Did Jesus Die on The Cross for The Just/Elect/Saved Whose Names Are Written in The Book of Life OR

Yes, I do. The regenerate has an old man a.k.a. a natural (psuchikos/soulish) man, his native mind-plus-flesh, which is led by his flesh; and he must keep on crucifying that flesh and that old man by relying on the Spirit residing in his renewed spirit: walking by faith and not by sight. (Eph. 4:22 That you put off concerning the former behaviour the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts"; Col. 3:9 Lie not to one another, seeing you have put off the old man with his deeds.") And the regenerate has a new inner man, a new invisible mind-plus-spirit, (a perfectly-renewed, perfectly-clean spirit, but an only partially renewed mind), which inner man is led by the Holy Spirit within him. (Eph. 4:23 "And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; and that you put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.") The new man must keep on putting off the old man so that the life of Christ is manifest through him. The more the new man allows the new spirit to renew the thinking of his mind with the revelation truth of the Holy Spirit, the more he is able to bring his flesh under submission to the new man ("but be transformed by the renewing of your mind,,,"

The unregenerate has an old man, a.k.a. a natural/psuchikos/soulish man, his native mind-plus-flesh, who is led by flesh, who relies on instinct; and the unregenerate man is prone to living according to that natural man, relying on instinct residing in his flesh, walking by sight, not by faith. But the unregenerate also has an old, unrenewed partially-damaged spirit, which may still hear from the Holy Spirit, who is with Him ( Acts 10:22 "And they said, 'Cornelius the centurion, a just man, and one that fears God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews, was warned from God by an holy angel to send for you into his house, and hear words from you.' "). It is possible for the unregenerate to hear from the Holy Spirit and to allow the Holy Spirit to influence his thinking, decisions and beliefs, but he tends to rely more often on his instincts and his learned customs and beliefs.

"Natural" just means that which one is born with. (1 Cor. 15:44 "It is sown a natural/psuchikos body...") A self-preservation focussed body-mind-spirit. "New" means that which supersedes the old and replaces the old in part or wholly. Unregenerate means "not born again", "without a renewed re-created, undefiled spirit". Both the regenerate and the unregenerate have a natural man component to their personalities, and are capable of allowing the flesh, instincts, customs and traditions to dominate their decisions and behaviour. Only the regenerate has a renewed perfect spirit able continuously to channel the Holy Spirit's influence and power into his mind and flesh to give him a more consistently Christ-like lifestyle. (Gal. 5:16 "This I say then, Walk by the Spirit and you shall not fulfil the lusts of the flesh.")

1Cor. 2:14 But the natural (psuchikos) man receives not the things of the Spirit of God (from context this means the deep things of the spirit 1 Cor. 2:6-13): for they are foolishness to him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

You apparently don't have the wit to answer my easy questions. There is no point trying to explain anything to someone so apparently witless. Once you answer my questions, it may be worth trying to dialogue further.

#6,739
PaulThomson said:
C.
16 Having known that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith that Jesus Christ exercises, even we believed in Jesus Christ, [yet not we, but Christ in us believed in Himself], that we might be justified by the faith that Jesus Christ exercises, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

This appears to be your understanding of the text.

So, Christ imposed His own faith upon us to believe in Himself through us, so that we could become permanently righteous in status, so that he could then withhold that same faith from us much of the time, so that we might often fall into sin and might often be unrighteously in practice.


#6,739
PaulThomson said:
B.
16 Having known that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ, even we believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faithfulness of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

This is one possible translation that is grammatically and semantically plausible and makes sense, without Jesus doing the believing instead of us.

The only scripture I see that mentions "into Christ" is Gal. 3:26-27
"For you are all children of God through faith in Jesus Christ. For as many of you as have been immersed into Christ have put on Christ."

It doesn't mention anyone in particular placing someone into Christ.

Rom. 6:3 Know you not that as many as were immersed into Jesus Christ were immersed into his death?

1 Cor. 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all immersed into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free, and have all been caused to drink into one Spirit.

The Holy Spirit immerses us into the body of Christ, so one could say that He is placing us into Christ. And the one immersing the convert in water may also be in some way placing the convert into Christ. Or he could simply be performing the ceremonial rite that symbolises what the Holy Spirit is actually doing. Probably, the latter.

