Dispensationalism

Dan_473 · Jun 19, 2016

Yes, eternal Christ was obedient to death. Its not impossible for eternal God in Christ, the anointing Holy Spirit of God.

According to his eternal work of faith in respect to His promised labor of love..It takes an eternal being to pay the eternal wage for violating any law. And if we stumble in the least the whole eternal wage is needed. Hoping in a purgatory by making His grace insufficient amount to pay the wage as another unknown amount only shows some do despite to the eternal grace of God.

Christians will be judged by the "law of liberty" in respect to His mercy and grace as His unmerited favor... not of our own sinful selves lest any man boast in false pride.

For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in "one point", he is guilty of all. For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.
So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by "the law of liberty" .Jam 2:10

I like that verse you put up at the end
JAMES 2:12 So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.

JGIG · Jun 19, 2016

BibleGuy - responding to your posts comprehensively requires that one go over the 20,000 character limit for posts here at CC. Therefore my response to you will be broken up into at least 2 posts. Do us all a favor and try not to put your whole belief system into one post . . . it's not necessary and stifles the discourse you say you desire. Thanks!

JGIG said:

BibleGuy said:

You continue to build your case founded on an obsolete covenant, but I'll play along.

I'm sure I typed that what you claim about Deut. 30:1-8 is YOUR interpretation, not what is actually said there. Guess it got lost in my editing. Vs. 1-8 are not the only verses in that chapter, are they? My Bible puts the verse count in Deut. 30 at 20 verses. Verse 16 clearly says,

"16 If you obey the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you today, by loving the Lord your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live and multiply, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take possession of it."

So if one continues to read in that chapter, it becomes clear that God's promise was completely dependent on Israel obeying the commandments that God gave them. It wasn't a promise "100% future full Torah-obedience", but rather a promise made on a condition.

The 'IF' did not happen; thus the 'THEN' did not happen.

Israel engaged in adultery and idolatry over and over and over - God, in His Mercy and Grace, preserved Her for His purposes and glory - mostly so that Messiah would be recognized when He came.

And Christ DID come, and now there is now a new Priesthood - the Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood of Christ. He is of the Tribe of Judah, and as such, it would be illegal for Him to mediate the Old Covenant. And since His Priesthood is Permanent by an oath from God, it is clear that the Old Covenant is NEVER coming back.

Some yahoos are building a temple and an altar and yes, there are some Levites who have kept track of their family lines, but if sacrifices are again offered in a temple in Jerusalem, they will NOT be sanctioned by God and will be an abomination to the Work of Christ and will be an insult to the Cross.

Again, BibleGuy, not possible because of the Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood of Christ. Will Israel again possess that piece of geography? Well, the Bible says that every promise that God has made is yes and amen in Christ:

20 For no matter how many promises God has made, they are “Yes” in Christ. And so through him the “Amen”is spoken by us to the glory of God. (from 2 Cor. 1)

So I have no doubt that God's promises will be fulfilled, but I do know it won't be through or "in conjunction with obedience to 100%of Torah."

Just like with so many other fulfillments of prophecy in the Bible, the fulfillment has not always matched up with what folks thought it should look like. Take the Pharisees, for instance. They knew Scripture inside and out - yet completely missed Messiah when He came. Likewise, you're missing what the Priesthood of Christ means:

12 For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed also. 13 He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the altar. 14 For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. 15 And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, 16 one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life. 17 For it is declared:

“You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek.”

18 The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless 19 (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.

20 And it was not without an oath! Others became priests without any oath, 21 but he became a priest with an oath when God said to him:

“The Lord has sworn
and will not change his mind:
‘You are a priest forever.’”

22 Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantor of a better covenant. (from Heb. 7)

Um, no, BibleGuy. And it's not 'my' position, but the Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood of Christ that you're taking issue with.

Yours is the classic 'Jesus +' equation of sooooo many false belief systems. "Jesus is good, BUT NOW YOU MUST . . . " to maintain that salvation. It's a fruitless path - a bunny trail that the Enemy puts so many on to keep them from living in the Rest of Christ and bringing others into the Kingdom. They're far too busy trying to keep whatever circle of Law some false teacher has put around them.

Jesus preached the Law to those born under the Law. We who are in Christ after His Work of the Cross, the Resurrection, the Ascension, and under His Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood have died to the Law (see Rom. 7:4-6). Torah has nothing to do with those who have died to it.

