Law vs Gospel

[Ernest T. Bass]

More church of Christ eisegesis. I already thoroughly explained John 12:42 to you in post #75.

In regards to renew them again unto repentance in Hebrews 6:6, this does not specify whether the repentance was merely outward or genuine accompanied by saving faith. They have in some sense "repented," there may be sorrow for sins and an attempt to turn from them (moral self-reformation) that non-believers can experience. There is repentance that falls short of salvation, which is clear from Hebrews 12:7 and the reference to Esau, as well as the repentance of Judas Iscariot in Matthew 27:3. Paul refers to a repentance “without regret that leads to salvation,” which shows there is a repentance that does not lead to salvation. As with “belief/faith”, so too with “repentance,” we must always distinguish between what is substantial and results in salvation and what is spurious. Renew them again "unto salvation" would be conclusive evidence for your argument in regards to repentance.

In regards to Acts 2:37, their "belief" at this point was "mental assent" that Jesus was the Messiah and that they were guilty of crucifying Him. That is not saving belief yet. They still lacked trust and reliance in Jesus Christ for salvation and that's why they still needed to repent and place their faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation and faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*

Believing/faith in Jesus for salvation causes us to become sons of God. (John 1:12; Galatians 3:26)

Romans 1:16-----believes the gospel-----UNTO-----salvation.
Romans 10:10-----believes-----UNTO-----righteousness.

Choosing to believe the gospel by trusting in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) as the ALL-SUFFICIENT means of our salvation is the act of obedience that saves. (Romans 10:16) Not to be confused with multiple acts of obedience/works which "follows" believing the gospel UNTO salvation. Repentance "precedes" believe him/believe the gospel/faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. (Matthew 21:32; Mark 1:15; Acts 20:21) Your faith is in "water and works" and is not in Christ alone for salvation, which explains a lot.

In regards to Mark 1:15, yes the Jews did need to repent of their unbelief and believe/accept Christ as that promised Messiah. In Mark 1:15, notice the order of repent and believe the gospel. Repentance precedes believing the gospel. You place repentance "after" belief/faith. Your mixed up gospel plan is the result of bad semantics and flawed hermeneutics.

You continue the same old thing in trying to rewite the Bible in order to make it conform to your faith onlyism.

Jn 12:42 proves that belief only cannot ave those who will not repent. Matt 10:32-33; Rom 10:9-10 make confession a necessity to being saved and you have not proven nor ever will prove have belief only can save those who will not repent, who will not confess, who will not be baptized.

You rewrite 1 Cor 15:1-4 to say trusing in the death urial and resurrection of Christ saves when the verses do not remotely say such. As shown many times before and ignore as many times by you, the gospel is something that must be OBEYED (Rom 10:16; 1 Pet 4:17else one will be in flamiung fire (2 Thess 1:8). Salvation is not something simply 'thought' about but something that is DONE by obedience in believing, repentance, confession and submitting to baptism.

And you continue the same old illogical and unbiblical areguemnt that one repents before belief never showing how such can be accomplished. Sin is transgression of God's law so how or why would the unbeleiving atheist repent of transgressing God's law when he does not know those law or does not care about those laws, does not believe in the idea of being lost or saved. Nor can repentance precede the gospel when repentance is part of the gospel along with beleif, confession and baptism.

 

[mailmandan]

You continue the same old thing in trying to rewite the Bible in order to make it conform to your faith onlyism.

I don't rewrite the Bible. I properly harmonize scripture with scripture before reaching my conclusion on doctrine. You distort and pervert passages of scripture in an effort to "patch together" your so called gospel plan.

Jn 12:42 proves that belief only cannot ave those who will not repent.

I already thoroughly explained John 12:42 to you in post #75 and this verse is dealing with confession.

Law vs Gospel

I was referring to the NT law of Christ in my post, not the OT law of Moses. Christ's NT law is called the gospel, the faith, the truth, royal law, etc. My point was that the gospel is not void of law as grace is not void of law for no one was ever saved by living in disobedient to God's law...

www.christianityboard.com

Matt 10:32-33; Rom 10:9-10 make confession a necessity to being saved and you have not proven nor ever will prove have belief only can save those who will not repent, who will not confess, who will not be baptized.

I already thoroughly explained this to you as well in post #75. Did you even bother to read my post?

Law vs Gospel

I was referring to the NT law of Christ in my post, not the OT law of Moses. Christ's NT law is called the gospel, the faith, the truth, royal law, etc. My point was that the gospel is not void of law as grace is not void of law for no one was ever saved by living in disobedient to God's law...

www.christianityboard.com

You rewrite 1 Cor 15:1-4 to say trusing in the death urial and resurrection of Christ saves when the verses do not remotely say such.

You obviously don't understand what it means to "believe" the gospel, which involves more than mere "mental assent" belief and includes trust and reliance. The word translated believe is from the greek word pisteuō which means "to have faith (in, upon, or with respect to, a person or thing), that is, credit; by implication to entrust (especially one’s spiritual well being to Christ).

As shown many times before and ignore as many times by you, the gospel is something that must be OBEYED (Rom 10:16; 1 Pet 4:17 else one will be in flamiung fire (2 Thess 1:8). Salvation is not something though about but something that is DONE by obedience in believing, repentance, confession and submitting to baptism.

