Something Wonderful About to Happen

[editor]

Dear Friends:

I can see that something truly wonderful is about to take place.  As we all become comfortable talking about our Assembly experience, we will soon become aware that many of us have some different ideas about things.  

Some have rejected everything that remotely reminds them of the Assembly.  Others, are perhaps looking for something that is exactly like the Assembly proclaims themselves to be, a "perfect pattern of testimony."  Still others have found pasture in denominaitonal and non-denominational churches like EV Free, Baptist, Calvary Chapel and many others.  Sadly, there are those who no longer even believe in the God of the Bible.

Let me say a few things:

• The intention of this website is to lead people out of bondage and into a love relationship with Jesus Christ
• We know that we may disagree on what the proper church should be like, but we are committed to keeping the unity of the Spirit, in the bond of Peace.
• We believe that these things can be discussed, openly, and in a manner that glorifies God, even though we may disagree on some viewpoints.
• Most importantly, we agree that none of us knows what we ought, none of us has arrived, and we can all learn from eachother.

I can forsee that all sorts of feathers may be ruffled when we discuss things like the proper role of women in the church.  Hiring and firing of pastors, Calvinism and reformed theology, Arminianism, Covenant theology, Dispensational theology, Gifts of The Holy Spirit, etc.

Frankly, it makes me nervous!  However, this was something that was NEVER allowed back at the "lodge."  I look forward to seeing what God will do here in the future.

We have some very strong, intelligent people here, as well as some fragile lambs.  Let's be careful to edify, and not break the bruised reeds out there.

I know that I don't need to remind the vast majority of our visitors here in this section to conduct yourselves in a manner that glorifies God.  There may be some people who want to snipe, etc.  Please, feel free to snipe and ridicule if you must, but if you do it here, we will move it to another section on the forum!

God Bless you all,

Editor

[trockman]

Hello everyone!

On my first Sunday at Calvary Chapel, here in SLO, I had a most excellent experience.  My lodge background made me very nervous about what to expect.  I knew that the dress-code was casual.  (Really, that is the dress code, you don't wear a suit and tie to this church for very long.)  

I also knew that there would be music, and in fact there was.  Of course, in the words of the grandmaster, music was "a counterfeit, never seen in the Bible."

I also suspected that there might be women speaking, not teaching mind you, but speaking.

Well, I was right on all three counts.

I was comfortable wearing jeans and a nice shirt.  It didn't distract me at all.

The music was awesome.  The words to the songs were every bit as much about God's glorious name as the hymns.  Furthermore, one of them was a hymn, "When I survey the wondrous cross."

Much to my amazement, there was open worship, we had liberty to pray out loud and bless the Lord.

No woman taught that day, but a very lively, lovely sister did give announcements. The pastor then taught from the Bible, and there was prayer up front afterwards.  People were brought into relationship with Jesus Christ almost every week, and I witnessed growth from about 600, to over 1200 in about 2 years.

During the next two years, I had some real changes in the way I looked at certain things: specificly, the role of music, women, and church government.

I see that music is a real asset, for a couple reasons,

• It is "all things to all men in our modern culture
• It helped me concentrate on what I was singing, quite the opposite of what I was taught before, when my mind wandered all through the universe during worship

I have no problem, with women talking out loud in church.  It doesn't bother me in the least that a woman gives the announcements.  However, I would be bothered if one were to stand up and teach some morning.

I also realized that paying a pastor is no problem at all, as long as the man is a pastor.  If he does it as a job, or a career, then he shouldn't be paid!  In fact, this isn't a pastor.  However, I satisfied myself that the men who were pastors in this church were of high moral character.  They knew the scriptures, demonstrated kindness, patience and compassion, and most importantly,  God was undeniably blessing their ministry.  This church is sending out many missionaries, and all kinds of good things are happening.

What I see now, is not a New Testament Pattern, but New Testament Principles.

My criteria for a church is simple, Is The Lord Present?.  If He is there, than it's OK for me to be there too.  If He is leaving, then I am going to leave also, because I want to follow Him.  If He is not there, then what business do I have being there and calling it a church?

I am far more interested in the Life of the church, than the Light of the church.  They may be great bible scholars, but if the church is stagnant and exclusive, I am uneasy.  On the other hand, there may be thousands of people, but if the Word of God is not preached, I am even more uneasy.

