GALATIANS 1:8 WHO IS ACCURSED ?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Davy

Well-Known Member
Feb 11, 2018
11,466
2,500
113
Southeastern U.S.
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It has always been by grace through faith. The gospel messages are progressive and as such, were not all the same (Genesis 15:5-6 1 & Galatians 3:8 Corinthians 15:3-4). The gospel message in their and in our dispensation is to be believed (faith).

You're confused. What you said below has no bearing on Biblical New Testament doctrine.

Equating faith with the gospel message is not substantiated.

Faith is the pivoting factor in The Gospel of Jesus Christ. Without that Faith then The Gospel would be meaningless, and Christ's Blood shed upon His cross would have been for nothing.

Now if you're trying to say I ever implied that the word 'faith' and the word 'gospel' mean exactly the same thing, then that is an even more confused idea on your part!

Have you had your orange juice today?
 

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Sorry to differ but, by right division the Bible is harmonized and leads to proper exegesis.
For instance how do you reconcile justification for example:
Is it by works as in James 2:24 or without works in Romans 4:5
Well, you must have heard this response a thousand times by now, James was not defining salvation, he was defining faith. Due to the fact that many were exploiting the profound and sublime concept of faith and grace, by living licentious lives and then claiming that they have faith, and therefore, works don't apply to them. James was just addressing this form of hypocrisy, deceit and misguided salvation. It's a beautiful passage, because we all probably know many people who make such claims. Whether it's due to justifying either their wayward ways, or their lack of diligent Bible study, James was exposing, and warning of, such a shallow and perverted understanding of the Gospel of Christ, which is grace not works.
Not for one minute did James believe that works are a required, on any level, to attain salvation. But, he is saying, I can tell by your works whether or not you have faith that leads towards salvation.
 

Webers_Home

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2012
4,612
726
113
80
Oregon
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
1Cor 16:22 . . If anyone love not The Lord, let him be accursed.

One's love of The Lord is exemplified by loyalty.

John 14:15 . . If you love me, you will comply with what I command.

John 14:21 . .Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one
who loves me.

John 14:23-24 . . If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching . . He who
does not love me will not obey my teaching.

Does a Muslim have to be a terrorist to be accursed? No; they only have to
be a loyal follower of Muhammad ibn `Abdullāh instead of a loyal follower of
Jesus Christ; same goes for Atheists, Nonreligious, Baha'i, Buddhists, hinese
Universalists, Confucianists, Jains, Kabbalah mystics, Shintoists, Spiritists,
Taoists, Zoroastrians, Jews, Sikhs, and Hindus-- they're all accursed and
there is nothing to be gained in arguing about it.

How many people am I talking about? Well, as of mid 2014, worldwide there
were:

550,000 Scientologists
1,500,000 Mormons
8,200,000 Jehovah's Witnesses
7,794,000 Baha'i
515,951,000 Buddhists
451,292,000 Chinese Folk Religionists
8,424,000 Confucianists
974,597,000 Hindus
5,567,000 Jains
14,142,000 Jews
1,673,590 Muslims
2,819,000 Shintoists
24,918,000 Sikhs
14,183,000 Spiritists
8,660,000 Taoists
196,000 Zoroastrians
828,594,000 Nonreligious
692,111,000 Agnostics
136,483,000 Atheists.

The grand total of just those categories alone is 5,369,071,000

If those figures are in the ball park, and if classical Christianity is the reality;
then a minimum of at least 75% of the earth's 2014 population of 7.2 billion
people didn't love The Lord.


NOTE: Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons are Christians, yes, but not in the
classical sense.

Joseph Smith's movement is a spin-off; in other words: there's some
classical Christianity in Mormonism, but comprises only a portion of
Mormonism. The rest of it is extreme, to say the least.

Neither do Jehovah's Witnesses qualify as Christians in the classical sense.
Charles Taze Russell's movement is a spin-off too. There's some classical
Christianity in the Watchtower Society's doctrines, but comprises only a
portion of Russell's doctrines; and his slant on it is very peculiar.
_
 

Jane_Doe22

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2018
5,241
3,442
113
116
Mid-west USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
.
NOTE: Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons are Christians, yes, but not in the
classical sense.

