Loss of salvation???

[Musicmaster]

Rejecting the gospel of grace by legalists comes from the usual bent within fleshly desires for self-righteousness and salvation through works. Many are ignorant of what the Mosaic Law requires, thus unable to see their own sinful nature, which leads them to believe they can earn salvation. In Galatians 1:6-7, Paul warns against turning to a different gospel, showing to us that the tendency toward self-salvation is a significant reason for this rejection. It's a fleshly tendency to resist the idea that salvation is solely by grace through faith rather than through human effort. The glamorization of works-based salvation in its three main forms remains a key feature within Western and Eastern religions such as Roman Catholicism, Evangelicalism and much of what is seen as the "independents" that like to lay claim to being "nondenominational," as if that elevates their works-based salvation model above the others.

So, the anti-saved-by-grace-through-faith hounds try defending their non-functional, works-based salvation model by trying to cast shadows of "continual sinning pleasures" upon what Paul taught, which is that even unbelief doesn't negate one's genuine salvation, established on the basis of Christ's faithfulness rather than our own. Notice that I pointed at "genuine" salvation, which is one who believed in the death, burial and resurrection on the third day the Christ Jesus portrayed within scripture rather than the fabricated, hip Jesus of post modernism who demands their duty-driven efforts toward "retaining" their salvation.

The anti-saved-by-grace-through-faith hounds almost never address Paul's instruction to "rightly divide the word of truth," other than to draw the defining lines for that instruction in some areas but rejecting the existence of those lines in key areas where it clearly belongs. Claiming Paul preached the same gospel as did Peter and the twelve, that's an irrational and intellectually dishonest stance that fails miserably to ever consider why Paul ever went to Jerusalem to make his appeals to the twelve and to the elders the push to expect Gentiles and the body of Christ to embrace the Kingdom Gospel and its adherence to the Mosaic Law that the scriptures make so very clear is indeed the drive and thrust within the Kingdom Gospel that James himself bragged to Paul about:

Acts 21:20
And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:

Paul's gospel, then, was indeed a thorn in the craw of the believing Jews, for if his gospel had indeed been just like that of the Kingdom Gospel, this instruction would make absolutely no sense whatsoever:

Acts 21:21
And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.

How blind and lacking in critical thought practiced by those claiming to love the Bible, thus failing to see the glaring divide between the gospels preached by the twelve and that of Paul and his fellow apostles, it triggers incredulity in the rational mind that some choose to uphold the claim for sameness between the two gospels to the extent that they are one and the same.

As we can see within the contextual narrative from which I quoted the above verses, one can see the effort to keep the peace between the believing Jews who were still practitioners and adherents to the Mosaic Law and the body of Christ under Paul's ministry, James and the elders instructed Paul to keep the peace among them all by making a show of his adherence to the Mosaic Law for purification, even shaving his head.

If James and the elders were of the mind Paul was preaching the same gospel as theirs, this chapter would make no sense whatsoever, being utterly false and without value for inclusion. James made not one statement in that context pointing to any reason to believe Paul was wrong for what he preached to the Jews out among the Gentiles within the scope of his ministry. His obvious intent was peace-keeping and salve upon the consciences of the believing Jews.

It therefore makes no sense whatsoever for one to claim Paul preached the same gospel as the twelve and as did Christ concerning water baptism and works toward and/or for retaining salvation. Not Even Jesus taught works-based retention of salvation, but there are those today preaching that, thus corrupting the minds and hearts of new converts. Looking at what Jesus Himself said:

Mark 16:16
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Luke 7:50
And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.

Luke 8:12
Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.

Luke 18:42
And Jesus said unto him, Receive thy sight: thy faith hath saved thee.

There are many other proof texts of Jesus teaching instantaneous and everlasting salvation. If those people were not SAVED at the point He declared such, then Jesus would have been a liar. So, works-based retention of salvation is nothing but a satanic and wicked injection into the overall message we glean from the Bible.

MM

 

[GWH]

Salvation cannot be lost or misplaced, but it can be refused (Matt. 23:37) and repudiated (Heb. 6:4-6).

 

[mailmandan]

Rejecting the gospel of grace by legalists comes from the usual bent within fleshly desires for self-righteousness and salvation through works. Many are ignorant of what the Mosaic Law requires, thus unable to see their own sinful nature, which leads them to believe they can earn salvation. In Galatians 1:6-7, Paul warns against turning to a different gospel, showing to us that the tendency toward self-salvation is a significant reason for this rejection. It's a fleshly tendency to resist the idea that salvation is solely by grace through faith rather than through human effort. The glamorization of works-based salvation in its three main forms remains a key feature within Western and Eastern religions such as Roman Catholicism, Evangelicalism and much of what is seen as the "independents" that like to lay claim to being "nondenominational," as if that elevates their works-based salvation model above the others.

So, the anti-saved-by-grace-through-faith hounds try defending their non-functional, works-based salvation model by trying to cast shadows of "continual sinning pleasures" upon what Paul taught, which is that even unbelief doesn't negate one's genuine salvation, established on the basis of Christ's faithfulness rather than our own. Notice that I pointed at "genuine" salvation, which is one who believed in the death, burial and resurrection on the third day the Christ Jesus portrayed within scripture rather than the fabricated, hip Jesus of post modernism who demands their duty-driven efforts toward "retaining" their salvation.

