Smoke Screens?

[Episkopos]

between our condition, and I position.

Whereas I see these as identical (position and condition). The difference I see is in our responsibility and our faithfulness to that. To whom much is given more is required.

Our condition IS from our position. If we are in Christ then we don't sin. So then our condition is directly proportional to our proximity to Christ. The closer we walk to Him, the more faithful will be our walk. And the more faithful our walk the closer we will be to Him.

So then I see our position as fully conditional. We have ACCESS to God and to enter into Christ. If people are taught that they are already "positionally" this or that...they will not be urged to seek God and actually ENTER into Christ. They will have the "emperor's new clothes" of nakedness as their true condition.

So we speak IN Christ...OR...from our own understanding.

Or even a bit of both. :)

 

[Grailhunter]

We can and must indeed look to the law as a moral guide (though not as a means of salvation). It is written in Hebrews 8:8-10 and Hebrews 10:16 that the law is written on the hearts and in the minds of those who are effectively under the New Covenant. Also the the law is a schoolmaster to bring men to Christ (Galatians 3:24). It shows us that we are sinners in need of a Saviour (Romans 3:20). It is perfect, converting the soul (Psalms 19:7). We must therefore set forth the law of the Lord as a standard of righteousness to be obeyed by all. There is no law that will condemn a man who consistently bears the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23); and this means that those who walk after the Spirit and not after the flesh will be law-abiding citizens of God's kingdom. They are not attempting to earn their salvation through obeying a set of do's and don'ts; nevertheless because of faith and the subsequent infilling of love, their actions will not be in violation of the spirit of the law of the Lord.



the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament are one and the same...the God who created us has wrath against sin, period. In the New Testament we avoid being recipients of that wrath because we accept the fact that Jesus died in our place and that therefore, God's wrath against sin was poured out on Jesus instead of us. And His perfect life, blood, and righteousness is applied to our account. This is the divine exchange or propitiation.



I wouldn't. In Romans 7:6 it declares that our obedience is not according to the letter but according to the spirit of what the law teaches. Nevertheless, as a schoolmaster, the letter of the law effectively shows the sinner that he is a sinner. Galatians 3:10, James 2:10, Matthew 5:48 show us that if anyone is going to seek to enter into the kingdom of heaven by being a moral paragon of virtue, they must be obedient to all 613 commandments from conception into eternity (they would have to be born wearing tefilin and tzitzit and tallit). But such is the nature of sin: it is all-pervading and the law of the Lord only reveals that to us all: it shows us that we are sinner in need of a Saviour. The scripture hath concluded all under sin that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.



Those who seek to obey the law, knowing that they are redeemed by the blood of Christ and that there is no salvation in law-keeping, and motivated by love for the Lord rather than a need to be accepted before God, are not condemned by this scripture.



The scribes and Pharisees had added many things to the law that God had given them, so it effectively became "their law' rather than God's. But it should be clear that Jesus is also the God of the Old Testament (for He is God and there is one God according to the shema of Deuteronomy 6:4); and therefore the law of God is effectively the law of Christ.



Certainly not obsolete. The law continues to be a schoolmaster for those who have not yet come to faith in Christ. And also, the law is written on the hearts and in the minds of all those who truly live under the New Covenant (Hebrews 8:8-10, Hebrews 10:16).



False teachings can most certainly be found in the Bible; when scriptures are taken out of their immediate and/or topical contexts to form doctrines of devils.



They did, in Acts of the Apostles 15:21.



Again, Jesus Christ is God; and therefore His law is the law of God. He Himself told us that one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law until heaven and earth pass away.


Mat 5:17, Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.


Mat 5:18, For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.


Mat 5:19, Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.


Mat 5:20, For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.




The above scripture is found within the context of the teachings of Christ.



The end of the commandment is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith (1 Timothy 1:5).

The scriptures I listed are clearly against your position. I do not have to say anything else. People like you dogged the Apostle Paul throughout
his ministry. The first Christian council was all about this. Paul finally put what some call a curse on it. In dozens of Scriptures Paul
tells us that we are not under the law.

 

[Helen]

@Episkopos

Thanks...another day maybe.
I don't see it as you do. But, that is fine....we can still be 'friends'.
My hubby and I often spend many a fun hour debating these things...
...as a rule I do get to sort out his confused thinking
Just joking... we are well matched and a good 'team'.

