PDA

View Full Version : A Challenge for the followers of Bob Enyart



Jerry Shugart
February 1st, 2004, 11:51 AM
Bob Enyart teaches that the Jews were saved by "faith" plus "works".

They call themselves "dispensationalists",but their teaching is the greatest assult on the dispensational method today!Over and over I am confronted by non-dispensationalists who say that they reject dispensationalism because dispensationalists teach that some men are saved in different ways than other men.

Those who follow Bob Enyart should take this opportunity to clear up whether or not the Jews were saved by "faith" plus "works".If they think that they can prove their teaching from the Scriptures then at least one of them should accept my challenge.

This is a perfect subject for the "Battle Royale Center Ring".

Any takers?

In His grace,--Jerry

Freak
February 1st, 2004, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by Jerry Shugart

Bob Enyart teaches that the Jews were saved by "faith" plus "works".

They call themselves "dispensationalists",but their teaching is the greatest assult on the dispensational method today!Over and over I am confronted by non-dispensationalists who say that they reject dispensationalism because dispensationalists teach that some men are saved in different ways than other men.

Those who follow Bob Enyart should take this opportunity to clear up whether or not the Jews were saved by "faith" plus "works".If they think that they can prove their teaching from the Scriptures then at least one of them should accept my challenge.

This is a perfect subject for the "Battle Royale Center Ring".

Any takers?

In His grace,--Jerry

Enyart is terribly wrong regarding this issue as evident by what Jesus taught in the Gospel of John, for example. Perhaps someone will take up your offer in order to exposed.

Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him.

Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God--

I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.

Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"
Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.

I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins.

Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?

1Way
February 1st, 2004, 12:51 PM
Jerry - We are not the followers of Bob, and you are not (necessarily) the best follower of dispensational thought.

It is indeed an important and controverical topic. But settling this issue should not be because "dispensationalism" is being rejected (for wrong reasons), but because false doctrine is destructive, we need to promote the truth by God's word, and I'm sure you agree that God's word should be the focus for any such correction, so I don't mean to take your intentions wrongly. At the same time, you are presenting an arguably manmade doctrine (your understanding of dispensationalism) as the foundational issue. Unfortunately dispensationalism actually has a pretty widespread divergence, and make no mistake, the proponents of The Plot are indeed dispensationalists. So please be a bit more careful with your generalizations.

Also, I wish you would entertain more carefully the many corrections that have been thoughtfully given to you already, especially in the "claims validate your position" problem. A debate is no fun when both parties do NOT accurately 1) understand and 2) appropriately represent what the other party is arguing. I hope you will demonstrate a ready willingness to stand on the truth in the very midst of opposition, instead of neglecting opposition.

You may be improving in these regards, I'm not at all sure, but speaking past each other is pretty much a waste of time. The nature of the topic of dispensationalism is a naturally wide spread and somewhat complex issue, especially when you consider the various aspects of it all. I know who I would vote for in presenting an Acts9 12 out view, but I can not speak for him. If no one takes your challenge to the center ring, please consider my challenge to you to respectfully engage in point, counter-point arguments where you are reasonably consistent in representing your opponent accurately.

Nineveh
February 1st, 2004, 01:03 PM
I merged your threads Jerry :)

Jerry Shugart
February 1st, 2004, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by 1Way
I wish you would entertain more carefully the many corrections that have been thoughtfully given to you already, especially in the "claims validate your position" problem.
1Way,

The "corrections" that you have already given me do not even resemble what the Scriptures actually say.So I will stick with the Scriptures and not your so-called "corrections".

In His grace,--Jerry

1Way
February 1st, 2004, 01:38 PM
Jerry - There you go again!

I am not saying we have established any corrections between us doctrinally speaking, I am talking about your constant violence you do to what we say. Like right now!
Also, I wish you would entertain more carefully the many corrections that have been thoughtfully given to you already, especially in the "claims validate your position" problem. A debate is no fun when both parties do NOT accurately 1) understand and 2) appropriately represent what the other party is arguing. I hope you will demonstrate a ready willingness to stand on the truth in the very midst of opposition, instead of neglecting opposition. Don't rip the context of what people actually say, doing so is fundamentally dishonest and going against the truth of the matter.

1Way
February 1st, 2004, 01:49 PM
I am considering a new periodless and perhaps commaless mode of communication there is an epidemic of people who just love to rip your words out of the wider truthful context in which they were given so if I stop using periods to separate my various discrete thoughts maybe people will be more likely to take in the wider context instead of constantly violating it what do you think about that if that does not serve the purpose very well then perhaps you have a better suggestion I don't know thanks for your time and thoughtful consideration no one likes his own words being used in a contrary way so come on and join me in the latest revolution punctuationless writing the new contextually heavy method thanks in advance for all your kind support violence to understanding is a terrible thing to waste blessings

Jerry Shugart
February 1st, 2004, 01:50 PM
So now I am dishonest!

What did you say that I mis-represented?

1Way
February 1st, 2004, 01:52 PM
:doh:

Jerry Shugart
February 1st, 2004, 01:58 PM
If you would spend more time in discussing what the Scriptures say instead of always offering up inane "advice" as to how one should conduct themselves on this forum you might actually come to the knowledge of the truth.

If I have mis-represented anything you might have said then I apologize.But If I did I did not do it on purpose,and your remarks about "dishonesty" are not appreciated.

In His grace,--Jerry

1Way
February 1st, 2004, 02:21 PM
Read posts 5 and 6 again to see your mishandling what I actually said, you ripped my words out of context. Stop neglecting/violating the context in which ideas are presented.

You portrayed my own words as being about doctrinal corrections,

when in fact, my own words (contextually not violated) says that the corrections was NOT doctrinal as much as it was against you violating the context of what people say

i.e. not about doctrinal corrections but contextual non-violence.

drbrumley
February 1st, 2004, 03:57 PM
Oh brother!!!!!!

Is this attack Bob Enyart month?

Jerry Shugart
February 1st, 2004, 03:58 PM
And because I did this you feel like that you have the right to question my "honesty"?

Here are your words:

Also, I wish you would entertain more carefully the many corrections that have been thoughtfully given to you already, especially in the "claims validate your position" problem. A debate is no fun when both parties do NOT accurately 1) understand and 2) appropriately represent what the other party is arguing. I hope you will demonstrate a ready willingness to stand on the truth in the very midst of opposition, instead of neglecting opposition.

Here you can see that you are talking about "corrections" that have been given me,and you speak about one set of "corrections" in reference to "contextual non-violence".However,I was speaking about the "corrections" in regard to the Scriptures.

And for that my honesty is put into question.

In His grace,--Jerry

Jerry Shugart
February 1st, 2004, 04:03 PM
Originally posted by drbrumley

Oh brother!!!!!!

Is this attack Bob Enyart month?
Those who follow Bob Enyart should welcome the opportunity to prove by the Holy Scriptures that the Jews were saved by "faith" plus "works".

But so far I have not heard from any of his followers saying that they would be willing to defend this teaching on the "Battle Royale Center Ring".

In His grace,--Jerry

Jerry Shugart
February 1st, 2004, 04:04 PM
1Way,

You say:

You portrayed my own words as being about doctrinal corrections.
You are mis-representing what I said.Does that give me a right to question your honesty?I was not mis-representing anything you said.Instead,I was speaking about the "many corrections" that you spoke of that were not in reference to representing what others are arguing.

Here are your words:

Also, I wish you would entertain more carefully the many corrections that have been thoughtfully given to you already, especially in the "claims validate your position" problem. A debate is no fun when both parties do NOT accurately 1) understand and 2) appropriately represent what the other party is arguing. I hope you will demonstrate a ready willingness to stand on the truth in the very midst of opposition, instead of neglecting opposition.
You yourself speak of "many corrections",and some of the corrections were in regard to representing what the other person is arguing.

But I was not speaking about the "many corrections" which were
in regard to representing what the other party is representing,but instead about the so-called corrections in regard to the meaning of Scriptures .If you would read what others are saying more carefully then perhaps you would not make statements in regard to others that put their honesty in question.

In His grace,--Jerry

drbrumley
February 1st, 2004, 04:27 PM
Well, Jerry

I don't follow Bob Enyart as if he is God. And his fans do not either. But your insinuation that we are "followers" of Bob instead of Jesus has alot to be desired. Actually I am surprised to see you sink to this level. As if we are sheep of Bob's as another poster put it. Maybe I am reading something into your comments Jerry, but I apologize cause they don't sit well with me.

And since you are a dispensationalist Jerry, as well as Bob and I, you know it has always been by the blood of Jesus for which we are saved. But it is total foolishness Jerry to say Isreal didn't have to do anything else other than just believe. How many laws did they have? They had to keep every one of those laws or otherwise suffer at the hands of Allmighty God. And they went ahead and just did just that. To thier destruction. Your problem seems to be coming from all Isreal had to do was beleive. Yes they had to beleive. But they had alot more than that to do.

In Christ,
DRBrumley

Freak
February 1st, 2004, 04:31 PM
Originally posted by Jerry Shugart to 1way

If you would spend more time in discussing what the Scriptures say instead of always offering up inane "advice" as to how one should conduct themselves on this forum you might actually come to the knowledge of the truth.

In His grace,--Jerry You see it too, huh? 1Way is another poster who offers "wordy" posts with little substance of Scriptural truth.

Freak
February 1st, 2004, 04:31 PM
Originally posted by drbrumley

Well, Jerry

I don't follow Bob Enyart as if he is God. In Christ,
DRBrumley I'm glad you cleared that up for us. :rolleyes:

Freak
February 1st, 2004, 04:34 PM
Originally posted by Jerry Shugart

Those who follow Bob Enyart should welcome the opportunity to prove by the Holy Scriptures that the Jews were saved by "faith" plus "works". But they won't.


But so far I have not heard from any of his followers saying that they would be willing to defend this teaching on the "Battle Royale Center Ring".

In His grace,--Jerry Nor have I concerning the issue of spiritual gifts/miracles for today...;)

drbrumley
February 1st, 2004, 04:35 PM
Freak, you really make it hard for people to listen to you and to like you.

Sozo
February 1st, 2004, 04:38 PM
Originally posted by drbrumley

Freak, you really make it hard for people to listen to you and to like you.

It's not hard for me, not to listen to or like Freak

:Grizzly: :freak:

drbrumley
February 1st, 2004, 04:39 PM
I welcome Jerry to ask questions. I welcome you also Freak. But when all you do is talk alot of crap as you do and profess to be the end all be all of what the bible is saying and you being so prone to take a majority opinion and make the claim is truth, why bother having a sincere thought provoking dialouge with you?

Freak
February 1st, 2004, 04:39 PM
Originally posted by drbrumley

Well, Jerry

But it is total foolishness Jerry to say Isreal didn't have to do anything else other than just believe.
In Christ,
DRBrumley What did Jesus tell those under the Old Covenant to do?

Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him.

Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God--

I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.

Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"
Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.

I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins.

Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?

1Way
February 1st, 2004, 04:46 PM
DrBrumley - You said
They had to keep every one of those laws or otherwise suffer at the hands of Allmighty God. And they went ahead and just did just that. To thier destruction. Your problem seems to be coming from all Isreal had to do was beleive. Yes they had to beleive. But they had alot more than that to do. You mean God was serious and trustworthy when He said ...


Nu 15:30 ‘But the person who does [anything] presumptuously, [whether he is] native-born or a stranger, that one brings reproach on the LORD, and he shall be cut off from among his people. 31 ‘Because he has despised the word of the LORD, and has broken His commandment, that person shall be completely cut off; HIS GUILT SHALL BE UPON HIM.’" 32 Now while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, . 33 And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron, and to all the congregation. 34 They put him under guard, because it had not been explained what should be done to him. 35 Then the LORD said to Moses, "The man must surely be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp." 36 So, as the LORD commanded Moses, all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him with stones, and he died. I asked Jerry to respond to this example of God "requiring works" for everlasting life, and well, for some reason he just wont deal with it. So be it, so it is.

make it "hard" to like Freak? ... Being a jerk in about every way possible is not "making it hard to like him". It's obvious to me that he wants us to feel toward him like he does towards us. Extreme unjustified animosity. I might have said, you make it hard to listen to you and respect what you are saying.

Jerry Shugart
February 1st, 2004, 04:59 PM
Originally posted by drbrumley
I don't follow Bob Enyart as if he is God. And his fans do not either. But your insinuation that we are "followers" of Bob instead of Jesus has alot to be desired.
DRBrumley,

I never ever insinuated that anyone followed Bob Enyart instead of the Lord Jesus.

Actually I am surprised to see you sink to this level. As if we are sheep of Bob's as another poster put it. Maybe I am reading something into your comments Jerry, but I apologize cause they don't sit well with me.
You are reading something into my comments that are not there.Your apology is accepted.

And since you are a dispensationalist Jerry, as well as Bob and I, you know it has always been by the blood of Jesus for which we are saved. But it is total foolishness Jerry to say Isreal didn't have to do anything else other than just believe. How many laws did they have?
They had many laws,but the law was never given as a way whereby the Jews could justify themselves before God:

"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"(Ro.3:20).

They had to keep every one of those laws or otherwise suffer at the hands of Allmighty God. And they went ahead and just did just that. To thier destruction.
Not to their eternal destruction.Those who had "faith" were preserved forever.This is what the OT Scriptures say about the OT saints:

"For the LORD loveth judgment, and forsaketh not his saints; they are preserved for ever"(Ps.37:28).

That is why Paul could say this about a "murderer",king David:

"Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin"(Ro.4:6-8).

Your problem seems to be coming from all Isreal had to do was beleive. Yes they had to beleive. But they had alot more than that to do.
As Freak has clearly demonstrated,the Lord Jesus Himself told the Jews that those who believed already possessed a life that would never end and were already passed from death unto life:

"He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment; but is passed from death unto life"(Jn.5:24).

In His grace,--Jerry

1Way
February 1st, 2004, 05:04 PM
The Lord said, obey the commandments in answer to the question, what must I do to have eternal life. Keeping the commandments included love and faith in God and in Him only, so all your faith without works teachings do not invalidate Christ's teaching that fully lines up with all of scripture for those in the dispensation of Law.

Keeping the commandments was not a suggestion from God, it was do them, or be cut off from being a part of His people, do them or die in your sin guilt.

Jerry Shugart
February 1st, 2004, 05:05 PM
Originally posted by 1Way
I asked Jerry to respond to this example of God "requiring works" for everlasting life, and well, for some reason he just wont deal with it.
I did deal with it.There are some under the illusion that being a member of the nation of Israel equated with being saved,and being cut off from Israel is the same thing as losing eternal life.