You said, "There is no answer besides Christ - eternal life resides only in Him and is Him. If someone has Christ, they then have eternal life..." Well, if someone has Jesus Christ, it does not matter whether they think they had nothing to do with their own reception of Christ, or whether they think they cooperated with God to effect their reception of Christ.
In arguing that someone who has Christ, but believes they received Him by cooperatively participating in their salvation, cannot really have Christ, you have contradicted your own premise that "There is no answer besides Christ - eternal life resides only in Him and is Him. If someone has Christ, they then have eternal life..."
Also, by insisting that it is necessary to affirm that one had no part to play in their own salvation, you are making that affirmation a work that must be done to be truly saved, and again you are contradicting your own premises that we need do nothing to be saved by Christ".

Do you think there will be a hell in the New Jerusalem? I say, “absolutely no.”

Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also there was no more sea. Then I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from heaven saying, "Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people. God Himself will be with them and be their God. "And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away." Then He who sat on the throne said, "Behold, I make all things new." And He said to me, "Write, for these words are true and faithful." And He said to me, "It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. I will give of the fountain of the water of life freely to him who thirsts. "He who overcomes shall inherit all things, and I will be his God and he shall be My son. "But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death." But there shall by no means enter it anything that defiles, or causes an abomination or a lie, but only those who are written in the Lamb's Book of Life.

- Revelation 21:1-8,27

That's Latin.

Yes, I've seen your creative eisegetical meditations and have little doubt you can create a lot apart from Scripture...

It sure is. It's nice to see that someone can work in Scripture! BTW, Paul, how did you notice this - by looking at the Greek Text that some downplay the importance of?

If some would just branch out a bit from their comfort zones of favorite translations and systematic theologies, they might notice that translators are dealing with such translation issues and they might pick up some tools like interlinears and others available for free on the internet today and do some actual work in the Text.

We can see English translators are making decisions here:

NKJ Galatians 2:16 "knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.

NET Galatians 2:16 yet we know that no one is justified by the works of the law but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by the faithfulness of Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified.

YLT Galatians 2:16 having known also that a man is not declared righteous by works of law, if not through the faith of Jesus Christ, also we in Christ Jesus did believe, that we might be declared righteous by the faith of Christ, and not by works of law, wherefore declared righteous by works of law shall be no flesh.'


Thanks for caring and doing some real work in our Text, Paul. Very refreshing.

FWIW, I think the YLT get's it best with "faith" instead of "faithfulness". I see Jesus living in the precursor of our life in Him. He lived in faith and in Spirit, perfected this life, then passed it on to us.

I also think at the end of the analysis, His faith was a life of perfect obedience and thus was perfect faithfulness, which helps us to see what Biblical Faith truly is and helps us to understand what is being developed in us in Christ in Spirit.

Nice work!

Again, nice work!

I was wondering if @Cameron143 ("Cam") would do any of this work (but it seems not) and actually note what I had already posted that showed (in answer to Cam's question) how and when one enters into Christ

This Galatians 3 Scripture was one I posted to Cam to show who in context Paul was writing to and I included 3:28 to further this and point out Christians - Paul's primary addressees - being "in Christ": NKJ Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

I was critiqued for doing so.

As you've addressed, we are immersed/baptized into Christ and the verb is passive meaning someone - the Spirit - does the immersing.

It's quite odd how we who read and analyze the Text and go against someone's favorite theology will get accused of thinking we save ourselves, when we understand and recognize things like passive verbs.

So, since you've done the work, it looks to me like the verses from Gal3 which both you and I posted shows in regard to being in Christ (there is also some work to do here re: faith and Christ that I'm not going to get into here but will make a few notes):

• You (Galatians) are all sons of God through faith (literally the faith in Christ Jesus).
  • Explanation: As many [of you who] were baptized into Christ, put on Christ (interesting middle voice)
    • There is not Jew nor Greek, there is not slave nor free, there is not male nor female
      • Explanation: You all are one in Christ Jesus

Whoever was baptized [by the Spirit] into Christ put on Christ are one in Christ are sons of God through the faith in Jesus Christ.

A lot going on here while Paul is making the case that he fears some will desert and fall from grace and be released from Christ.

Again, nice work.

Thanks again. So if the Spirit is the One who places us or baptizes an individual into Christ, how is it possible for an individual to baptize themselves out of Christ?

Who mentioned baptizing oneself out of Christ?

If I bath my dog and dunk it under water in a lake, there is no reason to suppose that it will stay permanently under water or in the lake, or that I am going to hold it under water permanently. The dog does not need to "submerge itself out of the lake" (whatever you think that means) to leave the lake. Why would you assume it could never leave the lake once it has been dunked.

