The Holy Spirit is my Proof

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

We are not saved BY our good works, we are save TO do good works. Do you not understand the fundamental differences there? Justification (salvation as spoken of in the past tense referring to saved from hell), is NOT the finish line reward of our walk with Christ, it's just the beginning!!! For Pete's sake, I even re-clarified this position with you not more than two days ago. Lastly, I've never once said there is no "judgment" for those of us who are in a covenant relationship with Jesus,

This is all just philosophy.

If you say so:

"There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." ~ Romans 8:1

Strong's (#2632) definition for condemnation above is "damnatory sentence".

So it could be said this way:

"There is therefore now no damnation (to hell) to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."

We, as in the whole world, were redeemed, in order to put us into the New Covenant situation.

Actually, the New Covenant was instituted before redemption was made, not after. Christ instituted the New Covenant before He died for our sins.

This is opposed to, or the opposite of, the old Covenant, which did not have the power to change a person, so as to be able to stop sinning, the old system repeatedly covered sins that kept on being committed.

No, the Old Covenant didn't have the power to justify a person, the only way sins were forgiven was with the shedding of blood by sacrifice. That's why the righteous dead under the Old Covenant were not in heaven but in Abraham's Bosom until final redemption was made by Christ. Now the redeemed go straight to heaven upon death, final atonement was made at Calvary. God made Christ sin who knew no sin so that we would be made the righteousness of God in Him. (The Great Exchange)

You make something which is no judgement, and substitute it in to replace a real judgement, then just change the definition of a judgement.

Here we go yet again for the 100th time, I never said we Christians are not judged..

WE ARE JUDGED!!!

Our salvation is never at risk at our judgment, because our sins are forgotten by God. Our works are judged, rewards are won or lost, salvation is never in jeopardy at our judgment. (1 Corinthians 3:13-15) You can't just completely ignore scripture to suit your Theology.


"each one's work will become manifest, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed by fire, and the fire will test (judge) what sort of work each one has done. If the work that anyone has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If anyone's work is burned up, he will suffer loss (of reward), though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire."


For the love of God Almightly, hopefully I'll never hear you again claim I say that we are not judged.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Another straw man at best, lie at worst. That is EXACTLY how we do good works post-justification, by the indwelling and leading of the Holy Spirit. But He isn't given to us before we are justified, but at the point of justification. It is His work that regenerated our heats, that gives us a new nature, that makes us a new creation in Christ Jesus. Salvation from hell is not a reward for our faithfulness, it's a gift of God's goodness and grace. It's not our final goal or the end of the race, it's a gift from God to BEGIN the race. You're busibodying around trying to earn your own justification when God wants you to accept it with humble joy, thank Him, then get busy with the tasks and the works He has for you to advance His Son's kingdom. All it takes to be saved is to call upon the name of the Lord, to ask Him, to acknowledge our sin and need for a Savior because we are impotent to be perfect ourselves. And the Lord says anyone who calls on Him will never be cast out nor ashamed.

It clearly does say it is the goal. Yes you do have to work at assuring your election and to show you are worthy of that election. That is in the Bible but you are presenting a non biblical philosophy that you are saved before you ever did anything.
It is true that the foundation on which your salvation is built was established before we were born but we are not saved untill we stand on the sea of glass.

First of all let me apologize to you if that was not you're intention. Most people enjoy getting down right nasty about this type of conversation. I would also like to add before I get started I am unsure if this truely was Pauls intention's to undermind Jesus's teaching. I sincerly pray not, other wise judgement day may not turn out so nice for him.

Yes GOD absolutely looks at their hearts. Luke 18 13-14, I quoted earlier because of the humbleness of the publican. My point isnt the length of the prayer. It is when I compare Paul to Jesus, Paul doesnt match Jesus's teachings. Jesus never outright taught faith alone is sanctification. Which Paul seems to have been teaching.
Since he wasnt an Apostle, He did not travel with Jesus nor witness his death and resurection. He had no right to be an Apostle. Brethern yes, Apostle no.

Paul says, "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds (works) of the law." Rom 3:28 Elsewhere he sates that God "...imputes righteousness without works." Rom 4:6 Paul is saying here that salvation is through faith alone and that we do not need works such as works repentance and works of righteousness. Jesus says, "And why do you call Me Lord, Lord, and do not do what I say?" Luk 6:46

His doctorine also seemed to teach anti semitism or atleast help edifiy those seeking to be so.
1 Thessalonians 2:14-18
Wycliffe Bible (WYC)

14 For, brethren, ye be made followers of the churches of God, that be in Judaea, in Christ Jesus, for [and] ye have suffered the same things of your even-lineages, as [and] they of the Jews.

15 Which slew both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and pursued us, and they please not to God, and they be adversaries to all men;

I also saw that Peter was chosen to be called upon to be the apostle to the gentile's.Where?

