This is a response to the second comment from a "prominent grace pastor" with whom our brother Keith has been corresponding concerning the pastor's aversion to the finished cross-work of Christ. The first comment was answered and published in a previous blog.
It should be noted that much of the objections presented by this pastor in the following comment have already been answered in this podcast which was published over 3 years ago: https://youtu.be/x7ttpa0cih4?si=cadm7_CmjOMy4pSh
keithstewart8613: Hey Brother, I brought up exactly everything you mentioned, but he [Pastor] responded with this. ...Whenever time permits, I would really appreciate it if you could provide some insight as to how to respond to these comments. Thank you in advance Brother! Peace and Blessings!
TTR: First of all, this is an extremely odd way for him to answer to the corrections concerning his assumptions about Acts 26:18. (Which was published in a previous blog, https://truthtimeradio.com/blog/f/qa-about-acts-2618 ) and it’s a bit mind-blowing that he completely ignored the correction on his usage of the word “receive.”
This pastor really needs to learn better communication skills. Every sentence of the following comment from him is unconnected to the next, each statement presenting a different thought. Perhaps the topic of forgiveness at the cross gets him a bit too “fired up” to have a coherent discussion about it. Of course, his randomness could also be part of his strategy.
Because of the fact that his complete comment is just a compilation of disconnected assertions, we will need to look at each statement individually. Had he presented a clear thought and then provided a few statements for support of that thought (we usually call those “paragraphs") – I could have easily answered back in kind.
But since that is not the case, and every sentence he uses is a separate thought, we will just dissect it and answer each statement one by one, so as not to look over anything.
So, let's look at each sentence, in the exact order he typed them out.
Pastor: “Produce just one verse in Paul's epistles that says a sinner is forgiven but not saved or justified.”
TTR: There are several.
Romans 5:10
2 Corinthians 5:19-20
Colossians 2:13-14
Acts 26:18 (not a Pauline epistle, but certainly is Paul speaking)
We've already addressed this here: https://youtu.be/b7n8peDXyrQ?si=1NrfYXdXQL76UoxB
Pastor: “You keep trying to separate the two aspects of imputation (our sins to Christ and His righteousness to us) and reconciliation (God to us and us to God), but the Bible does not do that.”
TTR: What? Due to this statement being so poorly written, I can’t tell if he is claiming that there are two aspects each – to imputation and reconciliation – or if he is claiming that imputation and reconciliation are never to be “separated” according to scripture.
He’s wrong on both accounts, however, I won’t waste time responding without knowing which claim to address.
Maybe this series will help him decide what he wants to say: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBqHPdT-s8SAEn-StBd2N2eTnp5K3bHAv&si=FEYpM7fWS3tWlwgy
Pastor: “All that Christ accomplished on the cross is only applied to those who are in Christ, and no one is in Christ until they believe the gospel.”
TTR: Only the second part of this statement is true.
I invite this pastor to produce just one verse in Paul’s epistles that makes the claim that all that Christ accomplished on the cross only applies to those who are “in Christ” (believers), when we have undeniable evidence that what was accomplished on the cross (at the very least) caused God to cease imputing sins to the entire world. How many believers today were even alive to believe back then?
Unless he is ignoring it on purpose, then 2 Corinthians 5:19 should be more than sufficient to prove his assumption as false. But let’s add to that the fact that we are presently enjoying the dispensation of grace and are not under the law, or how about the entire chapters one and two of Colossians, maybe? How about Romans 11?
All these things were accomplished on/at the cross. -The mystery of which, for this dispensation, was not revealed until Paul, and that’s still way before anyone who is believing today was even born.
Oh, and let’s not forget this one: 1 Timothy 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
According to this pastor’s logic – Christ only gave himself a ransom for all that believe. -Which is limited atonement.
And, by the way the “in Christ” verses are off the table concerning who is forgiven and who isn’t. We’ve already addressed that basic grammatical misunderstanding multiple times.
“In Christ” is speaking of the source of forgiveness, not the location you have to be in to become forgiven.
https://truthtimeradio.com/blog/f/be-careful-with-the-term-in-christ
Pastor: “It is not our faith that accomplishes anything, forgives or justification, but it is how we receive it.”
TTR: In relation to his primary argument, this statement is about as clear as mud. How does one say “your faith doesn’t accomplish anything”, while at the same time, literally claim that your faith is what activates God’s application of your personal forgiveness?
