Was the Cross Always Understood?

[PS95]

You misunderstand the point. All of scripture is FOR us but not all is TO us. I realize you may not like that, but it is what it is.

Insults will get you nowhere.

I dealt directly with the scriptures you quoted, which is to say that injecting salvation into those as if they lend some ethereal support to some idea of losing salvation, that simply is false.

All of the passages I gave you and you did not " deal directly with the scriptures"- not even ONE. Is this magical fairyland now? You blew all of the off and said I superimpose dogma. Hilarious.
--IF WE DENY HIM HE WILL DENY US--
Obviously someone who commits apostasy - has left the faith has denied Christ--- and will be denied by Christ. He cannot deny HIMSELF!
This is called CONTEXT.
Jesus plainly stated, deny Him- He will deny you before His Father! He with be faithful to his own WORDS. Yet you disagree...
Not good.

Yes, it's always the better way to avoid all sin and to live lives dedicated to the Lord.

Yes- we are commanded to live holy lives-

That you ignored what Paul said about his own life and sin, that speaks volumes to your bias. The habitual practice of assuming we believe we have license to sin, that only poisons the well given that I personally never even hinted at that concept.

Now I am biased too? lol
What is it about Paul that you are upset about? Did you pre suppose something? Did I ever say we will never sin? Nowhere did I say that. We are convicted by the Holy Spirit and repent. Should we "practice sin"? of course not, how can we?
YOU say that a person who leaves the faith and lives in sins is still saved. It's a lie.- <--That's what I said. It's not bias. it's scripture.
To use what Paul said as your excuse is not going to fly- unless you ignore ALL of the rest of the scriptures including Paul's.
You see Paul and you take from that- that we can walk away from the faith and sin and we are saved? NO. NO- WE are given the Spirit of God in us- who is working in us and helping us, teaching us, convicting us, and guiding us. Sin no longer has DOMINION over us. We are given the POWER of the Spirit to put the deeds of the flesh to death. Paul was not just throwing off his sin as if it was nothing. He was grieving his sin. We all have times when we can relate to Paul there.
THAT is not leaving the faith and living in all manner of sins.

So, if we can't discuss that line that so many seem to believe exists, including yourself from what I have seen you state in prior posts, it really become moot. We know where the line is for crossing over INTO salvation, but the salvation loss people seem to have no definition for its alleged loss. That serves as an indictment against that false doctrine. Would you agree?

BTW

Of course I don't agree. You presented no scripture for scripture. You addressed nothing but gave a feeble attempt to discard what I wrote to you with your own fleshly condescensions.
You were shown how you ripped a verse out of context and still you ignore that as you did all of the scriptures. There are plenty more.
I hope you reconsider your stance. It's a dangerous thing to tell people they are saved when they are not abiding in Christ.

 

[GodsGrace]

Explain what you mean by JESUS did speak in a way that was different from paul .
You are correct they did not conflict .
but what do you mean by In a different way .

Jesus was more direct.
He plainly stated that we are to obey and love God.
He spoke about HOW we are to be obeying and how we are to behave.
Jesus didn't speak about being born again and faith only and all this that we hear nowadays.
He wanted us to be "perfect" as our Father in heaven is perfect.

Paul taught the same.
But he spoke about the Jews having to accept the Gentiles being let in (Romans 9)
He spoke about a lot of theology....how it's faith that saves.
He seems to be more concentrated on faith - which is good - but some take this to mean that
faith is all we need and this simply is not in keeping with Jesus' teachings.
Paul believed the same,,,,but added more detail.

 

[GodsGrace]

if we read paul carefully we wont find any difference .
People really think ol paul was easier on believers .
What i think is most folks dont know the whole of his letters at all . At most they exclude and skim over
some of the most dire warnings i ever seen . Paul gave very serious and dire warnings
just like JESUS did . Allow me to let you in on a secrete , T HOUGH I THINK you already KNOW THIS .
Men who follow pauline , DONT KNOW PUAL at all my friend . THEY twisted even the warnings HE gave .
PAUL said IF ONE continues NOT IN CHRIST what happens . That man warned more than folks realize .
ITS just the OSAS camp and others TWISTED HIS warnings . OH but he sure made it clear
as did peter . People like to pick and choose twisted doctrines is what this is all about .
recreating a paul , or a jesus , or a james or etc Into an image that suits their flesh . That is a fact .
I know it angers folks that i am direct and to the point and dont down tone sins either .
But if you find me a wee bit too grave
THEN OPEN up that bible again and YOU SEE what JESUS said , later paul , later peter .
john and others . MEN are fleecing and have been fleecing folks and folks seem to love to be sheared
by these money mongering hirelings who have done nothing but change with the times
and tickled ears . No worries i shall expose them and their doctrines no matter how shunned it makes me .

