the NT looks at any person with unrepentant sin as being treated like a publican and sinner. But then we get to the NT and we do have the NT, and it is much more specific and abounding in material. We have less stuff in Scripture on inspiration.<BR/><BR/>DT,<BR/><BR/>I'm a historic Baptist, not in a group. Independent and Baptist are adjectives of sorts, but our church is very clear that not all Baptists are Baptist historically. We fellowship only with churches of like faith and practice and I fellowship with men the same way. That is not the same as "talking." Talking about doctrinal or practical issues is not fellowship, especially as I see how the term "fellowship" is used in the NT.<BR/><BR/>I could not understand Minnick's explanation of separation and this is because fundamentalism separates but doesn't practice it consistently for one big reason that I've talked about numbers of times here.<BR/><BR/>Minnick says at least separate over the gospel and he probably does that consistently, although he was being too chummy with Dever, IMO, for someone who wouldn't fellowship with him. He wouldn't fellowship with Southern Baptists because of liberalism in the convention. It is majority conservative, true gospel, etc., but it still has liberals in the convention.<BR/><BR/>For me, the gospel isn't all there is, so I would break fellowship over numbers of issues. BJ guys break fellowship over numbers of issues too, but they are usually their pet issues that they have deemed important, like KJVO, music, etc. Especially KJVO. They act like they hate that worse than anything. Why? It's hard to really understand. As I explain my position, it is completely historical and Scriptural. They should be applauding that. What do they not like? Here's what I think it is---they don't like how it feels to be confronted in the inerrancy of Scripture issue. They are pretty conservative guys and they are ticked off about it. As a result, they say lots of outlandish, untrue things about that issue. But I digress.<BR/><BR/>The separation issue is easier than they make it. And there's a reason why. I have written on it often here.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-74503962366990237232008-06-27T10:41:00.000-07:002008-06-27T10:41:00.000-07:00Kent,Good points to ponder.I have always been asto...Kent,<BR/><BR/>Good points to ponder.<BR/><BR/>I have always been astounded at how lightly we treat baptism now, when Baptists have historically called it "the badge of the Whore". Strong language, but very true - infant baptism has been the reason for unregenrate churches, and unregenerate churches are oxymorons.<BR/><BR/>On the other hand, I'm just wondering how far we should take this. Isn't that still a matter of opinion? As an independent Baptist, should I leave the movement because it "harbors" Ruckamanites, ultradispensationalists, and various forms of false teaching? Not trying to start an agrument..just wondering what you think. I know we're "independent" but we're just as much a part of a movement as SBC guys..and they're fairly independent, too.<BR/><BR/>One thing about Dever - at least he's not assocaiting with ppl who believe in baptismal regeneration. That's not a justification of his position, but I don't want to say that infant baptism by tradition is the same as infant baptism for salvation - that would touch on the gospel. (I still strongly believe both are wrong, of course)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-81966387371590167502008-06-27T06:32:00.000-07:002008-06-27T06:32:00.000-07:00IT SEEMS THE VERSES QUOTED FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT ...IT SEEMS THE VERSES QUOTED FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT WERE DESIGNED TO SAY THAT CHRISTIANS WERE NOT TO HAVE FELLOWSHIP WITH UNBELIEVERS.<BR/><BR/>In the New Testament:<BR/>1 Timothy 6:3-5 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; 4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, 5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.<BR/><BR/>This verse speaks of WHOM? Are there many Baptist churches that would fall in this “withdraw yourself from?” We would have to know the pathology of false teachers in order to understand this verse.<BR/><BR/>First Timothy 6:3-5 describes the internal deviations from spiritual normalcy that characterize false teachers. The pathological characteristics Paul laid out are not unknown to us, but we need to be reminded of them.<BR/><BR/>One of the duties every pastor, Bible teacher, or spiritual leader has is warning others of error. It isn't enough to be positive and help people see the good side of everything. Warnings run throughout the Old and New Testaments because God knows His people can be led astray by false teaching if they aren't properly prepared for it. Also false teaching victimizes those who have never embraced the truth because they come under the illusion that they have found it. We are thus reminded of the danger of false teaching.<BR/><BR/>Herein I believe is the real issue of separation.<BR/><BR/>Are the verses that speak of “withdraw oneself from” speaking to the Nation, or Individuals or both? When 2 John says “receive him not into your house,” doesn’t that speak of individuals responsibility?” .