According to Scripture, God, in Christ, has provided a righteousness APART from the Law (Torah):

21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. (from Rom. 3)

What is the work of God after the Cross? To believe on the One He sent and to love one another (1 Jn. 3:23-24). And Scripture tells us that love is the fulfillment of the Law - that if we're loving others, we are doing them no harm, and any of the laws that God still cares about from the Old Covenant are automatically obeyed by us simply loving one another.

It really is that simple. And even cooler is that God does not demand what He does not provide in His Grace - Love. We love because He first loved us (1 Jn. 4), and if we are led by the Spirit we are not under the Law (Gal. 5:18), and the Fruit of the Spirit is . . . yep . . . Love. And joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; all those things are subsets of love, and Scripture adds that against such things there is no law. That would include Torah.

Gee you went to all that trouble to use a definition of pistis that contextually does not fit in Gal. 3:11 when all you had to do was to read Gal. 3:12 -

11 Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because “the righteous will live by faith.” 12 The law is not based on faith;

Same Greek word for faith there, 'pistis' which can mean faithfulness (the last definition of several), but in this case it's not the quality of one's faith (faithfulness) but in Whom one puts their faith.

Do you 'do' Fruit or do you bear Fruit?

Scripture tells us that the discipline of the Lord produces a harvest of righteousness. Sounds like a Fruit thing. Scripture also tells us that Grace teaches us to say no to ungodliness. It's a process that takes time, just like Fruit takes time to grow on the vine. It's not matter of 'do, do, do', but a matter of resting in and abiding in Christ, the True Vine, and letting Him produce His Fruit in and through us. Remember what Heb. 7 said . . . The Law made NOTHING perfect, because it was weak and useless, so a better way was introduced by which we draw near to God.

That working of Christ in us is His grace teaching us to say no to ungodliness and to live upright and righteous lives (see Titus 2).

I'll go with the better way in Christ rather than the weak and useless method to bear His Fruit and bring forth harvests of righteousness.

Keep telling yourself that. Abraham learned obedience through grace, not by the 'Torah he had available to him.'

In its pure definition, Torah simply means instructions, so one could say that Abraham received instructions from God, just as Noah and others did before him. To say that he obeyed those instructions all the time, however, is to engage in a grievous misreading of Abraham's history. Abraham's righteousness was indeed a gift from God because he believed God - Abraham lied and cheated and disobeyed God on many occasions.

Yet God preserved him by His Grace and Mercy for His purposes. And eventually Abraham learned to trust God and saw God deliver on His promises. It was a life-long learning process on Abraham's part, and a life-long commitment of God investing in Abraham, being patient to bring about the fruit in Abraham He knew would come over time.

You're trying to turn what is a covenant of Grace regarding Abraham into a covenant of Law - and it is nothing of the sort.

(continued . . . )

JGIG · Jun 19, 2016

(. . . continued)

BibleGuy said:

Yeah, no. Again, if you would just take the time to look at the few verses around the one you're quoting out of context, you'd see that's not the case:

32 It will not be like the covenant
I made with their ancestors
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they broke my covenant,
though I was a husband to them,”
declares the Lord. (from Jer. 31)

Since Jeremiah could not see the Work of the Cross from where he sat, God left it to the Apostles to clarify what His Law would be after the Cross: To believe on the One He sent and to love one another (1 Jn. 3:23-24).

BibleGuy, that's your interpretation, which is faulty for the many reasons listed above. Contextual Scripture defends my position. The Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood defends my position. Type 'yikes' all you want - my position is a secure one.

Jesus was preaching the Law to those born under the Law before the Cross. After the Cross God's Law was to believe on the One He sent and for us to love one another.

Also -

12 The law is not based on faith; (from Gal. 3)

56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. (from 1 Cor. 15)

5 For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. (from Rom. 7)

20 The law was brought in so that the trespass might increase. (from Rom. 5)

Not to mention that

21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. (from Rom. 3)

Torah obedience has ZERO to do with righteousness after the Cross. ZERO. That passage doesn't say that God's righteousness is obtained/attained by faithful Torah-obedience. God's righteousness has been manifested APART from the Law. If you insist on obtaining/attaining righteousness through the Law, Paul is talking about you here:

2 For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. (from Rom. 10)

Paul also said he, 'as to righteousness under the Law, was blameless according to the Law (see Phil. 3). Yet he admitted to struggling with the sin of coveting (see Rom. 7), so while blameless according to what the Law pointed to outwardly, Paul knew that his righteousness by the Law was as filthy rags - it didn't deal with his heart, and he says this in Phil. 3 -

7 But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. 8 Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith— 10 that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, 11 that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead.