The anti-saved-by-grace-through-faith hounds almost never address Paul's instruction to "rightly divide the word of truth," other than to draw the defining lines for that instruction in some areas but rejecting the existence of those lines in key areas where it clearly belongs. Claiming Paul preached the same gospel as did Peter and the twelve, that's an irrational and intellectually dishonest stance that fails miserably to ever consider why Paul ever went to Jerusalem to make his appeals to the twelve and to the elders the push to expect Gentiles and the body of Christ to embrace the Kingdom Gospel and its adherence to the Mosaic Law that the scriptures make so very clear is indeed the drive and thrust within the Kingdom Gospel that James himself bragged to Paul about:

Acts 21:20
And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:

Paul's gospel, then, was indeed a thorn in the craw of the believing Jews, for if his gospel had indeed been just like that of the Kingdom Gospel, this instruction would make absolutely no sense whatsoever:

Acts 21:21
And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.

How blind and lacking in critical thought practiced by those claiming to love the Bible, thus failing to see the glaring divide between the gospels preached by the twelve and that of Paul and his fellow apostles, it triggers incredulity in the rational mind that some choose to uphold the claim for sameness between the two gospels to the extent that they are one and the same.

As we can see within the contextual narrative from which I quoted the above verses, one can see the effort to keep the peace between the believing Jews who were still practitioners and adherents to the Mosaic Law and the body of Christ under Paul's ministry, James and the elders instructed Paul to keep the peace among them all by making a show of his adherence to the Mosaic Law for purification, even shaving his head.

If James and the elders were of the mind Paul was preaching the same gospel as theirs, this chapter would make no sense whatsoever, being utterly false and without value for inclusion. James made not one statement in that context pointing to any reason to believe Paul was wrong for what he preached to the Jews out among the Gentiles within the scope of his ministry. His obvious intent was peace-keeping and salve upon the consciences of the believing Jews.

It therefore makes no sense whatsoever for one to claim Paul preached the same gospel as the twelve and as did Christ concerning water baptism and works toward and/or for retaining salvation. Not Even Jesus taught works-based retention of salvation, but there are those today preaching that, thus corrupting the minds and hearts of new converts. Looking at what Jesus Himself said:

Mark 16:16
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Luke 7:50
And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.

Luke 8:12
Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.

Luke 18:42
And Jesus said unto him, Receive thy sight: thy faith hath saved thee.

There are many other proof texts of Jesus teaching instantaneous and everlasting salvation. If those people were not SAVED at the point He declared such, then Jesus would have been a liar. So, works-based retention of salvation is nothing but a satanic and wicked injection into the overall message we glean from the Bible.

MM

That salvation is by grace through faith and is not by works (Ephesians 2:8,9) is not hard to understand. It's just hard for works-salvationists to ACCEPT. It's a shame that human pride will not allow works-salvationists to place their faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. Their hands are full of their works, and they will not let go in order to receive Christ through faith.

 

[Musicmaster]

That salvation is by grace through faith and is not by works (Ephesians 2:8,9) is not hard to understand. It's just hard for works-salvationists to ACCEPT. It's a shame that human pride will not allow works-salvationists to place their faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. Their hands are full of their works, and they will not let go in order to receive Christ through faith.

True indeed. Their resume's are of no value whatsoever in relation to salvation.

Rewards earned through good works are not salvation, and salvation is not a reward through works...it is a GIFT.

I wonder how many of them think back to their childhoods and reflect upon all their good works that brought about the gifts delivered by the Santa Clause their parents lied to them about and that they lie to their children about in modern times... They can say that they received gifts from their parents on the basis of good works, but salvation is not at all tied to works, as you stated.

Amen

MM

 

[JimiSurvivor]

That salvation is by grace through faith and is not by works (Ephesians 2:8,9) is not hard to understand. It's just hard for works-salvationists to ACCEPT. It's a shame that human pride will not allow works-salvationists to place their faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. Their hands are full of their works, and they will not let go in order to receive Christ through faith.

A. The word "works" in Ephesians refers specifically to the WORKS OF THE LAW which the Judaizers were teaching as necessary to do
in order to obtain salvation. The term "JUDAEIZERS" refers to a group in the early Christian church who were teaching that, in addition to answering the Messianic call to REPENT and BELIEVE, people ALSO had to adhere to certain Jewish laws and customs to be made righteous and acceptable to God.
B. Specifically, the KIND of WORKS Paul was referring to were WORKS OF THE [Mosaic] LAW which included such practices as
(1). circumcision, (2) eating Kosher, (3) celebrating New moons and the other festivals and (4) keeping Shabbat
(Philippians 3:2-3; Colossians 2:6) none of which was necessary to receive the gift of salvation.

C. According to the Messianic proclamation, what is necessary is REPENTANCE of our sins and FAITH in the Savior Himself. This involves more than just accepting a truth proposition ABOUT Jesus. Rather it is the result of a direct personal transaction WITH Him which leads us not only to trust IN HIM but to ENTRUST ourselves TO HIM. Faith and works are inseparable in salvation.