Agreed !

(you answered your own question!).

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Anyone
let it be said , let it be sung and let it be heard ,
anyone
i say anyone
whether your own mother to a pastor to any
That pits parts of the bible against other parts
IS ONE I WONT HEED PEROID .
nor should any other .
What was written by EVERY apostel did NOT CONTRADICT any other or JESUS .
And men who dare to even think certain letters should be removed
DONT even understand the very letters they THINK should remain .
I TELL US ALL
that from JESUS HIMSELF down to every apostel , to include paul
THEIR WORDS DID NOT CONTRADICT one another .
Even from page one to past last of that bible , THERE IS NO CONTRADICTIONS .
Yes you heard me right . N O contraditions . just warped thinking or lack of understanding on the parts
of those who T H INK there is .

Good point. Thanks for this message. This brings to light the importance of rightly dividing the word of truth as Paul instructed.

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Insults will get you nowhere.

All of the passages I gave you and you did not " deal directly with the scriptures"- not even ONE. Is this magical fairyland now? You blew all of the off and said I superimpose dogma. Hilarious.
--IF WE DENY HIM HE WILL DENY US--
Obviously someone who commits apostasy - has left the faith has denied Christ--- and will be denied by Christ. He cannot deny HIMSELF!
This is called CONTEXT.
Jesus plainly stated, deny Him- He will deny you before His Father! He with be faithful to his own WORDS. Yet you disagree...
Not good.

Yes- we are commanded to live holy lives-

Now I am biased too? lol
What is it about Paul that you are upset about? Did you pre suppose something? Did I ever say we will never sin? Nowhere did I say that. We are convicted by the Holy Spirit and repent. Should we "practice sin"? of course not, how can we?
YOU say that a person who leaves the faith and lives in sins is still saved. It's a lie.- <--That's what I said. It's not bias. it's scripture.
To use what Paul said as your excuse is not going to fly- unless you ignore ALL of the rest of the scriptures including Paul's.
You see Paul and you take from that- that we can walk away from the faith and sin and we are saved? NO. NO- WE are given the Spirit of God in us- who is working in us and helping us, teaching us, convicting us, and guiding us. Sin no longer has DOMINION over us. We are given the POWER of the Spirit to put the deeds of the flesh to death. Paul was not just throwing off his sin as if it was nothing. He was grieving his sin. We all have times when we can relate to Paul there.
THAT is not leaving the faith and living in all manner of sins.

Of course I don't agree. You presented no scripture for scripture. You addressed nothing but gave a feeble attempt to discard what I wrote to you with your own fleshly condescensions.
You were shown how you ripped a verse out of context and still you ignore that as you did all of the scriptures. There are plenty more.
I hope you reconsider your stance. It's a dangerous thing to tell people they are saved when they are not abiding in Christ.

There you go again, playing the victim card. I didn't insult you by pointing out what you MIGHT believe about something. It was an indefinite since I dont know all the ins and outs of your belief system.

Additionally, forcing salvation into that context is nothing more than eisegetical nonsense. I blew off only what was irrelevant in your presentation you wrote at the expense of a failure to rightly divide.

Leave the victim card to those who need it.

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Does that mean that you don't have a SHRED of evidence for your false claims about the Catholic Church?

That's what I thought . . .

Your guile openly betrays your bias and bent toward the historic revisionism of the leaders in your religion, which poisons the wells of discussion, therefore the reason for my lack of engaging with you on this topic.

BTW

 

[Charlie24]

Was the Cross Always Understood?

You’ve probably heard someone say, “Today we are saved by looking back to the cross, just like in time past everyone was saved by looking forward to the cross.”

Sounds spiritual. But is that true?

Did God say to Noah, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved”?
No—He told Noah: I’m going to flood the earth. Build an ark or you’ll drown.

Paul, in contrast, says in Acts 16,

Acts 16:30–31
“Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.”

Now look at 1 Corinthians 15:1–4.
Paul lays out the gospel clearly:

“Christ died for our sins, was buried, and rose again the third day, according to the Scriptures.”

That’s the gospel Paul preached.

Now—did Peter and the Twelve understand and preach that gospel before the cross?

Look at Mark 9:31–32:

“He taught his disciples and said, The Son of Man shall be delivered, killed, and rise again the third day.
But they understood not that saying, and were afraid to ask him.”

Satan knew of the coming death and resurrection of Christ, even though the disciples didn't understand the cross—even though the Lord told them directly, face to face.

