Grace vs works!

[Jabberjaw]

it says "not that we loved God -- but that He loved us" -- the same apostle tells us why we love - because He first loved us!
nuts, i thought this would be easier to chew. sorry.

i thought you said you had a map??

oh yeah - as i asked you, when Christ hung there being crucified for all your transgressions, long before you ever repented of them -- and He prayed to the Father to forgive all those unrepentant, works-lacking, unrighteous sinners, what do you think mr. Jabber? did the Father hear His prayer?

or is it like you affirm, that no one has ever been forgiven without earning their mercy?

(in re: post #137 that you have ignored)
i really do look forward to your reply, though i confess my interest is a little scatological.

It says (I can't believe I have to say this again) it says He loved us even when we were in transgression, it does not say He quickened us "in transgression" it says "with Christ" he quickened us, it means the Ephesians "obeyed the Gospel, they were saints Eph. 1:1.

Now to your post # 137, you quoted :

Jesus said,
"Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing."
(Luke 23:24)

So you think that he was speaking for all mankind?, do you think all mankind was were forgiven here? if so, Peter really had no idea what he was doing here when he said:

Acts 2:36-38 (KJV)
36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. 37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


The Father will forgive mankind for killing His son, if we "Repent, and be baptized every one of you (us) in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins"

 

[posthuman]

It says (I can't believe I have to say this again) it says He loved us even when we were in transgression, it does not say He quickened us "in transgression" it says "with Christ" he quickened us, it means the Ephesians "obeyed the Gospel, they were saints Eph. 1:1.

you do realize that Christ actually died on the cross - and that there He took on all our sins - and that He was raised from the dead because He actually died, not because He was still alive, right?
it's not the quick who need quickening

so that even as He took on our sin and the Father raised Him up, we, being also dead, full of sin, could be made alive from that very state?

Jesus said,
"Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing."
(Luke 23:24)

So you think that he was speaking for all mankind?, do you think all mankind was were forgiven here?

that's not the question. you boasted that nowhere in the scripture was anyone ever forgiven before repenting and doing good righteous works.
this is the second example i gave you - that those unrepentant, unrighteous, non-good-working sinners that the Lord prayed the Father to forgive - however many, even one is enough for the point - you still didn't answer, did the Father hear the prayer of the Son and forgive them, or no?

this is the flesh we are given to eat, and the blood we are given to drink: that we were dead in our transgressions, and Christ came to give us abundant life.

take, eat! taste! the Lord is GOOD!

 

[posthuman]

i made a little bit of art to describe how i feel our conversation is going so far =\

 

[Jabberjaw]

that's not the question. you boasted that nowhere in the scripture was anyone ever forgiven before repenting and doing good righteous works.
this is the second example i gave you - that those unrepentant, unrighteous, non-good-working sinners that the Lord prayed the Father to forgive - however many, even one is enough for the point - you still didn't answer, did the Father hear the prayer of the Son and forgive them, or no?[/COLOR]

When did the Father forgive them, after He said this (your quote):

=posthuman]
Jesus said,
"Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing."
(Luke 23:24)

Or did God answer the Sons request when through Peter he said this:

Acts 2:36-38 (KJV)
36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. 37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


The Son asked the Father, the Son said through Peter "what they must do" to be "forgiven".

 

[Jabberjaw]

i made a little bit of art to describe how i feel our conversation is going so far =\





View attachment 97738

Remember when I said "immature" ?

 

[posthuman]

Remember when I said "immature" ?

yeah, i know. i do have an art degree -- and i can do much better. i was in a hurry and didn't want to go through getting out some better media to work with, and then having to photograph and upload my work. so i just did a quick job with MS Paint. i kinda wish i had one of those styluses etc. that professional animators use, so i din't have to sketch with my finger on a mousepad, you know?

in terms of composition, though, as a rough preliminary sketch, what do you think?
does it at least convey meaning?

actually i think the 'primitive' style befits the subject matter. but i'm open to criticism.