THey also believe that "physical" death is the same as losing "eternal" life,but what can be said about the following verse?:

"To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus"(1Cor.5:5).

In His grace,--Jerry

1Way
February 1st, 2004, 05:06 PM
Attack one thing avoid another, attack another thing avoid yet another, attack something else, avoid everything. :radar:

Freak
February 1st, 2004, 05:08 PM
Originally posted by 1Way

The Lord said, obey the commandments in answer to the question, what must I do to have eternal life. Why have you lied to the Holy Spirit in such a obvious manner?

Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"
Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.


Keeping the commandments was not a suggestion from God, it was do them, or be cut off from being a part of His people, do them or die in your sin guilt. Huh??? What have you been smoking?

Jesus told those under the Old Covenant the following:

Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him.

Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God--

I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.

I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins.

Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?

1Way
February 1st, 2004, 05:12 PM
Nu 15:30 ‘But the person who does [anything] presumptuously, [whether he is] native-born or a stranger, that one brings reproach on the LORD, and he shall be cut off from among his people. 31 ‘Because he has despised the word of the LORD, and has broken His commandment, that person shall be completely cut off; HIS GUILT SHALL BE UPON HIM.’" 32 Now while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, . 33 And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron, and to all the congregation. 34 They put him under guard, because it had not been explained what should be done to him. 35 Then the LORD said to Moses, "The man must surely be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp." 36 So, as the LORD commanded Moses, all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him with stones, and he died.

You think that is not a picture of redemption and not damnation? Faith alone and not the requirement of works or else be damned? Jerry, get a bit more realistic please. The guy died in his sins, he was damned because he did not keep the Sabbath law, his faith was not even brought up. Works were required to stay right with God.

Freak
February 1st, 2004, 05:18 PM
Originally posted by 1Way

You think that is not a picture of redemption and not damnation? Faith alone and not the requirement of works or else be damned? Jerry, get a bit more realistic please. The guy died in his sins, he was damned because he did not keep the Sabbath law, his faith was not even brought up. Works were required to stay right with God.

Our eternal God and Savior said to those under the Old Covenant:

Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?

Do you believe this?

1Way
February 1st, 2004, 05:23 PM
I tell you the truth, I did not lie. Matthew 19:16-22
16 Now behold, one came and said to Him, "Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?" 17 So He said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments." 18 He said to Him, "Which ones?" Jesus said, "'You shall not murder,' 'You shall not commit adultery,' 'You shall not steal,' 'You shall not bear false witness,' 19 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' " 20 The young man said to Him, "All these things I have kept from my youth. What do I still lack?" 21 Jesus said to him, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me." 22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions. God hates one who's sow's discord and falsely accusses the bretheren.

Freak
February 1st, 2004, 05:28 PM
Originally posted by 1Way

But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments

And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us.


God hates one who's sow's discord and falsely accusses the bretheren. The Lord Jesus hates those like yourself, 1Way who attempt to distort His message that He clearly presented:

Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

geoff
February 1st, 2004, 06:02 PM
Heb 11:2 Indeed, by faith our ancestors received approval.

Hmm the author of Hebrews says it was by faith..




Heb 11:40 since God had provided something better so that they would not, apart from us, be made perfect.

They are not made perfect apart from us (by another means) but by the same means.

Dwayne hasnt kept up with modern studies of Judaism - especially E P Sanders et all.

The idea of justification by law being the normal mode of OT salvation is like... way out of date... and incorrect.

drbrumley
February 1st, 2004, 06:18 PM
Fact is,

Before I get full bore into this, I need to ask this question to Freak and Jerry.

Bob teaches that man in different times has been called upon to manifest his faith in different ways.

Freak and Jerry, did God tell Able, or Noah, or Abram, or Moses, or David to beleive the same message that Paul told the Philippian jailer: Beleive on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved."

But all these men beleived the message that God gave them and they were all saved on the basis of faith.

Your problem lies in the fact that you two cannot differeniate this. The only thing you two seem to looking at is Jesus had saved these people and thats the end of it. Let's ask Moses if this is true.

God COMMANDED Isreal to be circumsised. Moses decided that he wasn't going to do that. God was going to kill him had it not been for his wife. Perhaps the greatest person in Isreal's history decided to disobey God. Was Moses saved? He saw all the miracles and yet decided to disobey.

And another thought, When being saved in the Old Testament and the Gospels, it seems pretty clear that salvation is usually from physical enemies, disease, or death. When Peter cried,"Lord save me" (Matthew 14:30), he was not thinking about salvation from sin. Everything in the Old Covenant dealt with the physical side of salvation. You two are trying to spiritualize all the Old Covenant when it isnt warranted. Hence, your problem.

In Christ,
DRBrumley

A) Freak and Jerry, did God tell Able, or Noah, or Abram, or Moses, or David to beleive the same message that Paul told the Philippian jailer: Beleive on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved."

Freak
February 1st, 2004, 06:28 PM
Originally posted by drbrumley

And another thought, When being saved in the Old Testament and the Gospels, it seems pretty clear that salvation is usually from physical enemies, disease, or death. When Peter cried,"Lord save me" (Matthew 14:30), he was not thinking about salvation from sin. Everything in the Old Covenant dealt with the physical side of salvation. You two are trying to spiritualize all the Old Covenant when it isnt warranted. Hence, your problem.

In Christ,
DRBrumley You're not very smart are you? You said:

"Everything in the Old Covenant dealt with the physical side of salvation."

What are you talking about? Jesus, when speaking to those under the Old Covenant, spoke of salvation in spiritual terms--eternal life, the forgiveness of sins, etc...

Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him.

Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God--

I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.

I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins.

Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?


Freak and Jerry, did God tell Able, or Noah, or Abram, or Moses, or David to beleive the same message that Paul told the Philippian jailer: Beleive on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved." God has always required faith in Him. Nothing has changed to attain salvation.

geoff
February 1st, 2004, 06:43 PM
God has only EVER asked for faith to be manifested in one way... obedience to His commands...

thats never changed.

drbrumley
February 1st, 2004, 07:06 PM
Freak,

When Moses said to the people of Isreal "Do not be afraid. Stand still, and see the salvation of the LORD, which He will accomplish for you today. For the Egyptians whom you see today, you shall see again no more forever.

Is this spiritual?

When Saul declared,

Then the elders of Jabesh said to him, "Hold off for seven days, that we may send messengers to all the territory of Israel. And then, if there is no one to save us, we will come out to you."
13But Saul said, "Not a man shall be put to death this day, for today the LORD has accomplished salvation in Israel."

Is this spiritual?
----------------------------------------

Faith and works of faith are so closely identified that we may say that men in the past dispensations could NOT have been saved apart from the works which God commanded, since the works were the manifestation of their faith. Yet it was not the works by themselves which saved them, but their faith in God.

Romans 3:21, 22 shows the distinction between the obtaining of righteousness in this dispensation as compared to the former dispensation. In the Old Testament there was righteousness of God in association with the law, but Paul says, NOW the righteousness of God APART FROM THE LAW is manifested.

In this dispensation, God does not say, "Beleive and offer sacrifices, Beleive and be baptized, Beleive and be circumsized, Beleive and do anything else in order to be saved." Faith NOW is in the finished work of Christ. Faith accepts the fact that Christ has done all of the work necessary for salvation, and it simply rests in the completed work.

The beleivers life should have good works, but these arethe result of salvation and not a cause of it.

In Christ,
DRBrumley

drbrumley
February 1st, 2004, 07:18 PM
Freak,


God has always required faith in Him. Nothing has changed to attain salvation

So that's it? Just faith in Him? He told you to do something and you didn't do it, is just your faith in Him enough?

Jerry Shugart
February 1st, 2004, 07:32 PM
Originally posted by drbrumley
Freak and Jerry, did God tell Able, or Noah, or Abram, or Moses, or David to beleive the same message that Paul told the Philippian jailer: Beleive on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved."
DRBrumbley,

All men are saved by grace through faith,and it is all made possible by the Cross.However,the revelation of God that man must believed has varied down through the ages.

And if it is of grace,it is not of works.And Peter said in no uncertain terms that he was saved by the grace of Jesus Christ just as the Gentiles are:

"We believe that it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved,just as they are"(Acts15:11).

What better proof is there than the words of the inspired Apostle Peter,a man himself who lived under the law?

And again,if it is of grace,then it is not of works.Peter was not saved by "faith" plus "works" and neither were any of the believing Jews.

In His grace,--Jerry

God_Is_Truth
February 1st, 2004, 08:06 PM
am i the only one here who doesn't know who Bob Enyart is?

geoff
February 1st, 2004, 08:09 PM
yes...

even I have heard of him (and met him).. and I live in New Zealand..

I'm still recieving counseling :)

1Way
February 1st, 2004, 08:23 PM
LOL

God_Is_Truth
February 1st, 2004, 08:38 PM
Originally posted by 1Way

LOL

all i have ever about Bob enyart is what is talked about on here which is not that reliable.

drbrumley
February 1st, 2004, 10:25 PM
Brother Jerry,


All men are saved by grace through faith,and it is all made possible by the Cross.

AMEN!!!!! This is a good start.


However,the revelation of God that man must have believed has varied down through the ages.

Another fact!!!!!! This is basic truth!




And if it is of grace,it is not of works.

Please answer the following:

Is Circumsion of Grace?

Is the Mosiac Law of Grace?


And Peter said in no uncertain terms that he was saved by the grace of Jesus Christ just as the Gentiles are:"We believe that it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved,just as they are"(Acts15:11).


Yet our beloved brother Peter fell in the trap and temporarily forgetting ( giving the benefit of the doubt) by acting like the law applied to Gentiles wherein Paul had to set him straight.


What better proof is there than the words of the inspired Apostle Peter,a man himself who lived under the law?

That's fine. But I will stick with Paul who was the apostle to the Gentiles and was givin this Dispensation of Grace.


And again,if it is of grace,then it is not of works.Peter was not saved by "faith" plus "works" and neither were any of the believing Jews.

Sorry Jerry, but the 12 apostles never forsook the Kingdom rules.
Even the scriptures bare this out. James wrote to the JEWS, Peter's 2 books are to the JEWS.

On a further thought, the 12 will always be identified with Isreal.

From the Plot.

Not until God gave Paul "the dispensation of Grace" for the Gentiles could any beleiver since Abraham live out from under the law (Romans 6:14). Yet even after God called Paul, the 12 and their early converts continued under the law. For Paul's message was for the "uncircumsion" (Gal 2:7), wheaeas the 12's ministry CONTINUED to the "circumsion" (Gal 2:9) and even their followers ministered "to no one but the JEWS ONLY" (Acts 11:19)

In Christ,
DRBrumley

1Way
February 1st, 2004, 11:45 PM
God is Truth

You don't know who Bob Enyart is...
You say that what is talked about Bob Enyart here is not reliable.
You quoted me laughing.

I don't get what you are thinking about by quoting me. I thought geoff was funny, talking about meeting Bob once, so now he is still in therapy, he still has a sense of humor, even though he cant stand anything to do with BEL. I met Bob a few times and went to one of his seminars and a few of his TV shows, he's a very interesting character. Bob, not geoff. Geoff is interesting, but in a very different way. ;)

God_Is_Truth
February 1st, 2004, 11:59 PM
You don't know who Bob Enyart is...
You say that what is talked about Bob Enyart here is not reliable.
You quoted me laughing.


i figured you were laughing because i'd never heard of Bob enyart before these boards :doh:



I don't get what you are thinking about by quoting me. I thought geoff was funny, talking about meeting Bob once, so now he is still in therapy, he still has a sense of humor, even though he cant stand anything to do with BEL. I met Bob a few times and went to one of his seminars and a few of his TV shows, he's a very interesting character. Bob, not geoff. Geoff is interesting, but in a very different way.

geoff was funny too looking back on what he wrote :D so do a lot of people around here follow on what Bob teaches or do most reject him or somewhere in the middle? what's the deal with bob?

Freak
February 2nd, 2004, 12:55 AM
Originally posted by drbrumley

Freak,


Faith and works of faith are so closely identified that we may say that men in the past dispensations could NOT have been saved apart from the works which God commanded, Why are you so confused? Why? Throughout the Holy Scripture the salvation theme is consistent.

Moses wrote:

Then the word of the LORD came to him: "This man will not be your heir, but a son coming from your own body will be your heir." He took him outside and said, "Look up at the heavens and count the stars-if indeed you can count them." Then he said to him, "So shall your offspring be."
Abram believed the LORD , and he credited it to him as righteousness.

The prophet of Old Habakkuk tells us:

For the revelation awaits an appointed time;
it speaks of the end
and will not prove false.
Though it linger, wait for it;
it will certainly come and will not delay.

"See, he is puffed up;
his desires are not upright-
but the righteous will live by his faith."

Then the great apostle Paul of the New Covenant said:

All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law." Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, "The man who does these things will live by them."


The beleivers life should have good works, but these arethe result of salvation and not a cause of it.

In Christ,
DRBrumley Your spelling is hideous, my friend.

Freak
February 2nd, 2004, 01:00 AM
Originally posted by drbrumley

Freak,



So that's it? Just faith in Him? He told you to do something and you didn't do it, is just your faith in Him enough? For salvation of course.

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about--but not before God. What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."
Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:

drbrumley
February 2nd, 2004, 06:25 AM
Originally posted by Freak

For salvation of course.

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about--but not before God. What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."
Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:

Book of James, Chapter 2:21-24, it says this:
James 2
21Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 22Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? 23And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." And he was called the friend of God. 24You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.

Notice that in verse 23 it says, "the Scripture was fulfilled". Abram had his faith accounted for righteousnes in the previous dispensation, promise. Then, in the next one, circumcision, when he was justified by works and faith, the Scripture from the previous dispensation, promise, was fulfilled.

Jam 2:23 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." And he was called the friend of God.

In Christ,
DRBrumley

Zakath
February 2nd, 2004, 07:43 AM
Originally posted by God_Is_Truth
... so do a lot of people around here follow on what Bob teaches or do most reject him or somewhere in the middle? what's the deal with bob?
The owners of the board and some of the moderators are disciples of Enyart, and some of them attend his church. His radio broadcast (Bob Enyart Live) is even given its own forum (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=42) here on TOL where his followers faithfully post links to each broadcast. There were enough questions raised about the financial relationship between Enyart and TOL early on that the following disclaimer now appears on the TOL homepage:


TheologyOnLine is not affiliated financially with ANY church, organization or ministry of any type. TheologyOnLine operates solely on the donations of it's participants. If you can donate please consider donating any amount to keep TheologyOnLine "online"!