I have not ignored Romans 10:16 or 1 Peter 4:17 and have already explained to you that we OBEY the gospel by choosing to BELIEVE the gospel. Romans 10:16 - But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our report?” Through bad semantics and flawed hermeneutics, you erroneously turn "obey the gospel" into "salvation by works."

And you continue the same old illogical and unbiblical areguemnt that one repents before belief never showing how such can be accomplished.

I already showed you and I will show you again.

Matthew 21:32 - For John came to you to show you the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes did. And even after you saw this, you did not repent and believe him. *Notice the order.

Mark 1:15 - ..repent, and believe the gospel. *Notice the order.

Acts 20:21 - testifying both to Jews and to Greeks of repentance toward God and of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. *Notice the order.

This article may help you further:

Faith and Repentance

To be saved, does a person first believe or repent? What is biblical repentance? What does the Bible mean to repent?

www.cofcdilemma.org

Sin is transgression of God's law so how or why would the unbeleiving atheist repent of transgressing God's law when he does not know those law or does not care about those laws, does not believe in the idea of being lost or saved. Nor can repentance precede the gospel when repentance is part of the gospel along with beleif, confession and baptism.

An atheist must first believe in the existence of God before they can "repent" change their mind even further and trust in Jesus Christ for salvation. You are obviously thoroughly indoctrinated into Campbellism and remain confused.

Answers for Church of Christ beliefs

Answers for Church of Christ errors such as water baptism for salvation and non-instrumental music

www.cofcdilemma.org

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

God has not "cast away His people" (Rom 11:1, 2). Those among Israel that believe in God but not in Christ are still in union with God, but not in fellowship; and the rest of Israel who do not believe in God have not obtained union with Him: "Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for (Jews not believing in God); but the election hath obtained it (Jews believing in God), and the rest were blinded" (Rom 11:7).

I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.


"His people" that God has not cast away of Rom 11:1-2 refers to Christians, the true Jew (Rom 2:28-29) the spiritual Jew for the text of Romans 11:19-23 clearly states that God did cast away the fleshly nation of Israel. Yet then why was Paul not cast off since he was a fleshly Jew for he says "I am also an Israelite"? For Paul became a Christian, a spiritual Jew. Rejection of the fleshly nation of Israel had nothing to do with the rejection of the individual Israelite for God will accept ANYONE who will obey Him as God accepted fleshly Jews that obeyed in Acts 2:38 as He accepted Paul for he too obeyed God, Acts 22:16.

Many fail to make the distinction between the nation and people....."Paul refuted the allegation that God had cast off his people by appealing to his own conversion as proof of the validity of God's promise; which fact demonstrates what Paul meant. Paul was not saved through his membership in the Jewish nation at all, but as an individual obedient believer in Christ, such salvation also being available to all who ever lived since Christ came (Jews and Gentiles alike), and upon identical conditions. "

Now Paul alleged his own redemption as the fulfillment of God's promise not to cast off his people, but...... many ..... do not accept Paul's premise. Why? They have incorporated into their reasoning a major premise which is false, that being the opinion that God's covenant was with a nation, state, or race of people. That is not true at all. God's covenant was with the spiritual seed of Abraham, as Paul showed extensively in Romans 9 where he proved that the promise never was to the fleshly seed of Abraham, but to the people "whom he foreknew," the spiritual seed. God's covenant was never with the state, or kingdom, of Israel, nor with any of their kings, AS SUCH. Even the Davidic kingdom was not the earthly state but the spiritual kingdom, upon the throne of which, even now, Christ indeed reigns. .........the earthly kingdom and the spiritual "people" of the promise were historically indistinguishable for centuries, but Paul here showed the separation as finally precipitated in the first advent of our Lord."

The thought that God ever had any covenant with the ancient kingdom of Israel, in the sense of their state, through any of their kings, is repugnant. The very existence of their line of kings was contrary to God's will, existing with his permission, but not with his approval, as a glance at 1 Samuel 8:7 (NAS) "The Lord said to Samuel, "Listen to the voice of the people in regard to all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from being king over them" as a glance of 1 Sam 8:7 proves. It was precisely in the events there recorded that Israel "rejected God" from reigning over them; and the great historical rejection of God by the fleshly Israel, in their irrevocable repudiation of God as their king and the elevation of one of themselves to rule over them, was the pivot upon which all their later apostasy turned. The Solomonic empire which they so ardently desired to be restored with its earthly glory was the concept that totally blinded them to the Christ, and which still blinds many as to what is meant by God's "people."

Think of it. If God should be thought of as owing anything at all to the fleshly descendants of Abraham, as viewed separately from the spiritual seed, why does he not owe it also to the Edomites, the Arabians, and the Ishmaelites? "Race," in the sense of fleshly descent, means absolutely nothing to God. And as to that southern portion of the divided kingdom, could there be any justice whatever in making them the recipients of any special dispensation of God's grace, in view of the bitterest denunciations of them pronounced by God through the mouths of their noblest prophets? That southern state, historically identifiable as the present Israel, and also that of Paul's day, could not possibly deserve anything at God's hands which could be viewed as favoring them over the ten northern tribes who were swallowed up in oblivion, because Ezekiel plainly declared the sins of the southern kingdom to have been "more than" those of the kingdom that disappeared (Ezekiel 23:16 (NAS) "When she saw them she lusted after them and sent messengers to them in Chaldea", even declaring that Judah's sin exceeded that of both Samaria and Sodom....Thou wast corrupted more than they all (Samaria and Sodom) in thy ways" (Eze 16:47).