 

[posthuman]

i baited my line,
i sat patiently by the waters.
when i felt a nibble, and gave a tug to set the hook -
but the fish swam away.

truly, the scripture is right, i have seen it!
"the horse is prepared for the day of battle,
but victory belongs to the Lord"

 

[MarcR]

I understand the Greek usage and how some words have many meanings, but the reason for was used in Acts 2:38 is because the translators use scripture to interpret scripture. Yes they did get it wrong sometimes but in this case I do not believe they did. Because the Lord Jesus in Luke 13:3 made a clear statement that if repentance of sins is not made we will still perish. So repentance does have to be made in order to receive remission.
If you want to try and make it say in recognition of, or in light of, then you are initially saying that remission is received before repentance/confession is even made. Which the Lord Jesus and other scriptures make clear it does not. Repentance is done before remission is given, baptism (baptizo=immersion in water) was commanded by the Lord, and 1 John 1:9, 2:1-2 says confession has to be made on future sins to receive remission.

God bless

If you want to try and make it say in recognition of, or in light of, then you are initially saying that remission is received before repentance/confession is even made. Which the Lord Jesus and other scriptures make clear it does not. NOT SO!


The reading i see is :

Repent μετανοήσατε [this is sufficient for salvation since the repentence called for subsumes belief]


and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ

εἰς ἄφεσιω τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν in recognition of forgiveness of sin.

If baptism were needed πρός would have been used instead of εἰς to avoid these doctrinal disputes.

Jn 3:36
36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
KJV
Note the abscense of any requirement of baptism.

 

[MarcR]

I understand the Greek usage and how some words have many meanings, but the reason for was used in Acts 2:38 is because the translators use scripture to interpret scripture. Yes they did get it wrong sometimes but in this case I do not believe they did. Because the Lord Jesus in Luke 13:3 made a clear statement that if repentance of sins is not made we will still perish. So repentance does have to be made in order to receive remission.
If you want to try and make it say in recognition of, or in light of, then you are initially saying that remission is received before repentance/confession is even made. Which the Lord Jesus and other scriptures make clear it does not. Repentance is done before remission is given, baptism (baptizo=immersion in water) was commanded by the Lord, and 1 John 1:9, 2:1-2 says confession has to be made on future sins to receive remission.

God bless

If you want to try and make it say in recognition of, or in light of, then you are initially saying that remission is received before repentance/confession is even made. Which the Lord Jesus and other scriptures make clear it does not. NOT SO!


The reading i see is :

Repent μετανοήσατε [this is sufficient for salvation since the repentence called for subsumes belief]


and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ

εἰς ἄφεσιω τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν in recognition of forgiveness of sin.

If baptism were needed πρός would have been used instead of εἰς to avoid these doctrinal disputes.

Jn 3:36
36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
KJV
Note the abscense of any requirement of baptism.

It is never a good idea to build doctrine on one or two verses which lend themselves to conflicting interpretation.

The vast majority of verses linking belief with salvation make no mention of baptism.


Forgive the double post but it timed out so i couldn't edit any other way

 

[kennethcadwell]

If you want to try and make it say in recognition of, or in light of, then you are initially saying that remission is received before repentance/confession is even made. Which the Lord Jesus and other scriptures make clear it does not. NOT SO!


The reading i see is :

Repent μετανοήσατε [this is sufficient for salvation since the repentence called for subsumes belief]


and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ

εἰς ἄφεσιω τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν in recognition of forgiveness of sin.

If baptism were needed πρός would have been used instead of εἰς to avoid these doctrinal disputes.

Jn 3:36
36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
KJV
Note the abscense of any requirement of baptism.

Was or was not baptism (baptizo) commanded by the Lord ? (Answer is in Matthew 28:19, Mark 16:16)

Then you give John 3:36 which I highlighted the believeth part because some do not know what this really in tells. But we get what believing in Him is all about in Luke 6:46-49 where the words of the Lord Himself says; Those who come to Him, hear what He says, and then does what He said. Nowhere does the bible say a nonactive or disobedient to His teachings and commands faith is the sign of a true faith.
So the question that one must ask is not if it is needed or not, but if you love and believe in Him would you or would you not want to obey all of His commands ?