However, if they have a little strength, and keep His word, then I am quite happy.

So, I think we can have some excellent discussion on some of the Bible passages that pertain to some of the things I have just mentioned.

[trockman]

I am really pressed for time at the moment to respond to the first three, but I intend to do so in the most intelligent manner that I am able.  but I would like to respond to the last point about The Lord skinning His knee.

At one time I thought that He was never sick, never cried in anger or frustration as a baby, never hit his thumb when pounding a nail, etc.

I am pretty convinced that this is true, although I don't consider it blasphemy if someone thinks he may have fallen and skinned His knee.  I just don't agree with it.

However, he was acquainted with all of our weakness.  Certainly, if He didn't know what a skinned knee felt like, he knew what it felt like to have the flesh on his back ripped to ribbons.  He knew what it felt like to have a rough piece of wood chafe against the raw flesh of his shoulder. He sweat, He thisted, He was fatigued, He wept, He rejoiced, He was angry, and everything else.  Not to mention the horror He experienced on my behalf when He cried, "My God, My God, Why have You forsaken Me?"

So, to me, the other speculative stuff is maybe not so important.  I cringed the first time we had The Lord's Supper at our church.  The pastor said, "...this is my body which is broken for you."  I immediately judged the man, and actually asked him about Psalm 91.

He patiently listened and answered by saying,  "Have you ever studied what crucifiction does to a person's body?"

Well, he explained it to me.  Jesus didn't have a bone broken, but His body was definitely broken.  So, again, it isn't that big of a deal to say the word "broken" before taking communion.  What is important is to humbly walk with our God.  Confess our sins, and trust in His blood. Not the fact that it may or may not have had heparin, or vitamin K, or clotting factor, etc.,  but rejoice in the fact that it is the precious blood of the Lamb, who takes away the sins of the world.

I'll take a stab at the other three soon.

Brent

[Aslan213]

Hi Freebird & Others,

GG taught that God created mankind on the 7th day.  I believe this is in error, but how serious is this?

That's a good question.  I think the seriousness occurs when the LB's start applying this interpretation in the local assembly.

If we backtrack to Mark 2:27 it says: "And He was saying to them, The Sabbath was made for the sake of man, and not man for the sake of the Sabbath."  The Sabbath was a day of rest and is a picture of our rest in Christ.  If God created man on the Sabbath, then God did not really rest.  With that mindset, neither are we to rest.  This leads to an abusive opportunity to control God's people.  It has been done for many years, but they only had Hebrews 10:25.  Now they have new revelation!  It results in the following abuse:  The meetings are to be observed with strict discipline, any absence is cause for harassment.  The belief is held that brethren need to serve all the meetings rather than being served by the meetings.  This is also one of the reasons why I left.

I welcome input on this.

The Lord bless you,

Eric

[Terry L Huffman]

Hello everybody:
I too used to get the one about" this is my body which is broken for you." A certain LB wd. always replace broken with given, and then pause and say "his body was not broken, saints." At least where I came from the ministry really wasn't very good. More time was spent telling us what the Lord's Supper was not than giving any kind of decent exposition of the Scriptures as to what it was. I termed the teaching I was getting unsubstantiation. Catholic Church-transubstantiation
      Luther................consubstantiation
Assembly I attended-see above
  I apologize for the sarcasm that probably ekes out of this post but sometimes after the "ministry" I wondered why I
 was there sometimes. Perhaps this is a common phenomena.

[trockman]

If God created the Sabbath for man, then man was already created. This is not the strongest argument against George's very odd teaching, reading the verses is much more powerful, but it does lend itself to the priority of the two events in creation.

If our Inhereitance was based on law, none of us would ever get it. Especially those of us who made the mistake of following Assembly practice for so long.

Christ died to fulfill the law, among other wonderful things.  In doing this, he obtained an Inheritance.  We are sealed by the Holy Spirit, and we are adopted as sons,  all by divinely revealed faith. NOT OF WORKS!  If I get more Inheritance than you because I tried harder, I have reason to boast. NO! NO! NO! It is because of Christ.  We owe it all to Him.