 

[Episkopos]

Just one question here Epi.
"But the biggest difference is that I believe that God's people can be judged so as to suffer great loss...as it says in 1 Cor. 3. Not just a loss of rewards but a heavy eternal rejection into outer darkness as per Jude."
Do you see outer darkness as "Hell"? I've heard/read several different beliefs here. so, I'm like : with this a bit. ♥

You know where it says that Capernaum and Bethsaida will fare worse on judgment day than Sodom and Gomorrah?

Well, death could be seen as better than an eternity of shame and dishonour.

Outer darkness is to be cast out of the presence of God for ever. Hell, as we call it, is the destruction of the soul by being tossed into the lake of fire. That is reserved for the wicked. (the wicked among the non-believers)

But the eternal shame is for the saved. Saved but counted unworthy. Hence why I cringe when people claim their salvation as an unconditional status.

Outer darkness is reserved for the hypocrites of God's people. The Jews and ourselves.

Jude 1:13 Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.

Dead people don't wander forever.

If people understood the bible...and God's ways....there would be a great fear come over the churches. But God's people continue to perish for a lack of knowledge. Remember it says MY people perish....actually the word means to be cut off.

Even Paul was afraid of being cut-off. He knew he would be judged the harder for all he had been given. And he warns us also to fear because we can be cut off too.

Rom. 11:21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you.

So then passing on from death to life is a good thing...but what kind of life? Blind, naked, poor, and eternally wretched? A vessel of eternal shame and dishonour? The lack of knowledge is such that people don't realize just how much there is to lose.

Hosea 4:6
6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.

 

[Episkopos]

@Episkopos

Thanks...another day maybe.
I don't see it as you do. But, that is fine....we can still be 'friends'.
My hubby and I often spend many a fun hour debating these things...
...as a rule I do get to sort out his confused thinking
Just joking... we are well matched and a good 'team'.

God bless you Helen! :) Later...

 

[justbyfaith]

I am so excited I have a day off and can speak with you guys without having to just pop in during breaks and can speak with you at my leisure! There is no place I'd rather be than here with you guys. :)

I have a story.

A young woman, newly married, was having her mother-in-law over for dinner. She was very nervous, as she wanted the woman to like and accept her. She fussed over what she would serve. She discussed a menu for days with her husband, who kept saying, you're a wonderful cook, whatever you decide to make, my mother will love it!

The evening came, and the MIL arrived very early. This flustered the young woman, but she got the MIL a drink and sat her at the kitchen table so they could talk while she got the roast ready to put in the oven.

She got out her roasting pan, removed the meat from the wrapper, cut off the end of the roast and threw it in the trash, popped the roast in the oven and set the timer.

She sat down at the kitchen table and the MIL had a confused look on her face, and she said, dear, why did you cut off the end of the roast and throw it in the trash...? The daughter in law replied, because that's the proper way to cook a roast...

Well, a great argument ensued, with the MIL thinking the young woman made no sense and was wasting her son's hard earned money. And the young woman thought the MIL was a pushy control freak who had no idea of the correct way to cook a roast.

When the son (and husband) came home from work, he was miserable. Here were the two women he loved most in the world and he didn't know where all of the tension had come from that was between them, but it broke his heart.

After dinner, he told his mother which room they had prepared for her to sleep in but she announced that she didn't want to put them to any trouble and had got a hotel room. He said he would drive her but she said she had called a cab to come and get her.

The cab arrived, there were tense and cold pleasantries exchanged and the MIL left.

The wife immediately told her husband the whole story and fumed over the rudeness of his mother toward her.

The husband asked, well...why is the end of the roast cut off before cooking?

His wife couldn't answer that except to insist that she knew it was just the correct way to cook a roast. And then, she and her husband had tension between them and the young woman was even more distraught.

She called her mother to cry on her shoulder about the disastrous dinner and her mean MIL.

After her mother heard the whole story, she said, but dear, why did you cut off the end of the roast and throw it away...?

The daughter said...because that's the way YOU always did it so I just knew it was correct!