So can we honestly say “everyone before the cross understood it the same way we do today”?
No—they didn’t.

That’s not rightly dividing the Word of Truth. It’s just soft, unscriptural thinking deeply encased in human emotions.

What do they teach where you attend on Sunday?

BTW

A working knowledge of Dispensationalism will help you understand the progression of God's salvation down through history.

Dispensationalism divides time from the Garden to the present. Each dispensation of time we see the knowledge of God's salvation progressing.

For example, those under Law did not have the knowledge of the Cross that we have under this present dispensation of Grace. We are very much aware of the literal Cross, they were not, but they had been given the results of what the Cross would bring by being given the Sacrificial System in the Law of Moses.

The animal sacrifice in the Law represented the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world. They knew the Christ was coming but nowhere near the knowledge we now have looking back. But they knew the animal sacrifice represented that coming Messiah.

They knew this all the way back to Cain an Abel, when they brought sacrifices before the Lord. they knew to bring a sacrifice and they knew what it meant. Abel brought the proper animal sacrifice that represented his faith in the coming Messiah, and was accepted of God but Cain was in rebellion against God and brought a vegetable sacrifice and was rejected by God.

In this dispensation with Cain and Abel, they didn't have near the knowledge of God's salvation as those later under the Law to Moses. So on and so on. The knowledge of God's salvation is ever increasing and will continue to increase in the coming Kingdom Age. there will be much more knowledge of God then than now.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Your guile openly betrays your bias and bent toward the historic revisionism of the leaders in your religion, which poisons the wells of discussion, therefore the reason for my lack of engaging with you on this topic.

BTW

I guess that’s a wordy way of saying that you won’t provide evidence for your false claim.
Remember -YOU said the following in Post #62:
“According to the RCC, Jesus is still angry, allegedly needing Mary to calm Him down, as unbelievable as that is...”

Now, you’re saying that I’ve “poisoned the well of discussion” because of my bias based on “historic revisionism’??
This has NOTHING to do with history - and everything to do with doctrine.

The bottom line here is that YOU vomited out a LIE – and you got exposed . . .

 

[MatthewG]

Praise God! It's not mere doctrine that saves—
but the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Yeshua!
"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that He was buried, that He was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures." — 1 Corinthians 15:3–4

 

[BeforeThereWas]

I guess that’s a wordy way of saying that you won’t provide evidence for your false claim.
Remember -YOU said the following in Post #62:
“According to the RCC, Jesus is still angry, allegedly needing Mary to calm Him down, as unbelievable as that is...”

Now, you’re saying that I’ve “poisoned the well of discussion” because of my bias based on “historic revisionism’??
This has NOTHING to do with history - and everything to do with doctrine.

The bottom line here is that YOU vomited out a LIE – and you got exposed . . .

That you're missing the forest for the trees is the point. There's nothing you have exposed apart from my unwillingness to recap the known historic doctrinal teachings from historic RCC dogma. So, the things you assume about me personally...whatever.

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Insults will get you nowhere.

All of the passages I gave you and you did not " deal directly with the scriptures"- not even ONE. Is this magical fairyland now? You blew all of the off and said I superimpose dogma. Hilarious.
--IF WE DENY HIM HE WILL DENY US--
Obviously someone who commits apostasy - has left the faith has denied Christ--- and will be denied by Christ. He cannot deny HIMSELF!
This is called CONTEXT.
Jesus plainly stated, deny Him- He will deny you before His Father! He with be faithful to his own WORDS. Yet you disagree...
Not good.

Yes- we are commanded to live holy lives-

Now I am biased too? lol
What is it about Paul that you are upset about? Did you pre suppose something? Did I ever say we will never sin? Nowhere did I say that. We are convicted by the Holy Spirit and repent. Should we "practice sin"? of course not, how can we?
YOU say that a person who leaves the faith and lives in sins is still saved. It's a lie.- <--That's what I said. It's not bias. it's scripture.
To use what Paul said as your excuse is not going to fly- unless you ignore ALL of the rest of the scriptures including Paul's.
You see Paul and you take from that- that we can walk away from the faith and sin and we are saved? NO. NO- WE are given the Spirit of God in us- who is working in us and helping us, teaching us, convicting us, and guiding us. Sin no longer has DOMINION over us. We are given the POWER of the Spirit to put the deeds of the flesh to death. Paul was not just throwing off his sin as if it was nothing. He was grieving his sin. We all have times when we can relate to Paul there.
THAT is not leaving the faith and living in all manner of sins.