Now, here is where it gets sticky to me.  I realized about two years ago that I was not near the bible scholar that I had previously thought.  I am even worse off now.

I studied a little about reformed theology, which was incredibly helpful in learning about grace. I still have a very hard time with all 5 points in Calvinism however. I guess I'm a 3 and one half pointer.

I reject Arminianism, for much the same reasons that reformed guys do.  I don't believe I can lose my salvation, and I don't believe it all hinges on me.

I really can't figure out some of the other views out there, and I have been purposely avoiding them for the present.  Right now, I feel like a new believer, who memorized the bible while studying with JW's.

I know a lot of stuff. I can identify what's wrong quite well, but I am rather ignorant past that.

So, I decided to be a simple believer, and stick to the basics.  Jesus loves me. He saved me. Amazingly, I love Him, and want to please Him.

I know he can speak to me, and he is.  Even from this website and all of its humor!  He can also lead me from His Word, and He is.

I am going to make lots of mistakes, but He has taught me a slight amount of humility over that last two years. Now, if someone hits me over the head with a 2x4, I listen after the first or second time.  Before, I never did.

I know that I can't go wrong if I confess my sin, and trust Him to lead me.  I am really looking forward to the coming year.

Brent

[Terry L Huffman]

GX:
I forgot to say that I lean in your direction re. the Lord Jesus and the potential for injury. If he truly had a human nature-by divine prerogative-and willed for himself our lot(excepting a sin nature) it is very possible. I think the Psalms promise is general in the sense that if something is not part of the Divine Plan in terms of the ways the Lord
Jesus wd. suffer, thenhe wd. be protected from it. We don't really know either way re. "skinning his knee," etc.  was part and parcel of "being in all things like his brethren" and I am sure that you are not obsessing over this one. It is an interesting question....
Isn't this the greatness of the Lord Jesus, that He had His prerogatives as God and yet He chose ourlot? This is condescension, not men who tell us what a great thing it is that they are in our midst." What moves me is to think that God Himself knows our condition not just by virtue of His Omniscience-His Deity- but also by
His participation in our human nature(experience). This is the GREAT difference between Jesus and all other would-be avatars. Keeping this in mind grounds us in the truth that God is love. Also it frees me to celebrate His arrival(Christmas) if I so choose.

[trockman]

Hey Garth

I love that book. It is one of the books I recommend people to read when they are hung up on the inheritance stuff.  

I agree with you RE baby Jesus crying, of course He cried.  I just don't think He cried in anger and rebellion like most children do.  I also think He was always at peace, so He didn't cry in frustration.

However, lest this  become a foolish strife generating argument, I concede that it is entirely within the realm of reason to expect that when learning to walk, He fell down.

On to better things,  I was actually going to quote certain passages from Galatians, and from WW's commentary to answer the Inheritance questions. Perhaps today at lunch.

Go ahead and take a stab at it Garth.

Brent

[Mark C.]

Hi To All Bible Scholars,
  This is a great topic as The Assembly has a very unique set of hermenutics that understanding helped me considerably in my post Assembly life.
   Somewhere ( I forget where in the multudes of posts') the issue of whether or not certain scripture is more important than other scripture was raised.  Jesus himself stated that the Pharisees gave greater creedence to lesser things of the law while not seeking those values that were of greater value.  Jesus also taught that all of the law could be condensed into two main points: Love of God and love of my neighbor.
  Bible based cults delight in teaching that they are very diligent students of the Word (ex.= J.W."s) but their method of study is very unbalanced.  They will stress a verse that talks about "life in the blood" and totally miss the doctrine of the grace of God.  GG, in an attempt to prove his teaching of a conditional entry into Heaven, jumps around in his Bible and is able to put together "proof texts" but ignores the clear message of the entire New Test. that the inheritance is part of our salvation and as such is "reserved in Heaven for us".
   Possibly the most dangerous aspect of GG's teaching is his discussion on "receiving revelation".  GG made fun of Bible study as being unspiritual and the mind was not to be trusted.  You must get into a special "meditative" state in order to really understand the Word (shall we chant OM?).
     I'm enjoying all the Posts' greatly!  Merry Christmas and God Bless,  Mark                                                  

[trockman]

Garth

The reading that got me to open my eyes, was, in this order:

Haggai
Finding the Church, by Albert Zehr
The Geftakys File from Spiritual Counterfeit Project, http://www.scp-inc.org
The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse
A book about Mormonism, (i forget the title )
Be Free, by Bro. Wiersbe  

This book was the study guide for the fist bible study I went to in our new, compromised church.  At first, I was dissappointed when I heard we were going to use a commentary.  I didn't need one, I had most of the book memorized!  I believed that studying the bible alone was the proper thing to do. (Funny, this is part of the Lodge bylaws, but they all use George's commentary. Interesting eh?)