I need to apologize here, I cant seem to find the verse that I thought I saw. But it can be added that Peter was the first to teach to the non jewish converts. And gave an oath that allowed them to become apart of the community.

Also Jesus states that there is only 12 gates into the holy city. All named after his apostles. Not 13 but 12, paul is not among them.I'm not saying Paul is one of the 12.

Rev 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb.
To me this is a very important detail on exactly how high you should hold Pauline Doctorine. Matthias, not Paul, replaced Judas in Acts 1. There is only 12 as revelation proves. So there for he had no rights to change the docotrine Jesus set forth. He was a brethern, desciple, and witness to the begining of the communtiy. Nothing more. He should not be held higher then Jesus or his Apostles. Nor should he take up so much of the NT.

His Doctorine was the blue print for christanity. Including the Catholic church who have fallen very far from Jesus's teachings. Since Paul was everything to everyone and they teach pauline doctorine. We now have tares among the wheat. This doctorine divided Jesus's bride from her true calling. His doctorine confused people.
"For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints." 1Co 14:33
Here are just a few examples.....

Jesus instructs us to feed the poor. Paul says, 2Th 3:10"For even when we were with you we gave you orders, saying, If any man does no work, let him not have food.

We follow Jesus only!.Paul says 1Co 4:16 "Wherefore I beseech (beg) you, be ye followers of me."
Paul says,Phi 3:17 "Brothers, be imitators together of me, and mark those who walk this way, for you have us for a pattern."

"Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. Therefore I urge you to imitate (follow) me." 1 Cor 4:15-16 (NIV)

VS.

I follow Jesus Christ and imitate Him ALONE! And that is what Jesus clearly told us to do,"call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven."!. " Matt 23:9



About Pauls Conversion Story.
Conversion Story #1
And as he journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly a light shone around him from heaven. Then he fell to the ground, and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul Saul, why are you persecuting Me?" And he said, "Who are You, Lord?" And the Lord said, "I am Yeshua, whom you are persecuting, It is hard for you to kick against the goads." So he, trembling and astonished, said, "Lord, what do You want me to do?" And the Lord said to him, "Arise and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do."

Conversion Story #2
"Now it happened, as I journeyed and came near Damascus at about noon, suddenly a great light from heaven shone around me. And I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?' So I answered, 'Who are You, Lord?' And he said to me, 'I am Yeshua of Nazareth, Whom you are persecuting.' ...So I said, 'What shall I do, Lord?' And the Lord said to me, 'Arise and go into Damascus, and there you will be told all things which are appointed for you to do.'

Conversion Story #3
"While thus occupied, as I journeyed to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests, at midday, O king, along the road I saw a light from heaven, brighter than the sun, shining around me and those who journeyed with me. And when we all had fallen to the ground, I heard a voice speaking to me and saying in the Hebrew language, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.' So I said, 'Who are You , Lord?' And he said, 'I am Yeshua, whom you are persecuting. But rise and stand on your feet; for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to make you a minister and a witness both of the things which you have seen and of the things which I will yet reveal to you. I will deliver you from the Jewish people, as well as from the Gentiles, to whom I now send you, to open their eyes and to turn them from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me.' Therefore, King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision..."

The problem with #3 is it completely contradicts the first 2. He was told by Jesus to go to Damascus to the Apostle's. They had athourity over him not the other way around. He was to witness to the miacle he recieved and to be trained. The Apostles were to reveal these things to him. Well at least thats what his first 2 stories seem to state. But his doctorine seem's to lean towards the 3rd. He exalted himself to a station that was not his to hold.

I think you're talking about Peter. Paul rebuked Peter for doing this. The only thing similar with Paul was his words in 1 Corinthians chapter 9:

"v.19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more.

20And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;

21To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.

22To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.

23And this I do for the gospel's sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you."

I would need to restate Paul had no right to rebuke Jesus's chosen head Apostle.

"After this, king Agrippa, I did not disobey the heavenly vision. But to those first in Damascus, and Jerusalem, and to all the country of Judea, and to the nations, I made known the command to repent and to turn to God, doing works worthy of repentance Because of these things, having caught me in the temple, The Jews tried to kill me." Act 26:19-21

VS.


"Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." Gal 2:16

No Paul didn't for one, and for two Christ was speaking of the antichrist, not Paul.

Paul's average comes in at about 18.2 per thousand! personal pronoun usage per thousand words of text
ie, Me , My, Mine, I.

Also lets not forget......
-------->for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. Therefore I urge you to imitate (follow) me." 1 Cor 4:15-16 (NIV)

----->Phi 3:17 "Brothers, be imitators together of me, and mark those who walk this way

--->1Co 4:16 "Wherefore I beseech (beg) you, be ye followers of me."

