1. 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!

Featured understanding Paul

Discussion in 'Christian Theology Forum' started by Randy Kluth, Jun 29, 2020.

  1. marks

    marks Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,597
    Likes Received:
    5,525
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Where do you see that in Scripture?
     
  2. marks

    marks Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,597
    Likes Received:
    5,525
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Where to you see a problem? The law cannot make a person righteous, not because there is a problem with the Law, the problem is with people.

    This is Romans 7.

    OK, the new nature I'm talking about is the one who is born from above. The one who is a spirit, born of spirit. If you are talking about the culture of the people, that's what I mean. It inculcated a culture of the requirements of God's Law so there would always remain a remnant.

    That's an interesting point of view. Myself, I don't look at this as some sort of lingo, rather, extremely specific and direct teaching.

    upload_2020-6-30_15-50-9.png

    25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

    "hilasterion", translated here "propitiation".

    Atonement doesn't appear here.

    The KJV uses "atonement" in Romans 5:11, but that is better translated "reconciliation".

    In the NT, different words are used, send away, release, free, like that. But yes, I agree with the distinction, in the OT sacrifices sins were covered, and in Christ, they are removed.

    Much love!
     
  3. marks

    marks Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,597
    Likes Received:
    5,525
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Hi @Randy Kluth , please check post 33 . . . you've got me saying things Episkopos wrote.
     
    Randy Kluth likes this.
  4. marks

    marks Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,597
    Likes Received:
    5,525
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Sorry if this came across sarcastic! I was thinking back trying to remember where I was refusing something.

    marks said:

    By being conformed to the image of Christ, which happens by the renewing of our minds, which largely happens by internalizing His Word, this is how we are relevant to others, and to our culture. What this worlds doesn't need is someone with a system, or a philosophy, or a method, it needs someone who will be as Jesus, by being conformed to His image.


    I don't think you are thinking through what I'm saying here. I don't think we are to make it our business to dig into philosophy in order to be relevant. I'm not saying that's not what God will do with us. But just to try to import Scripture into philosophy or visa versa on the pursuit of relevance is to me a mistake.

    We pursue Christ, and let Him work out the rest.

    Absolutely!

    :)

    We follow along moment by moment wherever He should lead.

    Much love!
     
  5. marks

    marks Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,597
    Likes Received:
    5,525
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    All I ask is that you try to lay aside your preconceptions of me or my views. I'm perfectly happy to discuss these things, I feel them to be important.

    Much love!
     
  6. Yan

    Yan Member

    Messages:
    54
    Likes Received:
    19
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Indonesia
    Paul had been saved by Jesus from doing evil further, because before he was called paul was also doing such law breaker where he did persecute Stephanus and his name was still Saulus (Acts of the Apostles 7:54-60).
    Paul was doing the same as Moses did killed the egyptian (Exodus 2:11-15).
    So, both Moses and Paul was also disobedient of the law but they were still protected by God with his Grace only.
    So, nobody could obey 10 commandments in the whole life because in some point of man's life; everybody will disobedient to the law for something good intention like Moses killed egyption only to save their people from egyption tirany and slavery.
    Because as what Paul had told on Romans 3 & Romans 4 that nobody was righteous and God's grace was only a gift to mankind as our Parent and mankind as his children. So, Jesus had been redeem our mistakes by disobeying the law from the devil imprisonment, because as what Jude had told that Moses life was under imprisonment of the devil in Jude 1:9, so did the Paul was also in the same fate. But because of the salvation in Jesus name and our baptism in holy spirit makes our soul are free from the imprisonment of the devil.
    This is how we should understand that the main concern between obeying the law and disobedient of the law was no matter at all in Jesus name (1 Corinthians 7:17-24).
    But whosoever was the disobedient of the law should lived under the law as what Paul also tried to be holy to get lived under the obedient of the law that will make us free from our sinful nature and not to satisfied all of his fleshy desire (1 Corinthians 9:27 - Admin, why did this verse was not linked to the bible), because Jesus was redeem us to be obedient of his law that will make us lived in a righteous freedom (1 Peter 2:11-17; Colossians 2:6-23).
     
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2020
  7. justbyfaith

    justbyfaith Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    12,008
    Likes Received:
    2,596
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    It was not linked to the Bible because the translation of the Bible that is utilized by these boards does not have that verse in it.

    Some Bibles do in fact remove important verses and for this reason I stick to the kjv.

    (I am not claiming to be an Administrator, but I did have the answer to your question).

    To @Yan
     
  8. DNB

    DNB Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,889
    Likes Received:
    718
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Canada
    My understanding is that the Law, both its required observances and means for absolution (temporary), lead a person to righteousness. For this was the Covenant of God, a Covenant with a promise, 'those who adhere to my decrees and precepts, shall live by them'. Again, this was a Covenant, as much as we have today, the Covenant of Faith, that those who abide by its principles shall inherit life. Two Testaments, both with a promise.