<BR/>The Nation Israel was not to have dealings with any other nations; God was to be there God. And yet Israel wanted to be like other nations.Charles e. Whisnanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08110548370691986584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-46676860282349320342008-06-26T21:17:00.000-07:002008-06-26T21:17:00.000-07:00Charles, DT, and others,Dever is in the SBC, which...Charles, DT, and others,<BR/><BR/>Dever is in the SBC, which harbors liberals. That doesn't even fit Minnick's understanding of separation.<BR/><BR/>My understanding of separation has to do with those passages and none of them say that the gospel alone is a separating issue. Dever doesn't separate over the baptism issue, when Jesus said it was part of all righteousness. Some say it is just interpretation. We are giving a lot of credit to something the Bible says nothing about---sprinkling infants---replacing what it clearly does, baptizing believers. Isn't that bad? Shouldn't that be grounds of separation? No one could join our church based on that belief.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-41944517612893870192008-06-26T14:07:00.000-07:002008-06-26T14:07:00.000-07:00DtYes I am in total agreement, if we are teaching ...Dt<BR/>Yes I am in total agreement, if we are teaching the Word from the Word and not our opinions as much of preaching seems to be, the Word brings about conviction of living a life holy unto to the Lord. Then sometimes we fail. But for the Grace of God.<BR/><BR/>Do we need a policy in place to say we are separated? Don't think so.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Also I listen to Don Johnsons sermon. You preach on Separation? We teach the truth about what the Word says, but really? <BR/><BR/>I would say I am more fundamental than reformed or emerging. <BR/>CharlesCharles e. Whisnanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08110548370691986584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-89374130523408497362008-06-26T07:35:00.000-07:002008-06-26T07:35:00.000-07:00I've been trying to follow this discussion from di...I've been trying to follow this discussion from different perspectives for a little bit now, and still remain uncertain as to what is actually being discussed.<BR/><BR/>I'm a fundamentalist and I believe in separation.<BR/><BR/>Mark Dever gave examples in which he also practices separation.<BR/><BR/>So why are we trying to convince him and other evangelicals about a doctrine they already practice?<BR/><BR/>Maybe things just aren't clear, but it seems, at the end of the day, the issue isn't over separation being true or false, but how much separation needs to be employed. Isn't that the real issue?<BR/><BR/>So sure, we can disagree with some evangelicals because perhaps they aren't separate <I>enough</I>, but is it fair to treat them like they don't believe it at all?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-25218374448277268602008-06-23T14:21:00.000-07:002008-06-23T14:21:00.000-07:00CharlesIt really doesn't matter whether one refuse...Charles<BR/><BR/>It really doesn't matter whether one refuses to participate with another church/pastor/ministry over views that are explicitly taught in the Bible or views that are implicit and perhaps not necessarily shared by all other churches.<BR/><BR/>Everyone is accountable to the Lord, not to other Christians outside my local church or other churches - so if someone isn't conducting themselves in a way that I am comfortable with, I just am not going to work with them. Their choices may not be wrong, but if they go against my conscience I am not going to compromise my convictions for the sake of a show of unity. Let the Lord judge between him and me, I will do my best to carry out my ministry without the taint of what I perceive to be someone else's errors. (I am sure I will make plenty errors enough of my own to be thoroughly chastised when I make it to my accounting session.)<BR/><BR/>So... short answer: it doesn't matter how often fundamentalist churches break with those who do not hold their traditional views. They don't answer to them, they answer to the Lord.<BR/><BR/>Maranatha!<BR/>Don Johnson<BR/>Jer 33.3Don Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03332212749734904541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-61006973527997455292008-06-23T11:30:00.000-07:002008-06-23T11:30:00.000-07:00DonYou are totally correct. How ofen do fundamenta...Don<BR/><BR/>You are totally correct. <BR/><BR/>How ofen do fundamentalist churches break fellowship with those who do not hold to their traditional views that are not biblical. <BR/><BR/>CharlesCharles e. Whisnanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08110548370691986584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-7074671040884598052008-06-23T08:25:00.000-07:002008-06-23T08:25:00.000-07:00Hi KentThank you for the kind words. I don't have ...Hi Kent<BR/><BR/>Thank you for the kind words. I don't have all the answers, but i know something is rotten in fundamentalism and something must be done about it.