How to Recognize a Mixed-Grace Gospel

[Grace777x70]

Many of us have tried to speak grace into your life and it doesn't matter how many times we say the same thing to you..at the very least over 30 times and yet you still say the same old lies about the grace of Christ...

I am not interested in your humanistic philosophy.....it's not Christ...I use scripture because it's what we use for truth..not our philosophy or traditions....so I am "seeing to it "....as the scripture outlines below...so I'm not falling for your bait...

Colossians 2:6-8 (NASB)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Therefore as you have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him,
[SUP]7 [/SUP] having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith, just as you were instructed, and overflowing with gratitude.
[SUP]8 [/SUP] See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.

Grace7x77 Grace7x77 Grace7x77 where are you, and what are you doing. You do have a lens, and you only hear what you want to hear. A debate or discussion occurs when you listen to the other side and answer their points.

Or else you are just a machine spouting propoganda. Do you think that is what life is and what Jesus called us to be in the world? It is safe for you, but leaves you on an island, never able to let the Lord or anyone else reach and influence you.

You want me to be influenced by what you share, but all you can do is ask the Lord, which I do all the time.
Do you actually trust anyone or open up to anyone about your real life? I would suspect not based on your very defensive approach.

 

[PeterJens]

This is my belief as it pertains to the flesh and the old man being dead and the new man is alive now in Christ..it's long but thorough..

2) it is used when talking about self-effort

I have not found anything that talks about self-effort.
Now it is clear "flesh" regards the body physical and carnal desires, but I have never read anything about self-effort.

Now this is important because you found everything, failure of the church on self-effort. It looks like you are sliding this concept alongside other legitimate ones to justify a long idea, when actually you supply nothing for you major point.

I have seen this tactic before, because it relies on people putting effort in to spot the failure.

So where is your self-effort verses?

 

[PeterJens]

Many of us have tried to speak grace into your life and it doesn't matter how many times we say the same thing to you..at the very least over 30 times and yet you still say the same old lies about the grace of Christ...

I am not interested in your humanistic philosophy.....it's not Christ

Ok. Your position is discussing points or theology is humanistic philosophy. So you never went to school, you just accepted everything that was given to you.

I am lying about grace in Christ? Where am I lying?

 

[KennethC]

(Quote from hyper-Grace teacher Tullian Tchividjian)
"We are nothing but a league of the guilty. You see I wish I could say that I do everything for God’s glory. You know 1 Corinthians 10:31: “Whether you eat, drink, whatever you do, do it all to the glory of God.” Who does that? For one second? . . . I wish I could say that I do everything for God’s glory. I can’t, neither can you. What I can say is that Jesus’s blood covers all of my efforts to glorify myself. That’s what I can say. I wish I could say that Jesus fully satisfies me. . . . I can’t, [n]either can you. What I can say is that Jesus fully satisfied God for me. That’s what I can say. That’s the gospel. I wish that I could say I let go of all I have for Jesus. . . . I can’t, [n]either can you. What I can say is that Jesus let go of all He had for me."


This quote shows no victory or overcoming in it but a defeated mindset.................

 

[Grace777x70]

Thank you for asking for scripture..I appreciate that...

Philippians 3:3-4 (NASB)
[SUP]3 [/SUP] for we are the true circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh,
[SUP]4 [/SUP] although I myself might have confidence even in the flesh. If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more:

This is Paul talking about all his achievements in the flesh and that he said he did want to have any confidence in them...in other words..his self-effort..like being a Pharisee..his works of righteousness ( verse 6 ).

This scripture below talks about deeds done for righteousness as being done in the flesh..self-effort again.

Romans 3:20 (KJV)
[SUP]20 [/SUP] Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

This scripture below talks about Abraham through self-effort in the flesh trying to " bring about" the promise of God for an heir which was Isaac.

Galatians 4:22-23 (KJV)
[SUP]22 [/SUP] For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
[SUP]23 [/SUP] But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.

( it's interesting here that God told Abraham to take his son..his only son and sacrifice him..notice God does not recognize works done in self-effort by the flesh )

The scripture below shows that Paul was in fear and trembling because he didn't want to rely on himself when he came to the Corinthians to preach...he had no confidence in his ability to use enticing words of man's wisdom = self-effort/trsuting
1 Corinthians 2:2-4 (KJV)
[SUP]2 [/SUP] For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.
[SUP]3 [/SUP] And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.
[SUP]4 [/SUP] And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:

I have not found anything that talks about self-effort.
Now it is clear "flesh" regards the body physical and carnal desires, but I have never read anything about self-effort.