Thumbs up for actually having th8s
recognized!
.
Joseph Smith's movement is a spin-off; in other words: there's some
classical Christianity in Mormonism, but comprises only a portion of
Mormonism. The rest of it is extreme, to say the least.
And now thumbs down.

Heh, partial credit at least.


As to Galatians 1: you need to look at the WHOLE chapter, not just verse 8. The urging is for a person to have a direct relationship with the Lord God, rather than relying on "well Mike told me X". This isn't a matter of was bench your pew warms (or doesn't warm) Sunday morning, but about you submitting to Him.
 

Doug

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2018
1,452
327
83
south
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Well, you must have heard this response a thousand times by now, James was not defining salvation, he was defining faith. Due to the fact that many were exploiting the profound and sublime concept of faith and grace, by living licentious lives and then claiming that they have faith, and therefore, works don't apply to them. James was just addressing this form of hypocrisy, deceit and misguided salvation. It's a beautiful passage, because we all probably know many people who make such claims. Whether it's due to justifying either their wayward ways, or their lack of diligent Bible study, James was exposing, and warning of, such a shallow and perverted understanding of the Gospel of Christ, which is grace not works.
Not for one minute did James believe that works are a required, on any level, to attain salvation. But, he is saying, I can tell by your works whether or not you have faith that leads towards salvation.

You say you are leery of right division but, you, to some degree have done exactly that in not saying James is saying we need faith plus works for justification to eternal life. You say right division does contortions to harmonize scripture but aren't you doing that in saying James was warning of perverting grace and yet never mentioning the gospel of grace. James was speaking to Israel (1:1) about law keeping (2:9-12).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: charity

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
You say you are leery of right division but, you, to some degree have done exactly that in not saying James is saying we need faith plus works for justification to eternal life. You say right division does contortions to harmonize scripture but aren't you doing that in saying James was warning of perverting grace and yet never mentioning the gospel of grace. James was speaking to Israel (1:1) about law keeping (2:9-12).
James was talking to Christians. And again, he was speaking against the insincere Christians, those who believe that they can act any way that they like under the pretext of Grace. Paul established the principle of faith over works, and James expounded on it, explaining its peculiarities. He definitely was not contracted it. Wisdom elucidates that? These versus support the fact that James was speaking to Christians.

James 2:1. My brothers, as believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, don't show favoritism.

James 2:6-8
2:6. But you have insulted the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? 7. Are they not the ones who are slandering the noble name of him to whom you belong? 8. If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, "Love your neighbor as yourself," you are doing right.

James 5:8. You too, be patient and stand firm, because the Lord's coming is near.
 

Doug

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2018
1,452
327
83
south
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
James was talking to Christians. And again, he was speaking against the insincere Christians, those who believe that they can act any way that they like under the pretext of Grace. Paul established the principle of faith over works, and James expounded on it, explaining its peculiarities. He definitely was not contracted it. Wisdom elucidates that? These versus support the fact that James was speaking to Christians.

James 2:1. My brothers, as believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, don't show favoritism.

James 2:6-8
2:6. But you have insulted the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? 7. Are they not the ones who are slandering the noble name of him to whom you belong? 8. If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, "Love your neighbor as yourself," you are doing right.

James 5:8. You too, be patient and stand firm, because the Lord's coming is near.

The audience of James is the twelve tribes, the remnant of Israel suffering persecution and scattered throughout the nations (James 1:1 Acts 8:1). The body of Christ, the church never had twelve tribes, only Israel did. The believers in James believed on the name of Jesus as Messiah, Son of God who came to offer the prophesized kingdom on earth to them (Luke 12:32 James 5:8); they believed the gospel of the kingdom preached by Jesus and the twelve apostles (Matthew 4:23).
 