Sorry, I don't follow your point - I'll re-read after coffee. Did I say or imply that we must affirm anything to become saved? I don't recall that - if I did somehow, it was not my intention to do so.
I will say now, however, that God does it all. We have no part to play in it, as until then, being spiritually dead in sin, we do not/cannot have true spiritual discernment - we must first be indwelt by Him being made spiritually alive, after/by which, we come to realize that He made us so, but not of ourselves. The process of gaining that discernment is not necessarily instantaneous but can progress over time. All of this does not take away from the fact that Jesus is still the answer - He first applies that answer (Himself) to us, and by/through that, we comprehend the question. All of the glory goes to God.

Being in Christ is a spiritual position. One either is or is not. And one is or is not of the Spirit's action. An individual, unlike the dog in the lake, cannot extricate themselves from the condition.
This goes to the heart of the previous discussion concerning Galatians. Paul's concern for the Galatians could not have been that they were losing their salvation because they couldn't be taking themselves out of Christ. Rather, he was warning them of what was actually true of them if indeed what he was warning them concerning was true of them.
Further, since Paul teaches that salvation is by grace and not works, he would never view an individual's actions as a means of losing grace, but merely evidence that it never existed.

OK, I'm looking:

Looking ahead glancingly I'm seeing your male & female analogy.

The Spirit is neuter. The Word (whom John says is Jesus Christ) is masculine.

The Spirit impregnated Mary. I hope we're not going to say the Spirit impregnated the Word which is Jesus Christ.


So, the female Wisdom becomes the masculine Word - Jesus Christ, so the neuter Spirit can impregnate her/him.

This is sounding pretty current day gender ideology.

So, the neuter Spirit and the masculine Word aka feminine Truth differ and this correlates to man and woman being different.

Insert TULIP.

The neuter Spirit is like the wind.

God's objective feminine truth aka the masculine Word is sought out by the sons of men (who must be regenerate according to the above insertion of TULIP and its theory of Total Depravity or the modified Rufus Total Depravity which says all unregenerate men are God-Haters who want absolutely nothing to do with God and never seek Him).

But, we seem to be distinguishing between the sons of men who seek object feminine Truth as lead by the neuter Spirit aka wind OR us "pillars of the truth" who seem to be believers lead by the neuter Spirit aka wind.

• So, are the sons of men unbelievers?
  • Unbelieving God-Haters who want nothing to do with God and do not seek God are seeking objective Truth as the neuter Spirit aka wind leads them?
  • Or are these regenerate unbelieving men with the neuter Spirit aka who leads them?

Who can say - could have been - we very likely. So, let's use such speculation and terminology to PROVE that TULIP or RTULIP is TRUE!!!???

Sorry, Rufus. This is fanciful and confusing and pure speculation and maybe even contradicting what you say elsewhere. At times I can't tell. However, I do recall that I noted elsewhere that you're changing the conventional view of what it means to be regenerate, so maybe this is what you're attempting to explain here. It seems you have 3 categories of men:

1. The unregenerate God-Haters who have absolutely no interest in God and never seek God.
2. The regenerate walking fetuses lead by the Spirit (that I assume God sovereignly regenerated unbeknownst to them and apart from their volition)
3. The pillars lead by the Spirit who for some reason or natural/spiritual gestation period popped forth from the womb.

And I guess Cornelius was a walking fetus God sent Peter to in order to give him the masculine Word aka feminine Gospel Truth which Peter correlates to the feminine seed through the masculine word (1Pet1:23), but Cornelius had somehow become a male fetus or a non-male, non-female, non-race, non-status member of the Body of Christ before Peter gave him the feminine seed through the masculine word.

This all seems a very creative - albeit confused - to say the least - eisegetical meditation presupposing a TULIP.

I'm assuming the other posts will be similar, so I'm stopping here.

Scripture and Scripture only from here on.

Baptism by fire is trials.

All theological presupposition.

I know the theory and a part of it is interesting Scripturally - "merely evidence that it never existed." But I don't think the rest of what you say is all there is to it. It's just the typical warnings are not actual warnings theory and no matter what Scripture warns, a Christian can never desert as they can have no choice to do so. All the warnings are just about sanctification and rewards or warning the unsaved that they better not remain unsaved or warning Christians of what can never happen to them.

At this point, after having looked at all of these issues for decades, the rallying point IMO may have to do with the piece I quoted just above. John's narrative of Jesus in John 6 IMO may be key to much if not all of this.

Baptism by Fire is Satanism.

None of it is supposition. 1 Corinthians 12:13 establishes the Spirit as the One who babtizes one into Christ. Ephesians 2:8-9 establishes salvation by grace and not works.

What you propose is a works gospel. One is saved by grace but maintained by one's works.

Salvation is transformational. It always ends in a great harvest. Anything less is counterfeit. That's the message of the parable of the sower.