Now this is important because you found everything, failure of the church on self-effort. It looks like you are sliding this concept alongside other legitimate ones to justify a long idea, when actually you supply nothing for you major point.

I have seen this tactic before, because it relies on people putting effort in to spot the failure.

So where is your self-effort verses?

 

[Grace777x70]

lies concerning what others have been saying about the grace of Christ....that would have been more accurate way of saying it..

Ok. Your position is discussing points or theology is humanistic philosophy. So you never went to school, you just accepted everything that was given to you.

I am lying about grace in Christ? Where am I lying?

 

[PeterJens]

No, you are the one being obtuse. The Christian understanding of the flesh (sarx) is not a secret. This what it is not. It is not a synonym for inherent sin, sin principle, law of sin, old man, old self, old nature, sin nature , self nature, Adam nature or human nature.

The "flesh" is related to the desires of man. Those desires that are patterned toward selfishness and sinfulnes. Patterns developed throughout the experiences of our lives that are individualized in idiosyncratic patterns of selfish action and/or reaction, and that stand opposed to the things of God.

After looking at scripture it mainly centres around Romans and Paul appears to be using the term flesh to mean carnal desires, those things related to physical pleasure. Now physical pleasure by itself is not evil, but it can be used to sinful ends. The problem with such an open term is each reader can put the additions they want to it or leave out what they want. For instance dreams, panic attacks, the fear response, sexual desire, many feelings related to power, domination, over indulgence could be linked.

Interestingly this is very much Pauls language and not Jesus's.

Things linked to the spirit could also be linked to normal life in general. It is therefore difficult to see this division easily when talking walking in the flesh or the Spirit, though it can be said and written, what is its actual meaning?

My understanding is the Spirit is linked to upbuilding thoughts, aspirations, approaches, attitudes and the flesh is linked to destructive, self indulgent actions, emotions and ideas.

This creates a conceptual problem is you start introducing the idea of a new spirit and killing the old man. It strikes me the emphasis changes in what you encourage and discourage, but there is no physical change like some are suggesting.

I would argue Jesus is calling us to respond appropriately to our responses and very physical interaction with life in the light of His love and grace. It is through the Holy Spirit and His word dwelling in us that brings change about as we obey His commands. Now I would love a better language, but when I have to get up every morning to go to work, I know it is me doing the moving and action, so as much as the language might say it is Jesus, it is not. He can be my guide, my inspiration, my anointing, my love and my passion, but I am doing the actions.

So the argument I just rest and do not actively get involved is just stupid. I am involved and in control as much as my emotions and perception drive me.

So the language has to match what is actually happening else it is just a story for children at night.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Saying the old man/body of sin has been destroyed is like saying the law has been destroyed. The latter hasn't, but it has been rendered powerless and ineffective.

But if the ministration of death, written [and] engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which was to be done away: 2 Corinthians 3:7

For [Christ] is our peace, who has made both [Jew and gentile] one, destroying the middle wall of the barrier, the enmity, in his flesh; having abolished the law of commandments contained in ordinances; that of the two he should make in himself one new man, so making peace. Ephesians 2:14-15​

Done away/Abolished
G2673 καταργέω katargeo
1. to make entirely idle

GREEK-ENGLISH LEXICON of the NEW TESTAMENT BASED ON SEMANTIC DOMAINS
76.26 καταργέωc: to render ineffective the power or force of something—‘to invalidate, to abolish, to cause not to function.’ τὸν νόμον τῶν ἐντολῶν ἐν δόγμασιν καταργήσας ‘to abolish the Law of commandments consisting of regulations’ Eph 2:15;

This is the same Greek word used in Romans 6:6:

knowing this, that our old man was crucified together with [him], in order that the body of sin may be done away with, [that] we may no longer be enslaved to sin. Romans 6:6​

So the body of sin is powerless in our lives, IF we walk by faith, just as the law is powerless in our lives IF we walk by the spirit. Otherwise, we will become enslaved to sin.