This is precisely what he and all the other limited forgivers teach: that you aren’t forgiven until you believe that you are (which is the epidemy of circular reasoning, by the way.)
Here’s a newsflash for our dear pastor – our “faith reception” of what was accomplished at the cross nearly 2000 years ago doesn’t activate what happened nearly 2000 years ago, today in 2025.
Pastor: “You inconsistently say it is wrong to teach that a sinner must have faith to be forgiven, but then you say they must have faith to be justified."
TTR: Doing our best to understand what he is trying to say, but – it looks like he used the word “inconsistently” incorrectly… Is he saying that you are inconsistent for doing what follows the word “say” or is he saying that you teach what follows the word “say” in an inconsistent manner?
Either way, it looks like he’s unhappy because you aren’t teaching/believing something not found in scripture. What a horrible attitude.
If he wants others to teach that one must have faith to be forgiven, then he should first find a verse from our apostle that says “you must have faith to be forgiven” before attempting to correct you for NOT teaching such a thing.
Imagine… a pastor who doesn’t like it because you believe and teach that justification is by faith (like our Apostle Paul says), because he'd rather you believe and teach that forgiveness is by faith (which our Apostle Paul does not say.) -Perplexing is it not?
As for us, we are convinced that it’s best to stick with our apostle who very literally says, “you must have faith to be justified.” (Which is why we, and any other King James Bible Believing Mid-Acts Dispensationalists will continue to preach that one must have faith to be justified.)
Romans 1:17, 3:22, 3:28, 4:5, 5:1, 9:30, Galatians 2:16, 3:11, 3:24, and Philippians 3:9 all say that faith is required to be righteous and justified (a declaration of righteousness.)
We use the actual words our Apostle uses concerning what is given to us by our faith.
Paul says faith is required for justification. Paul never one time says that faith is required for forgiveness.
Pastor: “If the lost are forgiven and do not go to hell for their sins, then please explain Rev. 21:8.”
TTR: This guy must not be Mid-Acts…maybe he is just “supposed to be.” If he were, he’d know that the mysteries of this dispensation which were hid in God do not apply to the Ages to Come any more they did in Time Past.
Pastor: “By the way, unbelief is a SIN.”
TTR: Why, Thank you so much, Captain Obvious.
It sure is. A paid for sin, just like all the rest.
Now, if he is claiming that unbelief is a sin that Christ didn’t pay for, then he has worse problems with his theology than what is displayed in this comment.
If that isn’t his point, then this is just another limited forgiver deflective non-argument. (yawn)
Pastor: “Additionally, when Christ shed His blood on the cross He paid for the sins of the whole world, but that payment must be applied by faith.”
TTR: Zero verses, only conjecture. No verse says that Christ’s payment must be “applied” to the believer. I find plenty of evidence that God the Father accepted Christ’s payment for sin (the Atonement) – but nothing stating that payment is somehow shifted/applied onto the believer, upon belief. The payment is given to God the Father from God the Son. We aren’t even in that equation. The payment wasn’t owed to us – it was owed by us.
Limited Forgivers always have God doing extra things concerning the sins of the world, that the Bible says nothing about. They've got him storing sins away somewhere to be re-imputed, or not imputing unforgiven sins, applying a payment to a debt that was already paid for, or applying payments literal people based on their faith, and withholding forgiveness based on the individual's mental ascent of forgiveness. It's just a bunch of nonsensical confusion that our God is not the author of. -But we know who is, don't we?
Pastor: “He is the Saviour of all men (potentially), specially (experientially) of those that BELIEVE (1 Tim. 4:10).”
TTR: This pastor must not be a King James guy, otherwise, he wouldn’t be trying to correct it by adding his own words like a Jimmy Swaggart bible.
“Should have been translated: ‘potential Saviour of all men, and actual Saviour of those that believe.’”
I can’t take seriously anyone who so flippantly changes God’s Word. He isn’t the “potential” Saviour. HE IS THE SAVIOUR OF ALL MEN just like the verse says.
I wouldn’t expect any sincere reasoning together over the scriptures to happen with someone who is so audaciously arrogant as to insert their own words into what God said.
Pastor: “Our believing does accomplish forgiveness, but it is how we receive it and all the other blessings of salvation.”
TTR: It’s telling when a person cannot stay consistent with their own words in a single comment. Earlier in this comment, he said our faith does not accomplish forgiveness, and now he’s saying our “believing” does? -All over the place.
Pastor: “Salvation is a package deal (e.g., 1 Cor. 1:30-31; Col. 2:10).”