D. You seem to be CONFLATING obedience to Christ and His gospel with "works." However, the two are not are not at all the same. The yoke of Moses was a burden. The yoke of Christ (though it too represented submitting to a Master) brings rest.

E. Faith in Christ is not just a truth proposition. To TRUST Him is inseparable from the ACT of ENTRUSTING ourselves TO Him. Thus faith and works are inseparable in redemption.
7 ....This will take place when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels 8 in blazing fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and do not OBEY THE GOSPEL of our Lord Jesus. 9 They will suffer the penalty of eternal destruction, separated from the presence of the Lord and the glory of His might,…
(2 Thessalonians 1:7-8)
Salvation is priceless and therefore we can never purchase it. This is not to say the gospel is given without conditions just that fulfilling the conditions of REPENTANCE and FAITH does not PAY for it. Those are just the covenant conditions set forth and even then the Holy Spirit assists us in the process

 

[mailmandan]

A. The word "works" in Ephesians refers specifically to the WORKS OF THE LAW which the Judaizers were teaching as necessary to do
in order to obtain salvation. The term "JUDAEIZERS" refers to a group in the early Christian church who were teaching that, in addition to answering the Messianic call to REPENT and BELIEVE, people ALSO had to adhere to certain Jewish laws and customs to be made righteous and acceptable to God.
B. Specifically, the KIND of WORKS Paul was referring to were WORKS OF THE [Mosaic] LAW which included such practices as
(1). circumcision, (2) eating Kosher, (3) celebrating New moons and the other festivals and (4) keeping Shabbat
(Philippians 3:2-3; Colossians 2:6) none of which was necessary to receive the gift of salvation.

Although the Jews were primarily hung up on specific works of the Mosaic Law, Paul does not merely limit "works" to only those specific works you mentioned. Folks who teach salvation by works will typically try to turn "not saved by works" not saved by "these" works (works of the law) but still saved by "those" works (good works) but that argument is bogus. We are saved FOR good works and NOT BY good works. (Ephesians 2:10)

In James 2:15-16, the example of a "work" that James gives is: "If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, "Depart in peace, be warmed and filled," but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit?" To give a brother or sister these things needed for the body would certainly be a "work of faith/good work" yet to neglect such a brother or sister and not give them the things needed for the body is to break the second great commandment "love your neighbor as yourself" (Matthew 22:39) as found written in the law of Moses. (Leviticus 19:18)

In Matthew 22:37-40, we read: Jesus said to him, 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets. Now which good works could a Christian accomplish that are "completely detached" from these two great commandments which are found in the law of Moses? (Deuteronomy 6:5; Leviticus 19:18)

So, when it comes to the moral aspect of the law, we cannot dissect good works from the law of Moses. Elsewhere, in Titus 3:5, Paul said that it is not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us.. and in 2 Timothy 1:9, Paul said that God saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works.. so "not saved by works" is not merely limited to specific works of the law of Moses but includes works in general.

C. According to the Messianic proclamation, what is necessary is REPENTANCE of our sins and FAITH in the Savior Himself. This involves more than just accepting a truth proposition ABOUT Jesus. Rather it is the result of a direct personal transaction WITH Him which leads us not only to trust IN HIM but to ENTRUST ourselves TO HIM. Faith and works are inseparable in salvation.

Faith is the root of salvation and works are the fruit. No fruit at all would demonstrate there is no root. It sounds to me like you are conflating faith AND works which culminates in salvation by faith AND works, which is a "different" gospel.

D. You seem to be CONFLATING obedience to Christ and His gospel with "works." However, the two are not are not at all the same. The yoke of Moses was a burden. The yoke of Christ (though it too represented submitting to a Master) brings rest.

We obey the gospel by choosing to believe the gospel. Romans 10:16 - But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our report?” Not to be confused with multiple acts of obedience/works which "follow." You are conflating faith AND works. Post #11,583 is for you. The gospel is the "good news" of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) and is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that BELIEVES.. (Romans 1:16) To "believe" the gospel is to trust in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ as the ALL-sufficient means of our salvation. The gospel is a message of grace that is to be received through faith. The gospel is not a set of rituals to perform, a code of laws to be obeyed or a check list of good works to accomplish as a prerequisite for salvation.

E. Faith in Christ is not just a truth proposition. To TRUST Him is inseparable from the ACT of ENTRUSTING ourselves TO Him. Thus faith and works are inseparable in redemption.

More conflating of faith AND works. Roman Catholics make the same error. They basically teach that we are saved by faith "infused" with works and then those works become meritorious towards receiving salvation. Campbellites teach faith "conjoined" with works.

7 ....This will take place when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels 8 in blazing fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and do not OBEY THE GOSPEL of our Lord Jesus. 9 They will suffer the penalty of eternal destruction, separated from the presence of the Lord and the glory of His might,…
(2 Thessalonians 1:7-8)
Salvation is priceless and therefore we can never purchase it. This is not to say the gospel is given without conditions just that fulfilling the conditions of REPENTANCE and FAITH does not PAY for it. Those are just the covenant conditions set forth and even then the Holy Spirit assists us in the process

Those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus are those who refuse to believe the gospel. (Romans 10:16) We must first repent (change our mind) before we can believe the gospel and become saved. Jesus said repent and believe the gospel. (Mark 1:15) The apostle Paul said testifying both to Jews and to Greeks of repentance toward God and of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. (Acts 20:21)

 

[JimiSurvivor]

That salvation is by grace through faith and is not by works (Ephesians 2:8,9) is not hard to understand. It's just hard for works-salvationists to ACCEPT. It's a shame that human pride will not allow works-salvationists to place their faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. Their hands are full of their works, and they will not let go in order to receive Christ through faith.