Well, I changed my mind pretty fast.  In the Lodge, Galatians would have taken exactly 7 weeks. Overview and chaps. 1-6.  Period.  Every brother preaching would say, "We don't have time to really develop this, so I'm just going to share the burden I got from the chapter."

However, in this new bible study, we took 5 months to go thru the book.  Be Free was not ever studied, we never brought it to the bible study, we simply used Warren's outline of the book.  I never learned so much in a Bible study.

I learned who the Galatians were, and the two major theory's regarding them, the north and south theorys.

I learned all kinds of things about the Jewish customs that the Judaizers were using to bewitch the disciples.  With this background information, which was what the people that Paul was writing to were thinking about, I was able to see why the book was written. Amazing!  It was then that I really came to grips about how totally ignorant I was regarding the Bible.  Here is one example:

3:1  O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified?  2  This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?  3  Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?  4  Have you suffered so many things in vain--if indeed [it] [was] in vain?  5  Therefore He who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you, [does] [He] [do] [it] by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?--  6  just as Abraham "believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness."  7  Therefore know that [only] those who are of faith are sons of Abraham.  8  And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, [saying], "In you all the nations shall be blessed."  9  So then those who [are] of faith are blessed with believing Abraham.

For some reason, in the Lodge, the book of Galatians was called, "The Book of The Inheritance."  The key was Gal 2:20.  The book was all about the way of the cross, etc. Nothing but Assembly ideas.

However, the book is REALLY about a region where a bad spiritual influence, a false "gospel," came in and bewitched the believers.  What was the false "gospel?"

It went like this:  Yes, you must be saved, you must believe, but that is only the beginning.  Faith in Christ must be supplemented by obedience to the Law. You must add to your faith Holy behaviour and obedience.  That is how you can be really saved.  You can't get saved and continue to live like a gentile(worldly person, Galatian culture, etc.)  You must now live like we do.(Training homes, weekly meetings, submission to our customs and practices.)

My mind raced along this pathway:  "Wow, God gave me His Spirit when I believed, not when I was doing the right things. If I began like that, with faith only, how is it that I am convinced that in order to continue I must do all this?"  

Gal 4:15  What has happened to all your joy? I can testify that, if you could have done so, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me.  16  Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?  17  Those people are zealous to win you over, but for no good. What they want is to alienate you [from us], so that you may be zealous for them.  18  It is fine to be zealous, provided the purpose is good, and to be so always and not just when I am with you.  19  My dear children, for whom I am again in the pains of childbirth until Christ is formed in you,

Wow, these people lost their joy!  They had it in the beginning, but now it's gone. Hmm, the leaders were zealously courting them, in order to exclude them from other believers.....hmmmm.    Wow! Paul called them children! They had started out as sons, but had regressed to children.  They thought their faith was growing, but really it was shrinking.  Hmmm, I think I understand.  OK, what about this sons, and children and tutor thing.....Oh my, the child who needs a tutor is a Jew, not a believer!  Paul is saying, to the gentile believers, "Why are you going back to the tutor, acting like children, when you are sons?"

Boom!  All of a sudden, I realized that I had been bewitched. Now I knew why George hated "systematic theology, Cemetary," commentaries, etc.  He was zealously courting us to be his own devoted followers.  I had become duped by one of the oldest games in the Book!  Now I knew what had happened to my joy in Christ.

Well, to make a long story short, here I am.  BTW, the reason Paul wrote the epistle was not to preach mysticism and the wheel and the line, it was to contend for the faith, and to expose the false brethren, who were accursed because they preached another gospel!

I hope this helps begin the discusion on the Inheritance.

Brent

[Mark C.]