Now, if nothing but the flesh is considered, if Israel is to be viewed as any people identified with Abraham merely through fleshly descent, why should God have annihilated Sodom and Samaria and have spared Israel whom God himself declared to be worse than either of them? The reasons why God did spare fleshly Israel in preference over the ten tribes, until the historical fulfillment of their mission as flesh-bearers of the Messiah, and the reasons why fleshly Israel is still spared, contrary to all apparent righteousness, appears in the revelation of the great mystery of Rom 11:25. But the fantastic notion that the true Israel now has, or ever will have, any identification with that fleshly remnant is contrary to the scriptures and to all reason." --- Coffman.


God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,

Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.

But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.

These people (not individuals) which He forknew refers to the group called Christian. Those Jews that obeyed as the 3000 in Acts 2 and Paul who became Christians became of that group God foreknew. We can know this is the meaning of what Paul is saying for Paul uses the example of Elijah and his complaint that a great number of Israel turned from God unto idols EXCEPT those who obeyed by not bowing the knee to Baal. Hence God has always accepted, kept those who obey Him...those in the OT who obeyed by not bowing to Baal and in this present time those who obeyed the gospel as those in Acts 2 as well as Paul.

Therefore any (Jew or Gentile) that obey God are His people, hence there is "no distinction" (Rom 10:12) between Jew and Gentile for both are one in Christ as Christians, the people God has not cast off.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

I don't rewrite the Bible. I properly harmonize scripture with scripture before reaching my conclusion on doctrine. You distort and pervert passages of scripture in an effort to "patch together" your so called gospel plan.

You are rewriting the Bible at every turn trying ways to force faith onlyism into it creating contradictions yet never clear those contradictions up.

Again, in Mark 1:15 context matters. In the context Jesus was speaking to Jews who ALREADY believed in God, therefore Jesus was not telling them to begin to believe in God. They had to repent to God of their unbelief and disobedience of the OT law THEN they could come to believe in Jesus as the Messiah promised them.

You still fail to show how or why an unbelieving athiest would or even could repent when the atheits does not know or even care about God's law, does not beleive in salvation or condemnation, etc.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Below is an article that pointedly shows you are trying to conform the Bible with you faith olnyism as the reason why you are trying to do the illogical, the impossible in having one repent beofe one believes.......(my emp)

In our last lesson we promised that we would devote this lesson to a study of the order of faith and repentance. We want to determine whether faith precedes repentance, or whether repentance precedes faith. The importance of this lesson is magnified to us if we consider the extremes to which members of the denominational world will go in order to prove their point. Denominationalism is vitally interested in proving that repentance precedes faith.

They say that one must repent before he believes, and the reason for their efforts is this: Members of several large denominations believe that one is saved either by faith only, or at the point of faith. They virtually all used to say that one is saved by faith only, and affirmed this in debate many times, but here of late, they have almost universally quit affirming the doctrine of faith only. Now they affirm a modified form of the doctrine, still calling it the doctrine of faith only. They now say that one is saved at the point of faith, before and without water baptism. The reason for their saying that repentance comes before faith is because if they say that one is saved at the point of faith, and if repentance came after faith, then they would be saying that one was saved before he repented, which they refuse to admit. The seed of the whole doctrine was an effort to get as far removed as possible from the doctrine of baptism’s having anything at all to do with one’s salvation.

Actually, if salvation is by faith only as some denominations still affirm, it matters not whether repentance comes before or after faith, for salvation by faith only means that one is saved without anything else. Regardless of the order of faith and repentance; the doctrine of faith only excludes repentance. ‘Whether it comes before or after does not alter the case. Salvation by faith only still excludes repentance.

Many preachers, still believing the doctrine of faith alone, but realizing themselves to be caught in a verbal dilemma, have tried to solve the dilemma by putting repentance before faith. In view of their belabored efforts, one can see certain admissions that these denominationalists make. When they become so concerned about “getting” repentance before faith, they already have repudiated their doctrine of salvation by faith only. They are saying that repentance is also essential. Most of them will deny that they ever said that it was unessential, but nevertheless, they still have the doctrine taught in their official creeds, manuals, and disciplines. They say one is saved by faith only, and the word “only” excludes everything else, repentance included. They deny this doctrine when they admit that one must repent, but since they now teach that one is saved at the point of faith, they say repentance must precede faith. Repentance must precede faith or their doctrinal position collapses.

Psychological Impossibility​

First of all, let us note that for repentance to precede faith would be a psychological impossibility. One cannot possibly repent before he believes. There are so many foolish, absurd, and impossible tenets connected with this doctrine, that it seems almost vain to have to refer to it. Let us notice some of these absurdities.