  • Like
Reactions: charity

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
The audience of James is the twelve tribes, the remnant of Israel suffering persecution and scattered throughout the nations (James 1:1 Acts 8:1). The body of Christ, the church never had twelve tribes, only Israel did. The believers in James believed on the name of Jesus as Messiah, Son of God who came to offer the prophesized kingdom on earth to them (Luke 12:32 James 5:8); they believed the gospel of the kingdom preached by Jesus and the twelve apostles (Matthew 4:23).
Ok, that's fine, I see how you're deriving that from the passages that you quoted. I don't agree with your hermeneutics or exegesis, and I personally believe that you're missing the big picture. And thus, in short, are basically saying that James was not saved then if he didn't believe in the suffering Messiah, who was raised from the dead and is currently seated at the right-hand side of God.
 

Doug

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2018
1,452
327
83
south
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Ok, that's fine, I see how you're deriving that from the passages that you quoted. I don't agree with your hermeneutics or exegesis, and I personally believe that you're missing the big picture. And thus, in short, are basically saying that James was not saved then if he didn't believe in the suffering Messiah, who was raised from the dead and is currently seated at the right-hand side of God.
Sorry, but how did you come to say I was in any fashion saying James was not saved?
Just to clarify, in the gospels Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, the gospel they were to believe was that they had to believe on the name of Jesus for eternal life (John 3:18 John 20:31), there was nothing yet in that dispensation correlating to 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 in regards to believing that Christ died for our sins and rose again for our justification.
 
  • Like
Reactions: charity

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Sorry, but how did you come to say I was in any fashion saying James was not saved?
Just to clarify, in the gospels Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, the gospel they were to believe was that they had to believe on the name of Jesus for eternal life (John 3:18 John 20:31), there was nothing yet in that dispensation correlating to 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 in regards to believing that Christ died for our sins and rose again for our justification.
Redemption from sins is the only manner to be saved. Your language is vague '...they were to believe was that they had to believe on the name of Jesus for eternal life'. That doesn't explain why, you conveniently left that part out. Again, belief in Jesus means, expiation through his blood, it has no other significance. But you tried to give it another sense, by claiming that the Gospels regarded 'believing in Jesus' as something different than the propitiation of his sacrifice?
In other words, explain what 'Believing in Jesus' name' means, according to the Gospels. And please don't offer a vague response, but give it a logistically practical, and sin related significance.
 

Doug

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2018
1,452
327
83
south
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Redemption from sins is the only manner to be saved. Your language is vague '...they were to believe was that they had to believe on the name of Jesus for eternal life'. That doesn't explain why, you conveniently left that part out. Again, belief in Jesus means, expiation through his blood, it has no other significance. But you tried to give it another sense, by claiming that the Gospels regarded 'believing in Jesus' as something different than the propitiation of his sacrifice?
In other words, explain what 'Believing in Jesus' name' means, according to the Gospels. And please don't offer a vague response, but give it a logistically practical, and sin related significance.

I cited the Bible passage for believing on his name in John 3:18 and John 20:31. In regard to sins see John 8:24 where they had to believe Jesus was Christ, Son of God.
Of course the blood of Christ is expiatory and the basis for the forgiveness of all sin, but the full expiation was revealed progressively. Jesus at first was only shed his blood for many (Matthew 20:28 Matthew 26:28 Mark 14:24), for the new testament. It was later revealed to Paul is was for all (Romans 3:22 1 Timothy 4:10).
 
  • Like
Reactions: charity

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I cited the Bible passage for believing on his name in John 3:18 and John 20:31. In regard to sins see John 8:24 where they had to believe Jesus was Christ, Son of God.
Of course the blood of Christ is expiatory and the basis for the forgiveness of all sin, but the full expiation was revealed progressively. Jesus at first was only shed his blood for many (Matthew 20:28 Matthew 26:28 Mark 14:24), for the new testament. It was later revealed to Paul is was for all (Romans 3:22 1 Timothy 4:10).
You are way too hyper-literal. What you quoted were true facts of redemption, but just because they didn't stipulate all, does not mean they didn't mean all. All & Many are synonymous in the context of salvation. The Gospels didn't get specific because they didn't need to i.e. they knew that it was understood and that, ironically, the Apostles were going to elaborate and clarify its significance.
You are splitting hairs in such a radical way, that you're blatantly missing the big picture?
Very, very bad exegesis!
 