The mother laughed and said, oh no...I remember! When you were little, I had one roasting pan, a small one. The roast would never quite fit, so I would cut off the very tip so it would not hang over and drip juice and grease onto the bottom of the oven!

That's not the proper way to try to change the subject...

 

[justbyfaith]

I have no idea what your point is and please stop talking to me.

He was talking to Episkopos.

 

[justbyfaith]

I will tell you the same thing...I politely ask you not to talk to me so that I may remain polite.

Put them on Ignore...

 

[GodsGrace]

With number one, yes, we should try to be open-minded. This means, to be a bit like a child. Not assuming that another person has no wisdom to help you, even if you don't agree with something they've said.

Hah! You have made an assumption from the story that was not in the story. I never said it was a beef roast. It could have been a pork roast.

Well, if someone doesn't bother to tell us the item we make up our own!

Do you know how long it takes to convince a kid that Eve didn't eat an apple?
WEEKS!

 

[GodsGrace]

I gave this some thought. Your last sentence. I think Satan does actually know things God has said will happen in the future. He tries to muck them up.

He is in great delusion that He CAN muck them up though. Even when he works against God, God turns it to His own purposes.

OK.
Here's what I know:

If God SAID what is going to happen,,,THEN satan will know.

But he doesn't know the future
He doesn't know what we're thinking

That's all I could remember.
Satan is not like God...he's not omni present/omniscient/potent.
Only God is.

If you don't agree...could somebody post something because I learned this from a real source....(a person that teaches theology).

 

[GodsGrace]

Helen...I don't think you are understanding HR's doctrine. It's a twisting of the word. It is the belief system of the Conquistadors who raped and pillaged with impunity even while trying to get the native inhabitants of the new world "saved"...by putting their trust in the cross. They even carried a cross before them as they cut off their noses, ears, and hands to make them work harder to find gold and silver... .and to warn others what would happen to them if they didn't. All of this with the pretense of a trust in the cross of Christ and what Jesus did for them.

All of the crimes of Christianity stems from this disconnect between faith and works.We will all be judged by our works NOT our beliefs. Do you deny that?

HR claims his works of the flesh are meaningless...not chargeable to him...because of belief.

Is that what you believe, Helen? God only looks for approval of a sacrifice and doesn't care what we do with our hands and feet? God doesn't care what you do in the flesh? Really?

The truth is that the Holy Spirit makes us MORE responsible for our sins...not less as HR says.

Hr said..."Since the sin debt of those who place their faith in Jesus has been paid by God, the child is sinless before God in spirit but not the flesh." (post #34)

This is pure Gnosticism. Something the early brethren wrote entire books against and is the subject of correction in 1 John 1. It divorces a person's sins from the responsibility of these. It makes grace a license to sin without consequence. It's all paid for in advance? Utter foolishness.

Jesus made the law MORE exacting ...like even thinking evil was wrong... like lusting after a woman being the same as adultery. Why would He do that if He didn't care about what we did in these bodies we have been given on loan? So then was this done to show us that God cares LESS about sin now? He is just looking for beliefs?...religious positions? Self-gratifying doctrinal posturings?

Really? I thought you were more in tune with the purpose of God than that.

Has the word become...the soul that sins...it shall live?

Whereby we were once dead in sins are we now made alive in sins? Born again sinners?

Ask HR about this.

Very well spoken.

 

[justbyfaith]

it is never Written God's was an <old covenant>. God never had an <old covenant>, never made an <old covenant>, never <effected> an <old covenant>.

See Hebrews 8:13.

What verse can you give me that tells me my job is to defend God?

Jude 1:3-4, at the very least, tells us to defend sound doctrine, if not God Himself.

The real smokescreen is in believing that our human beliefs...religious opinions and doctrinal stances are what saves us.

I find that a simple bible reading will show that we all will be judged by our works. But this is of course contrary to the belief system of many,...so it is rejected. Imagine that...rejecting the bible in favour of a salvation based ostensibly on the bible?

So if I say ....We will be judged by our works...that is the kind of sound doctrine that people in these latter days will be unable to bear.

Did I mention...we will all be judged by our works? ;)

Yes...however we are saved by grace through faith, and that not of ourselves, it is the gift of God...not of works, lest any man should boast.