 

[MarcR]

Was or was not baptism (baptizo) commanded by the Lord ? (Answer is in Matthew 28:19, Mark 16:16)

Then you give John 3:36 which I highlighted the believeth part because some do not know what this really in tells. But we get what believing in Him is all about in Luke 6:46-49 where the words of the Lord Himself says; Those who come to Him, hear what He says, and then does what He said. Nowhere does the bible say a nonactive or disobedient to His teachings and commands faith is the sign of a true faith.
So the question that one must ask is not if it is needed or not, but if you love and believe in Him would you or would you not want to obey all of His commands ?

I certainly agree! but if time elapses between the time a person responds to the Lord in faith and the time he/she becomes aware that the Lord wants him/her to submit to baptism; he/she is saved in that interim and if he/she dies in that interim he/she dies saved!

 

[Jeff_56]

i made a little bit of art to describe how i feel our conversation is going so far =\





View attachment 97738

this reminds of something yahweh said that is very true today, if some of the assemblies or tribes or nations or people are ever going to be made alive.

it was somewhere in the bible, prophetically, about speaking to the bones ...... yahweh's accomplishment of making the dead dry bones from the graves
have sinew and muscles and flesh(or some combination like that) and maybe 'breath' (i.e. life)...

referring to people walking around on earth but having no life in themselves-- being dry and dead and lifeless, and requiring
yahweh's grace and mercy and resurrection life through yahshua to be spoken to/over them and yahweh being required to give the growth 'upon the dead bones' so to speak..... and bring the dead assemblies or nations or people alive.... (not physically dead, but spiritually dead, even though called by his name (whether Jewish or 'christian' as if alive)

 

[posthuman]

this reminds of something yahweh said that is very true today, if some of the assemblies or tribes or nations or people are ever going to be made alive.

it was somewhere in the bible, prophetically, about speaking to the bones ...... yahweh's accomplishment of making the dead dry bones from the graves
have sinew and muscles and flesh(or some combination like that) and maybe 'breath' (i.e. life)...

amen!

it's Ezekiel 37 you are thinking of -- and reading it, we notice that the word of the Lord enfleshed them and brought them to life -- they did not spring to life on their own, or by their own power or will.

i am glad my poor drawing was used for good in at least one other!

 

[kennethcadwell]

I certainly agree! but if time elapses between the time a person responds to the Lord in faith and the time he/she becomes aware that the Lord wants him/her to submit to baptism; he/she is saved in that interim and if he/she dies in that interim he/she dies saved!

Yes but I do not agree that we should be as born again believers in Christ telling others not needed, as this leads to a slippery slope of leading others to deny all of His other teachings as well. I see this a lot any more in some, saying we do not have to obey or do anything listed in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Those are the gospel books, therefore the gospel message is contained within them. To reject those books would be to reject the gospel, for His words are His teachings unto salvation through Him.

 

[posthuman]

Yes but I do not agree that we should be as born again believers in Christ telling others not needed, as this leads to a slippery slope of leading others to deny all of His other teachings as well.

i think ultimately we should be telling the truth.

the truth is that the Lord saves, by grace through faith, not by works; the ritual and sign for others that's given to us doesn't save. it symbolizes what saves. that's the truth.

it's just as much of a "slippery slope" to deceitfully maintain that H[SUB]2[/SUB]O works salvation - in place of Christ's blood - when we know it doesn't, and i for one see that it's worse to trivialize the work of Christ as though it were ineffective than it is worry that another teaching may be marginalized by us affirming the truth.