We know that Christ preached the spiritual aspects of the Law - murder is against the Law, but even hate another and you're as guilty as if you had murdered them. Paul recognized that though blameless under the Law, righteousness still was not obtained/attained. No, the righteousness that comes from God (and is apart from the Law) is a gift, given when we put our faith in Christ!

No, that's not what Christ said.

4 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’” (from Mt. 4)

The Greek there is 'rhema', not 'nomos', which is the Greek word used for 'Law' or 'Torah' in the NT. Heck, a case might even be made if the author had used the Greek 'graphe' which means written Scriptures, but he didn't, he used 'rhema', meaning spoken, leading word of God, not the written Scriptures of Torah.

Every time I look at what the Scripture you cite actually says, it proves to say the opposite of what you claim!

8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;(from Rom. 10)

Again, the Greek there is 'rhema', not 'nomos' or 'graphe', and it's identified as the "word of faith". We know from Galatians 3:12 that "the Law is not of faith", so Paul (same writer) is not saying that Torah-obedience is the word of faith.

What you're preaching here is simply contrary to what Scripture clearly states at every turn.

Yet you ignore the big fat IF in Deut. 6:25 (you know, part of the context of that passage) -

25 And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us.

And Jesus also pointed out to each and every one who claimed they kept the Law exactly where they fell short. Again, Jesus preached the Law to those born under the Law. He was telling them, "Here is the Law, but not the watered down Law you've been taught - here's the full weight of what the Law requires", and NO ONE could measure up. That was the point!

20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin. (From Rom. 3)

BUT Jesus also preached the New Covenant coming in His Blood - and John 3 and many, many other passages are clear about what gains us entrance into eternal life.

I'm not confusing anything. I'm stating that we who are in Christ are dead to the Law. Whether you have faith or not when 'doing' the Law, they are dead works. I'm not confused in the least about that.

There is no teaching from Paul that mandates Torah obedience for believers. And again, Paul, in Gal. 3:12, tells us that the Law is not of faith, so your point is, well, pointless.

So what use for the Cross then? No need for Christ to be crucified and shed His Blood if it's all about faithfully obeying Torah, right? There would be no need for the Cross, the Resurrection, the Ascension and the Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood of Christ. Yet those things did happen and are in place, rendering the Old Covenant obsolete.

Romans 2 is showing not how or that Torah Law can be kept, but that the Law stands against every person, Jew or Gentile. The chapter, read in context, proves that no one will be justified by the Law. Indeed, Romans 3:20 (cited above) confirms this!

Whatever is not of faith is sin (from Rom. 14). And for those in Christ, when they do sin, whether from lack of faith or acting contrary to love (for love fulfills the parts of the Law that God still cares about, see Rom. 13), God is not counting our sins against us because where there is no law (because in Christ we've died to it, see Rom. 7:4-6), sin is not imputed (Rom. 4).

For you it seems to be all about sin; for God it's all about caring for and growing His children up into the maturity of who they are in Christ. The more Christlike we become, the less sinning there is. Torah is not a part of the equation, as the Law stirs up and is the power of sin (see references above).

Sigh. You're beating a dead horse, BibleGuy. Mt. 28:20 does not cite the whole of Torah Law. If Jesus were stating that, He would have said to obey everything Moses commanded them.

I always love when I go to the Greek and find that God has so orchestrated the Gospel in such a fashion that it always, Always, ALWAYS is clear! The Greek for 'words' in Jn. 8:51 is 'logos' - not 'nomos' or 'graphe' (used for Torah or Scriptures).

Jesus was NOT pointing folks to Torah, but to HIMSELF.

Jesus preached the Law to those under the Law before the Cross. Your point is again, pointless, because we live after the Cross, not before the Cross. There is a New Covenant with a New, Perfect, Permanent High Priest. We have a better way by which to draw near to God (see Heb. 7)!

We don't imitate the Law-teaching Jesus, we bear the Fruit of the Crucified, Risen High Priest, Christ, and that Fruit is Love, which is what Jesus commanded as the New Commandment:

34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”(from Jn. 13)

I think I've found a solution for that . . . details coming soon . . .