Suppose you were trying to convert an atheist, one who does not believe that God exists. What would you do first? Would you try to persuade him to believe or to repent? It would be impossible to get the man to repent in the Biblical sense of the term. We saw last week that repentance is produced by godly sorrow, for one thing. How could this man have godly sorrow before he believed in God? Further, it was seen that repentance should be produced by the goodness of God, but this man does not believe that God lives, and therefore he would be wholly ignorant of the goodness of God. He might know something about the things that the Bible says are given us by God’s goodness, but he certainly would not attribute these things to God, but to insensate matter. The fear of judgment and punishment could not prompt him to repentance, because he does not believe that the Lord exists who could judge him. The desire to be saved could not be that which motivates him to repent, for as an atheist, he does not believe that man has a soul to be saved, nor that there is a God to save it. None of these forces which the Bible says produces repentance could operate on an atheist or an infidel, for they are unbelievers, and all these forces can have effect only upon believers. In the true sense of the word, only a believer can repent as God commands, and so repentance could not precede faith.

In Luke 15:7, we read that there is joy in the presence of the angels of heaven over one sinner that repents. One could repent without believing if repentance precedes faith. If he could not, then to repent and to believe must be one synonymous act, and if it is, then all the lengthy discussions by denominational preachers have been foolishness, for there could be no order of faith and repentance if they are the same. If they are not the same, it is possible for one to do one of them, and not do the other. The Bible says that there is rejoicing in the presence of the angels of heaven over one sinner that repents, but the writer of Hebrews says in the eleventh chapter and sixth verse, “that without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he that cometh to God must believe that fle is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him.” We have this dilemma, if the doctrine be true. We have angels rejoicing over a man because he has repented, but God not pleased with him because he has not believed. One should repudiate any doctrine that makes such folly of God’s Holy Word.

Further we read in Jas. 2:19 that the devils believed. Now, if repentance precedes faith, then it must be admitted that these same demons had repented. According to denominational dogma, repentance and faith is all that could possibly be required of anyone. According to this doctrine, the demons had believed and repented, and so they should have been saved, but we know they were not.

​

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

continued


Alleged Proofs​

When one has the gospel preached to him, and learns that he must repent, why does he repent? It is because he believes the message that is brought him. Were it not for this, he would not repent.

One replies, “Well, surely these people must have something by which they prove their doctrine, or they would not teach it. What do they use to substantiate their contention that repentance precedes faith?” To those who view their arguments only lightly and casually, they seem very plausible, but when they are examined -more closely, one can see that they do not teach, at all, what these men say that they do. They have perverted the passages. But let us now notice some of the passages offered in favor of this contention.

First of all, “Now after John was delivered up, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God, and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel” (Mk. 1:14, 15). In this passage the word repentance comes before the word believe, and therefore men infer from this that it means that in obedience to the gospel repentance precedes faith. On this occasion “Jesus was preaching to persons who already believed in the true God, and in the revelation which God had already made, and his object, at this stage of his ministry, like that of John, was to bring them to repentance as a preparation for faith in himself and his kingdom. This accounts for the order in which repentance and faith are here mentioned. To repent toward the God in whom they already believed, but whose revealed will they were violating, naturally and properly took precedence over believing in him whom God was about to reveal” (McGarvey, Commentary on Matthew and Mark, pp. 267, 268). This passage, then, does not teach that repentance precedes faith in obedience to the gospel.

Another passage used is Acts 20:21, which reads: “testifying both to Jews and Greeks repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.” Let us think just a little bit about what this passage really teaches. Paul was talking to a group of people who had (believed) in God. They were familiar with a part of the law of God at one time, but they had become disobedient to the laws of God, and indifferent to their responsibilities to Him. Paul was telling them that before they believed in Christ they needed to repent toward God of the way that they had acted toward Him. They needed not to repent of following the laws that they had been given, before they were to be taught anything else. These men needed to repent toward God, and then they would be in better position to believe in Christ. The order here was: faith in God; and then repentance toward God. The gospel order differs from that in that we are commanded to have faith in God, and also in Christ as the Son of God, then repent toward Christ, and then to be baptized into Christ.

What someone needs to find in order to prove this doctrine is an instance in which one was told to repent toward Christ before he believed in Christ, or an instance in which one is told to repent toward God before he believed in God. Acts 20:21 is an instance of where one, who is a believer in God, is told to repent toward God, and then to believe in Christ. These are not the passages that these people need. There are some other passages that teach the same thing, and that they often use, but they do not add anything else to the argument and so we will omit them. Both of these passages tell one, believing in God to repent toward God, and have faith in Jesus Christ, but no passage tells one to repent toward Christ before he believes in Christ, or to repent toward God before he believes in God. They must look elsewhere if their doctrine is to find support.

Scriptural Order​

The New Testament has examples of the order of faith and repentance. Study the events that occurred and are recorded in Acts the second chapter, On this occasion Peter, the key speaker was addressing a group of Jews that he accused of having slain the Lord of Glory. He used several arguments convicting these people of their crime. They believed the charges that he made against them. By Peter’s arguments they became persuaded that they had crucified the Son of God. The Scripture says that they were cut to the heart by these things, “and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles. Brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:37, 38). Why did they ask the question? It was because they believed what Peter has said unto them, and that they were persuaded that the one that they had crucified was God’s own Son. They were believers. Had they not been believers, surely they would have rushed upon Peter and the other apostles and would have killed them for bringing this charge against them. They knew that what Peter said was the truth. We know that they were believers. But what did Peter tell them to do when they asked him “what shall we do?” Peter told them to “repent ye and be baptized, everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” Where did repentance come in this case? Did it come before or after faith? Certainly we all know that it came after their faith, and even after they asked what they must do to get forgiveness for killing this one who was God’s only Son. If there were not another case in all the Bible, this would be enough to silence the gainsayers, and to prove conclusively that repentance comes after faith.

