The Power of the Cross

[RichardBurger]

It's a work in progress bro not a one off thing.

The power of the cross is still with us bro.
[quote/]

I never said it wasn't bro.

No one mentioned mans works, it's God work in us... so we are ether in Christ or not bro.
[quote/]

I agree with that statement bro.

[/quote]

Jesus did not do something once and then just let us run around like chickens, like your position on Grace that it has a time frame that's just a joke and it happens to be a rejection of Christ..

[quote/]

I don't think my placing all my belief, faith, trust, confidence in the finished work of Jesus on the cross is running around like chickens. Nor is it a rejection of Christ. God's building the body of Christ is a work in progess but for the individual, he/she is saved as soon as he/she places all their belief, faith, trust, confidence in the finished work of Jesus on the cross.- bro

[/quote]

True Charity is about Love, and Christ is that on the Cross, dear bro.

[/quote]

I think I said that bro

This thread is not about charity. It is about the work of God on the cross "The power of the Cross'". It is not about man's works, it is about Jesus' work of love for us on the cross.

 

[Theodore A. Jones]

The power of the cross:

God’s power is shown in the cross. It is the power of God for salvation to all those that will place their belief, faith, trust, and confidence in it. (period). It is God’s gift to mankind.

The above is true but to many it is foolishness and certainly not enough for salvation.

Only Paul tells us about the power of the cross. Nowhere in the book of Acts do we see any of the 12 talk about the power of the cross. To them the cross was something for the Jews to repent of.

Explain why you think this, "To them the cross was something for the Jews to repent of."

 

[RichardBurger]

Explain why you think this, "To them the cross was something for the Jews to repent of."

You must read Acts for what Peter """said""" in order to see this. He, and Stephens, were constantly telling the Jews they had killed their Messiah and that they had to repent of it and accept Jesus as their Messiah and king. Absolutely """NO WHERE"" in the book of Acts does Peter say anyone is saved by Jesus' shed blood on the cross. -- If you can find ONE SCRIPTURE in the book of Acts where Peter preaches that the cross is salvation for man then you have better eyes than I do.

The problem is that I don't think anyone on this forum will actually read the book of Acts to see if what I say is correct. They would rather rail against me and sit in ignorance.

 

[ajdiamond]

They would rather rail against me and sit in ignorance.

Son of God,

Will you learn the law of judgment? For it was not given for our condemnation, nor for our guilt or shame; but for our liberation,

Others are like unto us a mirror. And what we see in them and express in judgment about them speaks about us, not them. For with what judgment we judge another, the law of judgment is saying we are really just seeing ourselves in that other. So, do you rail against others? You could not write what you did if it were not so.

Again, these judgments arise in us, not for condemnation or that we grovel in guilt; but so that we might look with honesty and innocence at them and be free from the content of self from which they arise. So that the Spirit of our God may flow more and more freely through us.

So, the next time a judgment of another arises, before expressing it, look at it honestly. For it will be a reflection of your self. But, the good news is that you need not identify with or remain attached to those judgments. We can put off the old and put on the new. Praise God for this law, for in it we often are shown what we will not face or do not see. And we know that it is for our good.

Peace.

 

[Theodore A. Jones]

You must read Acts for what Peter """said""" in order to see this. He, and Stephens, were constantly telling the Jews they had killed their Messiah and that they had to repent of it and accept Jesus as their Messiah and king. Absolutely """NO WHERE"" in the book of Acts does Peter say anyone is saved by Jesus' shed blood on the cross. -- If you can find ONE SCRIPTURE in the book of Acts where Peter preaches that the cross is salvation for man then you have better eyes than I do.

The problem is that I don't think anyone on this forum will actually read the book of Acts to see if what I say is correct. They would rather rail against me and sit in ignorance.