What kind of "works" are you talking about? Which group do you offer as an example of this practice?

 

[mailmandan]

What kind of "works" are you talking about? Which group do you offer as an example of this practice?

Any group that teaches salvation by faith + works of any kind, which includes multiple groups.

 

[Musicmaster]

A. The word "works" in Ephesians refers specifically to the WORKS OF THE LAW which the Judaizers were teaching as necessary to do
in order to obtain salvation.

That's not entirely true. In Ephesians 2:10, that is not works of the Law, per se. The Thayer's Greek Lexicon defines that instance of the three as "every good work springing from piety," some of which do align with the Law and some not specifically stated in the Law. Your broad brush statement, then isn't entirely consistent with the facts.

The term "JUDAEIZERS" refers to a group in the early Christian church who were teaching that, in addition to answering the Messianic call to REPENT and BELIEVE, people ALSO had to adhere to certain Jewish laws and customs to be made righteous and acceptable to God.

That was indeed true of us who were of Israel at that time and under the Kingdom Gospel. That is not the case today, however. It's only works-based salvationists who lay claim to the works of the Law being tied to acquiring salvation and/or its retention. Are you a legalist in the arena of theology?

B. Specifically, the KIND of WORKS Paul was referring to were WORKS OF THE [Mosaic] LAW which included such practices as
(1). circumcision, (2) eating Kosher, (3) celebrating New moons and the other festivals and (4) keeping Shabbat
(Philippians 3:2-3; Colossians 2:6) none of which was necessary to receive the gift of salvation.

We of Israel were indeed still under requirement for circumcision, cleansing, Kosher lunar cycle observances, et al that was not a part of sacrifices for sin given that Messiah fulfilled that for us all. It is written that we of Israel were indeed doing those things during the time of Paul's writings, and we still required new converts into Messianic Judaism to be circumcised...that is, until our fall as a nation and as the priesthood unto God. Those who were called "Judaizers" were teaching our truth as a nation at that time. None of what they taught was wrong at that time.

What the Judaizers did that was wrong was to go into another man's work and disrupt it with a gospel that was not meant for Gentiles, neither then nor now. That was and is another gospel, the preachers of which are accursed who preached then, and preach now, that other gospel to those who are under the Gospel of Grace, which was/is Paul's gospel.

C. According to the Messianic proclamation, what is necessary is REPENTANCE of our sins and FAITH in the Savior Himself. This involves more than just accepting a truth proposition ABOUT Jesus. Rather it is the result of a direct personal transaction WITH Him which leads us not only to trust IN HIM but to ENTRUST ourselves TO HIM. Faith and works are inseparable in salvation.

Repentance OF our sins? Please define what you mean by that. It would be appreciated.

Additionally, to say that faith and works are inseparable in salvation smacks of works-based salvation. Is that your meaning? Given that we are saved by grace alone through faith alone, and that works are the OUTFLOW RESULT of that grace through faith, the wording you used sounds problematic. Works cannot save anyone. If works were a part of acquiring salvation and/or retaining salvation, then the sufficiency in the shed Blood of Christ is then in question. Do you see the problem here? If, say, 0.0000001% of our salvation were based upon works, then the death, burial and resurrection of Christ on the third day was in vain if mankind could, by any measure, acquire righteousness through his works.

For a better understanding of the ramifications of what I'm pointing out here, one is either righteous or one is not. There is no middle ground. That small percentage I addressed with that decimal number above, that points to some partial righteousness, which is non-existent. So, what really can any man do, through his personal efforts in works, to either acquire salvation and/or retain his salvation through works? Do you honestly believe in degrees of righteousness? Please elaborate, if you would.

D. You seem to be CONFLATING obedience to Christ and His gospel with "works." However, the two are not are not at all the same. The yoke of Moses was a burden. The yoke of Christ (though it too represented submitting to a Master) brings rest.

This sounds like a switcheroo of the tables of explanation. Could you clarify all this in the midst of this confusing, seeming change in direction?

E. Faith in Christ is not just a truth proposition. To TRUST Him is inseparable from the ACT of ENTRUSTING ourselves TO Him. Thus faith and works are inseparable in redemption.

Here again you changed directions. You said above that it's a conflation of works with obedience. What is obedience? Is it not works? How would you differentiate them? Please elaborate in your own words.