I'll get to it. Patience.

Whether you will admit it or not, my position is well-defended using contextual Scripture with the Work and High Priesthood of Christ in full view.

Grace and peace,
-JGIG

Grace777x70 · Jun 19, 2016

JGIG - Great job refuting the "law-keepers" that oppose the grace of Christ for salvation and life.

I have no interest in endless back and forth discussions about the law but that is your area of anointing from the Lord as you have many dealings with this kind of perversion of the gospel of the grace of Christ. We thank you for your efforts as the viewers that might get sucked into this stuff can now see a clear biblical defense of the gospel.

To me it all boils down to not wanting to commit spiritual adultery on my Lord by going back to the law after I have been joined to Him as Romans 7:1-6 talks about.

This picture says it all for me....

BibleGuy · Jun 19, 2016

John146 said:

Sounds like you're depending on KJV.

Even the NKJV says "faith IN Jesus Christ" not "faith OF Jesus Christ" (Gal. 3:22).

So your dependence upon "faith OF Jesus Christ" appears dubious here.

The NASB and ESV also favor "faith IN Jesus Christ".

So, why favor the KJV reading against the NASB, ESV, and even NKJV?

You haven't justified your position.

blessings...
BibleGuy

BibleGuy · Jun 19, 2016

Dan_473 said:

You haven't justified your position.

Why assume Paul's tongue "got the better of him"?

Why not, instead, assume that Paul had many important things which God wanted Paul to share?

Why not assume it was GOOD that Paul stayed up until midnight sharing the things of God with people who were hungry to learn?

Remember: Paul told us to IMITATE what we see in his behavior (1 Cor. 11:1; Php. 4:9).

Apparently you are OPPOSING APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY and telling us to criticize Paul's decision to speak a lengthy discourse at Ac. 20:7-9.

On what grounds do you oppose the apostolic authority of Paul himself?

On what grounds do you oppose this apostolic foundation of the church?

YOU HAVE NO GROUNDS...

Only Pr. 10:19 which you think requires that all lengthy discourses are FULL OF TRANSGRESSION!

But until you justify your conception of "lengthy", you have STILL failed to prove that Paul's discourse in Ac. 20 was "lengthy".

Seriously Dan....just admit you've dug yourself into a corner....

You KNOW that it's not necessarily FULL OF TRANSGRESSION for a person to speak for a few hours!

And if it's evil to speak for 3 hours....then it's also evil to speak for 2 hours, right?

Then it's also evil to speak for 1 hour, right?

Then hey! MULTITUDES of preachers throughout the world are now FULL OF TRANSGRESSION because they preached for an hour today at churches throughout the world....

Seriously Dan....

Don't go there....

BibleGuy

RickyZ · Jun 20, 2016

Grace777x70 said:

Would the picture perhaps more accurately depict the reality if it were Christ holding hands with the law instead of the believer? That would show the believer solely with Christ, and Christ tied to the law instead of us.

?

redeemed2014 · Jun 20, 2016

RickyZ said:

The Picture is showing us not being faithful to the death, burial, and Resurrection of our dear Lord Jesus Christ. It is depicting that some believers will preach faith in Christ, loving Him, accepting Him and His sacrifice etc. But while we are doing that we are telling Him He is not enough for us and that we have to go back to the law to be saved.

God Bless,

RickyZ · Jun 20, 2016

Not necessarily. The law has it's place even now after Christ's resurrection. Before I go any further let me say that Christ is the ONLY way one is saved, and that there is NO law that one can keep or deny that will get you in or out of 'heaven'. But... Christ didn't say He came to destroy the law, but to be it's fulfillment. The law exists - it is part of the eternal word of God and thus is eternal. I know there are those who erroneously build relationships with the law, and the picture shared shows that relationship. What I was suggesting is a like picture that shows the truth - that there is a relationship with the law, but it belongs with Christ and not with us.

JGIG · Jun 20, 2016

RickyZ said:

Let's look at what Scripture has to say about our relationship with the Law after we come to Christ:

Romans 7:4-6
4 Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the body of Christ, that you may be married to another—to Him who was raised from the dead, that we should bear fruit to God. 5 For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were aroused by the law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death. 6 But now we have been >>> delivered G2673 – katargeō<<< from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter.

G2673 – katargeō is translated as both ‘abolished’ in Eph. 2:15 and as ‘delivered’ in Rom. 7:6.