It is true that the crucifixion of Jesus is the sin of murder caused by bloodshed and (FYI I have actually read the book of Acts many times). But I have also read a few of your conclusions, too, and they are a bit incongruent with the scriptures. You are correct that the message of salvation first preached to the Jews did require them to repent of the sin of crucifying Jesus in order to be saved from the penalty of eternal death. But this message stated first to the Jews was the exact same explanation stated to the Gentile. Rom. 1:16 However in your stated belief you state that the message of salvation for the Gentile, Romans, is not consistant with Acts. So from my view point you need to wise up. There are not two gates into God's kingdom.

 

[RichardBurger]

It is true that the crucifixion of Jesus is the sin of murder caused by bloodshed and (FYI I have actually read the book of Acts many times). But I have also read a few of your conclusions, too, and they are a bit incongruent with the scriptures. You are correct that the message of salvation first preached to the Jews did require them to repent of the sin of crucifying Jesus in order to be saved from the penalty of eternal death. But this message stated first to the Jews was the exact same explanation stated to the Gentile. Rom. 1:16 However in your stated belief you state that the message of salvation for the Gentile, Romans, is not consistant with Acts. So from my view point you need to wise up. There are not two gates into God's kingdom.

You say this to me but you refuse to show the scriptures where Peter said the shed blood on the cross has purchased salvation for those that believe it does. You had much rather cast me in a negative light.

No one has said there are two gates. That is going beyond anything said on this thread. There was a gospel of the kingdom at hand, a gospel that jesus was on the earth to set upo a promised kingdom for the Jews. The Jews rejected Jesus and He did not set up the kingdom and that gospel was put on hold. God turned to the Gentile with a new gospel that according the the scriptures you say you believe, was hidden in God and revealed to Paul and that Paul was the first to be saved under that new gospel.

But religious people have always rejected the idea that Paul's gospel for the Gentiles was hidden in God and revealed to Paul.

 

[Theodore A. Jones]

Mr. Burger,
Many people religious or other wise do not understand Romans. So you are correct in that. But there are not two messages of salvation as you propose. Neither Peter nor Paul digress from the standard that "God does not respect persons." If there is a message of salvation respective to the Jew and another for the Gentile then not only is this standard compromised but there is also more than one process to become born again of God. For hasn't Paul, long before this topic you have presented, already dismissed the conjecture "I am of Paul, I am of Peter, I am of Apollos etc." as an error? For the crucifixion of Jesus is of no effect, powerless, as a benefit for anyone whenever it is articulated that his crucifixion is not a unilateral accountable sin directly to God. As for casting you in a negative light. Posting your conjecture in a public forum is not the way to avoid that.

 

[RichardBurger]

Mr. Burger,
Many people religious or other wise do not understand Romans. So you are correct in that. But there are not two messages of salvation as you propose. Neither Peter nor Paul digress from the standard that "God does not respect persons." If there is a message of salvation respective to the Jew and another for the Gentile then not only is this standard compromised but there is also more than one process to become born again of God. For hasn't Paul, long before this topic you have presented, already dismissed the conjecture "I am of Paul, I am of Peter, I am of Apollos etc." as an error? For the crucifixion of Jesus is of no effect, powerless, as a benefit for anyone whenever it is articulated that his crucifixion is not a unilateral accountable sin directly to God. As for casting you in a negative light. Posting your conjecture in a public forum is not the way to avoid that.

So you are saying, that my saying Paul taught a different message, is the same as my saying I am of Paul etc. Foolishness! Paul was the apostle sent to the Gentiles with a gospel of grace and if that is saying I am of Paul then so be it.

I have never said there are two messages of salvation for today. That is in your mind. One gospel, the gospel of the promised kingdom at hand, faded away with the distruction of the Jewish Temple. God turned to the Gentiles after the Jews rejected Jesus as their Messiah and king with a gospel of grace that was hidden in God and revealed to Paul. Even though the scriptures plainly support this you insist that there has never been any other gospel than what Jesus and the 12 preached.

God has determined that the only way to be saved in this age of grace is through the shed blood of His Son on the cross and if he has determined that then who are you to question it.

You said, "As for casting you in a negative light. Posting your conjecture in a public forum is not the way to avoid that."