-->"Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by the law; you have fallen from grace. Gal 5:2-4


Secondly.......Christ warns there are many anti-christs. Anyone who teach's against what Jesus taught can be deemed to be an anti-christ spirit.

Not true at all, read what Jesus said in John 6:35-40.

I do read what Jesus alone taught, which is what makes these verses very disturbing.......!!!

"Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree..." (Gal 3:13) "And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree: His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God that thy land be not defiled." Deut 21:22,23 But does he quote the words of Jesus to prove his point? Never.

According to Galations, James the brother of Jesus is cursed because he preaches "another gospel." Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham justified by works when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by his works was made perfect?" (James 2:19-22)

"You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only." James 2:18-24 James was an Apostle of Christ and was taught directly from Jesus Himself. Paul on the other hand studied with no man, and never walked with Jesus, and claimed he was given all knowledge in a quick vision given to him by the Lord. Paul's says, "...knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified." Gal 2:16


I will continue later, My computer has begun to act up yeah
LOTZA LUV AS ALWAYS

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

When it says we are saved by grace alone through faith alone and not of works that's what I believe, the Word of God is my final authority. I don't deny we should do good works, we definitely should, for Christ's glory and the advancement of His kingdom. What I deny is that our works before justification have any bearing whatsoever on God's love in reconciling us to Himself through His Son's work at Calvary.

Works could be thought of as deeds.

Yes exactly, and more precise in the terms we are discussing "deeds of righteousness to God's glory".

Think of the one who comes to Jesus in the last day saying, "Did I not do miracles in your name?"

Irrelevant. Jesus said He never knew that person, which means that person never had a covenant relationship with Jesus.

That would be a work.

Yeah it would, on the man's part only, in God's eyes because that person is not in covenant relationship with His Son and that work couldn't have been done though the power of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit which is only given to those in a covenant relationship with Christ, that person's work is nothing more than a filthy rag. (In the Hebrew a filthy menstrual rag)

Jesus is not interested in that, he is interested in if that person is converted.

Which is a work of ours or the regeneration of us by the Holy Spirit?

He says, "Get away from me, Ye worker of iniquity."
This person still had his old sinful nature and had never been converted.
There is another kind of faith which is a personal faith, more like a belief, where by this faith, they see themselves being passed trough judgement with a positive verdict so that through this vision into the future, they see themselves as having been saved.

You didn't mention what Jesus said first, "I never knew you". meaning that person was never in a covenant relationship with Him.

reply to post by jmdewey60

It is true that the foundation on which your salvation is built was established before we were born but we are not saved untill we stand on the sea of glass.

Yeah, that's a big fat lie. Was Paul writing to people on Earth at the church at Ephesus or people standing on the sea of glass in heaven in Ephesians 2:8-9?


"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."


You teach the opposite, that Paul meant to say:

"For by merit are ye someday hopefully saved through effort on your parts, and that is of yourselves, it's not a gift of God, ye must merit it: Not by faith, lest any man not have an occasion to boast."

Heresy.

Originally posted by Mividau
First of all let me apologize to you if that was not you're intention. Most people enjoy getting down right nasty about this type of conversation. I would also like to add before I get started I am unsure if this truely was Pauls intention's to undermind Jesus's teaching. I sincerly pray not, other wise judgement day may not turn out so nice for him.

The people that get downright nasty are those who never heed the words of Edmund Spencer or Albert Einstein:

"Condemnation before investigation is the height of ignorance" ~ Albert Einstein

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all argument, and which cannot fail to keep man in everlasting ignorance. That principle is condemnation before investigation." ~ Edmund Spencer

But alas, both these men actually robbed it from Solomon in Proverbs:

"He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him." ~ Proverbs 18:13

Jesus never outright taught faith alone is sanctification. Which Paul seems to have been teaching.

No, Paul taught faith alone for justification. Salvation and Sanctification are not the same things. Sanctification is what the Holy Spirit does to us and is a life-long process. We should become more and more like Christ daily.

Since he wasnt an Apostle, He did not travel with Jesus nor witness his death and resurection. He had no right to be an Apostle. Brethern yes, Apostle no.

We don't know if he witnessed Christ's death, but considering he was a pharisee I'd assume he would have walked the short mile or so out to watch the crucifixion of the "blasphemer" the other pharisees so hated. The scriptures don't say he was there, but it doesn't say he was not either. Just a personal conjecture on my part.

Secondly, James Jesus's half-brother didn't travel with Jesus either, and he was an apostle to the Jews in Jerusalem, and wrote the book of James in the NT.

Paul says, "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds (works) of the law." Rom 3:28 Elsewhere he sates that God "...imputes righteousness without works." Rom 4:6 Paul is saying here that salvation is through faith alone and that we do not need works such as works repentance and works of righteousness. Jesus says, "And why do you call Me Lord, Lord, and do not do what I say?" Luk 6:46

Do you notice where it says "we conclude? That's the conclusion of the apostles at the council of Jerusalem where they all met to get on the same page about what doctrine they would teach and preach. There isn't a contradiction, people regenerated and indwelt by the Holy Spirit should want to do what Christ said. I'd be hard pressed to believe they had a saving faith if they didn't have a desire to do good works through the power of the Holy Spirit. James says the same thing, a person claiming to have faith but no works to show for it has a "dead" faith.