7 ....This will take place when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels 8 in blazing fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and do not OBEY THE GOSPEL of our Lord Jesus. 9 They will suffer the penalty of eternal destruction, separated from the presence of the Lord and the glory of His might,…
(2 Thessalonians 1:7-8)
Salvation is priceless and therefore we can never purchase it. This is not to say the gospel is given without conditions just that fulfilling the conditions of REPENTANCE and FAITH does not PAY for it. Those are just the covenant conditions set forth and even then the Holy Spirit assists us in the process

Paul seems to disagree with how you're trying to use one of his writings:

1 Corinthians 15:1-4
1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

There is not one work in that by which we are saved. Good works do indeed follow upon the heels of true salvation as the resulting ourflow, but adding any pre-requisite or efforts of retention to Paul's gospel here is exactly what the Judaizers were trying to implement against my brothers and sisters who are of the Gentile stripe (so to speak). Sanctification, being a process throughout our lives on this earth, is a power of God at work in all our lives that goes FAR beyond self-effort. Even falling off into unbelief doesn't nullify salvation, so what you're saying drives home some serious flaws in support of confusion.

MM

 

[JimiSurvivor]

Although the Jews were primarily hung up on specific works of the Mosaic Law, Paul does not merely limit "works" to only those specific works you mentioned. Folks who teach salvation by works will typically try to turn "not saved by works" not saved by "these" works (works of the law) but still saved by "those" works (good works) but that argument is bogus. We are saved FOR good works and NOT BY good works. (Ephesians 2:10)

Still, do you not agree that when the text uses the phrase WORKS of the LAW it is referring to the Law of Moses and those practices that were mandatory under terms of that covenant? These were the kind of "works" that the "Judaezers" were teaching as being NECESSARY for Gentile converts to do in order to be fully accepted as covenant children of God. Since that was the current situation in many of the Churches Paul wrote to that was what was addressed in many of his epistles.

That's not entirely true. In Ephesians 2:10, that is not works of the Law, per se. The Thayer's Greek Lexicon defines that instance of the three as "every good work springing from piety," some of which do align with the Law and some not specifically stated in the Law. Your broad brush statement, then isn't entirely consistent with the facts.

The kind of "works" the Judaizers were teaching came out of Judaism. Of course, many people who are not Jewish consider themselves to be "good people" for other reasons - perhaps because they are not guilty of certain sins or they are not "as bad" as certain other people. Paul addressed works of the law precisely because that was being taught by the Judaeizers at the time.

However, the Apostles also pointed out many OTHER wicked practices, some of which were considered acceptable or even virtuous in the Graco-Roman culture they lived in.. The teachings of the Judaeizers, were dangerous in a different way - because those ideas came directly or indirectly from the scriptures or from Jewish tradition and so could more easily be mistaken as coming from God (especially among novices). This is why Paul rebuked the Judaizers so sternly in his letters.

Before I go on I need to ask you this: does the Messianic gospel call all mankind to REPENT (of their sins) AND BELIEVE (in Jesus) to be their only way of Salvation?

 

[mailmandan]

Still, do you not agree that when the text uses the phrase WORKS of the LAW it is referring to the Law of Moses and those practices that were mandatory under terms of that covenant? These were the kind of "works" that the "Judaezers" were teaching as being NECESSARY for Gentile converts to do in order to be fully accepted as covenant children of God. Since that was the current situation in many of the Churches Paul wrote to that was what was addressed in many of his epistles.

The kind of "works" the Judaizers were teaching came out of Judaism. Of course, many people who are not Jewish consider themselves to be "good people" for other reasons - perhaps because they are not guilty of certain sins or they are not "as bad" as certain other people. Paul addressed works of the law precisely because that was being taught by the Judaeizers at the time.

However, the Apostles also pointed out many OTHER wicked practices, some of which were considered acceptable or even virtuous in the Graco-Roman culture they lived in.. The teachings of the Judaeizers, were dangerous in a different way - because those ideas came directly or indirectly from the scriptures or from Jewish tradition and so could more easily be mistaken as coming from God (especially among novices). This is why Paul rebuked the Judaizers so sternly in his letters.

Before I go on I need to ask you this: does the Messianic gospel call all mankind to REPENT (of their sins) AND BELIEVE (in Jesus) to be their only way of Salvation?

Did you thoroughly read post #11.586?

 

[JimiSurvivor]

We of Israel were indeed still under requirement for circumcision, cleansing, Kosher lunar cycle observances, et al that was not a part of sacrifices for sin given that Messiah fulfilled that for us all. It is written that we of Israel were indeed doing those things during the time of Paul's writings, and we still required new converts into Messianic Judaism to be circumcised...that is, until our fall as a nation and as the priesthood unto God. Those who were called "Judaizers" were teaching our truth as a nation at that time. None of what they taught was wrong at that time.

When you allude to "YOUR TRUTH truth as a nation" you seem to be positing the co-existence of two (incompatible/contradictory) system of truths. The Bible settles this by positing only one way of being saved that which was purchased for mankind by the blood of the Lamb.
When Peter and John testified before the priests and elders of the Sanhedrin the Apostles said:
12 Salvation exists in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.”
(Acts 4:12)

Salvation is now fully and exclusively invested in Jesus Christ. This is demonstrated in
Mark 2:5-12....Jesus, seeing the faith of those who brought the paralytic to Him, declares, "Son, your sins are forgiven." The scribes present question in their hearts, "Why does this man speak like this? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" Jesus, perceiving their thoughts, responds, "But so that you may know that the Son of Man has AUTHORITY on earth to FORGIVE SINS," and then commands the paralytic to rise, take up his mat, and walk.
The forgiveness of sins by Jesus was the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy and Messianic expectation (Isaiah 53:5-6)