Enyart is what I would term a "Christian radio shock jock" who has bounced on and off of various radio and television venues over the last ten to fifteen years. His "bread and butter" message has been a self-proclaimed homophobia and a variety of Christian Reconstructionism that wants to institute an monarchy to replace the democratic republic we currently have in the U.S. According to his writings, this government would also be accompanied by revamping of the federal legal code to institute portions of the Mosaic law as the federal law of the U.S.

He recently started a church and since becoming a pastor Enyart has, of necessity, toned down some of his more egregious positions and removed most of the content from his "shadow government" site.

Sites owned or run by Enyart include KGOV.com, BobEnyartLive.com, Shadowgov.com and DenverBibleChurch.com

God_Is_Truth
February 2nd, 2004, 10:17 AM
thanks for the info Zakath! appreciate it. :thumb:

Jerry Shugart
February 2nd, 2004, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by drbrumley
Is Circumsion of Grace?
Brother DRBrumbley,

No,"circumcision" is a part of the law.

Is the Mosiac Law of Grace?
No.Paul speaks of the "works" of the law as being a "curse":

"For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them"(Gal.3:10).

That does not sound like "grace" to me.And Peter called the law a "yoke" which he says that neither him nor his forefathers were able to bear:

"Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?"(Acts15:10).

Again,that does not sound like "grace" to me.And the very next verse Peter makes it plain that he was saved by "grace" just as the Gentile believers are saved by "grace":

"We believe that it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved,just as they are"(Acts15:11).

But this is all you can say about Peter's words:

Yet our beloved brother Peter fell in the trap and temporarily forgetting ( giving the benefit of the doubt) by acting like the law applied to Gentiles wherein Paul had to set him straight.
We are not talking about whether or not the the law applied to the Gentiles,but instead the words of Peter as to how he was saved.He said that he was saved by "grace" just as are the Gentile believers.

Paul makes it is plain as possible that the believing remnant out of the nation of Israel were saved by the election of grace:

"Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace"(Ro.11:5,6).

The Jewish believers were saved by "grace" (as Peter says),and if it of "grace" then it is not of "works".

So there can be no doubt whatsoever that the Jews were saved by "faith" alone.

Sorry Jerry, but the 12 apostles never forsook the Kingdom rules.
Even the scriptures bare this out. James wrote to the JEWS, Peter's 2 books are to the JEWS.
Paul says that Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes:

"For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth"(Ro.10:4).

The Twelve Apostles obviously "believed" and so there can be no doubt that for them Christ is the end of the law for righteousness for them.

But according to your ideas the Jewish believers must continue to attempt to establish their own righteousness by keeping the law.

From the Plot.

Not until God gave Paul "the dispensation of Grace" for the Gentiles could any beleiver since Abraham live out from under the law (Romans 6:14). Yet even after God called Paul, the 12 and their early converts continued under the law. For Paul's message was for the "uncircumsion" (Gal 2:7), wheaeas the 12's ministry CONTINUED to the "circumsion" (Gal 2:9) and even their followers ministered "to no one but the JEWS ONLY" (Acts 11:19)
Yes,the Jewish believers continued to follow the law through the Acts period.But this following of the law was not in order so they might establish their own righteousness.Instead,the Lord had a purpose for them continuing to keep the law during the Acts period.And that purpose is the same purpose which Paul speaks about in regard to his ministry to the Jews and his participation in the rituals of the law as seen at Acts 21:26.Here are his words to explain his actions,and they can be applied to the Jerusalem church as well:

"And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law"(1Cor.9:20).

After the Acts period came to a close we can see that the Jewish believers no longer referred to themselves as "Jews" but now they refer to themselves as "Christians"(1Pet.4:16).And during the Acts period they remained under the law,but after that period came to an end they were "at liberty" from the law (1Pet.2:16 compare with Gal.5:1,13).

In His grace,--Jerry

Zakath
February 2nd, 2004, 01:02 PM
Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

thanks for the info Zakath! appreciate it. :thumb: You're welcome. :)

geoff
February 2nd, 2004, 01:48 PM
my brain hurts... I've never read so much dribble in my life.. zakath is the only one who has made any sense so far.. except for

1way:

LOL

I can recommend reading Dr G Bahnsen's book, Theonomy in Christian Ethics, especially the first section, regarding the abrogation of the law. If you havent read that, you shouldnt be debating this, IMHO.

1Way
February 2nd, 2004, 09:01 PM
God Is Truth - Oh man, talk about getting snowed. You just thanked Zakath for a load of crap he just dumped right in front of you. Zakath practically hates us Enyartians, he is a devout atheist (for the sake of pure foolishness), I'm telling you. Don't listen to him (except for some of the raw data). Check out the Battle Royal VII, it's Bob Enyart verses Zakath(!) entitled "Does God exist? " Bob totally demolished him, he went way beyond the call of duty, did an outstanding job of providing a lot of scientific evidence and such. Zakath didn't even finish, let alone put up a respectable fight. Zakath does have some of the core basics right, but colored in remarks are all "off color" and biased against him, go figure.

Bob is the best bible study teacher I have ever come across, especially in terms of having a total big picture understanding of God's word. His does not specialize in linguistics or cutting edge scholarship, as much as a solid consistent bible wide understanding. He is great on practical application and clear and logical presentations. He does seminars around the country and is writing his second book, a sequel to The Plot. That should really be something.

I though you had been here a long time, are you pulling our legs that you don't know about who Bob E is?

One little side note, I was at John Mangopolis's (spl?) house (seriouis conservative and friend/associate of Bob's) one night that Bob was asked about the "open view", and a bit to my surprise, he had not heard about it yet! He said that he does not keep up much on theology per say. He's a bible man. :thumb: Bob Enyart and Bob Hill (his old pastor and dean of Derby school of theology) have been longtime proponents of the open view, but perhaps they called it free will theism without the Calvinism or something like that. That was at the taping of Bob Enyart debating Brian Swartly on Predestination, and boy was that debate great. That weekend was so much fun. We even had a thing John calls the heretic club, where everyone gets together and sort of takes off the gloves and gets serious and lively about God and politics and bible and other such eternally minded things. That was a great night too!

About the financial disclaimer. Knight and his family, along with another Christian family, his sister and brother in law have been carrying the financial load without any church or ministry backing all this time! Knight does this as a part time hobby! He doesn't make money off this, although I think it is growing and I hope it does better, it costs alot of time and effort and a sizable enough amount of money to make it all happen. So in order to help others understand the nature of this website's financial situation, of course they needed to make it clear that this website is brought to you by some regular folks who happen to have big hearts but NOT a big expense account. [u]Some go out of their way to try to make BEL and TOL look bad, saying things like that this site is probably financially backed by BEL so they really aren't hurting for donations like the say they are, so the clarification was useful and sincere, not a shadey response. For a long time, the websit has been just a hobby, I don't think that Knight really expected so many people to make it what it has become and is becoming, but the donations have been very modest, I know that TOL has always been in the red as far as donations go, but that may be turning around in recent times, I hope. Those two families have gone though a lot just for all of us!

Reading Freaks (CORRECTION) Zakath's description is one part informative, and 2 parts agregious. Bob has been a pastor now for probably over 3 years or so, and I know of nothing about him toning down or removing content because he is now in a more reputation sensative vocation, the way Freak puts it. I have not visited ShadowGov much, but it was an interestingt site. Your open view, so your half way there to the teachings in the Plot!

I hope this helps.

Knight
February 2nd, 2004, 09:04 PM
Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

thanks for the info Zakath! appreciate it. :thumb: Just so you know... Zakath is not a reliable source.

Knight
February 2nd, 2004, 09:14 PM
Originally posted by 1Way

I can't believe Zak had the nerve 2 trash B.E after being so wipped!

God Is Truth - Oh man, talk about getting snowed. You just thanked Zakath for a load of crap he just dumped right in front of you. Zakath practically hates us Enyartians (or BELite, hmmm), he is a devout atheist for the sake of pure foolishness, I'm telling you. Don't listen to him (except for some of the raw data). Check out the Battle Royal VII, it's Bob Enyart verses Zakath(!) entitled "Does God exist? " Bob totally demolished him, he went way beyond the call of duty, did an outstanding job of providing a lot of scientific evidence and such. Zakath didn't even finish, let alone put up a respectable fight. Zakath does have some of the core basics right, but colored in remarks are all "off color" and biased against him, go figure. :D I had to read that paragraph twice it was so funny! :chuckle:

And true. :up:

1Way
February 2nd, 2004, 09:34 PM
Thanks Knight! I'm an editing fool, you got my somewhat rough, almost ready version, please see my above post first paragraph for the finished product. I'm a bit slow sometimes in catching mistakes. :o

I hope that that lower middle para about the financies meets your approval too.

God_Is_Truth
February 2nd, 2004, 10:15 PM
relax 1Way, i wasn't only going to believe what Zakath said about him. i used it as a start (zakath isn't a liar but perhaps has a slight bias towards Bob because of the battle royale which i do remember now) to getting you guys to get going and explain who you think he is. that way i get both sides of information (pro and against) giving me an all around better picture of who Bob Enyart is.

i have been around on these boards for a little while now, something like a year i think and have only heard bits and pieces of who Bob is. i knew he was in that debate so i figured out he was a christian pastor but other than that i had NEVER heard of him in my life. seriously.

thanks for enhancing my knowledge of who Bob is 1Way :up:

Behira
February 2nd, 2004, 10:31 PM
What does the proberb say about a many who uses many words?

1Way
February 2nd, 2004, 10:48 PM
10-4 God Is Truth, I figured you were perhaps looking for more. ;)Zakath is more honest than some, but God calls the atheist a fool for a good reason, basically they reject truth in the most significant ways, so his upright nature is certainly in doubt even if he gets some facts correct. You are more than welcome for the assistance, anytime. As far as the uptight response :sozo2: , that's just me, and not because of you but for Zakath's case, he needs someone to keep him in check. I figured as much about your intentions, but your thumbs up was a bit too affirming for me, so you sort of asked for it. But you hooked me in so I guess it worked! All in good fun. :thumb:

drbrumley
February 2nd, 2004, 10:48 PM
Originally posted by Jerry Shugart

Brother DRBrumbley,

No,"circumcision" is a part of the law.

No.Paul speaks of the "works" of the law as being a "curse":

"For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them"(Gal.3:10).

That does not sound like "grace" to me.And Peter called the law a "yoke" which he says that neither him nor his forefathers were able to bear:

"Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?"(Acts15:10).

Again,that does not sound like "grace" to me.And the very next verse Peter makes it plain that he was saved by "grace" just as the Gentile believers are saved by "grace":

"We believe that it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved,just as they are"(Acts15:11).

But this is all you can say about Peter's words:

We are not talking about whether or not the the law applied to the Gentiles,but instead the words of Peter as to how he was saved.He said that he was saved by "grace" just as are the Gentile believers.

Paul makes it is plain as possible that the believing remnant out of the nation of Israel were saved by the election of grace:

"Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace"(Ro.11:5,6).

The Jewish believers were saved by "grace" (as Peter says),and if it of "grace" then it is not of "works".

So there can be no doubt whatsoever that the Jews were saved by "faith" alone.

Paul says that Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes:

"For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth"(Ro.10:4).

The Twelve Apostles obviously "believed" and so there can be no doubt that for them Christ is the end of the law for righteousness for them.

But according to your ideas the Jewish believers must continue to attempt to establish their own righteousness by keeping the law.

Yes,the Jewish believers continued to follow the law through the Acts period.But this following of the law was not in order so they might establish their own righteousness.Instead,the Lord had a purpose for them continuing to keep the law during the Acts period.And that purpose is the same purpose which Paul speaks about in regard to his ministry to the Jews and his participation in the rituals of the law as seen at Acts 21:26.Here are his words to explain his actions,and they can be applied to the Jerusalem church as well:

"And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law"(1Cor.9:20).

After the Acts period came to a close we can see that the Jewish believers no longer referred to themselves as "Jews" but now they refer to themselves as "Christians"(1Pet.4:16).And during the Acts period they remained under the law,but after that period came to an end they were "at liberty" from the law (1Pet.2:16 compare with Gal.5:1,13).

In His grace,--Jerry


Brother Jerry,

I had asked two questions in which you graciously answered. Thank You!

Question 1-Is Circumsion of Grace? And you replied


No,"circumcision" is a part of the law.

Question 2-Is the Mosiac Law of Grace? And you replied


No.Paul speaks of the "works" of the law as being a "curse":

These are the correct answers. What gets me Jerry is since you know this, you can still say the Jews were saved by faith with NO works. It is clear in scripture that the Jews had to keep the law. Otherwise they were doomed. Individually and collectively. There are exceptions (David comes to mind), but that is only because of God's DIRECT intervention.


And Peter called the law a "yoke" which he says that neither him nor his forefathers were able to bear:

and


And the very next verse Peter makes it plain that he was saved by "grace" just as the Gentile believers are saved by "grace":

Yes Jerry, this is correct. After Paul's conversion, there were no Jews or Gentiles. So Peter would be correct in making these statements. Also, Peter had a hard time with Paul's teachings. Paul did not teach what Jesus taught while our Lord was walking this earth. Jesus taught "keep the commandments", did he not? Paul said no! Cause the commandments are the ministry of death.

WE are talking about a time frame here Jerry. What applies to us now and since Isreal was cast aside is not the same as when the 12 were walking with Jesus. This is basic understanding. The Jews had to keep the law. Or die. And as Peter says, they couldn't do it.

This is fasinating studying scripture and being able to have a deep, meaningful discussion on this topic. I will have to finish the rest of your post tomorrow being I work at 4 AM and have to hit the bed. But thank you for this thread and may God Bless You.

In Christ,
DRBrumley

1Way
February 2nd, 2004, 10:58 PM
Behira - Ah yes, the proverb of verbose-man. Tell us please, what does it say.

That was cool, DrBrumley and myself posted at (very nearly) the same time, I expected to see my post, but saw his instead. But it was a pleasant surprise, he's a great poster.

drbrumley
February 2nd, 2004, 10:59 PM
And before I go,

I want to thank 1Way for the graciousness and humility in his presentation of the arguments at hand. It is a blessing to witness other brothers and sisters willing to speak of such matters in the attitude he gives on these boards. I wish there were more like him. God Bless You 1 Way!

