Abiding In Christ Necessary for Eternal Life

[amigo de christo]

The Catholics took the Apostles ministry over pretty early. It did not get big and popular until the second century. But for it to be that big then it must have taken roots much earlier. I read historians writing about holy water as far back as the year 80 or 90. They may have been around starting up even when some of the Apostles were still alive and if so they probably helped to kill them. So they got it early with the help of the Roman King and corrupted the thing so that even today there's a whole bunch of people who believe what the Catholics taught them and think it's from Jesus.

It was already on the move very early on . John was warning about a man who LOVED to have the pre emience
and was already kicking out folks . IT came in quite fast . PRE EMIENECE , men loving to be exalted .
Paul had warned too and did others that they would come in amongst them and lead many astray .
The RCC was able to come into power , the entity that exalts man and giveth man the pre eminence .
As leaders later would be called popes , most holy father , most holy reverand just loving that same pre emeinence
that ol diotrepehes had so loved . The problem is the leaven just took over a lot . and within short time
a state religoin would be born that had completely changed and would throughout the centuries get worse and worse and worse .

 

[GracePeace]

These guys were Preachers... Apostles teaching to both Christians and new people like everyone else does. Do you think Romans 10:9-10 was written to believes or unbelievers?

The very same ones Paul said had believed Paul also said could be cut off for unbelief--even if your ridiculous error ("Paul writes theologically instructive letters to unbelievers!") were granted it would do nothing to help your view.

The text is explicit: believers can fall into unbelief. What is your justification for not believing and admitting what the text so plainly teaches?

 

[GracePeace]

@Philip James
Some material shared here that you, being a Catholic, might appreciate:

We're justified by righteousness--the righteousness of keeping the Law of Faith (Ro 3:27).
Faith is counted as the man's righteousness--man having God's righteousness (Ro 3:21).
(One of Jesus's Names is "God Is Our Righteousness" (Jer 23:6).)
The Law of Faith is twofold: 1) believe in the Name of God's Son, and 2) love one another.
Those who obey these commands "abide in Christ" (1 Jn 3:23,24).
There is "no condemnation" for those who are "in Christ" (Ro 8:1).
(In context, this is because there is no sin in Him (Ro 7:7-25; 1 Jn 3:5).)
There is "condemnation" for the one who does not walk by faith (Ro 1:5, 16,17, 14:5,23).
("If we live by the Spirit let us also walk by the Spirit" (Gal 5:25).)
(Same as James 2--ie, God's adjudications, justified/condemned, are ongoing.)
(We began in His righteousness by faith; we continue in it by walking in faith.)
That the believer who doubts is "condemned" suggests he's not "abiding in Him".
(Because there is "no condemnation" for those who are "in Christ" (Ro 8:1).)
This is 1 Jn 3:23,24--the one who keeps His commands abides in Him.
The one who doubts his actions is infracting "love one another".
"Faith works by love" (Gal 5:6), "whatever is not of faith is sin" (Ro 14:23).
(Love fulfills the Law (Ro 13:8-10; Ga; 5:14), "sin is also transgression of the Law")
"God's righteousness is revealed from faith to faith" (Ro 1:5,16,17).
Therefore, justification is compromised when faith is compromised (Ro 14:5,23).

That said, a person could also idolize their own works. The main point in loving others is to say "This is how God has loved me", so, if a person is idolizing their own right-doing, as if that is saving them, they are minimizing or dismissing the love God had had toward them, and, in a large way, defeating the purpose of righteousness/loving others, which is the glorifying of God, the leading of those he loves back to the God Who had first loved them. There would be a disconnect between the right action taken and the ultimate purpose for the right action having been taken. This would be like a branch floating out on its own.

 

[Philip James]

The Law of Faith is twofold: 1) believe in the Name of God's Son, and 2) love one another.

Hello GP,

Nice post. I would suggest an ammendment to this that the twofold is 1) Love God! (which of course includes believing in the Name of the Son)

Loving God includes offering Him the very best we have (the Lamb of God), which HE, HIMSELF, has given us. It is right and just that we do so, fulfilling Malachi 1:11

1. On the Lord's Day of the Lord come together, break bread and hold Eucharist, after confessing your transgressions that your offering may be pure;
2. But let none who has a quarrel with his fellow join in your meeting until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice be not defiled.
3. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord, "In every place and time offer me a pure sacrifice, for I am a great king," saith the Lord, "and my name is wonderful among the heathen."

~The Didache~



Pax et Bonum

 

[GracePeace]

Hello GP,

Nice post. I would suggest an ammendment to this that the twofold is 1) Love God! (which of course includes believing in the Name of the Son)

Loving God includes offering Him the very best we have (the Lamb of God), which HE, HIMSELF, has given us. It is right and just that we do so, fulfilling Malachi 1:11

1. On the Lord's Day of the Lord come together, break bread and hold Eucharist, after confessing your transgressions that your offering may be pure;
2. But let none who has a quarrel with his fellow join in your meeting until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice be not defiled.
3. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord, "In every place and time offer me a pure sacrifice, for I am a great king," saith the Lord, "and my name is wonderful among the heathen."