His doctorine also seemed to teach anti semitism or atleast help edifiy those seeking to be so.

No, when he speaks of the "Jews" there it's not the Jews collectively, but the Jewish authorities. They were the ones persecuting the Christians, not your average Jews. Paul says in Romans he'd give up his own salvation if it meant God would save all his Jewish brethren. Very humble and loving. Would any of us give up our salvation for our fellow man to have it?

I need to apologize here, I cant seem to find the verse that I thought I saw. But it can be added that Peter was the first to teach to the non jewish converts. And gave an oath that allowed them to become apart of the community.

No apology needed. And We're all supposed to preach to all men, and Paul also taught to the Jew first, Greek second. No conflict there.

To me this is a very important detail on exactly how high you should hold Pauline Doctorine. Matthias, not Paul, replaced Judas in Acts 1. There is only 12 as revelation proves. So there for he had no rights to change the docotrine Jesus set forth. He was a brethern, desciple, and witness to the begining of the communtiy. Nothing more. He should not be held higher then Jesus or his Apostles. Nor should he take up so much of the NT.

We aren't in position to judge who God chose to be included in His Bible. The Holy Spirit inspired scripture, and the heptadic structures underlining the text itself attribute the Pauline letters to the fingerprint of the Holy Spirit. Check out Dr. Ivan Panin's work in that regard. Secondly, to me, to consider that God isn't sovereign to control which books made it in and which books didn't seems silly. He's in control of something as trivial as a sparrow falling to the Earth to die, how much more so in what books make it into His Word and which ones do not?

His Doctorine was the blue print for christanity. Including the Catholic church who have fallen very far from Jesus's teachings.

I agree his epistles are the blueprint, but not that he had anything to do with the Catholic church's doctrinal issues. Those issues came about from the corrupt codecies that came out of the Gnostic's School of Theology in Alexandria, Egypt in the 3rd-4th century. The Textus Vaticanus and Textus Sinaiaticus Mss. The Gnostics made it a practice of expurgating portions of scripture that didn't match up with their beliefs. A perfect example is the last 12 verses of Mark. The Antiochian Codecies have these verses, Irenaeus quotes from them in his commentary in 150 A.D., Hypolateous quotes from these verses in the 3rd century AD, but somehow a century later when the Gnostics come out with their two manuscripts the TV and the TS these verses are missing. The TV and TS are the foundational codecies of the Catholic Bible.

Not to mention, the worst thing done to Christiandom was when Constantine's second successor made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire. The pagan priests didn't cease to teach their pagan rituals and doctrine, they simple removed their pagan amulets and donned robes and continued their rituals and doctrine with a Christian flair.

Jesus instructs us to feed the poor. Paul says, 2Th 3:10"For even when we were with you we gave you orders, saying, If any man does no work, let him not have food.

No contradiction. Being poor means you have little money, not that you cannot work for your food. Paul lead by example, when he was with a church he did work with his hands, he was a tent maker.

We follow Jesus only!.Paul says 1Co 4:16 "Wherefore I beseech (beg) you, be ye followers of me."
Paul says,Phi 3:17 "Brothers, be imitators together of me, and mark those who walk this way, for you have us for a pattern."

Again, Paul is a leader. A leader leads by example, not by barking orders. I learned this in the military. atrue leader will lead by example. Paul also said to "follow me as I follow Christ. But Paul never placed his authority over that of Christs authority. And Paul said Christ is the head of the church. Catholics say the pope is.

"Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. Therefore I urge you to imitate (follow) me." 1 Cor 4:15-16 (NIV)

Fatherly figure, how a father leads a son. He wasn't saying he was a literal father. Only God is and our biological father. Paul was extremely humble in his epistles, even calling himself the least of the apostles.

The problem with #3 is it completely contradicts the first 2. He was told by Jesus to go to Damascus to the Apostle's. They had athourity over him not the other way around. He was to witness to the miacle he recieved and to be trained. The Apostles were to reveal these things to him. Well at least thats what his first 2 stories seem to state. But his doctorine seem's to lean towards the 3rd. He exalted himself to a station that was not his to hold.

Not really, Paul is adding details, not contradicting. And you didn't answer me, if Luke was dishonest in Acts we need to throw out the Gospel of Luke to do we not? Same author.

I would need to restate Paul had no right to rebuke Jesus's chosen head Apostle.