<BR/><BR/>To those commenting here:<BR/><BR/>Please, please, please do not mix church discipline and ecclesiastical separation. They are not the same thing at all.<BR/><BR/>In church discipline, we put a professed brother out of the assembly (ekklesia) and treat him as a sinner and a publican.<BR/><BR/>In ecclesiastical separation, first, we don't have the authority for that kind of judgement (unless it involves an individual who happens to be a member of our local church), and second, we are not pronouncing an anathema on them. We are simply refusing cooperation or partnership in gospel ministry. We are breaking fellowship (fellowship=partnership). There is a wide difference between the two.<BR/><BR/>In some cases, the confusion exists because people think separation means I am breaking with some liberal unbeliever professing Christian. But the fact is, unless the liberal unbeliever is a member of my church, I am not exercising discipline on him. I am simply refusing to work with him and avoiding him in my ministry. I may well see the liberal unbeliever as a candidate for evangelism, but my ecclesiastical separation from him is primarily a refusal of cooperation.<BR/><BR/>I hope that helps clarify things some. (I keep saying this but it often kind of echoes like no one is listening.)<BR/><BR/>Maranatha!<BR/>Don Johnson<BR/>Jer 33.3Don Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03332212749734904541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-40261366061258612872008-06-22T19:25:00.000-07:002008-06-22T19:25:00.000-07:00When we are speaking of individuals that are disor...When we are speaking of individuals that are disorderly and does not obey the words of Christ, and after the proper steps of discipline (Matthew 18) takes place we are to try to motivate them to repent, and one way is to separate and have no fellowship with him. But the idea is to use separation to get him to think about his behavior. There is a proper guide for us to know how we are to separate and do it properly as you have said.Charles e. Whisnanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08110548370691986584noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-65211983720028702512008-06-22T13:48:00.000-07:002008-06-22T13:48:00.000-07:00Doctrine (didache) is teaching. Is there teaching ...Doctrine (didache) is teaching. Is there teaching on separation in the Bible? Kent just demonstrated that beyond any shadow of a doubt. How can that not be seen? Most times it is because one simply does not want to see it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-69746040972989790712008-06-22T09:01:00.000-07:002008-06-22T09:01:00.000-07:00It is God working in us both to will and to do of ...It is God working in us both to will and to do of His good pleasure and conforming us to the image of His Son. No doubt. But it will occur, and if it doesn't, then we can doubt someone's salvation.<BR/><BR/>Regarding the bar, I think that is too simplistic representation of separation, especially looking at the passages. That is not an appropriate place for a believer, more of a stumbling block issue, but I'm talking about what I have in those verses listed.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-78107563925196531942008-06-22T08:52:00.000-07:002008-06-22T08:52:00.000-07:00Nothing in my comment implied no doing on the part...Nothing in my comment implied no doing on the part of God's own. In the bar example you're acting on your desire either way. <BR/><BR/>Probably an active effort that is needed once a person is regenerated and no longer desires vain things is the effort to fill the void that is created. This means engaging new influences. Obviously the Word of God and doctrine and so on. But other higher influences as well. You use to spend time going to bars, now you no longer desire that, so you have a void to fill with new activity and effort and interests. <BR/><BR/>But you don't have to make an effort to not go to the bar. You no longer desire to do that. <BR/><BR/>In the steps of the order of salvation I think our own effort comes into play in two areas: conversion and active, progressive sanctification. We need to make efforts to learn what we are to have faith in and what we are to repent of. And we need to make efforts in doing the two great commandments (to sum things up quickly). <BR/><BR/>The difference between the law of works and the law of Christ though is: with the law of Christ God gives freely that which He demands. Regeneration by the Word and the Spirit itself gives us new desires. Acting on those new desires is not difficult any more than doing what you wanted to do prior to regeneration was difficult.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-40150402956161147472008-06-22T08:27:00.000-07:002008-06-22T08:27:00.000-07:00J. Smith,I don't doubt that separation is the supe...J. Smith,<BR/><BR/>I don't doubt that separation is the supernatural outgrowth of the gospel; however, I don't see it as quietistic in Scripture as you represent it in your comment. For everything that God is doing in us, we need to work ourselves. In other words, we have to separate, not wait for God to do it for us.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.com