Law: Old Way of Salvation and Faith: New Way to Salvation

[TheAristocat]

Aristocat,

Aristocat = black, Me = purple


No need for your soul to be wrenched! haha I did go back and read your post in its entirety. -- Thank you very much.

I guess I'm not entirely understanding what you were saying. To me it seemed like you were saying that the traditional Gospel (involving Christ's sacrifice and resurrection) is what saved people. -- What I mean: salvation by faith which is God's free gift, as oppose to salvation by works of the Law, is what saves people. So, it is faith which saves from the guilty verdict of condemnation (everlasting separation from God), of which we are naturally children of the rebellion, and thus, children of wrath. Without faith being the catalist of hope, we are lost, even by the works of the Law. Yes, the Gospel of the Good News, by hearing and believeing its words, is what saves us through faith, and not works.

Only it seemed like you were saying that they first had to obey the sacrifices in order to be saved by Christ when the Gospel came to fruition so-to-speak. That was the part I was skeptical about. And I provided what I believed to be scriptural evidence against that point. -- Yes. Obedience to the Law was not only commanded of them by God, but by that obedience (fulfilling the rules and ordinances contained in the Law) and by trusting in the promises of that Covenant, they who followed the Law as a means of following God, did see thier Deliverer. The who did not follow the Law, had no sacrifice and thus, no forgivness of thier rebellion. They had their works of the Law as thier own righteousness, and if they failed to abide by the Law, they then remained children of the rebellion.

Also what's the difference between being forgiven and being justified? -- Forgiven = I will not remember (hold against) your offense towards Me. Justified = not held guilty. Specifically, not found guilty of offence towards God and worthy of an adverse sentencing. Through sacrifice they were forgiven their sins and remained obedeint to the Law, but that never released them of God's verdict of them being guity of offense. Because the Law never justified them of this guilt, they went to Hades (the realm of the dead). This is why it is said that under the Law, no one is found innocent (KJV: rightous). But, under faith, we are held blameless, seeing that there is no law to acknowledge offense. May I add for a point of interest, that is why we of faith cannot sin (offend), because, there is no Law to hold us guilty of offense and thus, worthy of condemnation (there is no condemnation in those of faith).

Is one not justified when they are forgiven? -- one can be forgiven, but Justice demands the penality be paid. Under the Law, the penality was condemnation. But praised be Jah, that penality was paid by Christ and through Him, we are justified (found blamless) in Him, just as they in Abraham's Bosom rceived justification. From the top of my spirtual voice, I sing praises to God, 'I am no longer guilty of rebellion, but have been justified from the guilty verdict which naturally awaits all.' No longer are we naturally children of the rebellion who are destined for wrath, but we stand before God spotless.

What takes place in Sheol? -- For those of faith, the Jewish saints and Gentile saints, nothing. But for those who are not of faith, the place where they await the Great White Throne sentencing. We of faith are not guilty of offense and Jesus has delivered those who are Jewish saints from it. So, it is not a place for saints, but those still held guilty of offense.

Is it a place of torment? -- No, just a place for the dead (as oppose to those who are alive in Christ) to await their final sentencing. On the other hand, Hell WILL BE a place enveloped in God's heated passion (wrath). Hell will be a place full of God's wrath, and that is, my brother, the fire of His anger. There will be no peace, no intermission, no day, or night, just constantly under God's wrath which reaches even to the floors of corruption.

And if everyone went to Sheol to be tormented before Christ's death and resurrection, then how do we account for Samuel being reluctant to be disturbed by Saul when he was consulted? -- They who were obedient to the Law went to Abraham's Bosom which was separated by a gulf. But, Paradise for the faithful is no longer in Hades, seeing that we, all of faith, are no longer held guilty. We can assume from Scripture that Samuel was before the LORD, and thus, went to Abraham's Bosom (Paradise).

1 Samuel 28:15 Samuel said to Saul, "Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?"

Some of the things which make me confused by what is claimed are the beliefs I already hold. For instance,

1. Sheol is the place of those who are both physically and spiritually dead. -- Now it is, but before there was a place called Abraham's Bosom in Hades for the righteous dead. 'Spiritually dead' only in the sense that they do/did not have Live in them. Not in the sense of complete non-existance, seeing that Jesus went their to proclaim the Good News of salvation to those in Paradise which happened to be in Hades. Also note: if you will, do a word search in the Old Testament for the words Hades, Sheol, grave, and you will see that there is still activity even on the other side of Abraham's Bosom, just as it was activity in the Lazarus story.

2. Sheol is a place of torment based on Luke 16:23-24. Luke 16:28 "for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment." The Hebrew word that would have been used in the name of this place would've been Sheol - not hell. So that man is being tormented in Sheol. -- We can assume, as we did with Samuel, that he was in the part of Hades where God's wrath was and by knowing that God's wrath is no upon those who are righteous but upon the wicked, then we can say that he was not in Paradise as Lazarus. Just remember that there was a gulf between those in Paradise and those under God's wrath.