Hi Brent and Others,
  I think your discussion of Galatians starts and ends the discussion of the GG error re. the inheritance.
  You are absolutely correct that GG by moving his listeners into the realm of "meditation" that he espoused set them up for his bewitchment.  I like the Phillips translation where he calls the Galatians "Dear Idiots", for falling for the deception they were being fed. (boy were we ever! )  
   GG would take away any sense of context (who was Paul speaking to, what was the culture of the day, figures of speech, etc.).  GG could sweep through scripture starting with Abe., the exodus, wandering of Israel, in the Land, David, Gospels, and Epistles, and pull out concepts that seemed to support his Inheritance teaching.  GG's method of interpretation was to place the above parts of scripture into categories that he established.  The establishment of these categories forced all texts into his presuppositions regardless of their original contexts'.  An example would be the Nation of Israel and their "Salvation" from Egypt, their wandering in the wilderness, and their eventual non-entry into the Land:  This to GG taught that not all believers would enter the Inheritance, regaradless of what the NT teaches re. same.
    I have discovered it makes much better sense to study the NT first to see what it teaches re. the inheritance and then to interpret the OT scripture with the understanding of same.
   A book that was very helpful to me re. GG's teaching is called, "A theology of the Holy Spirit", by Frederick Dale Bruner.  The book is actually a rebuttal to "higher life" teaching as taught by the old line Pentecostals.  Another book that was a great blessing is, "Grace, The Glorious Theme", by Lewis Sperry Chafer.  The first author is Reformed and the next is a Dispensationlist, but both reject GG "inheritance" teaching.
                                             God Bless,  Mark  

[trockman]

Garth

The thread is now unlocked!  The vision is free to flow!

First of all, with regard to the Wheel and Line.  I don't have any beef whatever with Dr. Solomon. While I don't agree with much of what he teaches, let's be clear, he has nothing to do with the abuse that goes on in the Assemblies, nor does he sanction or excuse it in any way.  I did have some correspondence with him about 2 years ago, regarding GG.  CS had the mistaken impression that George was greek, and understood greek.  I "elightened him," we shared some pleasantries and that was that.  He also agreed with me that [his] teaching on "The Cross," was for an individual believer, not for a "corporate gathering." He also stated that this misapplication of his teaching could very well lead to some of the probelms that I told him about within the Geftakys ministry.  He also said that he was under the impression that MANY who served with George had "greatly benefited," from his teachings about the cross.  So, George is right, "Chuck doesn't see the church."  I think if Chuck got a glimpse of the "church" George was referring to, he might have a thing or two to say about it.  George got CS to attend a worker's meeting once, in the late '80's.  I think he was up there for a few hours.  From this brief visit, George and Betty used his name to lend credibility to their ministry.  Again, although I don't agree with CS, I have no beef with him, and he has in fact helped a great many people.

I don't agree with the Wheel and Line, but my problem is more along the lines of what Lodge leaders DO with it, as opposed to what it is actually saying.

George, and mostly Betty, have taken the Identification truths, and perverted them in such a way that they are used as clubs and sticks in order to get people under control.  Solomon's teachings, while certainly not meant to be used this way by their author, were twisted by BG so that "worries, doubts, fears," were always a sign of "S" being in the center, which was sin!

So, let's say I am worried that Judy has a black eye and purple marks around her neck. (I was worried when I saw this)  Well, Christ is in control!  If He is in control, then why are we so worried?  Isn't that just the flesh, trying to get in there and muck things up? This is one example.

Another is this.  Picture a new believer, who is full of Joy!  They just quit an immoral life style, delivered by the grace of God.  They are washed and cleansed.  They are exactly where they should be, all is well, they are in a position to grow in grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ.  Then, they meet a person on campus.  Their zeal makes them open to these more "mature" brothers, who begin to teach them about all these theorys about spirit, soul, body, one nature, the other nature, the cross, the wheel, the line, etc.  This new believer now becomes introspective, they second guess every decision and impulse. They don't spontaneously glorify God anymore, now they are careful, trying to make sure that the rascal "Self," isn't usurping Christ.  This is NOT what Solomon had in mind.  The person I have described above is already doing what Solomon says they should.  The lodge guys came along and ruined everything.

There are many examples like this.