Why? We should all correct each other when we go astray on some point. Peter wasn't perfect, none of us are. Peter deserved rebuke, and Peter said himself in 2 Peter 3:15-16 that Paul was a "beloved brother" and that all he said in his epistles, though hard to be understood sometimes, was on par with scripture and that unlearned and unstable people would twist to their own destruction.

"After this, king Agrippa, I did not disobey the heavenly vision. But to those first in Damascus, and Jerusalem, and to all the country of Judea, and to the nations, I made known the command to repent and to turn to God, doing works worthy of repentance Because of these things, having caught me in the temple, The Jews tried to kill me." Act 26:19-21

VS.


"Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." Gal 2:16

Again, where is the contradiction? The justification happens when we repent and turn to God. The works Paul is speaking about is after that justification, which I don't think any of us disagree on. James even echoes this that if we claim to be in the faith, yet have no works to back it up whatsoever most likely our faith is "dead".

Paul's average comes in at about 18.2 per thousand! personal pronoun usage per thousand words of text
ie, Me , My, Mine, I.

Also lets not forget......
-------->for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. Therefore I urge you to imitate (follow) me." 1 Cor 4:15-16 (NIV)

----->Phi 3:17 "Brothers, be imitators together of me, and mark those who walk this way

--->1Co 4:16 "Wherefore I beseech (beg) you, be ye followers of me."

-->"Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by the law; you have fallen from grace. Gal 5:2-4

I went over that already. A great leader will lead by example.

Secondly.......Christ warns there are many anti-christs. Anyone who teach's against what Jesus taught can be deemed to be an anti-christ spirit.

No, for one that was John that warned there were many antichrist in the world. And secondly, his qualifier for a person to have the spirit of antichrist was one who would both deny the deity of Christ and who would deny the relationship between the Father and the Son. I'm certain I know of an entire religion that teaches exactly that today. You can guess which one that is.

I do read what Jesus alone taught, which is what makes these verses very disturbing.......!!!

Well, the context I said that was because you said Christ never taught an easy salvation. He certainly did in John 6:35-40. Did He not?

"Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree..." (Gal 3:13) "And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree: His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God

that thy land be not defiled." Deut 21:22,23 But does he quote the words of Jesus to prove his point? Never.

Quote how? Jesus's words were not on paper at that time, how could he quote them? The Gospel accounts weren't yet written. Paul could only comment on what he was taught by Christ, if Christ didn't give him those quotes he could not have commented on them. The gospels appear first in our Bibles because of their importance, not because they were written first.

According to Galations, James the brother of Jesus is cursed because he preaches "another gospel." Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham justified by works when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by his works was made perfect?" (James 2:19-22)

James doesn't preach another gospel. James says a true saving faith will produce works. James and Paul say the same thing, both take it in a different direction. And secondly, James wasn't written to combat Paul, James was written before Galatians and Ephesians, James was martyred around 52 AD hun, his martyrdom is recorded in Acts.

James was an Apostle of Christ and was taught directly from Jesus Himself. Paul on the other hand studied with no man, and never walked with Jesus, and claimed he was given all knowledge in a quick vision given to him by the Lord.

No he wasn't. James was the pastor of the church in Jerusalem, he wasn't a believer when Christ was traveling, he believed after Christ rose from the dead. James Christ's brother is not James the brother of John. And Paul said later that he didn't preach the gospel for a full 3 years, he went to "Arabia" and received instruction directly from the Lord Himself.

Paul's says, "...knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified." Gal 2:16

There is a big difference between works done through the power of the Holy Spirit and works done in the flesh trying to keep the letter of the law for righteousness. Christ said the two greatest commandments are to love God and love one's neighbor as themselves, the Paul echoes this and says love is the fulfillment of the entire law. Christ says that his "yoke is easy and His burden is light", because His yoke and burden is two commandments, Love God with everything you have and to love other men as you love yourself.

I will continue later, My computer has begun to act up yeah
LOTZA LUV AS ALWAYS

Take care, may take me some time to respond, I have a b-day party to attend.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Here we go yet again for the 100th time, I never said we Christians are not judged..

WE ARE JUDGED!!!

Our salvation is never at risk at our judgment, because our sins are forgotten by God. Our works are judged, rewards are won or lost, salvation is never in jeopardy at our judgment. (1 Corinthians 3:13-15) You can't just completely ignore scripture to suit your Theology.

There you go again with the same argument I have refuted over and over. All you have is a passage from Paul talking about his work in building up the church and that time will tell if he did a good job.
You turn that one thing into a whole philosophy that our only judgement is to judge how many awards we get.
That is not a judgement. Paul was talking about the judgement history will have on his accomplishments.
It has nothing to do with how our lives are judged after we die.