Another illustration though: “The men of Nineveh shall stand up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and behold a greater than Jonah is here” (Matt. 12:41). All of us know that they would not have repented under the threat of punishment by God, if they did not believe that there was a God that could punish them. They repented because they had faith that God would keep his promise, and that he would punish them if they did not obey. Their faith preceded their repentance, rather than repentance preceding their faith.

Conclusion​

We can well see the extremes to which men will often go to avoid the teachings of God’s Word. They strive to put repentance before faith in order that they might not have to obey the commandment of the Lord to be baptized for the remission of sins. It would be much better, more pleasing to the Lord and easier for man, if one would humbly submit to the commandments of Christ, rather than try to figure out some way to get out of having to do them.

Truth Magazine XX: 32, pp. 499-501
August 12, 1976
By Cecil Willis

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

more..............(my emp)

Does Repentance Precede Faith?​

Hiram Hutto
05/20/12 - Repentance

A person does not need to have listened to very much preaching — whether on the radio, television, or other places - to know that there are preachers who are telling people, "All you have to do to be saved is 'believe in Jesus'; 'accept Him as your personal Savior.'"

Some preachers have even been willing to affirm in public debate that a person is saved from his sins at the point of faith. Naturally this brings up quite a few complications, not the least of which is: If all a person has to do to be saved is to believe, he does not have to repent, or if he is saved at the point of faith he is saved before and without repentance. Not many are willing to say that God will save a sinner whether he repents or not, or God will save the impenitent. After all, it is "Repent or perish" according to 2 Peter 3:9, and God does "command all men everywhere to repent" (Acts 17:30).

Neither Reasonable nor Scriptural

In an effort to justify this obviously unscriptural position, (saved at the point of faith) — preachers (have resorted to the argument that repentance precedes faith, So, after a sinner repents he believes, and then can he saved at the point of faith!

The idea that repentance precedes faith is not only contrary to scripture but it is also contrary to reason. After all, how could a sinner repent of having sinned against God, when he doesn't even believe there is a God? Then, too, since sin is the transgression of God's law (1 John 3:4), before a person would repent of having transgressed God's law, he would have to believe that there was a God and that He had a law. He certainly would not repent if he did not believe in God, much less that He had a law that he had violated.

Repentance before faith is also contrary to scripture. Sometimes it is asserted that every time faith and repentance are mentioned together in the Bible, repentance always is mentioned first; repentance always precedes faith. This is just not true. It is true that many times faith and repentance are mentioned together, and sometimes repentance is mentioned first, but not always.

For example, consider Acts 2. Peter had preached about the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. He concluded his sermon by saying, "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ" (2:36). To "know assuredly" is to have the strongest kind of faith. After all, faith is the "assurance of things hoped for" (Heb. 11:1 ASV). Having told them first to have this strong assurance (faith), he, then tells them, "Repent and be baptized…" (Acts 2:35). Here we see faith preceding repentance. The claim that repentance always is mentioned prior to faith in the scriptures is not a true claim.

Even if this were a true claim that repentance is always mentioned prior to faith, it does not necessarily mean that it precedes it in fact. For example, we often say, "Put on your shoes and socks." We certainly do not mean that the shoes go on first and then the socks, do we?

Then, too, consider what Peter told the Jews in Acts 5:30, "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree." Does this mean that the Jews first "slew" Christ, and then after they had slain him, they later "hanged him on a tree"? Certainly not. But the "slaying" is mentioned before the "hanging", but it certainly does not mean that it occurred in that order. And so it is with faith and repentance. Just because repentance may sometimes be mentioned before faith, it certainly does not mean that they occur in that order.

Passages Where Repentance is Mentioned before Faith

In at least four passages (Matt. 21:32; Mark 1:15; Acts 20: 21; Heb. 6:1) repentance is mentioned first:

"And ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterwards, that ye might believe him" (Matt. 21:32).

"The time is fulfilled, arid the kingdom of God is at hand; repent ye, and believe the gospel" (Mark 1:15).

"Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ"" (Acts 20:21).

"Not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God" (Heb. 6:1).

While it is true that the word repentance is mentioned in these before the word faith, please notice that in not one of these passages is it repentance and faith toward the same person or thing.

Look at Acts 20:21. It is repentance toward God and faith toward Jesus Christ. In Heb. 6:1, it is repentance from dead works and faith toward God. It also needs to be remembered that in this latter passage as well as Matt. 21:32 and Mark 1:15, the address is made to people who were Jews; people who already believed in God. He certainly was not telling them to begin to believe in God. When the Bible tells us that "Abraham believed in the Lord" (Gen. 15:6), it certainly does not mean that he then believed in God for the very first time. Before we could conclude that repentance does in fact precede faith, scripture would have to be given that would show that one must repent toward Jesus Christ and then believe in Christ. And also show that that is the way it must be. But such a passage has not been given, nor can it be shown that the sequence must come that way.