3. What is claimed is that everyone before Christ's apparent emergence in this world went to Sheol (even those who were called righteous; i.e. those who had obtained imparted righteousness). So the claim is that God sent the righteous to a place of torment. Why would he do that if they were righteous in his eyes already? The righteous live by faith and are spiritually alive, right? -- Please see aboves statements.

4. Sheol is a place that is contrasted with Abraham's Bosom. Sheol is a place of punishment and Abraham's Bosom is a place of rest. Luke 16:23, "And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom."

5. On another point Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are called alive (spiritually alive) and not dead. Mark 12:26-27 Now about the dead rising--have you not read in the book of Moses, in the account of the bush, how God said to him, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. [...]" --- Because they were resurrected with the Christ from the dead, to live forevermore with Him.

So what we have is that God calls Abraham righteous and he forgives David's sins. Then he sends them to a place of torment where they are tormented in agonizing flames. And at the same time we have Samuel disliking the fact that he was called forth from such a place. Then we have paradise being called Abraham's Bosom when Abraham is being tormented in Sheol. On top of that we have Jesus contrasting Sheol with Abraham's Bosom before his death and resurrection and giving examples of the types of people we might find in each. Then God calling Abraham, Isaac and Jacob [spiritually] alive but all those people still going to a place of the spiritually dead.

I think the main point we differ on is that perhaps you think that everyone was effectively unsaved (even though they would be later) before Christ's manifest sacrifice and resurrection --- No. As long as it is understood that all was found guilty under the Law, but that those abiding by the Law did not go to the other side of Hades. And that they were justified from that guilty verdict by their faith in the One who came to them to reverse that sentencing. I repeat, God's wrath was/is not upon the righteous, but upon the wicked.

while I believe that it was fundamentally retroactive in its effects (i.e. God promising to pay his Son's life for everyone else's but in the mean time buying their lives "on credit" only later to pay his Son when the time for collection came). Of course it could work quite differently than that, but I believe that everyone who was righteous before Christ's death and resurrection rested after death and were considered spiritually alive.

So your view is just that Abraham's Bosom was once in Sheol - the place of the dead - but that there was a distinction between those found in Abraham's Bosom and those in Sheol? We're also coming at this from two different points of view. For instance, I believe the law holds physical condemnation still - even for Christians. God will discipline us according to our obedience and disobedience to the law. But that's not to say that we're spiritually dead if we break one of the laws. So in one way we're "under the law" but in the spiritual sense we're not. The metaphor "under the law" can have many different applications, and I just hope we haven't used it out of its original context.

For example, "under the law" can mean that we have to observe the law spiritually or else we're condemned to Sheol (Sheol is the Hebrew term for the English Hell, thus implying they're the same place): Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon It could also mean that we're disciplined by the law, because we're not spiritually mature enough to do what's right on our own. Then again it could mean that we're oppressed by the burden of obligation to observe all of the laws perfectly. And I've seen "under the law" used with all of these connotations and in a negative sense. But not all of those definitions are negative.

One interesting point is that I think Pharisaical Judaism didn't start in Israel - it had its origins in Babylon during the Babylonian Exile. The reason why Pharisees elaborated on the Law with all of these tiny regulations was because the temple was done away with and no one could offer a sacrifice for sins. So the only way they could be justified/righteous before God was by observing the law perfectly (in their opinions). Just one tiny sin and they wouldn't be righteous any more in their opinions. But current (unbelieving) Rabbinic Judaism has come up with the idea that prayers to God have taken the place of sacrifices now, even though Rabbinic Judaism seems to have come from Pharisaical Judaism.

At any rate, both Jews and Christians have their share of people who say, "The Law is no more," in spite of Christ's words, "... not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law [...]" So to me the Law is in effect - just in different ways depending on whether you're saved or not. It deals with both physical and spiritual matters, but its only condemnation to the Judeo-Christian is physical - not spiritual. To the unbeliever its condemnation is both physical and spiritual.

Just think: if people were no longer "under the Law" and if the Law were no longer in effect, then we wouldn't need Christ. So essentially we're saying the same thing - that without Christ we're condemned by it but with Christ we're set free from condemnation. I just think that, due to Jesus' words, there remains physical condemnation, because physical condemnation is a part of the written Law and not one letter will disappear from it, etc. Spiritual condemnation, however, does not appear to be part of the written Law, strictly speaking, and therefore the prophecy that "not the smallest letter" does not apply to the spiritual condemnation part of it.

 

[TheAristocat]

One interesting point is that I think Pharisaical Judaism didn't start in Israel - it had its origins in Babylon during the Babylonian Exile. The reason why Pharisees elaborated on the Law with all of these tiny regulations was because the temple was done away with and no one could offer a sacrifice for sins. So the only way they could be justified/righteous before God was by observing the law perfectly (in their opinions). Just one tiny sin and they wouldn't be righteous any more in their opinions. But current (unbelieving) Rabbinic Judaism has come up with the idea that prayers to God have taken the place of sacrifices now, even though Rabbinic Judaism seems to have come from Pharisaical Judaism.