In Christ,
DRBrumley

God_Is_Truth
February 2nd, 2004, 11:07 PM
Originally posted by 1Way

10-4 God Is Truth, I figured you were perhaps looking for more. ;)Zakath is more honest than some, but God calls the atheist a fool for a good reason, basically they reject truth in the most significant ways, so his upright nature is certainly in doubt even if he gets some facts correct. You are more than welcome for the assistance, anytime. As far as the uptight response :sozo2: , that's just me, and not because of you but for Zakath's case, he needs someone to keep him in check. I figured as much about your intentions, but your thumbs up was a bit too affirming for me, so you sort of asked for it. But you hooked me in so I guess it worked! All in good fun. :thumb:

glad to see we understand each other :D

Freak
February 3rd, 2004, 07:18 AM
Originally posted by 1Way


Reading Freaks description is one part informative, and 2 parts agregious. Bob has been a pastpr now for probably over 3 years or so, and I know of nothing about him toning down or removing content because he is now in a more reputation sensative vocation, the way Freak puts it. I have not visited ShadowGov much, but it was an interestingt site. Your open view, so your half way there to the teachings in the Plot!

I hope this helps. When did I give such a description? :nono: Why do you do this?

Freak
February 3rd, 2004, 07:22 AM
Originally posted by drbrumley

These are the correct answers. What gets me Jerry is since you know this, you can still say the Jews were saved by faith with NO works. It is clear in scripture that the Jews had to keep the law. Otherwise they were doomed. Individually and collectively. In Christ,
DRBrumley DR says this despite what Jesus declared over & over again in the Gospel of John:

Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him.

Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God--

I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.

I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins.

Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?


Jesus was talking to the Jewish people! Get this through your thick skull. :bang: Works were not required but only faith/belief in Him.

Zakath
February 3rd, 2004, 09:10 AM
Originally posted by Knight

Just so you know... Zakath is not a reliable source. How so? Was anything I wrote in my post on this thread factually incorrect? :think:

1Way
February 3rd, 2004, 09:21 AM
Freak - As to you saying
When did I give such a description? :nono: Why do you do this? I made a mistake, thanks for the correction, but no thanks for implying that I make such mistakes on purpose. You are being slanderous and accusing without any justification, I just mixed up your name with his, which is somewhat a natural mistake because when it comes to agregous misrepresntations, you are the king. You make Zak look fairly good in comparison, but the important point is that you are a false accuser, you do misrepresent the truth, and I mistakenly mixed up your names and I'm sorry for doing that. Here's my standing corrected.


Reading Freaks (CORRECTION) Zakath's description is one part informative, and 2 parts agregious. Bob has been a pastor now for probably over 3 years or so, and I know of nothing about him toning down or removing content because he is now in a more reputation sensative vocation, the way Freak puts it. I have not visited ShadowGov much, but it was an interestingt site. Your open view, so your half way there to the teachings in the Plot!

Jerry Shugart
February 3rd, 2004, 09:38 AM
Originally posted by drbrumley
It is clear in scripture that the Jews had to keep the law. Otherwise they were doomed. Individually and collectively.
Brother DRBrumbley,

You failed to addresss one of the verses I gave you:

"For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believeth"(Ro.10:4).

Those who believed at that time included both Gentiles and Jews.So we can clearly see that the Jews were not made righteous by the law!

Jesus taught "keep the commandments", did he not? Paul said no! Cause the commandments are the ministry of death.
After the Acts period the law was no longer binding on the Jewish believers.That is what the epistle to the Hebrews is all about:

"For if that first covenant had been faultless,then should no place had been sought for the second"(Heb.8:7).

"For the law made nothing perfect,but the bringing in of a better hope did...so much was Jesus made a surety of a better covenant"(Heb.7:19,22).

This is basic understanding. The Jews had to keep the law. Or die. And as Peter says, they couldn't do it.
So none of the Jews were saved?

You just cannot seem to understand that the Mosaic Covenant was no longer binding on the Jwish believers after the Acts period.The whole epistle to the Hebrews is about the fact that the Mosaic Covenant has been done away and replaced by the New.

Despite the fact that Paul writes that "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believeth",you say that the Jews must establish their own righteousness by keeping the law.

In His grace,--Jerry

Jerry Shugart
February 3rd, 2004, 09:49 AM
Freak,

I just cannot understand why those who follow the teaching of Bob Enyart and Bob Hill continue to refuse to address the words of the Lord Jesus Christ to the Jews where it is plain that "faith" is all that is required for salvation.

They act like those verses are not even there.They go out of their way to avoid these words of our Lord and Savior.Perhaps they think that if they close their eyes and pretend that they are not there then they will go away.

But they will not go away.Here is the Lord Jesus telling the Jews that whoever "believes" has eternal life and is passed from death unto life:

"He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life"(Jn.5:24).

Freak,I can just imagine them reading these words and then quickly covering their eyes with their hands so that they cannot see these words of the Lord Jesus!

In His grace,--Jerry

Zakath
February 3rd, 2004, 09:59 AM
Originally posted by 1Way
...Bob has been a pastor now for probably over 3 years or so,
When you're my age, 3 years is "recent". :)

drbrumley
February 3rd, 2004, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by Zakath

When you're my age, 3 years is "recent". :)

:crackup:

Zakath
February 3rd, 2004, 01:25 PM
Laugh now, DR, but your day will come! :chuckle:

I've gotta go put on more liniment... ;)

1Way
February 3rd, 2004, 01:28 PM
Jerry, just admit it, you are not even trying to understand what we are saying, the only reason you post what you do is to defend your presuppositions, you do not, and seemingly, can not, objectively consider and evaluate a position without letting your presuppositions override your supposed objectivity. The proof of that for me is that I can tell you 5 articles of my faith 30 times over the course of 50 posts, and you keep misunderstanding my views the entire time, therefore I KNOW that you are arguing from ignorance and from your own preconceptions which eliminate your false pretense of objectivity.

Just admit it, it will make you feel a whole lot better, and then we can all drop trying to do something that is impossible to do, make you understand what we are saying.

1Way
February 3rd, 2004, 01:40 PM
Or, if you understand our view so well, the be a good sport and faithfully represent it, if you can't or wont do that, then your bias and willfull ignorance is only obvious. You do a good job arguing your own preconceptions, but when it comes to ours, you are willfully ignorant.

But if anyone is ignorant, let him be ignorant. 1Cor 14.38

Don't be a swine, be a Berean objectively seeking the truth, not by man's thinking, but by God's word.

geoff
February 3rd, 2004, 02:27 PM
I spent 18 months researching Jesus, Paul and the Law. I wrote a 10,000 word thesis on it. I even passed!

This whole "The jews were all legalists" idea is very very old, and very outdated. E P Sanders and Albert Schweitzer(sp?) (and a few others) shot this down in the last 20 years. Even hardened Lutherans like Stephen Westerholm have had to admit that this was a false idea.

Basically, Rabinnic/judaistic writings confirm that the teachers of the Jews did not consider the law something that would save, but rather, something that one obeyed BECAUSE one was saved. Salvation was faith only.

If the Jews own writing confirm this, it means that the people Jesus and Paul dealt with did NOT represent ALL of Judaism, but a minority, a few sects and cults within the larger framework. Saying that the Bible teaches that all Jews were legalists based on this, is a bit like saying "all Chinamen are short".

Freak
February 3rd, 2004, 03:00 PM
Originally posted by Jerry Shugart

Freak,

I just cannot understand why those who follow the teaching of Bob Enyart and Bob Hill continue to refuse to address the words of the Lord Jesus Christ to the Jews where it is plain that "faith" is all that is required for salvation. It's called spiritual blindness and ignorance. The god of this age (Satan) has blinded their minds...


They act like those verses are not even there.They go out of their way to avoid these words of our Lord and Savior.Perhaps they think that if they close their eyes and pretend that they are not there then they will go away. It's strange indeed. Jesus was consistent throughout the Gospels that faith alone brought salvation, eternal life.


But they will not go away.Here is the Lord Jesus telling the Jews that whoever "believes" has eternal life and is passed from death unto life:

"He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life"(Jn.5:24). So clear!


Freak,I can just imagine them reading these words and then quickly covering their eyes with their hands so that they cannot see these words of the Lord Jesus!

In His grace,--Jerry It's laughable that they reject Christ for the bondage of the law. :kookoo:

Jesus once asked:

Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?

Freak
February 3rd, 2004, 03:03 PM
Originally posted by 1Way to Jerry


Don't be a swine, be a Berean objectively seeking the truth, not by man's thinking, but by God's word. You're calling Jerry a swine? Yet you're the one acting like a devil. 1Way, Jesus Himself would harshly rebuke you as you deny His very own words...

Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him.

Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God--

I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.

I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins.

Zakath
February 3rd, 2004, 03:03 PM
Originally posted by Freak
It's laughable that they reject Christ for the bondage of the law. Actually it's no laughing matter to them. It's vital to their intended theonomy that Mosaic law is applicable today. Without it how would they justify human slavery, or killing homosexuals, adulterers, and abortionists?

geoff
February 3rd, 2004, 03:06 PM
Originally posted by Zakath

Actually it's no laughing matter to them. It's vital to their intended theonomy that Mosaic law is applicable today. Without it how would they justify human slavery, or killing homosexuals, adulterers, and abortionists?

And that is a departure from "most" theonomist teachings - in an extreme, take it as far it can go, kinda way.

Zakath
February 3rd, 2004, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by geoff

And that is a departure from "most" theonomist teachings - in an extreme, take it as far it can go, kinda way. Well, one thing for certain is that we usually don't have to worry about Enyartians following the crowd doctrinally... :chuckle:

geoff
February 3rd, 2004, 03:21 PM
How true :)

drbrumley
February 3rd, 2004, 03:56 PM
Ok, just when you think we are having a meaningful and thoughtful fellowshipping Bible Study, Jerry makes his sarcastic post, Freak puts his two cents worth and Geoff decides to join in the "we know better than you club." You three ought to be ashamed. Your not in this discussion to learn as I am or 1Way. Your here to mock what you do not understand and willfully I might add. So much for civility. The 3 Stooges are alive and well here on TOL!

And the funny thing is, an athesist who LEFT God is right behind them.:down: Wonder if that means something?:think: :kookoo:

Zakath
February 3rd, 2004, 04:12 PM
Originally posted by drbrumley
... an athesist who LEFT God is right behind them.:down: Wonder if that means something?:think: Perhaps I merely arrived late to the party. :D

geoff
February 3rd, 2004, 04:14 PM
drb,


Would you like a reading list.. so you can catch up? Seriously.. no insult intended..

You should start with "Paul" by E P Sanders. And "What St Paul Really Said" By N T Wright. Then "Israels Law and the Church's Faith" By Stephen Westerholm (good summary of all the various positions at the beginning of this book).

Once you have read these, I can give you a more advanced reading list.

If you dont believe me, ask Jaltus or GreyPilgrim, if they are still around.

As for your insults.. ah well, I forgive you.

Zakath
February 3rd, 2004, 04:19 PM
Originally posted by geoff

If you dont believe me, ask Jaltus or GreyPilgrim, if they are still around.
Jaltus now mods on another board and hasn't posted here on TOL in over a year, I don't remember the other person. :think:

geoff
February 3rd, 2004, 04:21 PM
ahh, well there ya go.. I could get him to make a guest appearance..

like this:

<Jaltus> Yes, Geoff is 100% right about everything...

did that work?

drbrumley
February 3rd, 2004, 04:53 PM
Ahhhhhhh, Jaltus. Let's see if I remember Jaltus. Oh yes. He ran from Bob Hill in a way older thread here. He also didnt respond to me at the other forum where he currently resides. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he was to busy.

Ok Jerry,you want to have a battleroyal on this topic? Fine by me. Let's make it a tagteam or 3 on 3.It doesnt have to be a Battle Royal though. It can be HERE! (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=34)

Shoot, someone give Jaltus the link and he can join you!!!!

drbrumley
February 3rd, 2004, 04:55 PM
And since Geoff is so fond of Brother Jaltus, shoot, we can even go there and do this. Doesn't matter to me.

Freak
February 3rd, 2004, 04:58 PM
Originally posted by geoff


You should start with "Paul" by E P Sanders. And "What St Paul Really Said" By N T Wright. N.T. Wright, one of the finest New Testament scholars in the world. Good read!

geoff
February 3rd, 2004, 05:19 PM
freak,

Yes, NT Wright is a legend. I have heard him speak, seen a few videos and read everything I can get my hands on. He rawks.

drb,

is this some kind of competition?
Run away? Bob Hill doesnt scare anyone.. why would anyone run away? he's a lovely old (slightly misguided ;) ) man.

Most likely, Jaltus probably got bored throwing out his pearls here, shook the dust off his feet and went elsewhere...
I know I sure did/do.

drbrumley
February 3rd, 2004, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by geoff

I spent 18 months researching Jesus, Paul and the Law. I wrote a 10,000 word thesis on it. I even passed!

Wow, that's cool. Let me do the :bannana: :bannana: for you. Look Geoff, I'm happy you passed but if the seminary teaches what we are talking about wrong and you pass, then it is still wrong. Make sense?


Originally posted by geoff

This whole "The jews were all legalists" idea is very very old, and very outdated. E P Sanders and Albert Schweitzer(sp?) (and a few others) shot this down in the last 20 years. Even hardened Lutherans like Stephen Westerholm have had to admit that this was a false idea.

Basically, Rabinnic/judaistic writings confirm that the teachers of the Jews did not consider the law something that would save, but rather, something that one obeyed BECAUSE one was saved. Salvation was faith only.

If the Jews own writing confirm this, it means that the people Jesus and Paul dealt with did NOT represent ALL of Judaism, but a minority, a few sects and cults within the larger framework. Saying that the Bible teaches that all Jews were legalists based on this, is a bit like saying "all Chinamen are short".

This is not what 1way and I are saying. What we are saying is by Jesus' death, burial and resurrection, ALL people who followed God are saved, whether PAST, PRESENT and FUTURE. It is by his blood. Moses was saved by the Blood of Jesus. But it is foolish to suggest that he knew it when God called him. God gave him commands to give to Isreal, which he was part of that nation, and He had to follow.

An example. God said circumsion was neccessary. Moses decided for whatever reason to NOT circumsize his son. God was going to kill him for not doing it. The leader of Isreal, who saw God and his power in the burning bush, wasn't going to do what God had commanded. The only thing that saved his life was his wife went ahead and did the circumsion. Moses was going to throw away his relationship with God by not circumsizing his son. But God showed Mercy upon Moses when the circumsion was completed. Moses had faith, yes! And was saved by that faith. Yes! But he HAD to follow the law as God commanded. He had to show his faith. (works) That he didn't do. And it almost cost him his life with God. Does this make any sense to you? I pray it does.