Of course I don't agree. You presented no scripture for scripture. You addressed nothing but gave a feeble attempt to discard what I wrote to you with your own fleshly condescensions.
You were shown how you ripped a verse out of context and still you ignore that as you did all of the scriptures. There are plenty more.
I hope you reconsider your stance. It's a dangerous thing to tell people they are saved when they are not abiding in Christ.

You really seem to not like it when someone dares to disagree with you. When Paul said that disbelief doesn't lead to Christ forfeiting His own Spirit by taking salvation away from any He has saved, you seem to disagree, and that's on you, not me or anyone else. Pulling up a slew of other verses to try and remodify what Paul said into something he didn't say, that's manipulative hermeneutics. I don't buy it. I've seen that tactic far too often.

Now, if you want to talk about grammatical construct and lingual continuity in English and Greek, we can do that too. I'm well trained in both. My Israeli background has pushed me quite deeply into biblical languages and history.

So, if you can dispense with the victim card playing and cross-linking of verses not contextually tied to salvation in a similar framework of topical comparison, lets talk.

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

MatthewG hit it on the head in it's post above, #149. Paul didn't teach the requirement for water baptism unto the remission of sins. Paul's gospel was only about Christ's death, burial and resurrection on the third day. That Paul baptized a small handfull of people doesn't change his actual teaching and revelation of the mystery of salvation having come to the Gentiles.

It's sad that so many miss the import of that last statement:

Acts 28:28 — Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.

Romans 11:11 — I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

That salvation came unto the Gentiles, that clearly shows to us that it was therefore not available to them apart from joining with Israel before our diminishing because of our continued rejection of Chrjst Jesus as our Messiah.

Ephesians 2:12 — That at that time ye [Gentiles] were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

Why?

Ephesians 2:14 — For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

As an Israeli, I'm so very glad to be dead to the Law along with my Gentile brothers and sisters in Christ.

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

The Bible indeed warns us that we can fall away and LOSE our secure position if we do NOT remain in Christ:

Romans 11:22
“See, then, the kindness and severity of God: severity toward those who fell, but God's kindness to you, provided you REMAIN in his kindness; otherwise you to will be cut off.”
Paul is warning the faithful to REMAIN in God’s favor or they will lose their salvation. How can they lose what they never had?

Wrong. Injecting salvation into that and other texts is nothing but what is so typical of promoters of false doctrines. It's always easy to assume something into the texts what isn't there when you've had that drilled into you for who knows how many years.

Nope. Reading scripture for what it says without eisegetical overlays is far better a practice than to inject what one has been taught to insert into the text what isn't there.

BTW

 

[BreadOfLife]

Wrong. Injecting salvation into that and other texts is nothing but what is so typical of promoters of false doctrines. It's always easy to assume something into the texts what isn't there when you've had that drilled into you for who knows how many years.

Nope. Reading scripture for what it says without eisegetical overlays is far better a practice than to inject what one has been taught to insert into the text what isn't there.

BTW

Then, instead of your usual cowardly denials – ADDRSS THOSE VERSES and REFUTE them.

Rom. 11:22
“See, then, the kindness and severity of God: severity toward those who fell, but God's kindness to you, provided you REMAIN in his kindness; otherwise “you to will be CUT OFF.”

WHAT does that mean?
WHAT is Paul referring to, if NOT salvation??

I’ll wait right here for your explanation of EACH verse . . .
(Rom. 11:22, Heb. 10:26-27, 2 Pet. 2:20-22, Matt. 5:13, 1 Cor. 9:27, 2 Pet. 3:17, 1 John 2:24, Rev. 3:5, Rev. 22:19)

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Then, instead of your usual cowardly denials – ADDRSS THOSE VERSES and REFUTE them.

Rom. 11:22
“See, then, the kindness and severity of God: severity toward those who fell, but God's kindness to you, provided you REMAIN in his kindness; otherwise “you to will be CUT OFF.”

WHAT does that mean?
WHAT is Paul referring to, if NOT salvation??

I’ll wait right here for your explanation of EACH verse . . .
(Rom. 11:22, Heb. 10:26-27, 2 Pet. 2:20-22, Matt. 5:13, 1 Cor. 9:27, 2 Pet. 3:17, 1 John 2:24, Rev. 3:5, Rev. 22:19)

You can try to force meaning into that text all you want, but it won't work. The text says what it says, and trying to force salvation into it only demonstrates a bent upon subjective interpretation.

BTW

 

[amigo de christo]

There you go again, playing the victim card. I didn't insult you by pointing out what you MIGHT believe about something. It was an indefinite since I dont know all the ins and outs of your belief system.