Messiah can not only forgive sins, He also has the authority to grant eternal life:
"For You granted Him authority over all humanity, so that He may give eternal life to all those You have given Him" (John 17:2).
The Son is the WAY to God, the TRUTH about God and the LIFE of God. It seems that, despite this momentous act of mercy and grace, you desire to retain certain practices of the Mosaic Covenant while rejecting the sacrificial system it was based on.
However, according to the author of Hebrews,
13 By speaking of a new covenant, He has made the first one OBSOLETE; and what is obsolete and aging WILL SOON DISAPPEAR.
(Hebrews 8:13)

 

[JimiSurvivor]

In a prior post you said the following:

We of Israel were indeed still under requirement for circumcision, cleansing, Kosher lunar cycle observances, et al that was not a part of sacrifices

If, after the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus the Jewish people were still under the requirement of the law concerning circumcision, eating Kosher, keeping Shabbat and lunar cycle observances, then the Judaizers were right and the Apostle Paul, who strongly opposed them was wrong. It follows then that their hybrid version of gospel of faith PLUS keeping those other Jewish laws and rituals must have been correct. It sounds to me like you still hold the teaching of the Judaizers rather than the Messianic gospel of salvation through repentance and faith.

I used to attend a Messianic Synogue before I moved to this location. We NEVER tried to put people back under the yoke of the Law. As for the matter of circumcision this was settled long ago when the Apostles and Elders met and deliberated this matter in
Acts 15:1-11
1 But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.”2And after Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and the elders about this question....7 And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe.8 And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us,9 and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith.10 Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?11 But we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.”

If we accept the testimony of the Apostles, circumcision along with the other rituals you mentioned were no longer considered to be necessary for salvation, at least as of about 49 A.D.

 

[JimiSurvivor]

Repentance OF our sins? Please define what you mean by that. It would be appreciated.

A. I was using OF as an indicator of the Greek GENITIVE case which is a common practice, although I probably should have used FROM since the conjuction APO (from) actually appears in the verse. However, grammatically, repenting OF something is indistinguishable from repenting from something.

B. Since you have already cited J. H. Thayer as a lexical source I assume you generally accept his analysis. Therefore allow me to refer to his definition of repent: μετάνοια, a change of mind: as it appears in one who repents of a purpose he has formed or of something he has done; especially the change of mind of those who have begun to abhor their errors and misdeeds, and have determined to enter upon a better course of life, so that it embraces both a recognition of sin and sorrow for it and hearty amendment, the tokens and effects of which are good deeds
(Thayer's Greek Lexicon)
Notice that Thayer included recognition of sin in the very definition of the word REPENT. Therefore, I do not see why you are trying to make it about some other kind of change that has nothing to do with sin. Our sin is our primary issue with God.

C. Ephesians describes the way we used to be in chapter 2: 1And you⁺, being dead in your⁺ trespasses and sins—
2in which once you⁺walked [habitually] according to the age of this world, according to the ruler of the authority of the air, the spirit now working in the sons of disobedience, 3 among whom we all also once conducted ourselves in the desires of our flesh, doing the desires of the flesh and of its thoughts; and we were by nature children of wrath even as the rest
(Philippians 2:1–4).
If this is not a description of living in sin, i do not know what would be.

D. The central issue we had with God, the thing that made us His enemies was our sin. Until we know we are sinners we will not see our desperate need for Him nor will we surrender our lives to Him.
40 Some of the Pharisees who were with Him heard this, and they asked Him, “Are we blind too?”
41“If you were blind,” Jesus replied, “you would not be guilty of sin. But since you CLAIM you can see, your guilt remains.”
(John 9:40-41)
Those who think they are "good people" do not even know they need forgiveness. Until they are made aware through CONVICTION that they are guilty and blind the gospel will do them no good.
Jesus Himself said: 31....“It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. 32 I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.” (Luke 5:32)

Additionally, to say that faith and works are inseparable in salvation smacks of works-based salvation. Is that your meaning? Given that we are saved by grace alone through faith alone, and that works are the OUTFLOW RESULT of that grace through faith, the wording you used sounds problematic. Works cannot save anyone. If works were a part of acquiring salvation and/or retaining salvation, then the sufficiency in the shed Blood of Christ is then in question. Do you see the problem here? If, say, 0.0000001% of our salvation were based upon works, then the death, burial and resurrection of Christ on the third day was in vain if mankind could, by any measure, acquire righteousness through his works.

E. Is obeying Christ just another work like the legal works the Pharisees taught their disciples to do?
When Jesus preached the good news He invited all of us to take the radical step of becoming YOKED to Him.
28 Come to Me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest.
29 Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.
30 For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.”…
This was an invitation to become linked with Him, live with Him and serve Him.
(Matthew 6:28-30)
Of course no amount of service can ever buy this walk with Him. He invites us into this walk.

F. The Master also said this:
24.... “If anyone wants to come after Me, [as a sheep following its shepherd] he must deny himself and take up his cross and FOLLOW ME. 25 For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it. 26What will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul?…
(Matthew 16:24-26)

When Christ calls us to follow Him, answering that call requires FAITH otherwise we would not do it but it also requires a response on our part - an action or decision or step which then becomes a walk. Since this can be defined as a "work" - not the meritorious kind but an action of faith. Examples of this can be found all throughout the word.