"There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." ~ Romans 8:1

This is a verse from the Bible. Nothing wrong with it. I don't have a problem with it. My problem is how you start with something that should be simple enough but then you build your philosophy around it to make it mean something else.
There are always conditions attached to salvation. Sorry about that and learn to deal with it.
All you have to do is look at all the verses where people who claim to be with Jesus do not go to heaven, Look at the parable of the sower and how many perish. There is no universal guaranteed free pass into heaven, otherwise it would not be heaven for long. It would just revert to what we have now. The tares that get burnt, you think that never really happens?

Originally posted by jmdewey60

There is no universal guaranteed free pass into heaven, otherwise it would not be heaven for long. It would just revert to what we have now.

But according to the christian belief, aren't we "evil" because we are fleshly beings? Once we die, then we'd be spirit beings away from the flesh, and then this god gives us new bodies. If we don't live in these earthly bodies anymore, but in new "better" bodies, why would it be the same in heaven as on earth, biblically speaking?

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by jmdewey60

There is no universal guaranteed free pass into heaven, otherwise it would not be heaven for long. It would just revert to what we have now.

But according to the christian belief, aren't we "evil" because we are fleshly beings? Once we die, then we'd be spirit beings away from the flesh, and then this god gives us new bodies. If we don't live in these earthly bodies anymore, but in new "better" bodies, why would it be the same in heaven as on earth, biblically speaking?

No.
That's why you have that tree in the garden.
It says we became like gods, whatever that means but it marks a fundamental change in our nature and we have a certain degree of control over what we are on a spiritual level.
That's why I harp on conversion. We have to change that little god essence inside us that makes us the individual we are, into a good god. Not a bad god, like Satan. Satan will be destroyed.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Here we go yet again for the 100th time, I never said we Christians are not judged..

WE ARE JUDGED!!!

Our salvation is never at risk at our judgment, because our sins are forgotten by God. Our works are judged, rewards are won or lost, salvation is never in jeopardy at our judgment. (1 Corinthians 3:13-15) You can't just completely ignore scripture to suit your Theology.

There you go again with the same argument I have refuted over and over. All you have is a passage from Paul talking about his work in building up the church and that time will tell if he did a good job.

How arrogant, you didn't refute anything, you voiced your disagreement, but the matter isn't settled just because you posted your thoughts and hit the enter key. No, Paul isn't talking about his work alone, re-read the chapter.

You turn that one thing into a whole philosophy that our only judgement is to judge how many awards we get.
That is not a judgement.

It says our works will be "tested", that's a judgment being made about them. What is there to judge of Christians then if we are not under condemnation through Christ (Romans 8:1)? The only thing left is to judge how faithful we were. And Paul says rewards can be won or lost, salvation is never in jeopardy even for a person that has all their works burnt up with purifying fire.

Paul was talking about the judgement history will have on his accomplishments.

Umm, no, Paul isn't talking about his accomplishments only.

It has nothing to do with how our lives are judged after we die.

We already have a promise from God that He will remember our sins no more. That they will be as far from us as the East is from the West. We have assurance that we have eternal life by believing on Christ and calling on His name. We have assurances from Christ that any and all who come to Him He will "in no wise cast out". So what else is there to "judge" of our lives then after we die other than our works? What kind of judgment do you think will happen if we can never be condemned who are in Christ? You can't ignore verses of scripture you don't like and pretend they don't exist. When you come across verses of scripture that go against your theology you don't "re-write" the verse to mean something other than what the plain reading implies, you alter your theology to align with what the text says.

This is a verse from the Bible. Nothing wrong with it. I don't have a problem with it. My problem is how you start with something that should be simple enough but then you build your philosophy around it to make it mean something else.

How am I possibly making it mean something else? I continually say we who are in Christ will never be condemned. (Damned to hell) That's precisely what the verse says. Seems easy enough to understand to me. I don't think you need a doctorate in theology to understand Romans 8:1.

There are always conditions attached to salvation. Sorry about that and learn to deal with it.

I'm not learning to deal with anything you propose that's against scripture. If there were a single condition applied to "salvation" (Justification) then it no longer is by grace. That's what grace means. The Bible declares that by grace alone through faith alone we are saved, and not of ourselves less any man should boast. Again, the plain text reading is quite simple to understand. The very second a single condition needs to be met to "earn" salvation it no longer is given as a gift by grace alone.

All you have to do is look at all the verses where people who claim to be with Jesus do not go to heaven,

Which verses? And where does it say these people do not go to heaven? And if there were those folks it would be reasonable to assume Christ never "knew them" to begin with. they never had a covenant relationship with Him. There are false professions of faith. Today there are many who think they are saved because they were baptized as a child by their parents.

There is no universal guaranteed free pass into heaven, otherwise it would not be heaven for long. It would just revert to what we have now.

Of course our justification wasn't free, Christ had to die for it. He bought us with His shed blood. And yes, it is guaranteed, the Holy spirit is our "surety" of our inheritance. Christ said that all that the Father had given to Him He should lose none except the son of perdition only that the scripture would be fulfilled.