Additionally, forcing salvation into that context is nothing more than eisegetical nonsense. I blew off only what was irrelevant in your presentation you wrote at the expense of a failure to rightly divide.

Leave the victim card to those who need it.

BTW

Mr snow i clicked on this post
to make a mention about what you said about the victim card .
MANY use that card and it is how TRUTH was and is BEING SILENCED . As you probably already well KNOW that .
Folks who love sin and error brought it unto society and unto christendom .
The judge not correct not card . But woe woe woe
LOOK WHO GAINED THE GROUND when sin and error was not exposed . EVIL DID . it was the plan all along .
For leaven to come in and leaven the lump as error begat only .........MORE ERROR .
We really should have stuck to the original pattern that was left us by CHRIST and later the apostels .

 

[amigo de christo]

Then, instead of your usual cowardly denials – ADDRSS THOSE VERSES and REFUTE them.

Rom. 11:22
“See, then, the kindness and severity of God: severity toward those who fell, but God's kindness to you, provided you REMAIN in his kindness; otherwise “you to will be CUT OFF.”

WHAT does that mean?
WHAT is Paul referring to, if NOT salvation??

I’ll wait right here for your explanation of EACH verse . . .
(Rom. 11:22, Heb. 10:26-27, 2 Pet. 2:20-22, Matt. 5:13, 1 Cor. 9:27, 2 Pet. 3:17, 1 John 2:24, Rev. 3:5, Rev. 22:19)

Well did the unbelieving jews who were cast out of that tree DUE TO UNBELEIF have salvation .
THEN THERE is your answer .
Any not in that tree , any who is cast out of said tree , HAS NOT salvation but only UNBELEIF .
The key is ONE NEEDS TO BE IN THAT TREE .
but many will twist the scrips to fit a concept of men who contradicted it .

 

[amigo de christo]

Wrong. Injecting salvation into that and other texts is nothing but what is so typical of promoters of false doctrines. It's always easy to assume something into the texts what isn't there when you've had that drilled into you for who knows how many years.

Nope. Reading scripture for what it says without eisegetical overlays is far better a practice than to inject what one has been taught to insert into the text what isn't there.

BTW

Do not give power unto the RCC .
Sadly that man is correct on this . I mean
DID the jews who were cast out of their own tree DUE to unbeleif HAVE salvation .
OR would they have to come in through FAITH .
SO if one continues NOT IN HIM , NOT In his Goodness , they too are cast out of said tree .
IF a man is not in said tree , HE HAS NO SALVATION . But as paul once wrote
the jews who were cast out can be grafted back in , IF they COME TO BELEIVE , HAVE faith in HIM
You give power to a very dangerous place . Because It makes this man appear correct
and yet i know what he sits under . And what he sits under is dangerous . SO please pray about this my friend .
Its real simple . ANY not in the tree HAS NOT salvation .
For They have NOT FAITH IN CHRIST .
IF a man continues NOT IN ME HE is cast forth . SO the key is all about CONTINUING in teh FAITH in CHRIST JESUS
and Those who do beleive WOULD have the SPIRIT by which we are unctioned , given the d esires
and ability . to do the things pleasing TO GOD .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Well did the unbelieving jews who were cast out of that tree DUE TO UNBELEIF have salvation .
THEN THERE is your answer .
Any not in that tree , any who is cast out of said tree , HAS NOT salvation but only UNBELEIF .
The key is ONE NEEDS TO BE IN THAT TREE .
but many will twist the scrips to fit a concept of men who contradicted it .

That’ only HALF of the story . . .

Paul is comparing the fallen with those formerly secure but have ALSO fallen.
He is writing to believing Christians and that’s why he says:

“… but God's kindness to you, provided you REMAIN in his kindness; otherwise “YOU TOO will be CUT OFF.”

Explain what this means if NOT a loss of salvation.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You can try to force meaning into that text all you want, but it won't work. The text says what it says, and trying to force salvation into it only demonstrates a bent upon subjective interpretation.

BTW

In other words you can’t tell me what Paul is saying in Rom. 11:22 - can you?
What does he mean by, “… you too will be CUT OFF”??

Read the verse s-l-o-w-l-y and see that Paul is comparing the fallen with those formerly secure but have ALSO fallen.

And don’t think I didn’t notice that you completely ignored my challenge to explain the other verses I listed that PROVE my point that salvation can be LOST . . .
(Heb. 10:26-27, 2 Pet. 2:20-22, Matt. 5:13, 1 Cor. 9:27, 2 Pet. 3:17, 1 John 2:24, Rev. 3:5, Rev. 22:19)