 

[Musicmaster]

When you allude to "YOUR TRUTH truth as a nation" you seem to be positing the co-existence of two (incompatible/contradictory) system of truths.

Not at all. It would be absolutely contradictory for me to say that two opposing statements can both be true for all people at all time. That violates the law of non-contradiction.

Paul clearly pointed out that there are "divisions" in truth. Israel had the Kingdom Gospel for us of Israel and Gentiles had/have the Gospel of Grace, which we should all be under today.

The Bible settles this by positing only one way of being saved that which was purchased for mankind by the blood of the Lamb.

And yet most of Western Christendom today points to works-based salvation, which cannot save anyone. They will agree that we are "saved by grace through faith," and then turn right around and add to it, "...but ya gotta live it." You stated that it is by the Blood of the Lamb, which is indeed true, but when people cast in works into the discussion about our salvation, they are preaching "another gospel," which places them on the level of the accursed.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

If, after the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus the Jewish people were still under the requirement of the law concerning circumcision, eating Kosher, keeping Shabbat and lunar cycle observances, then the Judaizers were right and the Apostle Paul, who strongly opposed them was wrong.

Only when one cuts the scriptures up and puts it all back together like a puzzle with subjective and manipulated shapes...so to speak.

Yes, the Judaizers were indeed right, but what they preached as not what was meant for Gentiles nor was I Paul's assigned ministry to the Gentiles and to the Jews to whom he encountered who were not under the Messianic Kingdom Gospel. That doesn't make Paul wrong by any means. Paul made this clear:

Galatians 1:8-9
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

When people here in the West force meaning into this text an idea that isn't there, that's the usual error rooted in assumption that fills so many pulpits and Bible studies that is utter rubbish. Paul did not at any time declare all other gospels as false. Why?

Galatians 2:7
But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

They were not one and the same. Had they been the same, there would have been no controversy to have forced Paul to embark upon two different journeys to Jerusalem on this matter. Circumcision and uncircumcision are not the same thing any more than the gospel intended for each were allegedly the same. They are not. A simple reading of Acts 2:38 and 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 demonstrates that nicely.

MM

 

[JimiSurvivor]

Only when one cuts the scriptures up and puts it all back together like a puzzle with subjective and manipulated shapes...so to speak.

Yes, the Judaizers were indeed right, but what they preached as not what was meant for Gentiles nor was I Paul's assigned ministry to the Gentiles and to the Jews to whom he encountered who were not under the Messianic Kingdom Gospel. That doesn't make Paul wrong by any means. Paul made this clear:

Galatians 1:8-98 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
When people here in the West force meaning into this text an idea that isn't there, that's the usual error rooted in assumption that fills so many pulpits and Bible studies that is utter rubbish. Paul did not at any time declare all other gospels as false. Why?

Paul never mentioned the idea that there were TWO DIFFERENT GOSPELS and that the Judaeizers were only wrong because they were delivering the Jewish gospel to the Gentiles. Isaiah prophesied that when the Messiah appeared he would deliver the good news personally.
6Therefore My people will know My name; therefore they will know on that day that I am He who speaks. HERE I AM!”
7 How beautiful on the mountains are the feet of those who bring GOOD NEWS [the gospel], who proclaim peace, [peace with God] who bring good tidings, who proclaim SALVATION, who say to Zion, “YOUR GOD REIGNS!”
(Isaiah 52:6-7)
The message of Salvation was announced by the One whose name means JAH IS SALVATION, the One whom the Baptizer called the LAMB of GOD because he would take away the sins of the world. He was the embodiment and primary representative of the Kingdom of God that would eventually rule the world.

20 When asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The kingdom of God will not come with observable signs. 21Nor will people say, ‘Look, here it is,’ or ‘There it is.’ For you see, the kingdom of God is IN YOUR MIDST”
(Luke 17:20-21)
He was referring to Himself because He is the Sovereign of the Kingdom
The message of salvation called the gospel was given when He came and proclaimed that He had the authority to grant eternal
to those who believed. Preaching a divided kingdom would never lead to a united Kingdom consisting of BOTH JEWS and GENTILES

Galatians 2:7

But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

They were not one and the same. Had they been the same, there would have been no controversy to have forced Paul to embark upon two different journeys to Jerusalem on this matter. Circumcision and uncircumcision are not the same thing any more than the gospel intended for each were allegedly the same. They are not. A simple reading of Acts 2:38 and 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 demonstrates that nicely.

MM

Of the circumcision and of the uncircumcision refers to the TWO GROUPS Peter and Paul would be sent to. It does not suggest that there were two different ways to be saved. God did not give two different PATHS to salvation. There is only one and that is based on what Jesus accomplished on the cross.
As Paul said: 16 I am not ashamed of THE GOSPEL [singular] because it is THE power of God [singular] for salvation to EVERYONE who BELIEVES, first to the Jew, then to the Greek. 17For THE GOSPEL [singular] reveals the righteousness of God that comes by faith from start to finish, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”…
From start to finish means it is not a hybrid Gospel of faith plus Judaeism.

