Thanks, Greg.
I just sort of skimmed over it quickly and haven’t really gotten into it yet, but I did see some examples of the name calling at first glance. When I saw the “court ordered” in bold type, it caught my attention and I had to ask ! 

[quote author="Greg"]Eugene, I removed the link in your last post because I believe it is completely counterproductive to the topic at hand.

Yet you feel free to slander me without posting the source of your misrepresentation.

Oh, gosh...I am so sorry for asking my question now and causing all this “to do” about it. 

[quote author="Greg"]You have ample opportunity to spread your message on your own site

You said virtually the same thing when Stan Ermshar agreed with me that Maxwellian theology is a doctrine of demons. In retaliation for the light I brought, Ron Corson was allowed to misrepresent me on that thread and you told me that I had no right to refute him on your blog. In other words, you have common cause with the disciples of Maxwell. Well, I’m not surprised.

Eugene, your conclusions are wildly inaccurate. Recall that I asked Corson to interact with your ideas rather than simply dismiss you because you’ve been banned on other forums. To jog your memory, this is what I said:

“[Ron], I can’t help but notice the contradiction in your plea to Stan about voicing disagreement with other Christians while you do the same with Eugene Shubert. I’d like to suggest that we interact with the ideas these men put forward rather than automatically give latitude to a brother’s teachings just because he calls himself a Christ-follower.”

The only thing I subsequently asked you to do was to refrain from using this site as a platform to bring all of your old charges against Corson and everyone else. You seemed eager to tell an old story that you’ve thoroughly documented on your site, and yet now that you see I don’t agree with everything you say, you’re content to call me names and judge my salvation. I suggest that before you look for the sliver in my eye, you remove the log in your own.

Greg

[quote author="Greg"]"[Ron], I can’t help but notice the contradiction in your plea to Stan about voicing disagreement with other Christians while you do the same with Eugene Shubert. I’d like to suggest that we interact with the ideas these men put forward rather than automatically give latitude to a brother’s teachings just because he calls himself a Christ-follower.”

That’s not the paragraph that I’m complaining about. 

If you’re upset that I won’t allow you to use this site as a platform to discuss your problems with Ron Corson, then there’s nothing further to say. Feel free to use your own site for this purpose, or even better, send him an email. It’s ironic that you give me no credit for defending you against Corson and indeed my salvation is questioned.

I am not surprised so many people disagree with you, since your abrasive approach invites such. Maybe this is your goal, and if so, you’ve succeeded mightily.

Greg

[quote author="Greg"]Eugene Shubert (shubee) had a run-in with his local SDA congregation

Not only do you lack the discernment to understand what you’ve read, you suppress the truth that proves that you have difficulty in understanding plain English.

[quote author="Greg"]If you’re upset that I won’t allow you to use this site as a platform to discuss your problems with Ron Corson

I’ve already explained my protest but you don’t understand, just as you don’t understand Christ’s Investigative Judgment parables, even after the contested particulars have been explained to you.

[quote author="Greg"]It’s ironic that you give me no credit for defending you against Corson and indeed my salvation is questioned.

Your estimate of your own self-righteousness astounds me. You are wrong to think that you merit credit and that you defended me. You allowed Ron Corson to misrepresent me on your blog and you did not remove his slander, even after I specifically identified his slander. Instead, you just deleted my specific identification of the slander and my detailed proof that it is slander.  I freely admit that I question the salvation of everyone who promotes error and suppresses the truth (Romans 1:18). Also, where’s the merit in refusing to debate Matthew 25:14-30 and Matthew 25:31-46 as you condemn me for believing in its straightforward meaning? As I see it, your only excuse is that you’re oblivious to the fact that you condemn Christ’s Investigative Judgment parables as a soul-sucking, assurance-robbing, legalistic, righteousness by works gospel. I must confess–I don’t have much confidence that God would allow a stern critic of the everlasting gospel (Revelation 14:6-12) to escape the Investigative Judgment with such a flimsy defense.

[quote author="Greg"]I am not surprised so many people disagree with you, since your abrasive approach invites such. Maybe this is your goal, and if so, you’ve succeeded mightily.

I absolutely deny that my approach is abrasive. I’ve given you a severe beating and if you’re just barely aware of that, then logical arguments have little effect on you.

I count Stan Ermshar as someone who agrees with me on a critical item in my theology because he said, “I personally believe you are correct, that Maxwellian theology is a doctrine of demons.”

I agree that I’m virtually alone in my protests against the spiritualistic philosophy of A. Graham Maxwell being so warmly accepted in the Seventh-day Adventist church. I consider this as a fulfillment of prophecy. Ellen White said that the time would come when speaking against spiritualism would be considered blasphemy.

[quote author="Shubee"]I absolutely deny that my approach is abrasive. I’ve given you a severe beating and if you are just barely aware of that, then logical arguments have little effect on you.