In Christ,
DRBrumley

Jerry Shugart
February 4th, 2004, 10:31 AM
Originally posted by 1Way
Jerry, just admit it, you are not even trying to understand what we are saying, the only reason you post what you do is to defend your presuppositions, you do not, and seemingly, can not, objectively consider and evaluate a position without letting your presuppositions override your supposed objectivity.
1Way,

I do understand what you are saying.But I cannot bring my mind into believing that even though Peter was saved by "grace" that "works" were necessary for his salvation.

That is because if it is of grace then it is not of works.

You just cannot seem to understand this simple principle.If someone must "work" for salvation,then this salvation is no longer a free gift.

The proof of that for me is that I can tell you 5 articles of my faith 30 times over the course of 50 posts, and you keep misunderstanding my views the entire time, therefore I KNOW that you are arguing from ignorance and from your own preconceptions which eliminate your false pretense of objectivity.
You keep repeating your misconceptions but that does not mean that I do not understand what you are saying.I am not arguing from my own preconceptions,but instead I am using the Scriptures to prove my point.

For instance,the following words of the Lord Jesus Christ were spoken directly to the Jews,and there is no doubt that the Lord Jesus was teaching that "faith" alone brings everlasting life:

" He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live"(Jn.5:24,25).

And frankly,it does not surprise me in the least that those who deny the plain words of the Lord Jesus Christ would revert to the practice of name-calling.I have been called worse than "swine" so your words will not cause me to back down or to go away.

In His grace,--Jerry

Jerry Shugart
February 4th, 2004, 10:40 AM
Originally posted by drbrumley
Ok, just when you think we are having a meaningful and thoughtful fellowshipping Bible Study, Jerry makes his sarcastic post...
Brother DRBrumley,

I admit that I was being sarcastic.But I was doing that for a purpose--to get you to believe what the Lord Jesus Himself said to the Jews:

"He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live"(Jn.5:24,25).

If you are correct,then it would be impossible that the Lord Jesus would be telling the Jews that "faith" was all that was necessary for salvation.But that is exactly what He told the Jews.

Now if my interpretation of the words of the Lord Jesus is not correct,then I will ask you for a correction.

What is your interpretation of the meaning of the words of the Lord Jesus at John 5:24 & 25?

In His grace,--Jerry

Freak
February 5th, 2004, 08:27 AM
Originally posted by Jerry Shugart

Brother DRBrumley,

If you are correct,then it would be impossible that the Lord Jesus would be telling the Jews that "faith" was all that was necessary for salvation.But that is exactly what He told the Jews.

Now if my interpretation of the words of the Lord Jesus is not correct,then I will ask you for a correction.

What is your interpretation of the meaning of the words of the Lord Jesus at John 5:24 & 25?

In His grace,--Jerry These guys are laughable. The Lord Jesus was clear, faith alone brought eternal life. Unless, they have a Enyartian interpretation of John 5 that trumps Jesus' own words. :crackup:

Freak
February 7th, 2004, 08:19 AM
Drbrumley, well...

Jesus speaking to the Jews said this:

Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him.

Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God--

I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.

I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins.

If the Jews under the Old Covenant believed Jesus, in light, of what He said here, would they attain eternal life?

*Acts9_12Out*
February 7th, 2004, 09:36 PM
1Way and dr,

I apologize for joining so late. I have been very busy these past couple of weeks. I want you both to know that you are doing an excellent job and have both shown great patience with Jerry, Freak, Zak and geoff.

What I find comical as I read the first 7 pages of this thread is, Jerry and Freak actually disagree. If you read their "proof texts" for "faith," you will see that they believe two different things. For example, Freak said,



I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins.

Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?

Freak argues that "faith in Jesus" is all that is necessary. However, Jerry quotes John 5:24,


"He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life"(Jn.5:24).

Jerry argues "belief in Him that sent Me" as the "faith" requirement. Which is it guys? Do we need to have "faith" in Jesus or Him who sent Jesus?

The problem with Freak and Jerry is they fail to understand that the audience in all of these passages understood that "faith" meant "faith in something." Freak even quotes a wonderful passage from John 8 above...


I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins.

In this context, who does Jesus claim to be? The Jews listening to Christ in John 8 realize that Christ is claiming to be the promised Messiah that they have been waiting for. They needed to have "faith" that He was the Messiah, or they would not be saved. More on this in a minute. Jerry said,


Freak,

I just cannot understand why those who follow the teaching of Bob Enyart and Bob Hill continue to refuse to address the words of the Lord Jesus Christ to the Jews where it is plain that "faith" is all that is required for salvation.


It is plain Jerry? I love how you pick and choose what is "plain" and what is figurative. We all must have faith in something, and Gos decides how Hewants man to show that faith. Jerry, Freak, Zak and geoff will all be hard pressed to find one instance where the Jews walking the earth with Christ ever "had faith in" His death, burial and resurrection for salvation. In fact, Christ outright tells Peter He is going to die, and what is Peter'as response? "Not so Lord!" (Matt 16). Jerry continues,


They act like those verses are not even there.They go out of their way to avoid these words of our Lord and Savior.Perhaps they think that if they close their eyes and pretend that they are not there then they will go away.

Nice try Jerry. You fail to realize that we understand the context of each of those statements. It is quite simple to quote a verse and say, "See guys? Plain as day!" I would like to challenge Jerry's contention that "faith / belief" is all that was necessary... BTW, a BattleRoyal sounds great to me...

Let's take a look at the 8th chapter of John (which Freak actually quoted from above). Jerry begins with,


But they will not go away.Here is the Lord Jesus telling the Jews that whoever "believes" has eternal life and is passed from death unto life:

Uh oh Jerry, looks like you got us... :nono: Let's reason together from John 8. The chapter opens with a woman caught in adultery. The scribes and Pharisees attempt to test Christ by challenging Him with the law of Moses. However, these men are hypocrites and judging her as such. In verse 7, Christ challenges them, and rightly addresses their hypocrisy. The "accusers" were convicted by their conscience and went out. Christ sends the woman on her way and commands her to no longer commit adultery. The scribes and Pharisees call Jesus to the carpet and try to discredit Him. In John 8:14-29, Jesus defends His "self-witness" and establishes that He is indeed the promised Messiah. In verse 24, He tells them that if they do not believe that He is indeed the Messiah, they will die in their sins. Yes Jerry and Freak, they had to believe He was the promised Messiah. There is nothing in this context that even begins to allude to belief in the death, burial and resurrection for salvation, or just have a generic "faith" for that matter. Now we come to the most interesting part of the passage... As Christ is speaking these words (establishing that He is the Messaih), many believe in Him.


John 8
30 As He spoke these words, many believed in Him.
31 Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, "If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed.
32 And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

What does Jesus tell "those who believed in Him?" They needed to abide in His word. Wait! I thought "faith alone" was enough! What the heck is Jesus talking about Jerry / Freak? It gets better...

The Jews who just believed in Him are now offended. They claim they do not need to be set free from anything.


John 8
33 They answered Him, "We are Abraham's descendants, and have never been in bondage to anyone. How can You say, "You will be made free'?"

Jesus answers,


John 8
34 Jesus answered them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin.
35 And a slave does not abide in the house forever, but a son abides forever.
36 Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed.

Now, what happens to these Jews who recently "believed" in Him?


John 8
37 "I know that you are Abraham's descendants, but you seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you.
38 I speak what I have seen with My Father, and you do what you have seen with your father."

Now they seek to kill Him? I thought they just "believed / had faith" in Him and that was enough? It gets better...


John 8
39 They answered and said to Him, "Abraham is our father."
Jesus said to them, "If you were Abraham's children, you would do the works of Abraham.

<sarcasm>Wait a second Lord! Jerry and Freak say that "faith" is enough! Why are you telling them that if they were of Abraham, they would do the works of Abraham?</sarcasm> It gets better...


John 8
40 But now you seek to kill Me, a Man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Abraham did not do this.
41 You do the deeds of your father."
Then they said to Him, "We were not born of fornication; we have one Father--God."

Huh? Ten verses ago, these guys "believed" in Jesus. Now they seek to kill Him? What gives Jerry / Freak? They even claim to believe in God and have Abraham as their father (Remember, Jerry said "faith in Him who sent Jesus" was enough). It gets better...


John 8
42 Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of Myself, but He sent Me.
43 Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word.
44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.
45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me.
46 Which of you convicts Me of sin? And if I tell the truth, why do you not believe Me?
47 He who is of God hears God's words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God."

These guys "believed" in Jesus in verse 30. Now, Christ tells them they are of their father the devil. They do not believe Him. They are not of God (even though they said they were). The chapter continues with these "believers" challenging Christ. He goes on to tell them that He is God (v 58). What do these believers do? They take up stones to kill Him (v 59).

Jerry / Freak, what gives?

Again, the problem is, neither of you rightly understand that man must have faith in whatever God asks him to have faith in. God is Gracious to send His Son to die for mankind, but man must have faith. God asks man to show that faith in different ways. The Jews in John 8 needed to "believe / have faith in" the promised Messiah standing right in front of them. God asks us to "believe / have faith in" the death, burial and ressurection. It really is quite simple Jerry / Freak...

1Way and dr, keep up the good work!

--Jeremy Finkenbinder

Freak
February 7th, 2004, 10:00 PM
Originally posted by *Acts9_12Out*


--Jeremy Finkenbinder So you agree that when Jesus stated:

Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God--

...that belief/faith in Him was all that was needed to attain eternal life & status as a child of God?

*Acts9_12Out*
February 7th, 2004, 10:10 PM
Typical Freak...


So you agree that when Jesus stated:

Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God--

...that belief/faith in Him was all that was needed to attain eternal life & status as a child of God?

Yeah, like the Jews "who believed in Him" and then sought to kill Him... They must be believers since they "believed" in Him, but are now of their father the devil, right?

Since you didn't answer, I'll ask again... Are you implying that the Jews in John 8 are "children of God" simply because they had faith in Christ?

How about something with substance this time Freak?

--Jeremy

Jerry Shugart
February 8th, 2004, 01:13 PM
Originally posted by *Acts9_12Out*
Freak argues that "faith in Jesus" is all that is necessary. However, Jerry quotes John 5:24,

Jerry argues "belief in Him that sent Me" as the "faith" requirement. Which is it guys? Do we need to have "faith" in Jesus or Him who sent Jesus?
Jeremy,

Those who believed the words of the Lord Jesus were also believing the words of the Father--"For He Whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God"(Jn.3:34).

The problem with Freak and Jerry is they fail to understand that the audience in all of these passages understood that "faith" meant "faith in something."
It is not difficult to understand exactly what that "something" is the Jews must believe in order to be saved--"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God"(1Jn.5:1).

Jerry said,

"I just cannot understand why those who follow the teaching of Bob Enyart and Bob Hill continue to refuse to address the words of the Lord Jesus Christ to the Jews where it is plain that "faith" is all that is required for salvation."

It is plain Jerry? I love how you pick and choose what is "plain" and what is figurative.
John writes that "whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God."

We all must have faith in something, and Gos decides how He wants man to show that faith.
Yes,but the Lord does not need to see outward demonstrations of our faith before He knows whether or not one has faith or not.

...for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart"(1Sam.16:7).

The Jews who lived under the law were not saved by "faith" plus the "obedience of faith" (works).Instead,they were saved by "faith" alone.Here are Paul's words in regard to David,who lived under the law:

"But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered"(Ro.4:5-7).

Jerry, Freak, Zak and geoff will all be hard pressed to find one instance where the Jews walking the earth with Christ ever "had faith in" His death, burial and resurrection for salvation.
As I have already demonstrated,the Jews who received the Lord Jesus were "born of God" when they believed that Jesus is the promised Messiah.

Let's take a look at the 8th chapter of John (which Freak actually quoted from above). Jerry begins with,

"Here is the Lord Jesus telling the Jews that whoever "believes" has eternal life and is passed from death unto life."

Uh oh Jerry, looks like you got us... Let's reason together from John 8.
Here you do not even explain what the Lord Jesus is saying.Instead you run off to another place in the Scriptures to attempt to prove that what the Lord Jesus said is not true.

TYPICAL!!

What does Jesus tell "those who believed in Him?" They needed to abide in His word. Wait! I thought "faith alone" was enough! What the heck is Jesus talking about Jerry
There were some who "believed in Him" but they were not yet born again.That is why the Scriptures speak of believing with one's "heart" and understanding with one's "heart".Here is an example of men who "believed in His Name" but who were not yet born again:

"Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did.
24 But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men"(Jn.2:23,24).

And it is no coincidence that the chapter that immediately follows is in regard to being "born again".

These men needed to "abide" in His word until they were indeed born of God.They had a "mental" knowledge of Who the Lord was but it was not yet rooted in their hearts.

The Jews who just believed in Him are now offended. They claim they do not need to be set free from anything.
Again,the truth was not yet rooted in their hearts so they were not yet "born of God".

Wait a second Lord! Jerry and Freak say that "faith" is enough!
Wait a second Lord!Jerry and Freak did say that "faith" is enough,but so did the Lord Jeus.Here are His words at another place:

"It is the Spirit that giveth life...the words that I speak unto you, they are Spirit, and they are life"(Jn.6:63).

Wait a second Lord.Jeremy is saying that His words do not give life,but instead he teaches that it takes His Word plus "works"!.But Peter says that in order to be "born again" one must believe the "gospel":

"Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.... But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you"(1Pet.1:23,25).

Jeremy thinks that the Jews who lived at the time the Lord walked the earth had to have "faith" plus do "works" in order to be saved,despite the fact that Peter says that he was saved by "grace" just as the Gentiles:

"We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved,just as they are"(Acts15:11).

And Paul had this to say about "grace" in regard to the Jewish believers:

" And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace"(Ro.11:6).

Despite the fact that Peter says that he was saved by "grace" Jeremy still says that he was saved by "faith" plus "works".

Why are you telling them that if they were of Abraham, they would do the works of Abraham?
Because those who believe in their hearts do attempt to be obedient to the faith.But here is what the Lord said to these Pharisees:

"..but ye seek to kill Me,because My word hath no place in you"(Jn.8:37).

These guys "believed" in Jesus in verse 30. Now, Christ tells them they are of their father the devil.
This argumernt of yours is so weak,but this is about what I expected.It never says that these men who the Lord said that their father is the devil ever believed.Instead,we read that "many believed on Him"(v.30).

Many believed but not "all".