Now, on the other level, I am not a fan of "Deeper Life," for a host of other reasons. I'll go into those later. Have you read my book?

Brent

[Mark C.]

Hi Brent,
  I'm afraid I missed the teaching on "The Wheel and The Line."(I am aware of the "wheel in a wheel" of Ezekiel).
  I gather from what you said that it has to do with our identification with Christ.  We are supposed to wave the magic wand of "reckoning faith" and all the bad things will go away (and they say Harry Potter is bad).  When we sense evil in our hearts it is not time to wave magic talismans, be they saying the Rosery, or any other "word" to ward off the evil spirits.
  God has set eternity in our hearts and when we start to play the Holy Spirit by attempting to grapple with the old man we fight the losing battle of Romans 7.  Instead we need to simply understand the fact of our salvation as being complete and secure.  Yes, God has won the battle over sin and we need to recognize it, but what GG means by the word "reckon" is to actualize the fact of the cross.  Only God has the wisdom and the power to actualize our salvation and he certainly doesn't need our assistance, nor does he help those who help themselves in this matter.
   This is why Paul breathes such a sigh of relief in Rom. 8 where he recognizes the sovereignty of God in our salvation and the absolute confidence in the power of the Holy Spirit to bring our salvation to completion.
   No Heavenly Ladders to climb, old men to crucify, or other tricky inner doings; just a simple trust in the promise of God.  Romans 6 is really a discussion of justification and mentions sanctification as the result of the former.  We know this by the last verse where he concludes the chapter with the words, "the GIFT of eternal life".  Rom. 6 is a argument against those who claim grace is amoral and that the doctrine would lead to a sinful life.  Those who believe such things are ignorant of the power of God in the lives of those who are saved.  Paul does not teach here that all sin will be erradicated in the believers life, but that grace puts us on that road to completion and that God will bring us there.         God Bless,  Mark (Global moderator? )  

[trockman]

Hello all:

I don't think we need waste space on the database for this server trying to argue against this whacko teaching by using the bible. EVERYONE knows this is just plain false.  Even George says that, "six is the number of man. Seven is the number of spiritual perfection."  To engage in debate with this Bozo over this doctrine is to give it and him WAY TOO MUCH credibility.  It's wrong and any fool, (almost any) can see it! case closed.

The real question, which you brought up, is how a teaching like this can be permitted and accepted.

I believe the answer is this:

People do not accept it. Even though GG teaches it, they don't believe it
• It is not permitted, but tolerated.  This is because the average saint has been taught passivity, and the leaders are legendary cowards

I guarantee that Mark Miller, Jim Hayman, et al, don't believe that man was created on the seventh day.  Neither does anyone else, I hope.  However, just because they don't believe it doesn't mean that the teaching is not powerful. Let me explain.

I see that there is a lying spirit, a teaching demon, behind this.  The goal of the teaching is not to get people to believe that man was created on the seventh day, but to condition people to accept extra-biblical ideas!  If we let this one slip past, the next won't be so hard.  Then the next, and so on.  Our conscience's will become seared, we lose the ability to think and resist, and now we are open to anything.  This is how real live heretical cults are born.

Marshall Applewhite, of Heaven's Gate was once a pentecostal preacher.  Some of his vodka swilling followers were with him when he was a "christian."

Jim Jones was a "Kristian," when they ordered the case of kool-aide.  My point is that this teaching in itself is almost harmless.  It is the acceptance and toleration of the man and his twisting of the scriptures that is so dangerous.

This must be stopped!  It is very serious.  If we care one ounce for the people in the Assembly, we will do something about this, which is exactly what this website is for.

2 Tim 4:4 and they will turn  their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.

Brent

[trockman]

Hi Garth

I think you got it pretty much right.  Deeper Life proponents have made some contrubutions, valuable ones. But to elevated their ideas to the level where their words become God's words is a real danger.

Also, anything can be twisted, including Paul's epistles.

The main problem I have with the whole deeper life idea is that it promotes a second, deeper conversion, IN Addition To, salvation.  While I don't disagree with the exposition of the fullness of our salvation, I think it needs to be said that it is all part of salvation, not a second conversion.

I also don't agree with the One-Nature teaching that Solomon and the Deeper Life guys propound.

Shall we get into that some time?

Brent