That is a cop out! There is no need for anyone to put another in a negative light. Since this is a forum are we to discuss the scriptures and what we believe they say, or are we to dsicuss the posters personally? It seems that, to some, showing another in a negative light is standard practice and then they will go about saying how they love others.

You use the word conjecture to denote what I believe then are you also saying that what you believe is your conjecture? No, I don't guess you will use that word for yourself.

 

[Theodore A. Jones]

So you are saying, that my saying Paul taught a different message, is the same as my saying I am of Paul etc. Foolishness! Paul was the apostle sent to the Gentiles with a gospel of grace and if that is saying I am of Paul then so be it.

I have never said there are two messages of salvation for today. That is in your mind. One gospel, the gospel of the promised kingdom at hand, faded away with the distruction of the Jewish Temple. God turned to the Gentiles after the Jews rejected Jesus as their Messiah and king with a gospel of grace that was hidden in God and revealed to Paul. Even though the scriptures plainly support this you insist that there has never been any other gospel than what Jesus and the 12 preached.

God has determined that the only way to be saved in this age of grace is through the shed blood of His Son on the cross and if he has determined that then who are you to question it.

You said, "As for casting you in a negative light. Posting your conjecture in a public forum is not the way to avoid that."

That is a cop out! There is no need for anyone to put another in a negative light. Since this is a forum are we to discuss the scriptures and what we believe they say, or are we to dsicuss the posters personally? It seems that, to some, showing another in a negative light is standard practice and then they will go about saying how they love others.

You use the word conjecture to denote what I believe then are you also saying that what you believe is your conjecture? No, I don't guess you will use that word for yourself.

Most assuredly any statement that is a conclusion is also a conjecture. So whatever I have stated is a conjecture. However it is your stated opinion, a conjecture, that upon the distruction of the temple in 70 ad that this event signifys that the "gospel of grace" came to the fore front. This conjecture is what I contest as not true. For it is the Acts 2 message that is the only correct message of salvation. It is true that Paul is the apostle chosen by God to minister to the Gentiles, but the message of salvation he teaches does not digress from the frame of the Acts 2 statement. What Paul does explain by using the term grace as a discriptive is that everyone to save himself must confess directly to God that he is sorry Jesus' life was lost by bloodshed when he was crucified to resolve all past infractions of the written code of law irrespective of being a Jew or a Gentile. There are no exceptions.

 

[RichardBurger]

Most assuredly any statement that is a conclusion is also a conjecture. So whatever I have stated is a conjecture. However it is your stated opinion, a conjecture, that upon the distruction of the temple in 70 ad that this event signifys that the "gospel of grace" came to the fore front. This conjecture is what I contest as not true. For it is the Acts 2 message that is the only correct message of salvation. It is true that Paul is the apostle chosen by God to minister to the Gentiles, but the message of salvation he teaches does not digress from the frame of the Acts 2 statement. What Paul does explain by using the term grace as a discriptive is that everyone to save himself must confess directly to God that he is sorry Jesus' life was lost by bloodshed when he was crucified to resolve all past infractions of the written code of law irrespective of being a Jew or a Gentile. There are no exceptions.

Okay, that is what you believe and I will not make cute remarks about you for believing it like you and others do.

But it is not what I believe. Acts 2 is all about Peter telling the Jews that they had to repent of killing Jesus and accept Him as their Messiah and King. It was what the Jews had to do and it is not what we have to do. Peter was not speaking to Gentiles, his words were for the Jews.

 

[andrew7]

Hello everyone,

Just wanted to ask you what are the characteristics which make Christian a Christian?

I had some discussions with a lot of Christians on that

 

[Prentis]

Hi andrew, welcome here

I would say firstly is that he has a revelation of who Christ is, he truly sees the kingdom, and then that he follows Christ, obeys him, and picks up his cross daily, growing and walking in the Spirit. I think that's what it comes down to...

Whew! That's a high standard to walk by! May God gives us strength and wisdom!