Kind of where I'm going with this is that we also need to know what "law" was being talked about when it was said that we were "under the law". Some people take this to mean God's laws; some people take this to mean the body of Pharisaical laws that sprang up around God's laws, the civil and criminal laws of the country, etc. What I take it to mean is the Pharisaical law. We're no longer burdened by the Pharisaical law, because we have a sacrifice for sins and we don't have to worry about all of those minutely small laws that were devised by Men in order to keep us in right standing before God.

The Pharisees were so worried about breaking one of God's laws that they made their own - some of which nullified God's laws. Now that we know for certain the source of our salvation and justification, we don't have to obey the Pharisaical laws, and we're no longer under them. But I don't think this does away with God's laws.

So in effect we can actually obey God's laws better than the Pharisees did if that's our aim. And we're not under the Pharisaical law system, because we have a savior and a sacrifice. I think this could use some further research. I've just gotten this impression before, and it only makes more sense as time goes on and I learn more about the culture. But I need to re-read some of the relevant passages for sure.

 

[cfultz3]

TheAristocat,

Aristocat = black me = blue

So your view is just that Abraham's Bosom was once in Sheol - the place of the dead - but that there was a distinction between those found in Abraham's Bosom and those in Sheol? -- Yes. There was a distinction between those in Abraham's Bosom (Paradise) and those on the other side of the gulf which separated the righteous dead from the unrighteous dead.

We're also coming at this from two different points of view. For instance, I believe the law holds physical condemnation still - even for Christians. --Yes, for the Christian, the Law (minus the sacrifical and cleansing laws) is still spoken by the Spirit to those of faith. The Spirit under the Law said, 'do not kill'. To us today, He says, 'Love all and love says do not kill'. Under both circumstances, one receives the same punishment. Namely, death, physically and/or spiritually.

To us it is obedience to the Law of the Spirit which is spoken through love. But if one thinks about it, has it not always been about love (again, minus the sacrificial and cleansing laws)? So, maybe you and I only use different words to convey the same underlying Truth: God's will must be obeyed either under the Law or under the Spirit, seeing that He has only one Voice who speaks one Truth of God's unchanging will.

God will discipline us according to our obedience and disobedience to the law. -- Yes. Totally agree. As it was with them in the wildereness, it was and is about obedience to His Voice. And what does His Voice say any differently than what He has said before? It is not still about love of God and our fellow man? Under the Law one must earn his righteousness. But now, we are given our righteousness through faith. But now, we do not earn our salvation, seeing that salvation is freely given. But now, our obedience to the Spirit is not what saves us but that which maintains our salvation, seeing that it says that one who is running the race and becomes stubborn to His correction is fatherless, and thus, not a child of God. So, yes again, God will now discipline us according to our disobedience to the Spirit who still speaks of God's will laid out in God's Law.

But that's not to say that we're spiritually dead if we break one of the laws. --Amen. Praise God for His mercy.

So in one way we're "under the law" but in the spiritual sense we're not. The metaphor "under the law" can have many different applications, and I just hope we haven't used it out of its original context.

For example, "under the law" can mean that we have to observe the law spiritually or else we're condemned to Sheol (Sheol is the Hebrew term for the English Hell, thus implying they're the same place): Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon It could also mean that we're disciplined by the law, because we're not spiritually mature enough to do what's right on our own. Then again it could mean that we're oppressed by the burden of obligation to observe all of the laws perfectly. And I've seen "under the law" used with all of these connotations and in a negative sense. But not all of those definitions are negative. -- None of these fit the bill of what I am trying to convey. This is my meaning: we are 'under the Law of the Spirit' who does not lead us in the physical dos and don'ts of the Law of Ordiances to obtain our justification (found guilty and sentenced to death (separation from God)). The Law of the Spirit is spoken in love which is mental and not physical. Like those in the wildereness, after receiving deliverance (salvation), we must be obedient to His Voice, or otherwise, we shal fall like them andl not enter His rest.

One interesting point is that I think Pharisaical Judaism didn't start in Israel - it had its origins in Babylon during the Babylonian Exile. The reason why Pharisees elaborated on the Law with all of these tiny regulations was because the temple was done away with and no one could offer a sacrifice for sins. So the only way they could be justified/righteous before God was by observing the law perfectly (in their opinions). Just one tiny sin and they wouldn't be righteous any more in their opinions. -- I am reminded of a verse in the Old testament which spoke something like this, 'We will do all the LORD has comamnded us and that will be our righteousness.' So, perhaps this is why they were sticklers of the Law, having to work for their own righteousness so that they might receive their justification from Abraham's Bosom.

But current (unbelieving) Rabbinic Judaism has come up with the idea that prayers to God have taken the place of sacrifices now, even though Rabbinic Judaism seems to have come from Pharisaical Judaism. -- I must agree here only because you are talking way out of my league on this one point here. I will assume you are speaking from learned knowledge.