In regard to those whose father is the devil He said that His word had no place in them (v.37).

He goes on to tell them that He is God (v 58). What do these believers do? They take up stones to kill Him (v 59).

Jerry / Freak, what gives?
What "gives" is your mistaken view that they ever believed in Him in the first place.You attempt to make an argument based on the false premise that they actually believed in Him despite the Lord's own words that His word had no place in them!

And that about sums up your arguments.You attempt to prove that the Lord Jesus never said that "faith" was sufficent for salvation,despite the fact that He said:

"He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life"(Jn.5:24).

You attempt to use the Pharisees of an example of men who believed,even though the Lord Jesus Himself said that His word had no place in them!

In His grace,--Jerry

Freak
February 8th, 2004, 06:46 PM
Originally posted by *Acts9_12Out*

Typical Freak...
Since you didn't answer, I'll ask again... Are you implying that the Jews in John 8 are "children of God" simply because they had faith in Christ? Only God knows the hearts of men. I don't but I do know what God has revealed as being true.


How about something with substance this time Freak?

--Jeremy
Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God--

...that belief/faith in Him was all that was needed to attain eternal life & status as a child of God?

Yes or no will do....

1Way
February 9th, 2004, 02:42 AM
Acts9 12out - Thank you kindly, :o but with all due respect, that was one jammin post! :thumb: You quote their verses and beliefs together, you show them how they believed in "God", but rejected His teachings, so Jesus rejects them for rejecting His word! They were children of the devil who needed to get set free by obeying His word, and after Jesus spoke the truth in love, they took up stones to kill Him.

Jesus was “plainly” saying that faith alone in God was not enough, you had to abide in His word (produce good works), believe that He was the promised one, not in the death burial and resurrection, that was different gospel, and if they were not children of the devil but were children of Abraham, then they would do the works of Abraham, it was not just faith alone, Jesus taught a works based faith that conformed to the OT faith of Abraham while circumcised.

What kind of a response, after all that, would say, (Freak said)
Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God--

...that belief/faith in Him was all that was needed to attain eternal life & status as a child of God?

Yes or no will do.... A key differentiation that must be lost on Freak, first, you never take on scripture teaching in violation or contradiction of another, so his teaching does not contradict the John 8 teaching, and secondly is that they “received Him”, His teachings are a part of Him, thus implying they received His teachings as well, i.e. you must abide in His word/teachings, you keep the commandments for salvation
Matthew 19:17 So He said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one [is] good but One, [that is], God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments." so Freak’s verse does not alter the rest of Jesus’ teaching for salvation, that for the circumcision it was not faith alone, you had to have works plus faith.

That John 8 passage is pretty wild, the narrator=God, God said twice in a row, “they believed in Jesus”, “they believed Him”, and, He immediately pursued those who “believed in Him”, their faith in Jesus was NOT according to His teachings, they did not accept His teachings, so Jesus rejected them, Jesus condemned and shamed them, and they ended up wanting to kill the Savior and Lord. Yet when you ask if

those people who did not do the works of Abraham,
who believed in Jesus
but did not accept His teachings that required “abiding” in His word,
and elsewhere that you must keep the commandments to have eternal life,

were children of God or of the Devil, a freak might not know if that was faith alone, or the unambiguous requirement of works plus faith.

Freak says, I don’t know how to read the hearts of men, but I do know about God’s revealed truth. And then goes about rejecting the teaching of Christ for the Jews back then, suggesting that they did not have to do the works of Abraham they did not have to “abide” in His word, they just had to have faith and no works. :eek:

Jerry Shugart
February 9th, 2004, 10:16 AM
Originally posted by 1Way
Acts9 12out ...that was one jammin post!You quote their verses and beliefs together, [B]you show them how they believed in "God", but rejected His teachings, so Jesus rejects them for rejecting His word!
1Way,

Yes,Jeremy attempted to prove that those who the Lord said were sons of the devil had faith despite the clear words that they did not!

Here are the words which the Lord Jesus used to describe the men who Jeremy said "believed":

"...but you seek to kill Me,because my word has no place in you"(Jn.8:37).

In His grace,--Jerry

*Acts9_12Out*
February 10th, 2004, 06:38 AM
1Way,

Thanks for the kind words. I appreciate your ability to summarize all of the points and come up with a clear, concise and consistent conclusion. I usually get caught up in the heat of the discussion and respond to each of the points. I really like how you have the ability to paint the big picture. With that said, time to revert to my old self...

Jerry said,


Those who believed the words of the Lord Jesus were also believing the words of the Father--"For He Whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God"(Jn.3:34).

So what did OT Saints need to do to believe? How were they saved without Christ's words?


It is not difficult to understand exactly what that "something" is the Jews must believe in order to be saved--"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God"(1Jn.5:1).

So what did the OT Saints need to do before Christ came? How could they believe "Jesus is the Christ" if He had not yet come?


John writes that "whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God."

Again, your model suggests that no OT Saint was saved...


Yes,but the Lord does not need to see outward demonstrations of our faith before He knows whether or not one has faith or not.

...for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart"(1Sam.16:7).

The Jews who lived under the law were not saved by "faith" plus the "obedience of faith" (works).Instead,they were saved by "faith" alone.

Yes, He does know their hearts. Are you implying that an OT Saint could "believe in God in his heart" and not keep God's law? If they were saved by "faith alone," did they need to demonstarte that faith in any way? Why did God command Abraham to be circumcised? Could Abraham have refused, been cut off and still be saved? Why did God seek to kill Moses for failing to circumcise his son? What was the purpose of the law if it was by "faith apart from obedience?"


Here are Paul's words in regard to David,who lived under the law:

"But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered"(Ro.4:5-7).

If it was always by "faith apart from obedience" to the law, why does Paul even use this example? The point is Jerry, Paul uses David as an example of one man, who was under the law, who deserved death for what he did. God graced him out and did not impute David's sins to David. The reasons for this are numerous, and show the true character of God. Another discussion I guess...


As I have already demonstrated,the Jews who received the Lord Jesus were "born of God" when they believed that Jesus is the promised Messiah.

So, Jerry's model suggests that one needed to receive the Lord Jesus and then they were born again (which doesn't take place until John 3). I'll ask again, how do OT Saints fit into this scheme? Secondly, you didn't answer the question. Do you need to believe that Jesus is the Messiah to be saved Jerry? Did the Jews who did believe Jesus was their Messiah need to believe in the death, burial and resurrection to be saved? What do you need to believe to be saved Jerry? Messiah, resurrection or both?


Here you do not even explain what the Lord Jesus is saying.Instead you run off to another place in the Scriptures to attempt to prove that what the Lord Jesus said is not true.

TYPICAL!!

Uh, I did explian what Christ was speaking of... What's typical is your blatent eisegesis and dishonesty with the Scriptures.


There were some who "believed in Him" but they were not yet born again.That is why the Scriptures speak of believing with one's "heart" and understanding with one's "heart".Here is an example of men who "believed in His Name" but who were not yet born again:

"Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did.
24 But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men"(Jn.2:23,24).

And it is no coincidence that the chapter that immediately follows is in regard to being "born again".

These men needed to "abide" in His word until they were indeed born of God.They had a "mental" knowledge of Who the Lord was but it was not yet rooted in their hearts.

How were OT Saints "born again" if the ability to be "born again" did not happen until John 3? Are you "born again" Jerry? Were you water baptized to be saved? I sure wasn't...


Again,the truth was not yet rooted in their hearts so they were not yet "born of God".

This statement was in response to what I said about those who "believed in Him" in John 8. You make no sense Jerry... Last time I checked, John 8 came after John 3???


Wait a second Lord!Jerry and Freak did say that "faith" is enough,but so did the Lord Jeus.Here are His words at another place:

"It is the Spirit that giveth life...the words that I speak unto you, they are Spirit, and they are life"(Jn.6:63).

Wait a second Lord.Jeremy is saying that His words do not give life,but instead he teaches that it takes His Word plus "works"!

I ask again... What about OT Saints who did not have Christ's "life giving words?" They must not have life then, right?


But Peter says that in order to be "born again" one must believe the "gospel":

"Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.... But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you"(1Pet.1:23,25).

By your line of reasoning, no one could actually believe the gospel and be born again until after John 3, right? Peter says "believe the gospel to be born again," but according to Jerry, the ability to be "born again" does not come until John 3. Amazing...


Jeremy thinks that the Jews who lived at the time the Lord walked the earth had to have "faith" plus do "works" in order to be saved

Yes, Jeremy does. So does the Lord Jesus Christ. Jeremy is in pretty good company, no? Here's what Christ said Jerry...


Matthew 19
19:17 So He said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one good but One, [that is], God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments."

Matthew 24
24:13 He who endures to the end will be saved.

Jerry says faith alone is enough... Jesus Christ says keeping the commandments and enduring to the end, included with faith, will result in salvation / everlasting life. I know who I side with...


...despite the fact that Peter says that he was saved by "grace" just as the Gentiles:

"We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved,just as they are"(Acts15:11).

Typical Jerry... Pull a verse out of it's context and make it a pre-text. The issues surrounding Acts 15 are numerous. Unfortunately, this is yet another discussion. Let me ask you a question Jerry... Is Peter's meaning in Acts 15:11 what you really believe it to be? Were Peter and the Jews he is speaking to saved the same way the Gentiles were? The Gentiles are now asked to believe in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ based on Paul's teaching for the body of Christ. Where does Peter believe / preach this "same" message? He doesn't...


Despite the fact that Peter says that he was saved by "grace" Jeremy still says that he was saved by "faith" plus "works".

You are attempting to make two different words mean the same thing Jerry. Peter and Paul agree that all are saved by grace. You attempt to equate grace with faith. As I've stated numerous times in the past, all men are saved by God's grace. God was gracious to send His Son to die for the sins of all men throughout all time. That's what Peter and Paul mean when they speak of being saved by grace. Secondly, man must have faith in God. Man must believe what God tells him in order to have God's grace, the blood of Christ, applied to his account. However, God many times changes the way He asks man to show that faith. God asked Noah to show his faith by building an ark. God asked Abram to believe that his seed would be like the stars of the sky. God asked Abraham to be circumcised. God asks the body of Christ to believe that Jesus died for our sins and was raised from the dead. Just as Noah, Abram / Abraham did not need to believe that Christ died on the cross, we do not need to build an ark, be circumcised or believe that our seed will be like the stars in the sky. God changes the way He asks man to show faith. The same shed blood of Christ (God's grace) saves all men throughout all time.

Next, I asked why Christ told them they would do the works of Abraham if they were Abraham's children. You reply,


Because those who believe in their hearts do attempt to be obedient to the faith.

So you agree they were trying to "do something" (keep the law by faith) to show their faith? Good, so do I...

Now, here's where your argument becomes even more illogical... You say,


But here is what the Lord said to these Pharisees:

"..but ye seek to kill Me,because My word hath no place in you"(Jn.8:37).

Uh yeah... Christ defended the truth that He was the promised Messiah. Many believed in Him. Christ spoke the truth in love to these men, and they became angry. Yes, those who believed in Him turn on Him just as quickly. The word of truth He spoke in love no longer has any place in them. They now seek to kill Him. Next, Jerry makes a fatal mistake.


This argumernt of yours is so weak,but this is about what I expected.It never says that these men who the Lord said that their father is the devil ever believed.Instead,we read that "many believed on Him"(v.30).

Many believed but not "all".

In regard to those whose father is the devil He said that His word had no place in them (v.37).

Actually, you responded in the way I expected. You believe that Christ is speaking to the many who did not believe in Him, and call them children of the devil. Looks like Jerry forgot to read verse 31...


John 8
30 As He spoke these words, many believed in Him.
31 Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, "If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed.

Read it again Jerry... Christ is speaking to [i]those who believed in Him. Those who believed in Him turn on Him when He tells them that "the truth will set them free." This is a serious problem for you Jerry. Here, we have a group of men who believe in Jesus (after John 3 no doubt). Jesus addresses them, and tells them the truth. Jesus tells them that they would do the works of Abraham if Abraham was indeed their father. They turn on Him and seek to kill Him. Since they freely rejected Him, they lost their salvation and are now children of the devil.


What "gives" is your mistaken view that they ever believed in Him in the first place.You attempt to make an argument based on the false premise that they actually believed in Him despite the Lord's own words that His word had no place in them!

I must belabor this point to show you how wrong you are Jerry. You say my premise is false? Deal with verse 31 then. Christ is speaking to those who believed in Him. Why doesn't His word have place in them? They turned on Him and rejected Him after they had believed in Him.


And that about sums up your arguments.You attempt to prove that the Lord Jesus never said that "faith" was sufficent for salvation,despite the fact that He said:

"He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life"(Jn.5:24).

Again, I ask, faith in what? His words? What words? Did they have to "do" anything to show faith? If not, why did Christ say, "Keep the commandments," and "He who endures to the end will be saved?"


You attempt to use the Pharisees of an example of men who believed,even though the Lord Jesus Himself said that His word had no place in them!

Unfortunately for you Jerry, Christ is speaking to "those who believed in Him" (John 8:31), not the scribes and Pharisees he bashed in the beginning of the chapter. It's ok to admit that you're wrong Jerry... Then you address 1Way and say,


Yes,Jeremy attempted to prove that those who the Lord said were sons of the devil had faith despite the clear words that they did not!

Here are the words which the Lord Jesus used to describe the men who Jeremy said "believed":

"...but you seek to kill Me,because my word has no place in you"(Jn.8:37).

Still belaboring... The "clear words that they did not" have faith? Then what does John 8:31 mean Jerry? Did Christ speak to those who did not believe in Him even though John 8:30, 31 says they did believe?

In Christ,

--Jeremy Finkenbinder

Jerry Shugart
February 10th, 2004, 10:43 AM
Originally posted by *Acts9_12Out*
So what did OT Saints need to do to believe? How were they saved without Christ's words?
The OT saints needed to "believe God" just as Abraham did and just as we do.And the revelation which they believed in order to be born again was their Holy Scriptures.This is what the Lord Jesus told the unbelieving Jews:

"For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?"(Jn.5:46,47).

The Jews who believed the OT Scriptures were saved.

When the rich man ended up in hades after he died,he wanted to warn his brothers so they would not also end up in "this place of torment"(Lk.16:28).But Abraham told them:

"They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead"(Lk.16:39-31).

The Jews who believed the OT Scriptures were saved because they "believed God",just as Abraham was:

"Abraham believed God,and it was counted to him for righteousness"(Ro.4:3).

And that is why Paul can say that "a man" is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law:

"Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:
30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith"(Ro.3:28-30).