The answer is in that those who are saved by grace are regenerated and renewed in the Holy Ghost, made into new creatures in Christ...the kind that will do good works when they are presented to them for them to walk in.

If someone dies before having any opportunity to do a good work, but is truly born again...I believe the scripture teaches that he will be ushered straight into heaven...with a total absence of works to save him.

HR claims his works of the flesh are meaningless...not chargeable to him...because of belief.

He is correct on that. Of course, if anyone's belief is genuine, they will behave as though Jesus Christ is their Lord...they will do the will of their Father which is in heaven...this not negating the fact that they were saved by grace through faith and not of works. And also, if anyone's belief is genuine, their tendency will be to walk according to the Spirit rather than the flesh. Leaving Christ to be the final judge of whether anyone is truly saved or not.

My close friend of almost 20 years now @amadeus and I do NOT see eye to eye on quite a few things....but I love and trust him. He doesn't agree with things I believe, and I don't with all he believes.

I believe that we should all strive for a unity of faith by coming into surrender to the doctrines of the Bible (1 Corinthians 1:10, Philippians 2:2-3). And that we ought to even do this concerning what we perceive to be nonessentials (Luke 16:10).

Hr's position is all faith (actually beliefs) ...no works.

He is correct in that salvation is not of works (Ephesians 2:9 and context, also Romans 4:1-8, Titus 3:4-7, and Romans 11:5-6).

That being said, good works are definitely the evidence of one who is truly saved.

 

[justbyfaith]

The scriptures I listed are clearly against your position.

You have not brought your scriptures into balance with the scriptures that I have presented; in fact I think that you are ignoring them in your own theology. I suggest you take more time to study.

 

[H. Richard]

This would be a long conversation. :) And we probably wont agree on all points.
You see , even HR believes that if someone ( christian) sins, if they can fall back and be lost. I do not. He believe in hell , I do not. Not as it is taught.
Snipe ---

Bless you, Helen

I sniped the rest because you start off with a false idea as to what I believe, You said this before and I told you it was not my belief. Why don't you believe me?

I have NEVER said, nor do I believe, that a child of God can be lost because they sin. How can they since ALL their sins have been paid for by Jesus'
shed blood on the cross and they have become the children of God? God will not lose any of His children.

Sorry you think I did.

It is the cross people!!! God poured out His blood on the cross which paid for all the sins of mankind. This is what I teach.

God was on a cross reconciling man to Himself. It is His work that I proclaim.

 

[H. Richard]

I have no idea what your point is and please stop talking to me.

I did not reply to you. I will be glad to leave you alone. Please do the same for me.

 

[Helen]

I sniped the rest because you start off with a false idea as to what I believe, You said this before and I told you it was not my belief. Why don't you believe me?

I have NEVER said, nor do I believe, that a child of God can be lost because they sin. How can they since ALL their sins have been paid for by Jesus'
shed blood on the cross and they have become the children of God? God will not lose any of His children.

Sorry you think I did.

It is the cross people!!! God poured out His blood on the cross which paid for all the sins of mankind. This is what I teach.

God was on a cross reconciling man to Himself. It is His work that I proclaim.

Oh whoops, sorry , not sure where I got that. I thought I read it in one of your posts. Apologies to you...and, glad to hear it! :)

 

[stunnedbygrace]

[

OK.
Here's what I know:

If God SAID what is going to happen,,,THEN satan will know.

But he doesn't know the future
He doesn't know what we're thinking

That's all I could remember.
Satan is not like God...he's not omni present/omniscient/potent.
Only God is.

If you don't agree...could somebody post something because I learned this from a real source....(a person that teaches theology).

Ah...my thought was just that if Satan had no idea that God was coming in flesh, he would not have tried so hard to wipe out the line and then when he failed at that, to have Jesus killed by men he worked through. I wasn't giving a theological argument. More a common sense argument. (My common sense, admittedly). It also says he will go after men again because he knows his time is short. In Rev.

 

[farouk]

Read chapter 2...if you wish.

We did John 2 in our Bible study quite a while ago.

 

[Grailhunter]

We did John 2 in our Bible study quite a while ago.

Not sure where you are at with this conversation?

 

[farouk]

Not sure where you are at with this conversation?

Oops...