The effort to get repentance before faith is an unscriptural effort. Not only because it reverses the proper order, but also because it is usually done to try to refute the Bible's teaching that a penitent believer is saved after he is baptized scripturally and not before. Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" (Mark 16:16). Let's not only believe that, let it also be properly acted upon.

Does Repentance Precede Faith? - Online Articles ‹ Eastside Church of Christ

www.mightyisthelord.com

Again, you ARE trying to rewrite the Bible with faith onlyism in trying to get one saved BEFORE one is baptized.

 

[Netchaplain]

I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.


"His people" that God has not cast away of Rom 11:1-2 refers to Christians, the true Jew (Rom 2:28-29) the spiritual Jew for the text of Romans 11:19-23 clearly states that God did cast away the fleshly nation of Israel.

God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,

Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.

But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.

These people (not individuals) which He forknew refers to the group called Christian.

Paul makes a distinct identification between Israel and the Church. Firstly, there is never any language that shows God's disapproval with the Church, hence "God hath not cast away His people" is in reference to non-Christians. Also, when Scripture uses the terminology "His people," it always refers to the nation Israel in stead of Christian.

In verse 2 "His people which He foreknew" are those who Paul says are what Elias claimed to "make intercession to God against," which was "Israel." Plus, the following was not referring to Christians, but faithful Israelites: "I have reserved to Myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace" (vs 4, 5).

Unless I'm not understanding what you mean, it's clear that every verse in Romans 11 speaks of Israel stumbling in order that the Gentile Christians can come in. Those who were "broken off" due to "unbelief" aren't Christians but unbelieving Jews; whom God is going to bring back!

The Chapter is overwhelmingly evidenced of speaking of Israel and the Church!

 

[mailmandan]

You are rewriting the Bible at every turn trying ways to force faith onlyism into it creating contradictions yet never clear those contradictions up.

What am I rewriting? The Bible clearly states in many passages of scripture that we are saved through belief/faith "apart from additions or modifications." (John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 6:40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31; 26:18; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:2-6; 5:1; 10:4; 1 Corinthians 1:21; Galatians 2:16; 3:26; Ephesians 2:8; 2 Timothy 3:15; Hebrews 10:39; 1 John 5:13 etc..).

Repentance "precedes" believe him/believe the gospel/faith in Jesus Christ. (Matthew 21:32; Mark 1:15; Acts 20:21) Confession with our mouth that Jesus is Lord and believing in our heart that God raised Him from the dead are not two separate steps to salvation, but are chronologically together. (Romans 10:8-10) Water baptism "follows" saving belief/faith. (Acts 10:43-47) *Hermeneutics.

Now you don't need to add the word "alone" next to "belief/faith" in each of these passages of scripture in order to figure out that the words, "belief/faith" stand alone in connection with receiving eternal life/salvation. Do these many passages of scripture say belief/faith "plus something else?" Plus works? NO. So then it's faith (rightly understood) IN CHRIST ALONE. *Not to be confused with "faith only" per James, (James 2:14-24) which is an empty profession of faith/dead faith that produces no works.

Again, in Mark 1:15 context matters. In the context Jesus was speaking to Jews who ALREADY believed in God, therefore Jesus was not telling them to begin to believe in God. They had to repent to God of their unbelief and disobedience of the OT law THEN they could come to believe in Jesus as the Messiah promised them.

There is a difference between believing "mental assent" in the existence of God and believing the gospel. I never said by believing the gospel that these Jews were merely choosing to believe in the existence of God. These Jews needed to repent (change their mind) and believe in Jesus as their promised Messiah. Hence, believe the gospel. Jesus was preaching the gospel of the kingdom to Israel and John the Baptist also preached the gospel of the kingdom, "..Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." (Matthew 3:2) Mark 1:14 - Now after John was put in prison, Jesus came to Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, 15 and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.”

You still fail to show how or why an unbelieving athiest would or even could repent when the atheits does not know or even care about God's law, does not beleive in salvation or condemnation, etc.

You just failed to see what I already showed you. An unbelieving atheist would first need to realize and believe that God does exist before they would even consider they are sinners in need of a Savior for salvation. Beyond that the change of mind would need to progress to placing faith in Jesus Christ for salvation. To go from atheist, to believing in the existence of God, to ultimately placing faith in Jesus Christ for salvation would absolutely involve repentance. Lee Strobel is a Christian, but prior to that was an atheist. He did not come to believe in the existence of God and ultimately place his faith in Christ for salvation apart from repentance. That is not hard to understand, but for some strange reason, it seems to be hard for you to accept.

 

[mailmandan]

The Church of Christ gospel plan is to hear, believe, repent, confess, and be (water) baptized for the forgiveness of sins. Here it is reasoned that if one will simply accomplish these “5 steps,” the believer will thereby save himself.
Notice that this plan places faith before repentance.

To those in the Churches of Christ, this is common sense because it is believed that ‘one must believe before he can repent.’ This view arises from their understanding of both “faith” and “repentance.”

“Faith” in the Churches of Christ is understood as ‘intellectual assent” or accepting the facts of the Christian faith. To them it is believing God’s historical testimony about Himself, Jesus Christ, and that of the rest of the Bible.