At any rate, both Jews and Christians have their share of people who say, "The Law is no more," in spite of Christ's words, "... not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law [...]" So to me the Law is in effect - just in different ways depending on whether you're saved or not. It deals with both physical and spiritual matters, but its only condemnation to the Judeo-Christian is physical - not spiritual. To the unbeliever its condemnation is both physical and spiritual. -- I agree up to the point where you said, 'but its only condemnation to the Judeo-Christian is physical - not spiritual" and still agree even with the last sentence. I again point to those in the wildereness as an example of one having been saved but then hardened their heart, and finally as a result, loosing their entry in the promised land. That is, God's rest.

Just think: if people were no longer "under the Law" and if the Law were no longer in effect, then we wouldn't need Christ. So essentially we're saying the same thing - that without Christ we're condemned by it but with Christ we're set free from condemnation. I just think that, due to Jesus' words, there remains physical condemnation, because physical condemnation is a part of the written Law and not one letter will disappear from it, etc. Spiritual condemnation, however, does not appear to be part of the written Law, strictly speaking, and therefore the prophecy that "not the smallest letter" does not apply to the spiritual condemnation part of it. --Will you elaborate on this please.

 

[cfultz3]

Kind of where I'm going with this is that we also need to know what "law" was being talked about when it was said that we were "under the law". Some people take this to mean God's laws; some people take this to mean the body of Pharisaical laws that sprang up around God's laws, the civil and criminal laws of the country, etc. What I take it to mean is the Pharisaical law. We're no longer burdened by the Pharisaical law, because we have a sacrifice for sins and we don't have to worry about all of those minutely small laws that were devised by Men in order to keep us in right standing before God.

The Pharisees were so worried about breaking one of God's laws that they made their own - some of which nullified God's laws. Now that we know for certain the source of our salvation and justification, we don't have to obey the Pharisaical laws, and we're no longer under them. But I don't think this does away with God's laws.

So in effect we can actually obey God's laws better than the Pharisees did if that's our aim. And we're not under the Pharisaical law system, because we have a savior and a sacrifice. I think this could use some further research. I've just gotten this impression before, and it only makes more sense as time goes on and I learn more about the culture. But I need to re-read some of the relevant passages for sure.

I finally have a name for something that normally takes me 3 lines to explain: Pharisaical law. LOL, now I need to learn how to spell it. So, with that said, I can now say that we are under God's Law, except the Pharisaical laws. Even then, that would be taken out of context as me saying we are under the Law for salvation. But, we will see. Thank you for the phrase.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

The bulk of Dispensationalism is theological garbage.

amillenialism is theological garbage.

the only thing garbage about dispensationalism is that people were saved different ways in different ages.

the bulk of dispensationalsim is that history is separated into different events and ages, and future will also. It is a way to describe how God dealt with man here on earth during these ages, and not how men were saved (except the extremist views)

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Romans 4

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, discovered in this matter? 2 If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. 3 What does Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”[a] -- Absolutely NO ONE was justified (found guiltless) by the deeds of the Law. But, they who were obedient to the Law did receive their Deliverer. If we of faith are to be obedient to the Spirit as our Guide, or else we are fatherless, then they of the Law must had been obedient to the Law as their guide, or else they did not go to Abraham's Bosom awaiting their Messiah.

there was no law in abraham's day, why are you trying to bring them in? in fact the law did not come for hundreds of years after abraham.

paul is telling us all the work abraham did, (leaving his father, going to a strange nation, attempting to sacrifice his son, etc etc, did not save him, for if they did save him, he would have a reason to boast, or take credit for his salvation.

Just like he said in eph 2, It is not of our works (any works, not just works of the law) we are saved, otherwise we too may boast (take credit for our salvation) and in titus 3, it is not by any works of righteousness (not works of the law, any work we do, or any good deeds we do) which we are saved, but by the washing and renewing of the spirit.

Just because you see work in the NT does not mean law. a work is ANYTHING we do which is righteous. which would include chosing not to sin when temptation arises.

 

[cfultz3]

there was no law in abraham's day, why are you trying to bring them in? in fact the law did not come for hundreds of years after abraham.

paul is telling us all the work abraham did, (leaving his father, going to a strange nation, attempting to sacrifice his son, etc etc, did not save him, for if they did save him, he would have a reason to boast, or take credit for his salvation.

Just like he said in eph 2, It is not of our works (any works, not just works of the law) we are saved, otherwise we too may boast (take credit for our salvation) and in titus 3, it is not by any works of righteousness (not works of the law, any work we do, or any good deeds we do) which we are saved, but by the washing and renewing of the spirit.

Just because you see work in the NT does not mean law. a work is ANYTHING we do which is righteous. which would include chosing not to sin when temptation arises.

Thank you for that correction.

Not trying to bring the Law in, but by faith we do establish the Law. Obedience to the Spirit is not the same as the obedience to the Law to obtain justification. We all agree that we must assend that God's will is the only will to be followed as servants. Then, what does the Spirit speak if not God's will? Seeing that the Spirit is our sealment of sonhood, then how can we obtain salvation through the Law if we have it already?

Obedience to the Spirit is not WORKS FOR SALVATION it is us complying with the Spirit that God's will is the perfect will, just as Jesus fulfilled the will of God.