The tares that get burnt, you think that never really happens?

Of course they do. But I don't confuse the tares with the wheat. Tares are not wheat and wheat are not tares. Tares are the seed of the enemy, the false prophets, false teachers, wolves in sheep's clothing. They're not sheep in sheep's clothing.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

. . .He will remember our sins no more. . .

That is the writer of Hebrews quoting from an Old Testament Prophet. It is in reference to the New Covenant that would come, seeing how Israel had broken the covenent they had. So they were guilty and they had sinned against their god, and rightfully should have gone off into oblivion.
Again you are just haphazardly throwing little snippets of text out, completely out of context, hoping they will fall in such a way as to end up going along with how you want things to be.

And if there were those folks it would be reasonable to assume Christ never "knew them" to begin with.

That is the game you play where you say these people are something else. You did the same thing with the example I gave above where the man was preaching in the name of Jesus, and you still figure out a way to disown him.

Christ said that all that the Father had given to Him He should lose none except the son of perdition only that the scripture would be fulfilled.

Who is this?

Tares are the seed of the enemy, the false prophets, false teachers, wolves in sheep's clothing.

Are you saying the tares are these things you list, or are the the tares the people who are deceived by the things in your list?

reply to post by NOTurTypical

If there were a single condition applied to "salvation" (Justification) then it no longer is by grace. That's what grace means.

OK, a single condition.

Elected by God
Drawn to Jesus.
Hear.
Believe.
Feel remorse.
Repent.
Confess Jesus.
Ask for forgiveness.
Walk in the spirit

There are nine conditions.
So will you now admit that by your own definition, salvation is not free?

We have assurances from Christ that any and all who come to Him He will "in no wise cast out".

There is this bit that comes before that part.
"Everyone whom the Father gives me will come to me"
This modifies what comes after it. One of those things you do not like, so consistently ignore.
continuing;
"and the one who comes to me I will never send away"
The two clauses have the same subject, the one who comes to Jesus.
This one, God first gives to Jesus and without a doubt, does come, no real choice at this point, God wills it, and it happens.
Jesus is obedient in that when one comes to him where he is there, if for no other reason, than God had sent him, then at this point, Jesus is completely helpless in doing anything than complying and keeping that one with him forever.
Is this to make us feel all happy because we imagine it the other way around, that because we decided on our own, to head out towards Jesus, we have a guarantee?
No. Let me try this again, . . NO!
This is to make it clear to us that we have no guarantee because we can think back on when we were "saved" which was just us deciding for yourself to say we are, just because we want to. Did God force you there? If not, then you came on your own accord, and not by force, and so Jesus is under no obligation to accept you in the first place, much less forced to keep you.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

. . .He will remember our sins no more. . .

That is the writer of Hebrews quoting from an Old Testament Prophet. It is in reference to the New Covenant that would come, seeing how Israel had broken the covenent they had. So they were guilty and they had sinned against their god, and rightfully should have gone off into oblivion.

Ahh, I see, so God changes. Now it's all clear. He acts one way to one group of people but a different way to another group of people. All this time I assumed He was no respecter of persons. Thanks for clarifying that isn't in fact true.

Again you are just haphazardly throwing little snippets of text out, completely out of context, hoping they will fall in such a way as to end up going along with how you want things to be.

Um no, I'm fully aware that's a prophetic verse. And we're been in the New Covenant period since the Last Supper. When we confess our sins He is "faithful and just" to forgive us our sins. Instead of posting verses from the Word should I post chapters?

That is the game you play where you say these people are something else. You did the same thing with the example I gave above where the man was preaching in the name of Jesus, and you still figure out a way to disown him.

It wasn't my words, Christ said He would tell that person "I never knew you." I'm no Dr. of Theology mind you, but to me that actually means Christ never knew them. I don't think you need to do a Greek word study to understand that Christ "never knew" that person. Christ knows all who are in a covenant relationship with Him, meaning if Christ "never knew" him that means he was never in a covenant relationship with Him. Secondly, Christ said that no man can come to Him unless the Father first draw that man. And said that everyone the Father had given to Him would come to Him. And further states no one who comes to Him will He ever "cast out". So with that said, what does that tell us about the person Christ is speaking of. The Father never drew him to Christ and he never came to Christ. He never called upon the name of Christ. And he was never in a covenant relationship with Christ. Christ "never knew" him. And I think, I could be wrong, but I think that's why Christ tells the man, "I never knew you". All we can glean from the text is A: that person thought they were saved and B: since that person's protests only include what HE did and makes no mention of what Christ did for Him, that person's trust in his justification was on his meritorious works of self-righteousness.

Who is this?

Who is the son of perdition? The Bible only speaks of two men as sons of perdition. The antichrist was one, I'm sure you can figure out the other one.

How do you know this? Where would you get this idea? This is just the worse bit of interpretation imaginable. Seriously, you need to get out of the preaching business if you could ever come up with something this ridiculous.