Here’s the definition:

G2673 – katargeō

1) to render idle, unemployed, inactivate, inoperative

a) to cause a person or thing to have no further efficiency
b) to deprive of force, influence, power

2) to cause to cease, put an end to, do away with, annul, abolish

a) to cease, to pass away, be done away
b) to be severed from, separated from, discharged from, loosed from any one
c) to terminate all intercourse with one

That’s talkin’ about the Law for those in Christ!

The Law, for those in Christ, is these things:

➞ idle

➞ unemployed

➞ inactive (!!!)

➞ inoperative (!!!)

➞ to cause a person to have no further efficiency

➞ to deprive of force, influence, power (!!!)

➞ to cause to cease, put an end to, do away with, annul, abolish (!!!)

➞ to cease, to pass away, be done away (!!!)

➞ to be severed from, separated from, discharged from, loosed from any one (!!!)

➞ to terminate all intercourse with one (!!!)

It's pretty clear that in Christ we have no relationship with the Law - or shouldn't have.

-JGIG

Nikki84 · Jun 20, 2016

BibleGuy said:

Hi BibleGuy! The clergy is scripturally authorized and Paul writes about Bishops, pastors/priests, and deacons (all vocations in the Catholic Church) in 1 Timothy.
Only Jesus Christ is a priest forever in the line of Melchizedek. I hope this answers your questions.

BibleGuy · Jun 20, 2016

Nikki84 said:

Hello Nikki84,

Ok...so I think you're saying that the Catholic viewpoint regarding the proper function of Catholic priests comes from 1 Timothy?

I didn't find anything in 1 Timothy about priests...

Are you sure that was the right Biblical reference?

best...
BibleGuy

Nikki84 · Jun 20, 2016

BibleGuy said:

Priests are considered Pastors. Paul writes about Pastors, teachers etc. when describing the gifts of the Spirit. With your nickname I'm surprised you don't know this

BibleGuy · Jun 20, 2016

Nikki84 said:

Sorry! Maybe I'm missing something...but why assume priests are pastors?

I didn't find anything in 1 Timothy that said that priests are pastors...

So, maybe you have some other reason for believing that?

If so, what's the reason?

thanks...
BibleGuy

BibleGuy · Jun 20, 2016

Grace777x70 said:

Dear Grace777x70,

Why misrepresent my position?

We are saved by the grace of Christ for salvation and life. I agree!

So, you have falsely represented my position.

If unintentionally, then I'm willing to forgive you.

If intentionally, then maybe you're simply trying to deceive others regarding my position?

Sad...

Why would you do that?

I NEVER opposed the grace of Christ for salvation and life.

You have NO proof of this.

Sad....

BibleGuy

Grace777x70 · Jun 20, 2016

BibleGuy said:

I am not opposed to you personally. I am opposed to any teaching that is trying to get me or any others to commit adultery on my Lord now that we are joined to him.

I suggest you go to the thread called Dear "Bibleguy" as all the law-keeping fallacies are being looked at scripturally through the lens of the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ.

I also would suggest the book of Galatians which shows Paul's strong opposition to the Judaziers coming in to pervert the gospel of the grace of Christ alone for salvation and living. When you see Paul's passionate and forceful defense of the true gospel of Christ - you will understand why many are opposed to having the gospel perverted.

JGIG is answering all your points in a thread dedicated to you .....Dear "Bibleguy".

I pray that the Father will grant that your eyes be opened to the freedom and true life that is in Christ's completed work for us. His finished work is a beautiful display of the love He has for us.

John146 · Jun 20, 2016

BibleGuy said:

I believe it to be THE word of God without error. I'm one of "those people" who actually believe the Bible is true, every word. I've studied the history of the KJV compared to that of the new versions and the manuscripts that make up each. I depend of the Bible alone not commentaries, the Greek game, or intellect.

garee · Jun 20, 2016

BibleGuy said:

HI BibleGuy,

Christ is the just and justifier as the one who performed the work needed to pay the eternal wage of sin. If we hear his voice that give us the faith to believe Him we know it is him who justifies his own position.

Whoever paraphrased the others have destroyed the Christian source of faith coming from God. I am no Bible scholar but that's easy to see.That is, if a person lets God be true and every man a liar..

Many other versions like the Young’s literal reflect the faith comes from God as a work of our faithful Creator. For some reason or other some say God does not need faith. But if that is true how he work seeing he has no form? How would he purify the hearts of men through the law of liberty found in James as a work if he has no belief in what he hopes to accomplish. Or does God not need hope?