Law: do not steal
Love: do not steal

Law: love God
Love: love God

on
and
on
and
on

Where has the will of God changed? Does not the Spirit still speak of the Law descripting conduct?

Eternally Grafefuil,

I agree that the Law does not will not justifiy anyone, never has, never will. But, we are told that the one who loves Jesus, the Word, will keep His commandments and He shows mercy to them. What is His commandemnts but to love. And love fulfills all things.

So, will you please stop saying that I am saying we are saved by works as though we are to be under the Law. I am saying we are under the Law of the Spirit which says 'to love'.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Thank you for that correction.

Not trying to bring the Law in, but by faith we do establish the Law. Obedience to the Spirit is not the same as the obedience to the Law to obtain justification. We all agree that we must assend that God's will is the only will to be followed as servants. Then, what does the Spirit speak if not God's will? Seeing that the Spirit is our sealment of sonhood, then how can we obtain salvation through the Law if we have it already?

Obedience to the Spirit is not WORKS FOR SALVATION it is us complying with the Spirit that God's will is the perfect will, just as Jesus fulfilled the will of God.

Law: do not steal
Love: do not steal

Law: love God
Love: love God

on
and
on
and
on

Where has the will of God changed? Does not the Spirit still speak of the Law descripting conduct?

Eternally Grafefuil,

I agree that the Law does not will not justifiy anyone, never has, never will. But, we are told that the one who loves Jesus, the Word, will keep His commandments and He shows mercy to them. What is His commandemnts but to love. And love fulfills all things.

So, will you please stop saying that I am saying we are saved by works as though we are to be under the Law. I am saying we are under the Law of the Spirit which says 'to love'.

The law of the spirit is how one has always obayed Gods commands. If we or they ever did it in order to gain something, be it salvation or whatever, it was not out of love, but of selfish intentions.

To say we are saved by the law of love, and not the law of Moses is deceiving, because the law of love IS the law of Moses,

The point is not should christians do it. Yes we should. And we will be blessed if we do. The point is even when we do it, would we ever be good enough to earn salvation, and the answer is no. So tell us, if we could never on any day here on earth obay the law of love in a way that we could earn salvation for that day, how could we ever lose salvation because we were not good enough? The fact is, if what those who teach we are saved by obeying Gods law, and lose salvation if we do not is true. Then NO ONE WOULD BE SAVED. BECAUSE NO ONE CAN DO IT. not even for ONE DAY!

 

[cfultz3]

I give up eg. I concede.

 

[weakness]

Iv been following this and really feel your discussions are way over simplified. It has caused me ,or God has brought me to studying . I think it is basically to long for this forum but I might add a few things for consideration and maybe discussion sometime. The lord started me out right in the beginning. God said to Adam you may eat of all the trees But, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the day ,if you eat you will surly die. Even though this was not a law under the levitical priesthood ,it was the first commandment or law God gave to man.I don't so much think that eating this particular tree was what caused death. It was that the commandment no matter what it might have been,the breaking of it would without any other reason cause death,shame fear etc. For every man is tempted when drawn away by his own lust and when lust conceives brings forth sin and when sin is finished brings forth death. God knew this and was the start on earth of his eternal purpose" For until the law sin was in the world , but sin is not imputed where there is no law.Never the less death reigned from Adam till Moses Rom.5:13 &14 Moreover sin entered that the offence might abound, But where sin did abound grace did much more abound Rom.5:20 For by the law is the knowledge of sin Rom.3:20 For I was alive once , but when the commandment came sin revived and I died. Rom.7:9 What shall we say the ? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay I had not known sin, but by the law for I had not known lust ,except that, except the law said thou shalt not covet. I have to go now Ill write more latter God bless

 

[GreenNnice]

there was no law in abraham's day, why are you trying to bring them in? in fact the law did not come for hundreds of years after abraham.

paul is telling us all the work abraham did, (leaving his father, going to a strange nation, attempting to sacrifice his son, etc etc, did not save him, for if they did save him, he would have a reason to boast, or take credit for his salvation.

Just like he said in eph 2, It is not of our works (any works, not just works of the law) we are saved, otherwise we too may boast (take credit for our salvation) and in titus 3, it is not by any works of righteousness (not works of the law, any work we do, or any good deeds we do) which we are saved, but by the washing and renewing of the spirit.

Just because you see work in the NT does not mean law. a work is ANYTHING we do which is righteous. which would include chosing not to sin when temptation arises.

Sin is sin is sin, eg, and, not following God's voice, and, He who is Spirit in us, will lead to death, that is a fact, of Scripture no less

:eg, eg,?

No! You are NOT going to go to Heaven IF you sin willfully, eg, for when we do sin willfully Scripture is POINTED clear: there no longer is a covering (of Christ's blood) for our sins .

It is correct too, speaking of another thread, word it however you want, and, dear Lord...Amen, I pray I am led to word 'it' by Him when I say this, too: Ephesians 2:8 is CLEARLY talking about what is not of our own boasting what? Faith? No! Salvation we are saved BY GRACE, !!!