~The Didache~



Pax et Bonum

There is a reason John the Apostle (not me) did not say "love God"--because it is imperative that we love God, it is even more imperative that we receive God's love ("we love because He first loved us"), which is the monotheism of the obedience of faith ("little children" are led away from abiding in Him by "idolatry" (1 Jn 2:28, 5:21)) which is the righteousness of believing we are justified and at peace with God because God is both faithful and righteous (we accuse Him of unrighteousness if we disbelieve) in forgiving us our sins and cleansing us of all unrighteousness. Again, believing in the Name of God's Son is monotheism, unbelief is "idolatry" (as with the Galatians (1:6, 3:1-3, 5:7)--"this persuasion does not come from Him Who calls", so it was a "doctrine of demons", and "the idols the nations worship are demons").

 

[Philip James]

unbelief is "idolatry"

Can you expand on this?

This verse just came to mind. so adding it in..


Does God belong to Jews alone? Does he not belong to Gentiles, too? Yes, also to Gentiles,

for God is one and will justify the circumcised on the basis of faith and the uncircumcised through faith.

Are we then annulling the law by this faith? Of course not! On the contrary, we are supporting the law.

Pax et Bonum

 

[GracePeace]

Hello GP,

Nice post. I would suggest an ammendment to this that the twofold is 1) Love God! (which of course includes believing in the Name of the Son)

Loving God includes offering Him the very best we have (the Lamb of God), which HE, HIMSELF, has given us. It is right and just that we do so, fulfilling Malachi 1:11

1. On the Lord's Day of the Lord come together, break bread and hold Eucharist, after confessing your transgressions that your offering may be pure;
2. But let none who has a quarrel with his fellow join in your meeting until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice be not defiled.
3. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord, "In every place and time offer me a pure sacrifice, for I am a great king," saith the Lord, "and my name is wonderful among the heathen."

~The Didache~



Pax et Bonum

There is a pride in Peter's confident assertions of his love for God (which ultimately led to failure and public humiliation), but a humility in Apostle John's reception of God's love for him ("the disciple Jesus loved").

 

[GracePeace]

Can you expand on this?

This verse just came to mind. so adding it in..


Does God belong to Jews alone? Does he not belong to Gentiles, too? Yes, also to Gentiles,

for God is one and will justify the circumcised on the basis of faith and the uncircumcised through faith.

Are we then annulling the law by this faith? Of course not! On the contrary, we are supporting the law.

Pax et Bonum

Faith is monotheism; unbelief is idolatry.
The Gospel is breathed and empowered by God's Spirit, for God's glory.
The false Gospel is breathed and empowered by demons, for demons' glory.
When we believe God justifies by Christ we receive God's love.
When we disbelieve it is like eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
That was the first form of idolatry--"beside Me there is no Savior".
We cannot save ourselves.

 

[Philip James]

There is a pride in Peter's confident assertions of his love for God (which ultimately led to failure and public humiliation), but a humility in Apostle John's reception of God's love for him ("the disciple Jesus loved").

Ah Peter.. How many of us are schlubs like Peter and need to get smacked around a bit till we 'get it'. John gets it right from the beginning and his Gospel and epistles exude the love of Christ.. imo

And who learned these things from the apostle John?

St. Polycarp St. Polycarp of Smyrna

and

St. Ignatius: Ignatius of Antioch

Pax et Bonum

 

[Peterlag]

The very same ones Paul said had believed Paul also said could be cut off for unbelief--even if your ridiculous error ("Paul writes theologically instructive letters to unbelievers!") were granted it would do nothing to help your view.

The text is explicit: believers can fall into unbelief. What is your justification for not believing and admitting what the text so plainly teaches?

Give me the verse and let me look at it.

 

[Peterlag]

It was already on the move very early on . John was warning about a man who LOVED to have the pre emience
and was already kicking out folks . IT came in quite fast . PRE EMIENECE , men loving to be exalted .
Paul had warned too and did others that they would come in amongst them and lead many astray .
The RCC was able to come into power , the entity that exalts man and giveth man the pre eminence .
As leaders later would be called popes , most holy father , most holy reverand just loving that same pre emeinence
that ol diotrepehes had so loved . The problem is the leaven just took over a lot . and within short time
a state religoin would be born that had completely changed and would throughout the centuries get worse and worse and worse .

Thank you for sharing...