TTR: Finally, some verses we can go to for his assertions.
1 Cor 1:30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.
The context of this passage is Christ, not us.
Christ is made unto us wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption.
This isn’t a “salvation package deal” (a made-up term, by the way) – this is who Christ is to us, who are already saved. This isn’t talking about initial personal salvation. The verse says (word for word), “Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us...” Why would anyone confuse who Christ is to the already saved believer with the aspects of initial salvation unto eternal life?
As far as Colossians 2:10 – it is telling that he stopped at verse 10, concerning why we are complete as members of the body of Christ. -Especially since the verses that follow would fit better into his "package deal" than the ones in 1 Corinthians 1.
Maybe it’s because the rest of the passage doesn’t fit his “individual forgiveness timeline” narrative.
Colossians 2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:
12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.
13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
*Just a note – judging from the incoherence displayed in his correspondence so far, it’s highly likely that this pastor is a bit grammatically challenged, with reading comprehension skills and expressive communication not exactly being his strong suite (a shame for someone who is “supposed” to be a pastor…) So, just to clarify" the grammar of verse 13 makes it absolutely undeniably clear that the “having forgiven you all trespasses” is an action that takes place prior to the “quickening together with him,” and not at the same time, as limited forgiveness proponents have unsuccessfully tried to assert since at least 2013.
14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
Nailing it to his cross.
Nailing it to his cross.
Nailing it to his cross.
What is it, exactly, that is being “nailed to his cross” in 2025?
Colossians 2:10 isn’t about elements of our salvation that are cheaply named a “package deal” by limited forgivers who are too lazy to parse out how everything in their neat little “package” fits together. It’s about how we are complete because we believe what Christ accomplished nearly 2000 years ago… but our dear pastor would have to keep reading past his proof texting of verse 10 to find out what Christ did without our belief, way back then.
Pastor: “For example, you can't separate forgiveness from redemption (Eph. 1:7).”
TTR: In whom – is the source of the redemption and the forgiveness. Just because you see two terms in the same verse doesn’t mean those two terms cannot be “separated.” It is just sloppy Bible study to assume as much.
Again, we’ve already covered the “in Christ” topic, and he cannot use that term to prove one must be “in Christ” in order to be forgiven without compromising the context of the verses which use that term, where forgiveness is concerned. We have done several exercises to show why. https://truthtimeradio.com/blog/f/what-does-god-was-in-christ-mean
Pastor: “We receive Christ by faith (Col. 2:6). By your logic, the lost already have Christ without faith.”
TTR: A common trait of narcissists is that they tend to place their point of view on others. This is why they do not possess empathy. If they cannot see, experience, or understand something, then to them, it does not exist and is therefore irrelevant to their argument/point. This is an example of that.
That isn’t "your logic" he’s using to come to that conclusion, it’s his. That’s why his statement doesn’t make sense.
Our pastor believes that a person is not forgiven unless they “receive” that forgiveness by faith. So, by HIS logic, if a person is forgiven without believing, then they have somehow magically “received Christ” without believing the gospel.
His ideology is fatally flawed, in that you do not subscribe to what he is trying to assign as “your logic” (when it is indeed his own.) Additionally, his attempt to place his own logic onto you in order to argue against it – is nothing more than a textbook strawman tactic.
He could be corrected easily, and has been already, if only he would RECEIVE it, by simply changing his understanding of the word “receive” and all that the word does and does not imply on its own. It is always reliant on the surrounding context for modification and/or clarification. More on that later…
Colossians 2:6 is simply speaking of the walk of the believer, with the verses following stating how to accomplish that. This is a parallel verse to Galatians 2:20 and 1 Corinthians 9:14.
The act of “receiving Christ” is literally just believing the gospel of our salvation. No true minister of reconciliation preaches that anyone “receives Christ” without believing the gospel. His commentary here is courting false accusations which deserve no one’s time or respect.
Pastor: “Everybody knows that when you receive something, you obtain something you did not have before. That is simple and obvious.”
TTR: Precisely.
Unfortunately, what is not “simple and obvious” to our pastor, is the context which defines exactly what is to be “received.”
According to 1 Corinthians 15, we receive the gospel. That means we believe information concerning our salvation- the gospel. We did not have that knowledge before we heard the gospel. Factual information concerning how our sins were dealt with almost 2000 years ago must be received by a person in order for that person to be saved.
Forgiveness isn’t tangible. You can’t reach out and grab it with your hands.