So, why in the world would we want to willfully sin with the Spirit in us! I don't know, eg , seems utter foolishness to me since one leaves Christ as a result I TRULY follow Him in me, for understanding, the Lord leads





10:26 For when we - Any of us Christians. Sin wilfully - By total apostasy from God, termed drawing back, Heb 10:38. After having received the experimental knowledge of the gospel truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins - None but that which we obstinately reject.

I know, I know, eg, you say to this, 'Well, they were never a true christian in the first place,' sigh.....



Numbers 15:30 "'But anyone who sins defiantly, whether native-born or alien, blasphemes the LORD, and that person must be cut off from his people.

1 Samuel 2:25 If a man sins against another man, God may mediate for him; but if a man sins against the LORD, who will intercede for him?" His sons, however, did not listen to their father's rebuke, for it was the LORD's will to put them to death.

1 Timothy 2:4 who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.

Hebrews 6:4 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit.

Eg, the Lord leads, I wish that (or anyone else) could better explain to you that those who fall away who were never saved in the first place is not saying what you THINK it is saying, but, sigh, I can not

There , the Spirit (of God, the Holy Spirit) tells us there will be those who depart the faith .


DEPART THE FAITH !

THIS ' the faith' words tells me they WERE genuinely believing but then fell away, as Hebrews 6:4 states, , they once WERE enlightened, they ONCE HAD tasTed the heavenly gift (what does it mean to 'taste the heavenly gift?), and, they also , and, this, too, in the past tense, SHARED in the Holy Spirit, which means this person was led by God, eg, and, THEN, turned their back on their Saviour

Hebrews 6:6, eg, then tells us, there is no going back to REPENTANCE. They have done what? Denied the Holy Spirit by their actions, this IS the ultimate unforgivable sin too, blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

I am certainly NOT judging you, eg, that's not even on my mind but believing that we can be saved and STILL do sinning willfully and stop -- per your 'works' definition-- is deadly of consequence, I think, for God will spit you out , He would rather you ARE hot or cold than living IN and OUT of sin.

Should we sin, because we are covered by the blood, covered of our past sins, our present sins, our future sins, even?

Should we, eg? God forbid !

The whole of Scripture MUST be taken in willful understandingz as the Spirit leads us to Truth, I Love ALL of God's holy words, they are ALL there, old and new testament, to teach us things,cable us things, like in Daniel, predicting the Messiah's coming, predicting the destruction of temple in 70 a.d. ( nailed time period to the nines ! )


Ah, eg, what a MIGHTY GOD, we serve, almighty in power, in Love,, in blessings, and, in keeping us in check through the whole of 'the testaments, 'concealing,' for one, 'revealing' for another.

I ask that you meditate and ask God if green is making any sense this time, since you say I confuse you. Lol, eg, you're the only one I confuse

Listen, and, hear, too, to what's been said before breaking it all down and refuting it, for I spoke in Love, thus I hope and pray for you to see the Truth that one's falling away from salvation can indeed happen ONCE they were truly enlightened, truly, having tasted the heavenly gift, truly having shared a life led by the Lord's helper given unto us by Himself of Himself once Jesus departed...


Alll this said should tell you this 'enlightened, tasted, shared' was indeed what, Christbro, eg? Saved Truly was saved. Was, eg. Was. Was. Was....

 

[GreenNnice]

Eg: Just because you see work in the NT does not mean law. a work is ANYTHING we do which is righteous.which would include chosing not to sin when temptation arises.
--------
Choosing to sin willfully, this is a deliberate act we are talking about, partaking of this temptation will lead to DEATH as thus described in Rev. 20:14-15. You will be BLOTTED OUT of the Lamb's book of life.

And, this having been blotted out that you were WRITTEN IN , TOO. YOU departed, left the enlightened blessing of the heavenly gift, Holy Spirit sweetness leasing your life.

Why? I know why, I really shouldn't say I don't know why. They depart because they THINK their sins done in the past are irreparable for them getting to heaven so they say, 'het, I ain't going, might as well live it up ! '

Christ peeps, don't think.this way, it is the EXACT opposite of Christ's Love. We are to come to Him when we sin, EVEN AFTER WE BEEN BAPTIZED AND THEN MAKE MISTAKES, Christ will NEVER leave you nor forsake you. Even after you follow Christ, you WILL make mistakes , sin! So what! You are COVERED BY THE BLOOD , THE PRECIOUS BLOOD OF God, of Christ, of, too, yes, yes, yes, the Holy Spirit.

Why do you PERSECUTE YOURSELF? CONFESS YOUR SINS, LIKE 1 JOHN 1:9 says and Christ is just to forgive you and cleanse you of that WRONG STANDING WITH Him , also known as, 'unrighteosness.'

You don't do NO works to ve back in right standing with Is but CONFESS YOUR SINS and then let the July Spirit lead you to His Truth , His plan will be good, it will be JUST, why, yes, Just almost seems like QB unhappy word, but,vit's NOT! THE Lord is actually not even happy, where's that word in Scripture. Christ is overjoyed you gave that sin to Him, and, He threw it into the sea of forgetfulness so why don't you.