    Romans 10:5. For Moses writes that the man who practices the righteousness which is based on law shall live by that righteousness.
    The Law offered life to those who obeyed it, otherwise why stipulate such an arduous task if there were no rewards at the end. Yes, it was onerous and many failed, but provisions were established in order that one may find absolution if he was found in sin, knowingly or not. David extolled the virtues of the Law and how they brought life to those who revered them.

    Clearly not everyone under the Law knew of Christ, nor anticipated a suffering Messiah, nor the redemption on the cross. Therefore, outside of the hope for a Davidic king, they could not have appreciated the spiritual salvation that would come with the inauguration of the Messiah.

    Paul is establishing that the repetitious nature of the Law, sin & sacrifice, could never perpetually render someone absolved of their sins, but only temporarily. That is, only until the next time that they transgressed the Law. But the oblations and burnt offerings prescribed in the Law for forgiveness, were duly efficacious to render one guiltless for the time being. Death did not reign from Moses to Christ, nor did all the Old Testament saints comprehend the righteousness that comes with faith. And those that did, were merely foreshadowing what was to come, as in the case of Abraham (although not under Law).

    Paul explained that God has offered an alternate way to salvation, one less fastidious and grueling, and more permanent. Any allusions to this in the OT were not defining a mandatory means to salvation, but an anticipation and understanding of what was to come. The Law saved those who followed all its precepts, both for righteous living, and for restitution upon failure.
     
  9. Randy Kluth

    Randy Kluth Active Member

    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    203
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    I have no preconceptions of you or your views, other than you appear to be a faithful Christian. Discussion of points that matter to me are always preeminent in my mind. I try to fix things with brothers and sisters later. ;)
     
  10. Randy Kluth

    Randy Kluth Active Member

    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    203
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    I didn't understand the part about "death did not reign from Moses to Christ." Other than that I think that was wonderfully said, with a lot of insight. My biggest concern is that Christians would mindlessly quote Scriptures as if they understand, as if the external meaning can be stated without explanation. But you show you understand. Peace!
     
    DNB likes this.
  11. Randy Kluth

    Randy Kluth Active Member

    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    203
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    This, however, is *not* what I'm doing. So it is a bit judgmental of you to imply that.

    My point is that Paul is not speaking into a vacuum, that his "shorthand" statements about faith, righteousness, and salvation refer, in context, to salvation, and should not be confused with similar things that do not have the same meaning. This has led to problems that I will not take the time to describe now.

    It is precisely because we in the Western world think through a philosophical lens that we need to untangle the religious truth from the philosophical truth. And that is what I'm doing. In short, one example is the following.

    We should *not* say that because Paul said we were "dead in sin" conclude that nobody in the world can make a decision for righteousness, nor surmise that righteousness cannot exist unless it leads to Salvation. I'll let it go at that. It's a matter of straightening out messes when our secular world disturbs the message of religious truth.
     
  12. Randy Kluth

    Randy Kluth Active Member

    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    203
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Fixed--sorry about that!
     
  13. Randy Kluth

    Randy Kluth Active Member

    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    203
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Not at all. Man's works fall short of acquiring permanent atonement. And yet the priesthood of Israel was made effective by the word of God that commanded it to be done. "Filthy rags" applied to those who covered up their internal or hidden sin by doing external works of the Law.

    That was not the statement. I'm saying you're theology implies things similar to what Marcion taught--something that I don't at all believe you want to be associated with!

    I reject *your interpretation* of that verse. I do not reject the verse itself, nor what it actually means.

    Jer 17.9 The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?

    How do you get from the deceitfulness of the human heart to "Total Depravity?" You don't!

    I told you I don't hold to humanistic philosophy. I believe in the sin nature in all men. I believe that the new nature in Christ overcomes sin, though it cannot exterminate sin.

    Humanism mixes religious truth with human philosophical concepts. I don't do that. I do not believe man was able to obtain atonement on his own, even though God called for Israel to do something to that effect on a limited, temporary basis.

    There are things we do in the process of getting saved. For example, we accept Christ, we repent of our sins, and we determine to follow up on the receipt of a new nature by choosing for spiritual things over the carnal things that continue to press against us.

    Only Christ could make atonement for our sins, leading to eternal salvation. You're saying that man plays no role in accepting salvation, in believing for salvation, in producing righteousness as a result of that salvation? To say that righteousness under the Law was meaningless, worthless, and the opposite of true righteousness is clearly in the camp of Marcion-like dualism.