Repentance on the other hand is understood as moral self-reformation.

In regards to faith, those in the Churches of Christ often fail to understand that there is a deeper, more substantive aspect of faith which is believing upon the Lord Jesus Christ for eternal life, and most cannot distinguish between mere intellectual belief or assent from a personal faith that is trusting or resting on Jesus Christ alone for salvation.

Here, they will cite that “even the devils believe” (from James 2:19) in their sermons and will contend that even the "faith of devils" is the same as any other faith except that the faith of devils lacks any moral or religious good works.

Thus, their understanding gives rise to their reversal of the scriptural order of repentance and faith, and yet as we will find, there is not a single scripture in the New Testament to support their view.

To the contrary, when we consider this in light of the Scriptures, we find repentanceactually preceding Faith:

“…you did not repent and believe him.” Matt. 21:32

“Repent, and believe in the gospel.” Mark 1:15

“…repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.” Acts 20:21

“…repent and turn to God.” Acts 26:20

“…not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God.” Heb. 6:1

These verses should make it clear that repentance actually precedes faith.

Faith and Repentance

To be saved, does a person first believe or repent? What is biblical repentance? What does the Bible mean to repent?

www.cofcdilemma.org

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Paul makes a distinct identification between Israel and the Church. Firstly, there is never any language that shows God's disapproval with the Church, hence "God hath not cast away His people" is in reference to non-Christians. Also, when Scripture uses the terminology "His people," it always refers to the nation Israel in stead of Christian.

In verse 2 "His people which He foreknew" are those who Paul says are what Elias claimed to "make intercession to God against," which was "Israel." Plus, the following was not referring to Christians, but faithful Israelites: "I have reserved to Myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace" (vs 4, 5).

Unless I'm not understanding what you mean, it's clear that every verse in Romans 11 speaks of Israel stumbling in order that the Gentile Christians can come in. Those who were "broken off" due to "unbelief" aren't Christians but unbelieving Jews; whom God is going to bring back!

The Chapter is overwhelmingly evidenced of speaking of Israel and the Church!

The context of Rom 11 is making a clear distinction between fleshly Israel and the true Israel (Gal 6:16) the church and Christians are the true Jew as Paul says in Rom 2:28-29 "For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God." When one is water baptized, the there is a circumcision that takes place without hands (Col 2:11-12) where God cuts away the body of sin and one becomes the true Jew, inwardly with the circumcision is that of the heart.

Rom 11:1 "I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin."
Rom 11:2 "God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,"

"His people" in this context cannot refer to fleshly Israel for the text in Rom 11 clearly states fleshly Israel was cut off, cast away and God then graffed in the Gentiles (Rom 11:15-23). Since God did cast off fleshly Israel did that mean God did not keep His promises to fleshly Israel? No! How do we know that God did keep His promises to fleshly Israel? For Paul was an Israelite in the flesh Himself but he was not cast off. Why was he not cast off? Because he converted, he obeyed God and became a Christian as a remnant of Jews did (Rom 11:5),

Therefore God did not cast off His people means he was faithful to those people. Who are these people God was faithful to and did not cast off? It cannot be fleshly Israel for they were cast off. Those people of God that God was faithful to are here identifed as those people God foreknew. Those people that God foreknew and did not cast away were the ones who had faith in Christ (as Paul) becoming Christians.

The "foreknew" here has nothing at all to do with Calvinism's false idea that God foreknew certain individuals and predestinated them to be saved before the world began unconditionally with no regards to their free will in choosing to have faith or not. If Calvinistic unconditional election of individuals before the world began is true and these are the ones God "foreknew", then such people would never be cut off. But obviously the Bible does not teach the Calvinistic idea of predestination for God's people under the OT law were the fleshly Jews, who were for a fact cut off. Therefore God's people has always been those who of their own free will choose to obey Him...fleshly Israel would not obey, hence they were cut off except for that remnant including Paul who chose to obey God....those obedient fleshly Jews were God's people He foreknew whereby God kept His promises He made to fleshly Israel. It becomes clear then that God did not foreknow certain individuals regardless of their having faith or not, instead God forknew a TYPE of person that would be His people and that TYPE of person is the one who obeys God.

There are false teachings floating around that people today (the nation of Israel in the middle east) are still God's chosen people and the world better be careful in how it deals with those chosen people. Such idea is far removed from the truth and unfortunately some of the foreign policies of the United States in regards to Israel have been tied up in that false idea.
Again, Rom 11 makes it clear fleshly Israel was cast off by God and are no longer His chosen people but any one, Jew or Gentile, that obeys God are His people. God's casting away of fleshly Israel began before the OT law ended. Fleshly Israel had broken that old covenant with God and in Hosea God told fleshly Israel they would not be His people and He would not be their God (Hos 1:9) and He would love them no more (Hos 9:15) and these words are just as true today as they were thousands of years ago when they were spoken by God's Prophet Hosea. When the Messiah came and fleshly Israel rejected Him, then God's longsuffering with fleshly Israel ended and their being cast off was fully realized as seen in Romans 11. God does not owe those disobedent Jews salvation, He does not owe them a kingdom...God owes them NOTHING. If fleshly Jews are going to be saved then that salvation must come through Christ. There is no future earthly kingdom or salvation for the Jews that kingdom is NOW (the church) and that salvation is TODAY through Christ.