How do I know that the tares are the seed of the enemy and are really wolves in sheep's clothing? Because they are not wheat, they are tares. Tares look just like wheat until harvest time. (wolves in sheep's clothing) I grew up in farm country, I fully know what tares are. They appear just like regular wheat right up till harvest time then they change darker color and manifest themselves as not being true wheat, but weeds.

Oh yeah, silly me almost forgot, and also Jesus said this:

"The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels." ~ Matthew 13:38-39

This is just the worse bit of interpretation imaginable.

Complain to Jesus, not me. It's technically His explanation of His parable, I just repeated Him.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

There are nine conditions.
So will you now admit that by your own definition, salvation is not free?

I already said salvation isn't free. It cost the life of God's own Son. Did you even read that far in my post? I said God's grace is free. That's what grace means, unmerited favor. The implication you made is conditions we have to meet for God's grace. Which is none. The minute we have to meet a condition it is no longer unmerited favor.

Elected by God

Not a condition we have to meet.

Drawn to Jesus.

Not a condition we have to meet.

Hear.

Ouch, guess that screws the deaf person.

Believe.

"For by grace ye are saved, through faith..."

Feel remorse.

How is that possible before we repent? Repent means to change one's mind.

Repent.

That happens after faith. That's the "regeneration of our minds" Paul speaks of, that's a process of Sanctification, not Justification.

Confess Jesus.

That should be after faith. Remember "His goodness leads us to repentance."

Ask for forgiveness.

Just once?

Walk in the spirit

Yes, but this is after regeneration of our nature by the Holy Spirit. Good luck walking in the Spirit without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This is a process of Sanctification.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Ahh, I see, so God changes.

Happens all the time so what is your deal?

He acts one way to one group of people but a different way to another group of people.

that is what your dispensationalist sect is based on so why does it bother you now?

He acts one way to one group of people but a different way to another group of people. All this time I assumed He was no respecter of persons. Thanks for clarifying that isn't in fact true.

It is the difference between a nation, which it was talking about in the original, coming from Jeremiah, and then to the world, when it was quoted in the NT. What you are doing is trying to apply it to the individual case, something it was never intended for. This is indicative to all your philosophy, which is taking things and misapplying it to create a counterfeit religion, one that is completely self indulgent and without scruple.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

How is that possible before we repent? Repent means to change one's mind.

this is what you have to resort to? I never said this was in any particular order.
You are the one who is so compulsive about everything being in a particular order.

The minute we have to meet a condition it is no longer unmerited favor.

Ok so Hydroman is now saved because he does not have to do any of those things!

Yes, but this is after regeneration of our nature by the Holy Spirit. Good luck walking in the Spirit without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This is a process of Sanctification.

Well, isn't this just interesting.
I was quoting one of the verses you gave earlier to prove that we can not be lost.
Now you are saying we can't hardly do that untill we are sanctified.
So then according to you, only after you are sanctified do you get to where you can not be lost.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Ahh, I see, so God changes.

Happens all the time so what is your deal?

"For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed."

Malachi 3:6

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

How is that possible before we repent? Repent means to change one's mind.

this is what you have to resort to? I never said this was in any particular order.
You are the one who is so compulsive about everything being in a particular order.

The context and implication was that conditions needed to be met by us for God to justify us. You made the response to me when I pointed out that we are saved by grace through faith. Grace is unmerited favor of God. If we had to merit God's saving grace it wouldn't be grace.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

If we had to merit God's saving grace it wouldn't be grace.

When God was gracious was when He saw the work of Jesus and accepted this work as a redemption of mankind.
This is free from our standpoint, seeing we had no part in the work Jesus did.
But this gracious act of God was keeping his promise of a new covenant, once there was someone able to be the second party of such a contract. That is the faithfulness of God.
We are saved by grace through faith.
That is a corporate salvation embodied in the person of Christ, as the holder of the contract.
We must have an election to be a member of that corporate body.
You can nominate yourself, or God can do the nominating on your behalf.
The voting will soon commence.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

If we had to merit God's saving grace it wouldn't be grace.

When God was gracious was when He saw the work of Jesus and accepted this work as a redemption of mankind.
This is free from our standpoint, seeing we had no part in the work Jesus did.
But this gracious act of God was keeping his promise of a new covenant, once there was someone able to be the second party of such a contract. That is the faithfulness of God.
We are saved by grace through faith.
That is a corporate salvation embodied in the person of Christ, as the holder of the contract.
We must have an election to be a member of that corporate body.
You can nominate yourself, or God can do the nominating on your behalf.
The voting will soon commence.

If someone has been drawn to Christ and comes to Him for forgiveness and salvation that means they are the elect. No man can come to Christ unless that man is first drawn by God. (Christ's own words, not mine)

"No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day."