    For what it's worth, I don't think you believe in Marcion. I use him to shame you away from your apparent dualistic thinking. ;)
     
  14. Randy Kluth

    Randy Kluth Active Member

    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    203
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    I'm not at all sure you're right in your interpretation of "accuse and defend," but neither am I sure you're wrong! ;) I would have to defer to my brother, who is much more adept at the biblical languages. If you wish I can consult him?

    I do think, however, that this verse may not teach, but does assume, that all men have a conscience and are able to obey God's word, if only hidden within the universal human conscience. I think that's pretty explicit, and even though it is an assumed conception, it is spelled out.
     
  15. Randy Kluth

    Randy Kluth Active Member

    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    203
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    I believe all men were created, by God, in His own image, so that men may respond to the word of God for their lives. Sin has darkened human understanding, and when men do not live in covenant with God may not recognize that it is God's word speaking to them within their conscience. But men may avail themselves of the inherent power of God's word to obey that word, whether they recognize it as such or not.

    For example, after the Fall men remain capable to obeying God's word calling them to "fill the earth and subdue it." Men are still multiplying, and they are still subduing the earth. They are fashioning good things out of the soil of the earth to produce good things capable of serving the interests of men. That is "subduing the earth." The earth is now quite "full." ;)

    Men were equally able, under the covenant of the Law, to serve the word of God, particularly when they actually knew God! God Himself inspired Moses to say that these words were "not too hard" for Israel to obey them.

    And so, the word of God goes out across the earth, and reaches down from heaven to men, telling them to do the right thing, and to subdue evil desires. God told Cain he could indeed overcome sin, if he simply chose to do so. The word of God holds the inherent power to give men the ability to obey God.

    When men choose against the word of God, it is not because they are unable to obey God, but rather, because they simply don't want to obey God. They are free creatures.
     
  16. Randy Kluth

    Randy Kluth Active Member

    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    203
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    This is a perfect example of quoting Paul without providing the understanding. Here we have a statement of mine that is confused by some, because they misinterpret Paul.

    But you then simply quote Paul without any resolution of the problem I stated at all! Good job proving nothing! ;)

    I could explain what Paul means, but why bother? You don't try to explain it yourself!

    Let me just say this for the sake of others who may read. Paul is prescribing living in the new nature of Christ. He is not saying he is actually dead! ;) Nor was he saying that the Law was dead before Christ himself died. It died only at the moment Christ himself died!

    Again, I said: There is so much "Christianese" thrown about that quotes are used to say absurd things like, "the righteousness of the Law is not true righteousness" and "the Law was given not to offer righteousness but rather to prove people couldn't be righteous."

    The Law had righteousness that existed temporarily as a fill-in until Christ's atonement took place. Then the righteousness of the Law was finished.

    It had not been worthless, however, since it did do an adequate job of keeping Israel in relationship with God, and forgiven of their sins, until Christ's atonement made permanent their hope in Messiah.
     
  17. Episkopos

    Episkopos Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,554
    Likes Received:
    10,706
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Canada
    Randy Kluth said:
    That also had a covenant that propagated a new spiritual nature.


    Where do you see that in Scripture?
     
  18. justbyfaith

    justbyfaith Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    12,008
    Likes Received:
    2,596
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    And I'm saying that your theology implies things similar to what humanistic philosophy teaches...something that I don't believe you want to be associated with.

    Here is the kjv on it:

    Jer 17:9, The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

    I get total depravity out of that most faithfully.

    And if the heart is deceitful beyond cure, I get total depravity out of that also.

    No. I don't know what Marcion believed about these things; but I do know that righteousness under the law *is as filthy rags*...and that the only genuine righteousness is the righteousness which is of God by faith (Philippians 3:9, Isaiah 64:6, Revelation 19:8 (kjv)).
     
  19. Yan

    Yan Member

    Messages:
    54
    Likes Received:
    19
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Indonesia
    But lets take a look in the full verses of 1 Corinthians 9.
     
  20. Behold

    Behold Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    347
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Israel
    Actually, its your view of the Scriptures, that is the issue.
    For example, you stated that Peter said....."paul is difficult to understand"... Yet Peter never said this.... YOU said it.
    So the first sentence in your Thread is false.. Its this... """"Peter said that Paul was sometimes difficult to understand. """"
    What Peter actually said is that Paul's LETTERS can be difficult to understand, but he did not say the MAN himself is hard to understand.
    So, your original Thread's first sentence starts off with something that isn't in the New Testament, because its YOUR complete misunderstanding of the verse.
    But here is the good news.....
    Now you can go and edit the Thread so that you can pretend that you didn't write what i just exposed, and this way, your pretense of bible knowledge is more carefully hidden. (except it isn't).
     
Loading...