Not By Works
- Thread starter dcontroversal
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
You are correct there, Israel is now blinded temporary by God, the gospel of the kingdom has been postponed until the Tribulation. So no one NOW should be preaching the gospel of the kingdom. Romans 11 has the details.
But it WAS valid during the 4 gospels. Jesus was offering Israel that same kingdom then. They didn't had to believe anything about his death and resurrection in order to accept that offer.
But it WAS valid during the 4 gospels. Jesus was offering Israel that same kingdom then. They didn't had to believe anything about his death and resurrection in order to accept that offer.
That is the dispensational view, which in my opinion is wrong.
Like I said there is one gospel:
(Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.)
Rom 11 has no details to support your case. You just don't understand it correctly. Same with the dichotomy of claiming James is writing to some future generation of the 12 tribes, when in fact he was writing to the scattered of the 12 tribes of his own time calling them first fruits.
(James 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.)
(James 1:18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.)
And so does Peter write to the dispersed tribes:
(1 Pet 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia)
Like I said there is one gospel:
(Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.)
Rom 11 has no details to support your case. You just don't understand it correctly. Same with the dichotomy of claiming James is writing to some future generation of the 12 tribes, when in fact he was writing to the scattered of the 12 tribes of his own time calling them first fruits.
(James 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.)
(James 1:18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.)
And so does Peter write to the dispersed tribes:
(1 Pet 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia)
-
1
- Show all
I already stated Scripture that, while Christ was in the flesh, none of the 12 believed that Jesus had to die and they certainly were not expecting any resurrection on the 3rd day. Are you rejecting those verses in the 4 gospels?
Yet they were preaching the gospel of the kingdom (Luke 9:6, Matthew 10:7).
You mean you actually believe they could be preaching the death burial and resurrection (1 Cor 15:1-4) without even believing it, before it even happened?
Yet they were preaching the gospel of the kingdom (Luke 9:6, Matthew 10:7).
You mean you actually believe they could be preaching the death burial and resurrection (1 Cor 15:1-4) without even believing it, before it even happened?
The kingdom was at hand during His preaching. Entry into the kingdom came at Pentecost.
(Col 1:13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son)
I'll guess you are going to argue that the Son's kingdom is not the kingdom He preached while alive.
(Col 1:13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son)
I'll guess you are going to argue that the Son's kingdom is not the kingdom He preached while alive.
I had seek a clarification from you, which you have avoid answering so far:
Does one need to understand that Jesus had to die and rise again, in order to believe Jesus is the Son of God (John 20:31)?
The answer cannot be a yes, because the record in Matthew 16 gave us an example of Peter believing the latter, without the former.
13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
followed by
21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.
22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.
23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
Do you agree with what the Scripture tells us here?
Does one need to understand that Jesus had to die and rise again, in order to believe Jesus is the Son of God (John 20:31)?
The answer cannot be a yes, because the record in Matthew 16 gave us an example of Peter believing the latter, without the former.
13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
followed by
21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.
22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.
23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
Do you agree with what the Scripture tells us here?
My point exactly. 
No certificate of divorce.
My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.
1 John 2:1
No certificate of divorce.
My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.
1 John 2:1
Abba Father is using spoken word to put things in place.
Thank you all for an interesting 3 days.
God bless friends
How have I avoided answering "so far" - you keep moving the goal posts - at that time Jesus was revealing himself to his disciples, so the answer would be no they did not need to understand His death and resurrection.
How this helps your case I have no idea, neither does it support your claims of a different gospel - there is only one. Without his death there is no gospel.
(Mat 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come)
Do you think that Jesus intended the "gospel of the kingdom" would exclude His death and resurrection?
How this helps your case I have no idea, neither does it support your claims of a different gospel - there is only one. Without his death there is no gospel.
(Mat 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come)
Do you think that Jesus intended the "gospel of the kingdom" would exclude His death and resurrection?
-
1
- Show all
So you agree that the gospel of the kingdom that was being preached by the 12 in Luke 9:6 and Matthew 10:7, did not include his death burial and resurrection.
Yet you concluded that "Without his death there is no gospel."
Are you contradicting yourself? What gospel was being preached in Luke 9:6 and Matthew 10:7 then? Jesus had not been crucified during that time right?
Yet you concluded that "Without his death there is no gospel."
Are you contradicting yourself? What gospel was being preached in Luke 9:6 and Matthew 10:7 then? Jesus had not been crucified during that time right?