So how do you receive something intangible, like information? You accept it as truth by believing it.
Salvation isn’t getting your sins forgiven, it’s believing they already are.
Regarding our reception of forgiveness, Paul couldn’t be more clear that it is information to be believed as truth (received.) But for further clarification, we’ve covered it here, in 3 separate blogs:
https://truthtimeradio.com/blog/f/acts-2618---the-limited-atoners-gotcha-verse
https://truthtimeradio.com/blog/f/comparing-1-corinthians-151-3-with-acts-2618
Q&A About Acts 26:18
Pastor: “The reason that God is not unjust for sending people to hell for sins Christ died for is because His payment was not applied to them, and therefore they are still in their sins.”
TTR: This is not even the correct way to look at the idea of “still being in sins.” But that’s a topic for another day. I must say that it is almost humorous to see some of the self-righteous modern-day pharisees act as though once they have believed the gospel, their sinful flesh just disappeared, and they aren’t still wearing it every day.
Death is still one-a-piece, last time I checked. Everyone is “in their sins” until they get a glorified body. Some are just circumcised from that flesh (saved) and some are not (lost.) It's just that simple.
That aside, who is this guy to attempt to qualify the righteousness of God according to what he thinks instead of what God clearly says in his own Word?
God is not “unjust” regardless of what he chooses to do. (Has this pastor never seen Romans 3:5 or 9:14?)
The act of trying to require God to be “just” based on our finite human understanding of him is blasphemous. God isn’t “unjust” to do his own will and good pleasure, regardless of how we feel about his will and good pleasure.
Mr. Pastor needs to learn that what God the Father has chosen to do for the sake of his own Son, is none of his business, other than to believe and proclaim it. It is a self-important mindset which claims that God would be “unjust” to do exactly what he said he did concerning the world’s sins – without the mental ascent of humanity to permit him to do such a thing.
Concerning his statement about Christ’s payment not being “applied to them” we just want to note that this is the second time he has made this claim, without a single verse to back it up.
Pastor: “If the lost are already forgiven, please explain why they go to the lake of fire for their sins (Eph. 5:5-7; Rev. 21:8).“
TTR: Well, if he doesn’t already know the context of Ephesians 5 concerning who the “children of disobedience” are, and why there is a warning at that particular time concerning being outside of the kingdom of God, (which lines up perfectly with the Romans 2 “wrath against the day of wrath") then I don’t know what to tell him. I really don’t have time to give him a one-on-one lesson on how to rightly divide at the moment. Maybe he can catch some of our past podcasts and this blog: https://truthtimeradio.com/blog/f/the-wrath-of-god-on-the-children-of-disobedience
It seems that our pastor’s deficiency in following our apostle Paul has also led him to go outside of our current dispensation and doctrine to argue against what is happening inside of our doctrine and current dispensation, yet again, with yet another proof-text from Revelation.
But, to be direct concerning his final question about why forgiven people would go to the lake of fire, I would be interested knowing this of him:
Where does he suppose the forgiven lost from Luke 23:34 ended up? Surely, he doesn’t believe they were saved, just because they were forgiven...
Luke 23:34 Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.
35 And the people stood beholding. And the rulers also with them derided him, saying, He saved others; let him save himself, if he be Christ, the chosen of God.
36 And the soldiers also mocked him, coming to him, and offering him vinegar,
37 And saying, If thou be the king of the Jews, save thyself.
He forgave them, but they still:
-cast lots for his clothes
-derided him
-mocked him
Forgiveness and Salvation are not the same thing, and they are to be separated. We have clear precedence of this in scripture. If they were not different, all those who were forgiven that day would have all been saved at the moment Christ pled for their forgiveness.
But they were not. They carried on in their unbelief, with their immediate actions proving that unbelief, LOST but FORGIVEN. And if they never went on to believe that Christ was their Messiah, and obeyed that faith the 12 preached to them, they are in Hell right now waiting to be resurrected unto damnation and then cast into the lake of fire.
It’s odd that no limited forgiver has a problem with those lost forgiven people from Luke 23 going to the lake of fire – yet they want to claim God would be “unjust” for something HE decided to do for the sake of HIS SON during this dispensation.
But for those who have way too much invested in pushing the "no one is forgiven until they believe" lie, it's seems to be just too much to ask of them to take a closer look at their own doctrine and to examine their own salvation (as our Apostle Paul instructs us to do.)
After all, if they look too closely, some of them just might end up having to unpublish their books on Amazon.
Add comment
Comments