Again, your model suggests that no OT Saint was saved...
The Scriptures reveal that the OT saints were not only saved,but they also enjoyed eternal security:

"For the LORD loveth justice, and forsaketh not his saints; they are preserved for ever"(Ps.37:28).

Yes, He does know their hearts. Are you implying that an OT Saint could "believe in God in his heart" and not keep God's law?
The Jews who believed in their heart would attempt to kep the law.But it was their "faith" that saved them and not their "obedience of faith".

If they were saved by "faith alone," did they need to demonstarte that faith in any way?
For the same reason that we are to demonstrate our faith by keeping ourselves holy--because it is a part of our "service"(Ro.12:1).

Why did God command Abraham to be circumcised? Could Abraham have refused, been cut off and still be saved?
Paul reveals that Abraham was justified by God before he was ever circumcised (Ro.4:9-11).And since Abraham had true faith he got circumcised because the Lord told him to--the obedience of faith.

And since Abraham was clearly an OT saint,he was preserved forever.

What was the purpose of the law if it was by "faith apart from obedience?"
Here are Paul's words:

"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"(Ro.3:20).

The law was given so that the Jews would know that they were sinners and in need of a Savior to save them from their sins.

If it was always by "faith apart from obedience" to the law, why does Paul even use this example?
Because the knowledge that the Jew was saved apart from the law and only by faith was not revealed until Paul:

"But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed"(Gal.3:23).

Here Paul is speaking about the knowledge that salvation is by faith alone.

The point is Jerry, Paul uses David as an example of one man, who was under the law, who deserved death for what he did. God graced him out and did not impute David's sins to David. The reasons for this are numerous, and show the true character of God.
Yes,Paul used David as an example to demonstrate his previous words in the same discourse:

"Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law....Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith"(Ro.3:28-30).

Do you need to believe that Jesus is the Messiah to be saved Jerry?
No,the "gospel" which I believed when I was saved was the "gospel of the circumcision",which concerns the purpose of His death.

If you like you can read my initial post on the thread I started,"The 'Gospel of the Circumcision' and the 'Gospel of the Uncircumcision' " on the "General Theology" forum.

Did the Jews who did believe Jesus was their Messiah need to believe in the death, burial and resurrection to be saved?
Peter used His "death and resurrection" to prove that the Lord Jesus is indeed Israel's promised Messiah at Acts 2:24-39 to prove that the Lord Jesus is the Christ.So I would say that the belief in His death and resurrection is in integral part of the belief that Jesus is the promised Christ.

What do you need to believe to be saved Jerry? Messiah, resurrection or both?
The gospel that can be found at 1Cor.15:3-4.

Uh, I did explian what Christ was speaking of... What's typical is your blatent eisegesis and dishonesty with the Scriptures.
You could have fooled me.The Lord says that those who "believe" have already received eternal life and have alrteady passed from death unto life:

"He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life"(Jn.5:24).

Not a word about "works".It is about "faith" and nothing else.But you say that "works" must be performed plus "faith".

Would you mind giving me your interpretation of the meaning of the words of the Lord here?

How were OT Saints "born again" if the ability to be "born again" did not happen until John 3?
The ability to be "born again" did not happen until John 3,but instead that is when the fact was revealed.

Are you "born again" Jerry? Were you water baptized to be saved? I sure wasn't...
Yes,I am born again.And no,I was not saved by submitting to a rite of water baptism.I was "born of God" in the same way that Peter was--by the "word of God"(1Pet.1:23).

And that is why he could say that he was saved by "grace" just as were the Gentile believers:

"We believe that it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved,just as they are"(Acts15:11).

I will finish addressing the rest of your post later today.

In His grace,--Jerry

Jerry Shugart
February 10th, 2004, 11:46 AM
Jeremy,

Here is your answer to attempt to prove that the Jews were saved by "faith" plus "works:

So does the Lord Jesus Christ. Jeremy is in pretty good company, no? Here's what Christ said Jerry...

Matthew19:17 So He said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one [is] good but One, [that is], God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments."

Matthew 24
24:13 He who endures to the end will be saved.
First,I will address Matthew 24:13.This is in regard to "physical" salvation as the "context" proves,and not about "eternal" salvation.Here are the verses which precede the verse you used,and it is clearly about "physical" death:

"Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake"(Mt.24:9).

It is obvious that the Jewish believers already had a life in Jesus Christ that would never end,so it is equally obvious that they did not have to "endure to the end" before they would be eternally saved.Here are John's words to the Jewish believer:

"And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son"(1Jn.5:11).

The word translated "eternal" means "without end,never to cease,everlasting"["Thayer's Greek English Lexicon").

So John is telling them that they already possess a life in Jesus Christ that will never end.

So we can see that they did not have to "endure to the end" in order to be saved.

Next,let us consider the whole "context" of the discourse of the Lord Jesus at Matthew 19--"But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments."

After the rich man went away,the Lord said that it is harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of GOd than it is for a camel to go though the eye of a needle.To that,His disciples asked:

"When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible"(Mt.19:25,26).

Paul says the same thing.If one wants to earn salvation by their "deeds" or "works" then they must keep the law (Ro.2:6-12).But in order to earn eternal life,then one must keep the law perfectly.And Paul says that by that way none are saved--"...for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles,that they are all under sin;As it is written,There are none righteous,no,not one"(Ro.3:9,10).

And that is why he writes:

"Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight"(Ro.3:20).

But he goes on to describe a way that all belevers can be saved,and this way is "apart from the law":

"But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;Even the righteousness of God which is by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe"(Ro.3:21,22).

Read this carefully,Jeremy.This righteousness of God which is apart from the law comes upon all who believe,and that includes the Jewish believers.

Next,I quoted the following verse:

"We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved,just as they are"(Acts15:11).

Here is your response:

Typical Jerry... Pull a verse out of it's context and make it a pre-text. The issues surrounding Acts 15 are numerous. Unfortunately, this is yet another discussion. Let me ask you a question Jerry... Is Peter's meaning in Acts 15:11 what you really believe it to be?
Yes,it it really says what it means.Peter says that he was saved by "grace" just as the Gentiles are saved by "grace".

And here are Paul's words in regard to this grace that the Jewish believers were saved:

" Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace"(Ro.11:5,6).

Even though Peter says he was saved by "grace" and Paul says that this grace whereby the "remnant" out of Israel was saved is not of "works" you still continue to insist that they were saved by "faith" plus "works"!

Were Peter and the Jews he is speaking to saved the same way the Gentiles were? The Gentiles are now asked to believe in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ based on Paul's teaching for the body of Christ. Where does Peter believe / preach this "same" message? He doesn't...
They were saved in the same way that the Gentiles were saved--by "grace" through "faith".Even though the message which they believed was different than the message which the Gentiles believed does not change the fact that it was by "grace" through "faith".

Our "faith" is compared to the faith of Abraham,even though what we believed is different from what Abraham believed:

"And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised"(Ro.4:12).

You are attempting to make two different words mean the same thing Jerry. Peter and Paul agree that all are saved by grace. You attempt to equate grace with faith.
Yes,and Paul himself equates "grace" with "faith":

"Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace..."(Ro.4:16).

Any other grounds of receiving eternal life besides by "faith" would be inconsistent with "grace".Any other way would be by "merit",and grace is "unmerited favor".

As I've stated numerous times in the past, all men are saved by God's grace.
But you obviously do not understand the simple principle that if it is of "works" then it is not of grace.You seem to think that one can be saved by "faith" plus "works" and at the same time be saved by "grace".

Here is what Paul says about that:

"Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness"(Ro.4:4,5).

How plain can it be before you will believe that "works" are inconsistent with "grace"?

More later...

In His grace,--Jerry

Jerry Shugart
February 10th, 2004, 01:48 PM
Jeremy,

Earlier you said:

As Christ is speaking these words (establishing that He is the Messaih), many believe in Him.

John 8:30 As He spoke these words, many believed in Him.
31 Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, "If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed.
32 And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

What does Jesus tell "those who believed in Him?" They needed to abide in His word. Wait! I thought "faith alone" was enough!
The reason that the Lord said that they must "abide" in His word was because they were not yet "born again".They were like the following Jews who "believed in Him" because of the miracles which he did:

"Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did.But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men"(Jn.2:23,24).

They were not yet "born again" or else the Lord Jsus would indeed commit Himself to them.

And those who the Lord refers to at John 8:30 "believed on Him" but they too were not yet "His disciples" because the Lord says that they must continue in His word before He will consider that they are His disciples.And they did not "continue" in His word because they questioned what He said about being "servants of sin".

Because of this the Lord tells them,"...but ye seek to kill Me,because My word has no place in you"[/i](Jn.8:37).

They did not "continue in His word" so therefore they were never saved to begin with and the Lord never considered them His disciples.

Now, what happens to these Jews who recently "believed" in Him?
They were never saved to begin with and because of their unbelief they will die in their sins unless at some point in time they change their mind.

Now they seek to kill Him? I thought they just "believed / had faith" in Him and that was enough?
The "belief" that they had was not from the heart:

"For with the heart man believes into righteousness"(Ro.10:10).

These men are like those who are said to be "his disciples" who were offended at His teaching and "went back and walked no more with Him"(Jn.6:66).They were never "born again" or else they would have never left Him:

"They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they all were not of us"(1Jn.2:19).

Wait a second Lord! Jerry and Freak say that "faith" is enough! Why are you telling them that if they were of Abraham, they would do the works of Abraham?
If they had true "faith" then they would indeed do the works of Abraham.But it would be their "faith" that saved them and not their "works".

Ten verses ago, these guys "believed" in Jesus. Now they seek to kill Him? What gives Jerry / Freak?
They did not continue in His word and they were never born again.

They even claim to believe in God and have Abraham as their father (Remember, Jerry said "faith in Him who sent Jesus" was enough).
As I said before,a mental assent to the revelation of God is not enough to be born again.The truth must be rooted in the heart.

These guys "believed" in Jesus in verse 30. Now, Christ tells them they are of their father the devil. They do not believe Him. They are not of God (even though they said they were). The chapter continues with these "believers" challenging Christ. He goes on to tell them that He is God (v 58). What do these believers do? They take up stones to kill Him (v 59).
Again,these verses demonstrate the difference between believing something with the heart and and having only a mental knowledge of the truth.Those who "believed on Him" because of the miracles which they saw Him do were never saved in the first place,or else the Lord Jesus would commit Himself to them.

God asks man to show that faith in different ways.
Yes,the Paul speaks of the "obedience of the faith" in regard to those in the BOdy of Christ (Ro.1:5).And we are to keep ourselves "holy".But that is not a condition of "salvation" but instead it is our "reasonable service":

"...that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice,holy,acceptable unto God,which is your reasonable service"(Ro.12:1).

And the Jews were also to keep themselves holy because that as a part of their "service":

"That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear,In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life"(Lk.1:74,75).

Those who believe may not receive rewards if our "service" comes up short,but we will not lose our salvation:

"Every man's work shall be made manifest... If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire"(1Cor.3:13-15).

Jeremy,none of these verses you provided even hints at the idea that the Jews were saved by "faith" plus "works".

In His grace,--Jerry

*Acts9_12Out*
February 12th, 2004, 09:06 PM
Jerry,

Where do I start? I took some time and read your comments in the "circumcision / uncircumcision" thread. What I find interesting is I agree with most of your points raised there. I think you miss a few key points to make your argument rock solid. What I find more interesting is that we are both mid-Acts, but seem to be at opposite ends of the spectrum on the issues raised in this thread. With that said, I want to rewind a bit, and give an overview of what I'm trying to say. One quick point, however... In the three posts above, I find it interesting that the majority of passages you use to show "justification apart from works" come from Paul's epistles. There is a reason for this...

Jerry, this will not be a comprehensive overview due to lack of time and space. The points I raise can be substantiated with Scripture, but I hope they will be common knowledge, due to our agreement with the mid-Acts view. If there is something that you disagree with, please point it out, and I will support with Scripture.

I believe my position (Acts 9, 12 Out) is the best systematic / apologetic position. With that said, here we go... The primary point I would like to focus on is threefold.

1. God is Gracious to provide the only sacrifice powerful enough to take away the sins of the world throughout all time.
2. Man must have faith in God, and believe whatever God asks him to believe (ie - Build an ark, be circumcised, believe in the death, burial and resurrection).
3. God changes the way He deals with man (Dispensationalism) and changes the way He asks man to show faith.

I refer the to the above as the "method" of salvation. Now, we must distinguish the "means" of salvation differently. The "means" of salvation is always the blood of Christ. The blood of Christ applied to an individual's account is the only way to salvation. Now, we must ask, how does one have the blood of Christ accounted to their account? This is where the "method" comes in. If a person "does" whatever God asks them to do, then God applies the blood of Christ to them, and they are saved. This is true even in this dispensation Jerry. God asks us to believe in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. Even we, as the body of Christ, have to "show" something to have the blood of Christ credited to our account. We must "show" that we believe that almost 2,000 years ago, Jesus Christ died on a cross for our sins and that He was raised from the dead. Now, Jerry, we agree that this "showing of faith" has not always been the same.

You have rightly argued elsewhere that the OT Saints did not believe that Jesus died for them or was raised from the dead (because He had not yet come). What did they "do" to have the future blood of Christ applied to them? By faith, they believed what God told them. By faith, they practiced Judaism. By faith, they attempted to keep the law. By faith, they ate certain foods deemed clean by God. By faith, they offered the appropriate sacrifices. By faith, they were circumcised. By faith, they were baptized. By faith, they believed in a future (or present) Messiah. By faith, they endured to the end. By faith, they forgave to be forgiven. The list goes on and on Jerry. The examples of these points are numerous.

The point is Jerry, when you quote Christ's words that imply "faith alone" is enough, you are partly right. The question that must be answered is, "Faith in what?" You rightly note "Faith in God or faith in Christ." I believe that "faith in God / Christ" implies following whatever God / Christ asks man to do. For example Jerry, I hope you would agree that salvation for the body of Christ is attained by belief in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. I have to ask, what if a person "believes in God," but does not believe in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ? Could that person be saved Jerry? Orthodox Jews today are in that position. They believe in the God of Israel as revealed in the OT. They are waiting for their promised Messiah, but reject Jesus Christ. Based on their "faith alone" in God, are they saved even though they reject Jesus Christ as their Savior? I don't think so either Jerry... They are also required to believe in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ to be saved.