The above statement is self refuting, since “severe beating” and “abrasive” go hand in hand. Beating someone and claiming that you’re not abrasive when you beat him, calling names and questioning the salvation of all who disagree with you, since only when they agree with you they are promoting truth ("I freely admit that I question the salvation of everyone who promotes error and suppresses the truth “-Shubee), if this is not abrasive, I don’t know what abrasiveness is.

Since in your view, Mr. Shubee, we are incapable to carry a logical discussion with you, and don’t have the necessary IQ to understand you, we obviously are not good partners of discussion for you. You’re like a physician talking with a homeless guy who lived all his life on the street about Einstein’s theory of relativity. How productive is such kind of a discussion is hard to see.

Gabriel

Eugene,

A stopped clock is right twice a day, and just because I agree with you on Maxwell, doesn’t mean I agree with you on anything else.

I would encourage you to read more of John MacArthur’s books, and also books by RC Sproul, but most of all encourage you to study the Bible with a humble heart. There is none of us who has a corner on truth, as you seem to claim.

I believe Shubee, you are headed down a very dangerous road. You are holding up yourself as the standard of truth. Your thinking is indeed cultic, and you may be becoming a cult leader of your own.

Stan

The judgment (the only one mentioned in Scripture) will accord with works, but it is not based on works. An active faith that “works through love” (Galatians 5:6) is the evidence that one is truly saved and kept by God, not the basis of his right standing with God (especially not in the judgment). John Piper is good at explaining this point, first in his sermons on Romans 2:6-10 here:

http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Sermons/BySeries/2/1059_The_Final_Divide_Eternal_Life_or_Eternal_Wrath_Part_1/

Would it be a contradiction with the gospel of free and sovereign grace if that Gospel were powerful enough that all who truly believed it were radically changed by it and came to heaven on the path of persevering obedience? If that were true - and I think it is true - then the works that count would be the works of faith, and at the judgment they would be the evidence of saving faith in Christ. And our salvation would accord with them, but not be based on them.

And here:

http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Sermons/BySeries/2/1060_The_Final_Divide_Eternal_Life_or_Eternal_Wrath_Part_2/

How does receiving eternal life or eternal wrath “according to works” fit with receiving eternal life by faith in Jesus Christ on the basis of God’s righteousness, not ours?… We are not questioning whether we are justified, set right with God, and eternally secured not on the basis of our deeds, but on the basis of God’s own righteousness imputed to us through our faith in Christ alone. (Romans 3:28, Romans 4:5, Romans 5:1) So justification - getting right with God - is through faith, not deeds… And finally, Romans 8:33-34 shows that what is at stake here is indeed the final judgment and eternal life, as in Romans 2:7. “Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? [Future tense, namely, at the judgment day!] God is the one who justifies.” In other words, no one is going to be able to override the judgment of God in declaring his elect ones acquitted on the basis of Christ’s death for them. Then he states that basis in verse 34, “Who is the one who condemns? [implied: nobody! Why? Because . . .] Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us.” So the death of Christ in my place, and the justification (the righteousness God imputes) is the basis of the gift of eternal life, not our deeds… It (Romans 2:6-10) means that God does indeed give eternal life to those who persevere in obedience not because this obedience is perfect or because it is the basis or the merit of eternal life, but because saving faith always changes our lives in the power of the Holy Spirit so that true believers persevere in doing good. In other words, a changed life of obedience to God’s truth (verse 8) is not the basis of eternal life, but the evidence of authentic faith which unites us to Christ who is the basis of eternal life. Eternal life is always based on Jesus Christ and through our faith. But since faith, by the Holy Spirit, always sanctifies or changes us into the image of Christ (one degree at a time, 2 Corinthians 3:18), there will be deeds that “accord with” this saving faith. So while eternal life will be awarded only to believers, it will be awarded “according to” - there will be an accord with -their deeds. There will be a way of life that God can put on display to demonstrate to the world that this person’s faith was real.

That’s probably enough to see Piper’s explanation of these difficult texts. Also recommended on this topic is his seminar called “Future Grace” here:

http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Seminars/1587_Future_Grace__Battling_Unbelief_Session_1/

The parable of the servants in Matthew 25 very clearly states that the “worthless” servant who was “cast into the outer darkness” never had saving faith, as Greg has said many times already. Matthew 25:29 - “...from the one who has not...” Also notice that the very next section in the chapter explains the final judgment (the only judgment found in Scripture) further, namely, God separates the elect (sheep) from the reprobate (goats). Where did I get that idea?! ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ (Matthew 25:34b-36) This passage explains so well how God elects people to salvation before the beginning of time, keeps them unto final salvation and produces fruit in them that accords with His judgment.

Soli Deo Gloria

Nate