 

[JimiSurvivor]

Not at all. It would be absolutely contradictory for me to say that two opposing statements can both be true for all people at all time. That violates the law of non-contradiction.

Paul clearly pointed out that there are "divisions" in truth. Israel had the Kingdom Gospel for us of Israel and Gentiles had/have the Gospel of Grace, which we should all be under today.



And yet most of Western Christendom today points to works-based salvation, which cannot save anyone. They will agree that we are "saved by grace through faith," and then turn right around and add to it, "...but ya gotta live it." You stated that it is by the Blood of the Lamb, which is indeed true, but when people cast in works into the discussion about our salvation, they are preaching "another gospel," which places them on the level of the accursed.

MM

Yet you, or rather the hyperdispensational doctrines of Bullinger which you have adopted, posit TWO DIFFERENT Gospels both of which claim to be the fulfillment of the the SAME MESSIANIC prophecy in Isaiah 52. It is YOU who are trying to wring two gospels of salvation out of this one verse. At least, you believe your ancestors in the First Century were given two separate paths of salvation. Paul made no allowance for ANY OTHER SAVING gospel but the one he taught.

The fact that you conflate giving up our lives to Christ with legalism shows how far you have drifted from the truth since neither the Apostles nor Jesus Himself defined our relationship with Him in those terms. Peter said the Law was a yoke neither he nor his forefathers could bear. Jesus Christ has a yoke too that links us to Him in His work. This was not an option. Anyone who wanted to follow Him were commanded to "take HIS yoke on them and to LEARN of Him." A yoke represents our willing submission to Him which you seem to find distasteful and contrary to grace and liberty and even call salvation by WORKS. Perhaps this is why you try to separate repentence from SIN which is what it has always been about.

I also reject your assertion that the text "clearly" points out that there are "divisions" in truth on the basis that Israel had the Kingdom Gospel for us of Israel and Gentiles had/have the Gospel of Grace (which we should all be under today). There never were TWO plans of salvation only One which was offered for the sins of the whole world. This was revealed before by John the Baptizer who announced "Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world"

Peter also testified to his fellow Jews about how the plan of redemption included the Gentiles:
15 As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them, just as He had fallen upon us at the beginning. 16Then I remembered the word of the Lord, how He said, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’
17 So if God gave them [the Gentiles] the same gift He gave us who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to hinder the work of God?”
(Acts 10:15-17)
By this the Messianic Jews who were present understood that Gentiles who believed would inherit the same covenental blessings as they had.
18 When they heard this, they had no further objections, and they glorified God, saying, “So then, God has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto life.”
(Acts 10:18)
Peter, seeing this said: 47“Can anyone withhold the water to baptize these people? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have!” 48 So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.
(Acts 10:47-48)
By ONE LORD
ONE FAITH
ONE BAPTISM both Jews and Gentiles are saved and united into
ONE BODY.

 

[JimiSurvivor]

Only when one cuts the scriptures up and puts it all back together like a puzzle with subjective and manipulated shapes...so to speak.
Yes, the Judaizers were indeed right, but what they preached as not what was meant for Gentiles nor was I Paul's assigned ministry to the Gentiles and to the Jews to whom he encountered who were not under the Messianic Kingdom Gospel. That doesn't make Paul wrong by any means. Paul made this clear:

Galatians 1:8-9
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

a. Your difficulty here is that your starting point is your assumption that, for some brief period after the Resurrection TWO EQUAL paths of salvation existed, two separate VERSIONS of the "gospel" (good news) each of which had somewhat different requirements. One of these was meant only for Jews and required (not only) faith but that the individual had to perform certain requirements taken from the Law of Moses specifically:
1. circumcision,
2. eating Kosher
3. keeping Shabbat as well as
4. the lunar cycle festivals

The only good news here is that, *animal sacrifices mediated by a priesthood are no longer required. Neither, apparently is REPENTENCE. Bullingerites seem to find repentence distasteful and even contrary to grace. At least, that is what I take out of their continual effort to excise SIN from repentance. Grace seems to be like Ali MacGraw's definition of love:
"love means never having to say you're sorry" I will not say they rule out PERSONAL confession of sin entirely. However, they apparently do not make forgiveness and cleansing contingent upon confession (1 John 1:7-9)

If I have misunderstood the difference beteen the gospel of the Circumcision and that of the Uncircumcision I am open for comment.

 

[Musicmaster]

Yet you, or rather the hyperdispensational doctrines of Bullinger which you have adopted, posit TWO DIFFERENT Gospels both of which claim to be the fulfillment of the the SAME MESSIANIC prophecy in Isaiah 52. It is YOU who are trying to wring two gospels of salvation out of this one verse. At least, you believe your ancestors in the First Century were given two separate paths of salvation. Paul made no allowance for ANY OTHER SAVING gospel but the one he taught.

Well, once you get into slapping labels on others, the discussion only degenerates from there into the muck and mire of guttural nonsense and false accusation, demonstrated in claiming legalism in what I've stated, which is so very far from the truth. I'm absolutely opposed to legalism. Enjoy characterizing others with the broad brush strokes dipped deeply into buckets of non-discernment.

Shalom

MM