Doug

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2018
1,452
327
83
south
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You are way too hyper-literal. What you quoted were true facts of redemption, but just because they didn't stipulate all, does not mean they didn't mean all. All & Many are synonymous in the context of salvation. The Gospels didn't get specific because they didn't need to i.e. they knew that it was understood and that, ironically, the Apostles were going to elaborate and clarify its significance.
You are splitting hairs in such a radical way, that you're blatantly missing the big picture?
Very, very bad exegesis!

Hebrews 9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Jesus said he would shed his blood for many not all and in fact, he was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel in Matthew 15:24. Jesus said he would shed his blood for the new testament and Hebrews 9:15 upholds this. Israel was under the first testament not all, and certainly not Gentiles.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: charity

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Hebrews 9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Jesus said he would shed his blood for many not all and in fact, he was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel in Matthew 15:24. Jesus said he would shed his blood for the new testament and Hebrews 9:15 upholds this. Israel was under the first testament not all, and certainly not Gentiles.
Doug, I cannot agree! You are very correct in what was said, or written, but very wrong in your interpretation and understanding.
You are almost stating then, that there are 3 covenants, 1 of works and a monarchical Messiah, one with Jesus and the Jews, and the other with a sacrificed Messiah for the Gentiles? You claim that you're delineating only 2, but one has to admit that Jesus brought something new that Judaism did not have, and you agree that the Gentiles covenant was different altogether.
Can't agree Doug, your hermeneutics are just bad.
 

Doug

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2018
1,452
327
83
south
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Doug, I cannot agree! You are very correct in what was said, or written, but very wrong in your interpretation and understanding.
You are almost stating then, that there are 3 covenants, 1 of works and a monarchical Messiah, one with Jesus and the Jews, and the other with a sacrificed Messiah for the Gentiles? You claim that you're delineating only 2, but one has to admit that Jesus brought something new that Judaism did not have, and you agree that the Gentiles covenant was different altogether.
Can't agree Doug, your hermeneutics are just bad.

There are only two covenants. The first conveyed the law which they had to keep (Deuteronomy 13:10). The second, the new covenant, was only given to Israel and Judah (Jeremiah 31:31-34) and will be fulfilled at the coming of Christ to establish the kingdom on earth and they will be able to keep the law (Ezekiel 36:24-28).
The body of Christ is not under any covenants but the blood of the new testament is applied to the body of Christ (2 Corinthians 3:6 1 Corinthians 10:16).
 

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
There are only two covenants. The first conveyed the law which they had to keep (Deuteronomy 13:10). The second, the new covenant, was only given to Israel and Judah (Jeremiah 31:31-34) and will be fulfilled at the coming of Christ to establish the kingdom on earth and they will be able to keep the law (Ezekiel 36:24-28).
The body of Christ is not under any covenants but the blood of the new testament is applied to the body of Christ (2 Corinthians 3:6 1 Corinthians 10:16).
Ok, that's fine, then all the same, I think that you're completely wrong.
'...for there is no more Jew or Gentile, Slave or Bond man, Male or Female, all are one in Christ...'
 
  • Like
Reactions: Helen

Doug

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2018
1,452
327
83
south
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Ok, that's fine, then all the same, I think that you're completely wrong.
'...for there is no more Jew or Gentile, Slave or Bond man, Male or Female, all are one in Christ...'
Wrong about what?
I don't get why you are saying "no more Jew or Gentile"
 

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Wrong about what?
I don't get why you are saying "no more Jew or Gentile"
You have been trying to differentiate between, Israel & Judah, and the body of Christ, but they are all one in Christ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Helen

Doug

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2018
1,452
327
83
south
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You have been trying to differentiate between, Israel & Judah, and the body of Christ, but they are all one in Christ.
Sorry, but I don't know what you are conveying in saying they are "all one". Surely you cant mean the believing remnant of Israel is in the body of Christ....can you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: charity

DNB

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2019
4,199
1,370
113
Toronto
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Sorry, but I don't know what you are conveying in saying they are "all one". Surely you cant mean the believing remnant of Israel is in the body of Christ....can you?
Of course, that's what believing means. For there is nothing else to believe in that will lead one into salvation, or to receive approbation from God. Christ is the only way under the sun, to gain God's acceptance, for all peoples on the earth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Helen