You will therefore living justly in Him leadingvyour life be living under Christ, Loving Him, Loving yourself by not beating up on yourself, and, therefore you will Love othersvbecause you believe in Christ's having saved you from sin, not EVER 'REFERENCING' your sin again, per Hebrews 9:27 .

Joy, joy, joy, live in the joy of the Lord' s Loving leading JUSTLY for your life Now, <--- that's happy

Quit WORKING in this unjust way for your salvation, give it to Him, accept His leading, He will lead you past mere joy, too.
Overjoyed Lifted from what WAS burdening you , because why? God's great mercy,cChrist peeps, His Love lifted you and will lift you all the rest of your days. Satan shakes, Satan guilts you, not God , ever

 

[GreenNnice]

Please listen to cee's words, too, I pray I am Spirit led, I have work to do but this is very important, plus, I don't do study help to cee of Hebrews 4 because run out of time oh, work shmerk, whatever I do, it's for God, for God is good, His Spirit leads me, I hope and pray.

This paragraph makes no sense, I type on mytouch 4g and sometimes i type too fast and mistake, sorry of that.

Edit for:
You don't do NO works to GET back in right standing with GOD if sinned after having accepted Him as your Saviour, you pray to Him in you, His Spirit, showing Godly sorrow, and, you move on, accepting His CORRECTION , remember , it will be just, but laced with grace and mercy and Love, for God is Love.

CONFESS YOUR SINS , like 1 John 1:9 says and He is FAITHFUL to forgive you and then let the Holy Spirit lead you to His Truth , His plan will be good, it will be JUST, why, yes, 'Just' just, hmm, just sounds, uh, seems like just such anunhappy, parenting word. It is ! But it's just God and He is just. Christ peeps, GET in His Loving arms, and, JUST follow Him. It will OK, in fact, it will be great, ok? You will be with God, just. He is the ONLY one who will NEVER let you down, ultimately, . All human will, your sister, your wife/husband, even IFVyou have the best marriage in the world, or, sister/brother. But, will God ? No. He will chastise, He will scourge, He will even reBuke your wrong ways, but it will never be of guilt finding but of Love giving because He is yourvFather in Heaven

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Sin is sin is sin, eg, and, not following God's voice, and, He who is Spirit in us, will lead to death, that is a fact, of Scripture no less

I agree, it is why we were dead in the first place. It is why we needed the sacrifice of Christ. if it were not for that, we would all still be dead.

:eg, eg,?

No! You are NOT going to go to Heaven IF you sin willfully, eg, for when we do sin willfully Scripture is POINTED clear: there no longer is a covering (of Christ's blood) for our sins .

So your saying you do not sin willfully? Your saying when you get angry, that is not willful sin. Or when you go over the speed limit, that is not willful sin, or when you have fleshly thoughts that it is not wilfull? Or how about when you put self above someone else for ANY reason. all these things are not willful sins we ALL commit on a daily basis?

It is correct too, speaking of another thread, word it however you want, and, dear Lord...Amen, I pray I am led to word 'it' by Him when I say this, too: Ephesians 2:8 is CLEARLY talking about what is not of our own boasting what? Faith? No! Salvation we are saved BY GRACE, !!!

So, why in the world would we want to willfully sin with the Spirit in us! I don't know, eg , seems utter foolishness to me since one leaves Christ as a result I TRULY follow Him in me, for understanding, the Lord leads

I don't want to willfully sin, But I have the flesh in me still, and it wars against the spirit. So that although I chose to willfully follow the flesh, It is not me who sins but the flesh which is in me.

Who would want to willfully sin? No one that I know of who is a child of God. Do we still chose to sin on a daily bases even though we do not want to? Yes, anyone who says he does not I would question their sincerity!

so lets start here.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I give up eg. I concede.

If you would stop thinking I am teaching a licentious gospel, and understand what true faith is, you would not have to concede, you could start to see what i am saying.

 

[GreenNnice]

If you would stop thinking I am teaching a licentious gospel, and understand what true faith is, you would not have to concede, you could start to see what i am saying.

True faith is letting the Holy Spirit lead our life, eg. His power is in us not to sin WILLFULLY..
our spouse even, a careless word that deglorifies God, anything, really, can he SIN ! NOW, will we still sin sometimes? Absolutely, like you said, we get angry , even in our thoughts at someone, it's SIN if it's not righteous anger, we sin by a snooty look to a poor person with cup in.hand on street cornerz, we sin, we sin, we sin CONSTANTLY , but...
..we are covered, we are covered , we are coveted, past, present, future sins , COVERED, by THE BLOOD
God shed His blood for our sins, all of 'em. But we can STILL SIN, because Satan is real and we do willfully from time to time sin but those SINS are all coveted too as long as YOU confess to God that you made a mistake and won't go back (repented) and that you let Him know that you will let Him lead you from that area of sin from your life. And He will ! Willfully lead you, and, by the power of His Spirit you will follow. But will you then sin again, even WITH the Spirit's guiding? Absolutely! We are carnal, of 'flesh' as you said , eg.