Romans 9 is not about Calvinistic election but is about false ideas the Jews possessed and that God, according to those false ideas of the Jews, was unrighteous, unjust in casting them off. Paul in Rom 9 refutes those false ideas and PROVES that God in fact was righteous and just in casting off those disobedient fleshly Jews.
For example, the Jews falsely tho't that since they were direct fleshly descendants of Abraham that meant some unconditional, guaranteed salvation...that God MUST choose them....that their physcial descent was all that was necessary to be in the kingdom of God and Paul proves that idea false. Paul uses Jacob and Esau, who were both sons of Jacob who was the son of Isaac who was the true son of Abraham.
If God must base His choices and promises on physical descent, then God must have also chosen Esau and his children the Edomites. But Esau was NOT chosen showing Paul's proof that God does not have to base His choices and promises on physical descent. Paul even says "They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed". Again, fleshly descent does not make one a child of God but children of promise are. Who are these children of promise? Obviously NOT fleshly Israel but anyone who obeys God becoming a Christian. Anyone, Jew or Gentile, who obeys God in submitting to water baptism receives the circumcision made without hands (Col 2:11-12) become a true Jew, a circumcision inwardly of the heart (Rom 2:29) and are of spiritual Israel the church and are of Christ and of that seed that was promised to Abarham (Gen 22:18 cf Gal 3:27-29)...."For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." The true seed of Abraham and heirs to the promise are those, Jew or Gentile, that obey God and it has nothing to do with fleshly descent.

 

[Netchaplain]

The context of Rom 11 is making a clear distinction between fleshly Israel and the true Israel (Gal 6:16) the church

Looks like we disagree about this issue! God bless!!

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

The Church of Christ gospel plan is to hear, believe, repent, confess, and be (water) baptized for the forgiveness of sins. Here it is reasoned that if one will simply accomplish these “5 steps,” the believer will thereby save himself.
Notice that this plan places faith before repentance.

To those in the Churches of Christ, this is common sense because it is believed that ‘one must believe before he can repent.’ This view arises from their understanding of both “faith” and “repentance.”

“Faith” in the Churches of Christ is understood as ‘intellectual assent” or accepting the facts of the Christian faith. To them it is believing God’s historical testimony about Himself, Jesus Christ, and that of the rest of the Bible.

Repentance on the other hand is understood as moral self-reformation.

In regards to faith, those in the Churches of Christ often fail to understand that there is a deeper, more substantive aspect of faith which is believing upon the Lord Jesus Christ for eternal life, and most cannot distinguish between mere intellectual belief or assent from a personal faith that is trusting or resting on Jesus Christ alone for salvation.

Here, they will cite that “even the devils believe” (from James 2:19) in their sermons and will contend that even the "faith of devils" is the same as any other faith except that the faith of devils lacks any moral or religious good works.

Thus, their understanding gives rise to their reversal of the scriptural order of repentance and faith, and yet as we will find, there is not a single scripture in the New Testament to support their view.

To the contrary, when we consider this in light of the Scriptures, we find repentanceactually preceding Faith:

“…you did not repent and believe him.” Matt. 21:32

“Repent, and believe in the gospel.” Mark 1:15

“…repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.” Acts 20:21

“…repent and turn to God.” Acts 26:20

“…not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God.” Heb. 6:1

These verses should make it clear that repentance actually precedes faith.

Faith and Repentance

To be saved, does a person first believe or repent? What is biblical repentance? What does the Bible mean to repent?

www.cofcdilemma.org

Mk 1:15
And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

Context!!!! Christ was speaking to Jews who ALREADY were believers in God, they were not atheists with Christ telling them to begin to believe. Those Jews had disobeyed the OT and did not believe what the OT said to them about the Messiah. Christ is telling them to repent of that disobedience and unbelief then they could believe Him. Jn 5:46-47 is a good commentary on Mk 1:15 where Jesus says to the Jews "For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" If those Jews would repent of their unbelief of Moses' OT writings then they could believe Christ but as long as they will not believe Moses' writings how can they believe Christ? Hence they must first repent of their unbelief of Moses' writings before they can believe Christ's words.

Your argument continues to be illogical in having unbelievers as atheist to repent before they even have faith.

 

[mailmandan]

Mk 1:15
And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

Context!!!! Christ was speaking to Jews who ALREADY were believers in God, they were not atheists with Christ telling them to begin to believe. Those Jews had disobeyed the OT and did not believe what the OT said to them about the Messiah. Christ is telling them to repent of that disobedience and unbelief then they could believe Him. Jn 5:46-47 is a good commentary on Mk 1:15 where Jesus says to the Jews "For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" If those Jews would repent of their unbelief of Moses' OT writings then they could believe Christ but as long as they will not believe Moses' writings how can they believe Christ? Hence they must first repent of their unbelief of Moses' writings before they can believe Christ's words.

Your argument continues to be illogical in having unbelievers as atheist to repent before they even have faith.

I never said these Jews were atheists (so your argument is moot) and just because these Jews believed in the existence of God does not mean that they already repented and believed in the gospel. (Mark 1:15) You are making this out to be much more complicated than it really is.