 

[RichardBurger]

Hello everyone,

Just wanted to ask you what are the characteristics which make Christian a Christian?

I had some discussions with a lot of Christians on that

I disagree with the many that say Christainty is all about what men do. It certainy isn't being self-righteous.

It is a person walking humbly before God in complete confidence that Jesus' shed blood on the cross has made him/her a child of God just as the scriptures promise.

It is called walking in belief, faith, trust and confidence in the power of God on the cross.

The good that a child of God accomplishs will be as God leads him/her to do that good. It is not doing things and expecting a reward from God.

 

[Jake]

Hello everyone,

Just wanted to ask you what are the characteristics which make Christian a Christian?

I had some discussions with a lot of Christians on that

True believers are ones who are being conformed to the image of Christ. This life, for believers, is a testing and a preparation for things to come, God disciplines, breaks us, and molds us through our suffering, which is meant for our good, in order to perfect us. As Prentis mentioned, we are to pick up our cross daily and allow God to meet all of our needs. As we learn, we are tested in what we have learned, it'ts not simply a head knowledge, God gives us opportunities to put our knowledge into action. As we abide in Him, we obey Him, He grows our faith, and through this comes faithfulness to Him. Our transformation is a process.

 

[Prentis]

Well said, brother. The good news is about the new creation, Christ in us, and the new creation that is to come, the new heaven and the new earth, for which the Lord prepares us. By the new nature we must overcome, that we might be heirs with him when the time comes.

 

[RichardBurger]

Galatians 3:1-3
3 O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified?
2 This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
3 Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?
NKJV

My comments: We can not make ourselves children of God by what we do in the flesh.

1 John 4:4
4 You are of God, little children, and """have overcome"" them, because He who is in you is greater than he who is in the world.
NKJV

My comments: Notice the words ""have overcome". It is a done deal not a future reality.

1 John 5:4-5
4 For whatever is born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world — our faith.
5 Who is he who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?
NKJV

We overcome this world by our faith in Jesus' shed blood on the cross, not by our actions of the flesh. This is the power of God as shown on the cross.

 

[Prentis]

I thought you didn't believe in being made perfect :lol:

 

[RichardBurger]

I thought you didn't believe in being made perfect :lol:

Who are you speaking to? If to me then show where I said we become perfect in the flesh by the actions of the flesh. If people do not understand that a child of God has two natures, one of flesh and one of a born again spirit, and that they fight against each other, then those people have never read Romans 7 with their eyes open. My saying we have overcome is not me saying we are perfect in the flesh. We are only perfect in Christ."

The scriptures do not teach that we become perfect "in the flesh." Only man teaches it. Jesus came to save those that are sinful in the flesh and can't save themselves by the actions of sinful flesh.

Philippians 3:3
3 For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh,
NKJV

When men want to become "more like Christ" they are forgeting that Satan told Eve that if she ate of the tree she would be like God.

The self righteous glory in themselves (their goodness) but the child of God glories in the work of Jesus on the cross becuse it is the power og God to save sinners and keep them saved.

 

[Jake]

It is no longer I, but Christ living in me....the reason we can become sinless and perfect. Christ is the overcomer, we are living His life, in God all things are possible.

The Old Covenant was a covenant between God and Israel.

According to Richard, the New Covenant is a covenant between God and......God?

I don't think so.

 

[Prentis]

RichardBurger, you quoted Galatians 3
Galatians 3:1-3
3 O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified?
2 This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
3 Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?
NKJV
Yet you are the one that opposes the idea we can actually attain Christ, and become like him. You call THAT working in the flesh, when in reality it says that BY the Spirit, we are to put to death the deeds of the flesh. This very verse speaks of moving on forward to attain Christ, only it tells how NOT to do it.

As Christians we ought to glory in nothing of ourselves, but we ought to have faith that HE indeed can do all things, in spite of our old nature, and by his power through the new nature that is now in us.

The Kingdom is not word, but in power, and that is the power unto the salvation of the soul. To be saved from the corruption, and the forces of evil, now.