Perhaps you could explain the difference between the faith OF Christ (generated by) , the anointing Holy Spirit of God and the faith IN Christ. (generated towards.) the anointing Holy Spirit of God?

I can assure you it will make all the difference in the world. Seeing a faith without works has no life to offer to men who are dead in their trespasses and sins. By believing (having faith) Christ the faithful Creator said: “let there be and there was”. See how faith, as that in which he believed, worked with his works as an integral part and by faith... believing they would, things not seen, appeared?

Was that the faith OF Christ or faith in Christ?

By having a proper understand of who the faith belongs to a person can let God, not seen alone be true as the source of Christian faith. And if not generated from or of God’s faith we can call them a liar.

And if some do not believe God in respect to a faith coming from Him (not that their own selves) in regard to the imagination of one’s own heart, consceince (the humans source of faith) as that in which the scriptures identify as desperately wicked and beyond repair. Will that unbelief make the faith of God without effect?

What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.For what if some “did not” believe? shall their “unbelief” make the faith of God without effect?God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. Rom 3:1

Are the oracles OF God, generated by God, or IN God coming from the creation towards God ? No man can serve two masters.

The Apostate Jews who hoped to be found with a righteousness of there own self turned that upside down .They said the understanding (faith) came from the clay, the work of His hands as the things of men. Which way is it OF God or IN God?

Isaiah 29:16 Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?

Who gives us the proper understanding? Our own consciences or God who is greater then our hearts ?

Dan_473 · Jun 20, 2016

BibleGuy said:

You haven't justified your position.

Why assume Paul's tongue "got the better of him"?

Why not, instead, assume that Paul had many important things which God wanted Paul to share?

Why not assume it was GOOD that Paul stayed up until midnight sharing the things of God with people who were hungry to learn?

Remember: Paul told us to IMITATE what we see in his behavior (1 Cor. 11:1; Php. 4:9).

Apparently you are OPPOSING APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY and telling us to criticize Paul's decision to speak a lengthy discourse at Ac. 20:7-9.

On what grounds do you oppose the apostolic authority of Paul himself?

On what grounds do you oppose this apostolic foundation of the church?

YOU HAVE NO GROUNDS...

Only Pr. 10:19 which you think requires that all lengthy discourses are FULL OF TRANSGRESSION!

But until you justify your conception of "lengthy", you have STILL failed to prove that Paul's discourse in Ac. 20 was "lengthy".

Seriously Dan....just admit you've dug yourself into a corner....

You KNOW that it's not necessarily FULL OF TRANSGRESSION for a person to speak for a few hours!

And if it's evil to speak for 3 hours....then it's also evil to speak for 2 hours, right?

Then it's also evil to speak for 1 hour, right?

Then hey! MULTITUDES of preachers throughout the world are now FULL OF TRANSGRESSION because they preached for an hour today at churches throughout the world....

Seriously Dan....

Don't go there....

BibleGuy

'Why assume Paul's tongue "got the better of him"?'

its wise to only talk about what will '...give grace to those who hear.'

when people fall into a deep sleep, it's probably time to stop.

' OPPOSING APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY'

apostles don't always do the right thing

GALATIANS 2:11 But when Peter came to Antioch, I resisted him to his face, because he stood condemned.

BibleGuy · Jun 20, 2016

Grace777x70 said:

You have CLEARLY implied that I do not teach that we are saved by the grace of Christ for salvation and life.

Thus, you have opposed me PERSONALLY, for this is FALSE.

AND, you have MISREPRESENTED my position.

Is that what you do?

Misrepresent my position, rather than engage it?

I'm sorry to see you acting that way.

I expect better from a brother in the Lord.

But thanks for telling me about the "dear bibleguy" thread....

I didn't even know about! Cool!

Hopefully JGIG will explain in DETAIL how to defend her position against the 34 objections I now bring against her anti-Torah viewpoint.

Her integrity will soon be tested...will she follow the truth? Will she acknowledge the truth of my corrective influence on her many errors?

We shall soon see....exciting times!

Of course, please correct me too, at any point...I'm happy to follow the truth wherever it leads...unlike MANY people around here who CLEARLY are more akin to mere propagandists...

blessings...
BibleGuy

Dispensationalism

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Senior Member

redeemed2014

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

Banned