 

[FreeNChrist]

After looking at scripture it mainly centres around Romans and Paul appears to be using the term flesh to mean carnal desires, those things related to physical pleasure. Now physical pleasure by itself is not evil, but it can be used to sinful ends. The problem with such an open term is each reader can put the additions they want to it or leave out what they want. For instance dreams, panic attacks, the fear response, sexual desire, many feelings related to power, domination, over indulgence could be linked.

Interestingly this is very much Pauls language and not Jesus's.

Things linked to the spirit could also be linked to normal life in general. It is therefore difficult to see this division easily when talking walking in the flesh or the Spirit, though it can be said and written, what is its actual meaning?

My understanding is the Spirit is linked to upbuilding thoughts, aspirations, approaches, attitudes and the flesh is linked to destructive, self indulgent actions, emotions and ideas.

This creates a conceptual problem is you start introducing the idea of a new spirit and killing the old man. It strikes me the emphasis changes in what you encourage and discourage, but there is no physical change like some are suggesting.

I would argue Jesus is calling us to respond appropriately to our responses and very physical interaction with life in the light of His love and grace. It is through the Holy Spirit and His word dwelling in us that brings change about as we obey His commands. Now I would love a better language, but when I have to get up every morning to go to work, I know it is me doing the moving and action, so as much as the language might say it is Jesus, it is not. He can be my guide, my inspiration, my anointing, my love and my passion, but I am doing the actions.

So the argument I just rest and do not actively get involved is just stupid. I am involved and in control as much as my emotions and perception drive me.

So the language has to match what is actually happening else it is just a story for children at night.

No, it does not refer to the human body. That would be to fall prey to the polarized dualistic concept of Greek Platonism.

 

[FreeNChrist]

Saying the old man/body of sin has been destroyed is like saying the law has been destroyed. The latter hasn't, but it has been rendered powerless and ineffective.

But if the ministration of death, written [and] engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which was to be done away: 2 Corinthians 3:7

For [Christ] is our peace, who has made both [Jew and gentile] one, destroying the middle wall of the barrier, the enmity, in his flesh; having abolished the law of commandments contained in ordinances; that of the two he should make in himself one new man, so making peace. Ephesians 2:14-15​

Done away/Abolished
G2673 καταργέω katargeo
1. to make entirely idle

GREEK-ENGLISH LEXICON of the NEW TESTAMENT BASED ON SEMANTIC DOMAINS
76.26 καταργέωc: to render ineffective the power or force of something—‘to invalidate, to abolish, to cause not to function.’ τὸν νόμον τῶν ἐντολῶν ἐν δόγμασιν καταργήσας ‘to abolish the Law of commandments consisting of regulations’ Eph 2:15;

This is the same Greek word used in Romans 6:6:

knowing this, that our old man was crucified together with [him], in order that the body of sin may be done away with, [that] we may no longer be enslaved to sin. Romans 6:6​

So the body of sin is powerless in our lives, IF we walk by faith, just as the law is powerless in our lives IF we walk by the spirit. Otherwise, we will become enslaved to sin.

So dead doesn't mean dead? Sounds like zombieism.

 

[PeterJens]

Thank you for asking for scripture..I appreciate that...

Philippians 3:3-4 (NASB)
[SUP]3 [/SUP] for we are the true circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh,
[SUP]4 [/SUP] although I myself might have confidence even in the flesh. If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more:

Paul has created a conceptual problem in his own logic. His words imply that all his obeying rules, following after God as a Jew is walking in the flesh, ie wrong.

He implies everything in the flesh should not be done but everything in the Spirit should be followed.
The problem with using such labels as boxes, is he contradicts himself when saying we are slaves to righteousness.

The difficulty could be rather as being born a Jew and following the Mosaic law, it was something very related to who he was as a person, so of his flesh, not born of God in a spiritual relationship sense. This aspect would fit better, as a consistent view in light of the positive view of walking in righteousness. Another aspect is Pauls emphasis on circumcision which literally is a mark on your body. The giving of sacrifices is again a very physical performance, which the spiritual significance can be ignored.

So the view Paul is putting forward is actions that justify one on paper but not spiritually, he is condemning.