 

[stabbo]

Paul was writing in this epistle to the Saints at Ephesus (Eph. 1:1) Here in Eph. 2:8,9 he was reminding them that they had been saved by the marvellous grace of God, a grace that we could not fully comprehend. Paul continues to write that salvation is only available to us because of God and His grace, not of man; and that ‘faith' is our part. It is His grace, but for us it is ‘through faith'; a faith that is in Jesus himself.

The Bible is clear that we are all sinners (Rom. 3:23; 6:23) and undeserving of any grace; but the love of Jesus Christ is so awesome that in spite of our sin, he reached down to us through His own death and resurrection on that cross.

It is necessary for us to acknowledge that we are sinners and cannot do anything (referred to in the Bible as works) to save ourselves. It is through faith that we need to recognize that it is the sacrifice that Jesus made for us at Calvary that we can be saved. Paul reminds the Ephesians and us today that salvation is ‘not of works so no man may boast'.

There is no work of any quality or quantity that any man can do, thus no person can boast of their works as having any power to save themselves. If their works could save them in any way; Jesus sacrifice would have been in vain.

Come to Jesus today, from your heart recognize that you are a sinner in need of salvation, ask Jesus to come into your heart and save you from your sin. If you ask Him with a sincere and trustful heart He will save you.

Did that and he never quite got around to the saving part.

 

[MarcR]

Yes but I do not agree that we should be as born again believers in Christ telling others not needed, as this leads to a slippery slope of leading others to deny all of His other teachings as well. I see this a lot any more in some, saying we do not have to obey or do anything listed in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Those are the gospel books, therefore the gospel message is contained within them. To reject those books would be to reject the gospel, for His words are His teachings unto salvation through Him.

I agree completely. No believer should ever encourage another to ignore rationalize or otherwise dismiss anything God commands [or requests]

This does not alter the fact that a person can be and often is (at least temporarily) saved without baptism.

 

[michael56]

Zaccheus had a change of heart. He repented and said if he had cheated anyone he would pay them back four times as much. Because his heart had changed, and he accepted who Jesus was, Jesus said:

''Today salvation has come to this house.''

Jesus did not say.

Go and be baptised, then salvation will come to you.

 

[mailmandan]

Peter said "eight souls were saved by water."

Just exactly how were they saved by or through water? The context reveals that ONLY the righteous (Noah and his family) were DRY and therefore SAFE in the ARK. In contrast, ONLY THE WICKED IN NOAH'S DAY CAME IN CONTACT WITH THE WATER AND THEY ALL PERISHED. So in what sense were they saved by or through water? Was it the water that literally saved Noah and his family or the ARK? Hebrews 11:7 - By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ARK for the SAVING of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.

 

[royalscot]

]The standards are the same for all Christians,[/B] it does not matter who is being talked to.
Rather it is Jewish Christians, Gentile Christians, Hebrew Christians, Roman Christians, or any other name you want to place before Christian. The standards for all Christians is the same.
Second Matthew 10:22 is not talking about enduring to be saved through physical life in the flesh, else all the Apostles were failed as they all were killed but one who was exiled;

Peter- crucified upside down


Paul- beheaded


Matthew- slain by a halberd


John- exiled on Patmos

James- put to deat by the sword by Herod Agrippa ( Acts 12:2 )


Andrew- crucified by Roman Governor, Aegeas( Aegeates )
{ bound not nailed to cross to prolong suffering }


Bartholomew- beaten with rods and then beheaded


James, son of Alpheus- beaten, stoned, then clubbed to death


Thomas- thrust through with spears, tortured with red hot plates, and then burned alive.


Philip- tortured, stoned, crucified upside down


Simon- crucified and/or sawed in half


Judas Thaddeus- beaten to death in Mesopotamia


Judas- committed suicide for betraying Jesus


Matthias- (replaced Judas) stoned to death

with no context. your all ready blind.
again yes it dose. 70 ad happened. then you would have to understand what that means, to a a non christian jews.
and how did a christian jews. bridged the gap of no temple. with 70 ad in place and most of the apostles are dead. and the bible went to print 1500. so context is everything

and most of them were killed before 70 ad.