But, as long as we come to God, He is with 'great mercy' Scripture tells us, we will be forgiven!-

Only way we LOSE OUR SALVATION is by, and, really HEAR this word, eg, the only way we lose our dalvation is by WILLFULLY leaving Him, that is, the Holy Spirit's 'taste', 'enlightenment' 'sharing' of Himself in our life who WILLbe blessing, Loving, leading you and then you decide to DENY HIM.

Again, I have no verses in refute of 'they were never savedin.first place, as 1 John 2:19, they serene't saved in the first place does not refer to just any wannabe Christians though, eg, it refers to ANTICHRISTS ..

SO YES, they were always of Satan, these antichrists are not of 'the elect' which is WHOSOEVER CALLS ON.THE NAME OF THE LORD ROM. 10:13

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Only way we LOSE OUR SALVATION is by, and, really HEAR this word, eg, the only way we lose our dalvation is by WILLFULLY leaving Him, that is, the Holy Spirit's 'taste', 'enlightenment' 'sharing' of Himself in our life who WILLbe blessing, Loving, leading you and then you decide to DENY HIM.

John would beg to differ.

You said the only way we can lose salvation is to deny him, deny who? Christ right??

1 john 2: 22 Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son. 23 Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also.

so according to john, any one who denies is not of the father or of the son, so far we agree, anyone who Denys Christ will not get to heaven.

now, here is where we disagree. did they LOSE salvation, as you just said, or did they NEVER have it, like I contend.

again what does john say?

18 Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the[c] Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.


what do we see here?


1. Many people were in the church, and left the church
2. These who left now deny Christ, whether it be he is real, He is correct in his gospel, or whatever it is, they now deny Christ,
3. They are thus correctly termed antichrist (if you are not for me, you are against me) as Christ said.
4. They may have Been in the church, but they were NEVER a part of the church.

5. If they were truly part of the body of Christ, they NEVER WOULD HAVE LEFT.
6. They left to prove THEY WERE NEVER A TRUE PART OF US, or to expose their true belief, that they never trusted in God in a way which would save them why? if they did, again THEY NEVER WOULD HAVE LEFT.


now remember, this is NOT a prodigal son situation here. The prodigal son never denied his father was his father, Never denied he was not his fathers son, And never denied who he was. He just left his fathers provisions and went out on his own. He never stopped being the son. so can not be used to say he lost his salvation.



This is also why I would never judge a persons salvation, even though they may not be in the church, and out in the world. I was there once. I never denied my father, and I never denied Christ, but I did live in sin, not because I thought it was ok to. But because the situation in my life at the time, I was not thinking straigh, it was all about me, a dangerous situation.

Again, I have no verses in refute of 'they were never savedin.first place, as 1 John 2:19, they serene't saved in the first place does not refer to just any wannabe Christians though, eg, it refers to ANTICHRISTS ..

see above who an anti christ is.

SO YES, they were always of Satan, these antichrists are not of 'the elect' which is WHOSOEVER CALLS ON.THE NAME OF THE LORD ROM. 10:13

yes, and as it says, whoever calls on the name of the lord, and becomes his children would NEVER LEAVE, thus they could NEVER deny Christ. but this is not to say they may not chose to walk away for awhile.

A person who was never saved can't walk away from god, they were never of God. a child of God can stray, backslide or try to walk away, But God has promised he will never walk away from us, Just like the father of the son never denied the son was his son, he just allowed the son to use his free will to leave, and suffer the result of his sin. God will never leave us, although he may allow us to use our free will to do it, and he will chasten us. But he will never leave us. or forsake us.

 

[GreenNnice]

That right.antichrist, denial. : think. About what you said, eg let us both agree that antichrist were never saved in ,first. Place but what .about one who had Christ. First. then denied Him?????/ you pray. Then answer.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

That right.antichrist, denial. : think. About what you said, eg let us both agree that antichrist were never saved in ,first. Place but what .about one who had Christ. First. then denied Him?????/ you pray. Then answer.

well lets see. I can pray, Or I can just read what John said.

19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.

and what is the answer? Someone can not have Christ, and then turn around and deny him. Someone may claim to have Christ, Play the church game for many years, appear to be godly, and on the outside look saved, But if they all of a sudden leave and deny Christ, they were never of us, they left to prove they were never of us, why? Because IF they WERE OF US (were truly born of God) THEY WOULD NEVER HAVE LEFT.

it is very plain and simple. You can be a fake christian for 40 years, if you all of a sudden deny Christ, you were never saved.

 

[cfultz3]

If you would stop thinking I am teaching a licentious gospel, and understand what true faith is, you would not have to concede, you could start to see what i am saying.

To be honest, I never thought that, I just think that you do not see that obedience to the Spirit is a must and without such obedience, what are those called who become stubborn to His Voice, His guidance?

But, as I said, I concede.