Paul argues himself almost to a standstill and then creates this

The commandments, ‘You shall not commit adultery,’ ‘You shall not murder,’ ‘You shall not steal,’ ‘You shall not covet,’ and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’ Love does no harm to a neighbour. Therefore love is the fulfilment of the law.
Rom 13:9-10

I get the feeling Paul was grasping at trying to describe sanctification under grace and forgiveness and not quite completing it.

It is no wonder how you can then go to an extreme and turn it around to a version where righteousness no longer matters.

 

[FreeNChrist]

Paul has created a conceptual problem in his own logic. His words imply that all his obeying rules, following after God as a Jew is walking in the flesh, ie wrong.

He implies everything in the flesh should not be done but everything in the Spirit should be followed.
The problem with using such labels as boxes, is he contradicts himself when saying we are slaves to righteousness.

The difficulty could be rather as being born a Jew and following the Mosaic law, it was something very related to who he was as a person, so of his flesh, not born of God in a spiritual relationship sense. This aspect would fit better, as a consistent view in light of the positive view of walking in righteousness. Another aspect is Pauls emphasis on circumcision which literally is a mark on your body. The giving of sacrifices is again a very physical performance, which the spiritual significance can be ignored.

So the view Paul is putting forward is actions that justify one on paper but not spiritually, he is condemning.

Paul argues himself almost to a standstill and then creates this

The commandments, ‘You shall not commit adultery,’ ‘You shall not murder,’ ‘You shall not steal,’ ‘You shall not covet,’ and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’ Love does no harm to a neighbour. Therefore love is the fulfilment of the law.
Rom 13:9-10

I get the feeling Paul was grasping at trying to describe sanctification under grace and forgiveness and not quite completing it.

It is no wonder how you can then go to an extreme and turn it around to a version where righteousness no longer matters.

No, Paul created a conceptual problem for you and your logic. Obviously.

 

[PeterJens]

No, it does not refer to the human body. That would be to fall prey to the polarized dualistic concept of Greek Platonism.

No?

Carnal desires, things related to physical pleasures. Are you saying the flesh is linked to more than just this? If so what.

It also appears many christians like platonism and integrated some of the ideas into the faith.

 

[FreeNChrist]

No?

Carnal desires, things related to physical pleasures. Are you saying the flesh is linked to more than just this? If so what.

It also appears many christians like platonism and integrated some of the ideas into the faith.

I have already explained to you the Christian understanding of the flesh (sarx). That you would ask for it again is telling.

 

[Grace777x70]

That would also mean that Christ has not died if our old man didn't die ..because the scripture says we died with Him..the "old man" died...now if Jesus didn't die...we are in very big trouble....

without us "knowing" the old man is dead..we will not be able to see the " alive to God " part...

So dead doesn't mean dead? Sounds like zombieism.

 

[Utah]

You may have heard that God gives us grace in order to do good works, but this is misleading. God does not give you grace so that you can work. He gives you grace because He loves you. Period.

Those who receive from the abundance of His grace do indeed work and often they work harder than anyone else, but that’s neither here nor there.

Grand Slam! Game over! Series over! Grace777x70 is MVP for sharing this awesome OP.

 

[FreeNChrist]

That would also mean that Christ has not died if our old man didn't die ..because the scripture says we died with Him..the "old man" died...now if Jesus didn't die...we are in very big trouble....

without us "knowing" the old man is dead..we will not be able to see the " alive to God " part...

And many definitely do not see themselves as "alive to God."

 

[Grace777x70]

Very true...this is the kind of stuff we need to be talking about....instead of always having to defend the gospel of the grace of Christ.....just sayin'....

And many definitely do not see themselves as "alive to God."

 

[phil36]

Very true...this is the kind of stuff we need to be talking about....instead of always having to defend the gospel of the grace of Christ.....just sayin'....

Hi grace777x70,

Could you tell us what is the "the gospel 'of the grace' of Chrst". Please don't copy and paste huge amounts just three or four paragraphs in your own words will help us all I am sure. Many thanks in advance.

 

[Grace777x70]

Jesus died for me. He rose from the dead for me. He lives for and in me. It's all free and it's all good news.

Hi grace777x70,

Could you tell us what is the "the gospel 'of the grace' of Chrst". Please don't copy and paste huge amounts just three or four paragraphs in your own words will help us all I am sure. Many thanks in advance.