Much of the Roman Catholic doctrine was assimilated into Protestantism and is still being passed along as Christian groups continue to split off from one another. In a nutshell that is why even the independent church in your neighborhood today most probably believes that there is a trinity, dead people are alive, God is in control of everything that happens, the Four Gospels are written to Christians, and water baptism is relevant. And then there's everything that you know about our sin nature was taught to you by them.

 

[GracePeace]

Give me the verse and let me look at it.

Here it is again:

Romans 11
20Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; 21for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. 22See then the kindness and severity of God: to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; for otherwise you too will be cut off.

 

[Peterlag]

1. The text explicitly says those who had had faith could fall into unbelief.
2. The Jewish believers in the Roman Church had many objections to Paul's Gospel--Paul preempted (perhaps in part based on his own questions and/or his experience preaching to other Jews) and responded to them. Much of the letter addresses the Jewish believers in the Roman Church, actually.

Nobody is thinking Christians cannot fall into unbelief. But they can't fall out of their new birth and be cut off from God.

 

[GracePeace]

Ah Peter.. How many of us are schlubs like Peter and need to get smacked around a bit till we 'get it'. John gets it right from the beginning and his Gospel and epistles exude the love of Christ.. imo

And who learned these things from the apostle John?

St. Polycarp St. Polycarp of Smyrna

and

St. Ignatius: Ignatius of Antioch

Pax et Bonum

I had so many questions about the Bible I didn't want to consult these writings--I wanted to understand the Scripture first--but now that I learned to bring my difficulties to God, and let God answer them, I'm getting standing in Scripture, so I won't mind reading these other men. Thanks.

 

[GracePeace]

Nobody is thinking Christians cannot fall into unbelief. But they can't fall out of their new birth and be cut off from God.

1. Some people do actually deny believers can fall away by unbelief.
2. Romans 11, which I shared, explicitly teaches believers can be "cut off".

 

[Peterlag]

Hello Peter,

the entire epistle (including chapter 10) is written to these:


Through him we have received the grace of apostleship, to bring about the obedience of faith, for the sake of his name, among all the Gentiles,

among whom are you also, who are called to belong to Jesus Christ;

to all the beloved of God in Rome, called to be holy.

Pax et Bonum

I'm an expert in the Epistles and know they were written mostly for Christians and do teach all that we can know about what we have in Christ. But every now and again they started yelling about what the unbelievers were doing and thinking along with mentioning what we were before we believed. Romans 10:9 is a great example. It was not written to Christians.

 

[Peterlag]

Here it is again:

Romans 11
20Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; 21for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. 22See then the kindness and severity of God: to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; for otherwise you too will be cut off.

He's talking to Gentiles. And not Christians...

13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:

 

[GracePeace]

He's talking to Gentiles. And not Christians...

13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:

So, they don't have faith, even though he says "you stand by your faith"?

 

[Peterlag]

So, they don't have faith, even though he says "you stand by your faith"?

I do not know why we have so many Christians who believe the entire Bible is written directly to them, the Church of God. There is nothing in the Bible to indicate such thinking, and I would like to add nothing could be further from the truth. It's true the Word of God was written for everyone for all time, and it's for our learning because it contains what everyone should know. That does not mean every part of it is addressed to everyone in this time, because the subject matter was written either to the Jews, to the Gentiles, or to the Church of God (1 Corinthians 10:32).

What is written directly to the Jews, belongs to and is for the Jews. What is written directly to the Gentiles, belongs to and is for the Gentiles. What is written directly to the Church of God, belongs to and is for the Church of God. What does God mean when He tells us that the visions shown to Isaiah was concerning Judah and Jerusalem? It was not addressed to us or written concerning us, but it was addressed to and concerning Judah and Jerusalem. It would be dishonest for the Church of God to interpret to the Church of God what God said concerns Israel.

 

[GracePeace]

I do not know why we have so many Christians who believe the entire Bible is written directly to them, the Church of God. There is nothing in the Bible to indicate such thinking, and I would like to add nothing could be further from the truth. It's true the Word of God was written for everyone for all time, and it's for our learning because it contains what everyone should know. That does not mean every part of it is addressed to everyone in this time, because the subject matter was written either to the Jews, to the Gentiles, or to the Church of God (1 Corinthians 10:32).

What is written directly to the Jews, belongs to and is for the Jews. What is written directly to the Gentiles, belongs to and is for the Gentiles. What is written directly to the Church of God, belongs to and is for the Church of God. What does God mean when He tells us that the visions shown to Isaiah was concerning Judah and Jerusalem? It was not addressed to us or written concerning us, but it was addressed to and concerning Judah and Jerusalem. It would be dishonest for the Church of God to interpret to the Church of God what God said concerns Israel.

1. You didn't answer the question: So they don't have faith even though he says "you stand by your faith"?

2. The same ones to whom Paul says "you stand by your faith" the warning "if you disbelieve, you too will be cut off" is given. God includes ("grafts in") believers into His people, God excludes ('cuts off") disbelievers out from His people.