One key point that I hope you agree with is a majority of the Bible is addressed specifically to the nation of Israel. God continually accepts / rejects Israel. After the death of His Son, He gives them yet another chance (Acts 1-3). For some reason, the "straw that finally broke the camel's back" occurred at the stoning of Stephen. In Acts 7, Christ is shown "standing" at the right hand of the Father. I think this is significant as this is the only time in the NT where Christ is shown "standing" at the right hand of the Father. Every other reference shows Christ "seated" at the right hand of the Father. What does this imply? Many times, God is shown "standing" to judge the nation of Israel in the OT. I believe this is where God / Christ judges Israel and sets them aside as His special, chosen people. Shortly after this event, God raises up the Apostle Paul and gives him a new Dispensation which is shown by a new "method" of salvation. Up to this point, ethnic Jews and Gentiles needed to practice Judaism to show their faith. That's how Isarel and proselytes were credited the blood of Christ. They did what God asked them to do. At that time, they were still required to "show" faith in a physical way.

After Paul's conversion, we see that there is "no Jew nor Greek, nor slave nor free, nor male nor female" in the body of Christ. God again changes the way He deals with man. Now, instead of Judaism (there is no longer Jew nor Greek, etc), God asks man to show faith by believing in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This is the "method" of salvation today Jerry. This is why the majority of your "faith alone" passages come from Paul. In addition, Abram / Abraham is called the father of us all in Romans 4. This is significant because the "gospel of the circumcision" is based in Genesis 17 where God adds the covenant of circumcision for Israel. Paul, in Romans 4, tells us that his "gospel of the uncircumcision" is based in Genesis 15:6 where Abram "believed" what God told him (that his seed would be like the stars of the sky), apart from any outward works. Paul's point is that the uncircumcision gospel is based in Abram's "belief" before being circumcised. What must be noted is that Abram still had to "do" something. Abram "believed" God, and it (his belief in what God told him) was accounted to him for righteousness.

In Genesis 16, Abram attempts to fulfill the promise with a flesh trip. Abram has sex with Hagar. Ishmael is not God's promised son, but is the result of a flesh trip. Because of Abram's disobedience, he falls out of favor with God. This is why God adds the covenant of circumcision in Genesis 17, to show "no confidence in the flesh." When Abraham submitted to the "cutting off of his flesh," God again accounted him righteous and fulfilled His promise (Isaac) through Abraham and Sarah who were both sexually dead. The "gospel of the circumcision" is based on a physical covenant. Abraham needed to "do" a physical act (be circumcised) to show that He did indeed have faith in God in his heart. There is no way that Abraham could have rejected the circumcision and still have the future blood of Christ credited to him. There is no way Abraham could have rejected circumcision and had God fulfill the promise (Isaac). In that same way, we cannot simply "believe in God" and reject the death buruial and resurrection. Even the body of Christ must "do" something to be saved. Again Jerry, it's not the "doing" that saves, but rather the "doing" is an expression of faith in the way that God asks us to show faith. When we show that we have faith, God applies the blood of Christ to us and God saves us.

As I read back Jerry, I hope this whole thing was a misunderstanding. I hope you don't think we (Hill, Enyart, et al) teach that physical works ever saved anyone. We have always maintained that faith in God saves, but God always asks man to exercise that faith in different ways. For example, the water on the day of Pentecost was not in any way "magical" and did not physically wash away sin. However, God commanded the nation of Israel to show faith by being water baptized. After they showed they had faith in God by being water baptized, God gave them the gift of the Holy Spirit, and credited the blood of Christ to their account. Believers on the day of Pentecost could not simply "have faith in God" and reject Peter's baptism. Submission to water baptism at Pentecost was "showing faith in God." As I'm sure you'll agree Jerry, God does not ask the body of Christ to show faith by being water baptized. God asks the body of Christ to show faith by believing in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Again, the "method" changes. The "means" (blood of Christ) is always the same.

In Christ, --Jeremy Finkenbinder

drbrumley
February 12th, 2004, 09:12 PM
Greetings and blessings Jeremy,

I apologize for the delay, but have been tied up as of late with work and such that I didn't get a chance to welcome you to this thread. I for one am glad you made it.

Now to continue the business at hand......

In Christ,
DRBrumley

*Acts9_12Out*
February 12th, 2004, 09:22 PM
No problem!

Glad you made it back!

drbrumley
February 12th, 2004, 09:25 PM
Outstanding post Jeremy. Seems you have a gift that I have not attained as of yet and that is eloquence in your posts. You convey your points very well. There is nothing I can add to drive the point home any further than what you just did. Outstanding!

*Acts9_12Out*
February 12th, 2004, 09:34 PM
Thanks dr... Please let me know if you do have any issues because, as you know, "iron sharpens iron..."

God Bless brother,

--Jeremy

Jerry Shugart
February 13th, 2004, 12:19 PM
Jeremy,

You say:

I hope you don't think we (Hill, Enyart, et al) teach that physical works ever saved anyone.
You teach that the Jews were required to do "works" in order to be saved,so it is obvious that you are indeed teaching that their physical works were instrumental in their salvation.

It makes no sense whatsoever to say that "works" were necessary for salvation and then to turn around and say that works never saved anyone.

We have always maintained that faith in God saves, but God always asks man to exercise that faith in different ways.
You seem to confuse "faith" with the "obedience of faith".Both the circumcision and the uncircumcision are justified before God by "faith" and not by the "obedience of faith":

"Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law"(Ro.3:28).

According to you the Jews were saved by "faith" and by "obedience of faith".And the "obedience of faith" for the Jews was to keep the law.But Paul says that the believer is justified by "faith" apart from the "obedience of faith".

The Lord does not need to see outward demonstrations by man in order to know whether or not he has "faith":

"...for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart"(1Sam.16:7).

So the Lord does not need to see any "works" in order to know whether or not a man has faith.The Lord has a reason why he tells men to obey Him and it is not in order to know whether or not one has faith or not.

And the "obedience" that is required from man is in regard to our "service" for Him.For instance,Paul tells us,""let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God"(2Cor.7:1).

For us this is in regard to the "obedience of faith",but it is not in regard to salvation at all,but instead it is in regard to our "service":

"I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service"(Ro.12:1).

And "the law" was in regard to "serving" the Lord also.If the Jews kept the law then they would be a "holy nation" and a "kingdom of priests".The duty of a "priest" was always in regard to "service" for the Lord.

"Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation"(Ex.19:5,6).

The Jews were to obey the law and if they did then they would be serving God by glorfying Him in front of the whole world.This is their destiny:

"Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.
15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.
16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven"(Mt.5:14-16).

The "obedience of faith" of the Jews was in regard to "service" and not "salvation",just as it is for us.The Jews were to keep the law so that the whole world would see their "good works" and so that "all the people of the earth may know that the LORD is God, and that there is none else"(1Ki.8:60).

So the Lord has a reason why he tells man to "obey" Him,and that reason has nothing to do with "salvation" or demonstrating "faith".

Submission to water baptism at Pentecost was "showing faith in God."
Yes,but submitting to the rite of water baptism was not in regard to "salvation" but in regard to "service".I will start a thread on the "General Theology" forum which demonstrates this truth.

I believe my position (Acts 9, 12 Out) is the best systematic / apologetic position.
I have addressed this question as to whether or not the Twelve were in the Body of Christ on a thread I started on the "Dispensational" forum.Please read my initial post on that thread and then you are free to make any comments which you have which you think demonstrates that what I say is in error.

In His grace,--Jerry

*Acts9_12Out*
February 14th, 2004, 11:20 AM
Jerry,

I am short of time right now, and will respond in full later. One quick question... Can a person have "faith" in God, but reject the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and still be saved? Again, I point you to the Orthodox Jew who "has faith in" the God of Israel, but rejects Jesus Christ as his Savior. If that Jew has "faith" in God alone, can he be saved?

--Jeremy

Freak
February 14th, 2004, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by *Acts9_12Out*

Jerry,

I am short of time right now, and will respond in full later. One quick question... Can a person have "faith" in God, but reject the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and still be saved? Again, I point you to the Orthodox Jew who "has faith in" the God of Israel, but rejects Jesus Christ as his Savior. If that Jew has "faith" in God alone, can he be saved?

--Jeremy

Jesus said:

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

God's Word says:

It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. He is
" 'the stone you builders rejected,
which has become the capstone. Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."

Jerry Shugart
February 14th, 2004, 12:00 PM
Originally posted by *Acts9_12Out*
Can a person have "faith" in God, but reject the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and still be saved?
Jeremy,

If a person has true "faith" in God then he will believe the truth concerning the death,burial and resurrection of of Jesus Christ.He will also believe the truth concerning the purpose of His death--"when we were enemies,we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son"(Ro.5:10).

But if he refuses to believe this message which comes in the power of the Holy Spirit then it is evident that he never really had true faith to begin with.He was never saved and by resisting the Holy Spirit he remains unsaved.

In His grace,--Jerry

1Way
February 14th, 2004, 04:47 PM
Here’s some biblical food for thought.
Mt 16:20 Then He commanded His disciples that they should tell no one that He was Jesus the Christ. 21 From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised the third day.

Mr 8:29 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Peter answered and said to Him, "You are the Christ." 30 Then He strictly warned them that they should tell no one about Him. 31 And He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.

Lu 9:18 And it happened, as He was alone praying, [that] His disciples joined Him, and He asked them, saying, "Who do the crowds say that I am?" 19 So they answered and said, "John the Baptist, but some say Elijah; and others say that one of the old prophets has risen again." 20 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Peter answered and said, "The Christ of God." 21 And He strictly warned and commanded them to tell this to no one, 22 saying, "The Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised the third day." Jesus did NOT teach the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ prior to His resurection, He taught the message of the kingdom promised, offered, and rejected. Prior to Christ’s resurrection, faith in the resurrection of Christ was a forbidden message.

I hope that was where Jeremy was going with all that. But I am not quite sure, especially about the “rejecting” the death burial and resurrection bit, but certainly these passages directly address the question to, and answer from, Jerry.

*Acts9_12Out*
February 15th, 2004, 02:10 AM
1Way,

Yes, that's excatly where I was going. I'm trying to show Jerry that "salvation" is not something simplistic like, "Faith alone..." It seems that Jerry will have to concede that God has indeed changed the way He deals with man. Jerry must concede that God asks man to believe different "things" throughout time. I know Jerry does not believe that OT Saints needed to believe in a future death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, so this presents a bit of a dilemma. Jerry wants us to believe that "faith alone" is enough, but must concede that God asks man to have "faith alone" in different things...

--Jeremy

*Acts9_12Out*
February 15th, 2004, 03:26 AM
Jerry,

You said,


You teach that the Jews were required to do "works" in order to be saved,so it is obvious that you are indeed teaching that their physical works were instrumental in their salvation.

No, you are still confused. Again, God asks man to show faith in different ways. Let's look at the Thief on the Cross as an example. I believe that God required water baptism for salvation at that time (more on this later). Now, we know that the Thief on the Cross was not water baptized. We agree that "God looks at the hearts of man..." I believe that God accepted the Thief on the Cross because, had that man not been nailed to a cross, he would have submitted to God's requirements for salvation, and would have been water baptized. Again Jerry, the water is not this "magical" liquid that literally washes away sin, but rather, God required man to show faith by being water baptized. You continue,


It makes no sense whatsoever to say that "works" were necessary for salvation and then to turn around and say that works never saved anyone.

I never said "works" were necessary for salvation, but I did say that works never saved anyone. Since you miss the point again, I'll try again. God has grace. Man must have faith in God. God changes the way He asks man to show faith. In general, God asked the nation of Israel to show their faith in a physical way. The "works" were not active in the salvation process. God saw that they were expressing faith by doing His works, and God saved them. Here's a really simple example Jerry...

Let's say you have a job in a factory. Your boss asks you to make 100 gizmos by the end of the week. If you complete the task, your boss will give you a $1,000 bonus. You work all week, and make all 100 gizmos. You're boss is pleased and hands you 10 brand new $100 bills. Now, your boss is God. Making the 100 gizmos is keeping God's law. The $1,000 bonus is salvation. Because you did what your boss asked you to do, you received the $1,000. The fact that you made the 100 gizmos did not in any way result in the $1,000. In other words, you received the $1,000 because you did what your boss asked, not because you worked hard and made the gizmos. Your boss gave you the bonus because you did what he asked. You weren't making "money," you were making gizmos. The works did not equal the cash. Jewish works did not equal salvation. Your boss asked you to perfom a physical task, and upon completion, you received your bonus. God asked the nation of Israel to keep His law. If they attempted to keep his law by faith, they received their reward, salvation. Today, God asks the body of Christ to believe in the death, burial and resurrection. If we believe, we receive our reward, salvation. Simple, ain't it! :eek: You continue,


You seem to confuse "faith" with the "obedience of faith".Both the circumcision and the uncircumcision are justified before God by "faith" and not by the "obedience of faith":

"Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law"(Ro.3:28).

Again, you quote from a letter written to the body of Christ. Again, this is a truism. Jews were not "justified" by doing the works of the law. They were "justified" by God after they did what God asked them to do by faith.


According to you the Jews were saved by "faith" and by "obedience of faith".And the "obedience of faith" for the Jews was to keep the law.But Paul says that the believer is justified by "faith" apart from the "obedience of faith".

No. you're still confused. The Jews were saved by faith after they did what God asked them to do. We are saved by faith after we do what God asks us to do.


The Lord does not need to see outward demonstrations by man in order to know whether or not he has "faith":

"...for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart"(1Sam.16:7).

No, but the Lord does ask man to do physical things to show faith. How much more physical can you get than circumcision? Why didn't God just look at Abram's heart and say, "Ok good. Abram has faith..." and let it be? Why did God require Abram to cut off the flesh of his foreskin to be saved?

Genesis 17:14 “And the uncircumcised male child, who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.”


So the Lord does not need to see any "works" in order to know whether or not a man has faith.The Lord has a reason why he tells men to obey Him and it is not in order to know whether or not one has faith or not.

If this is true, why did God test Abraham? Couldn't God just look at Abraham's heart and see that he had faith?

Genesis 22:1 Now it came to pass after these things that God tested Abraham, and said to him, “Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.”


And the "obedience" that is required from man is in regard to our "service" for Him.For instance,Paul tells us,""let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God"(2Cor.7:1).

Can a man reject "service" for God and still be saved?


For us this is in regard to the "obedience of faith",but it is not in regard to salvation at all,but instead it is in regard to our "service":

"I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service"(Ro.12:1).

Jerry, you are so bizarre. So, believers should be obedient in regard to "service" but not salvation? Secondly, you use more passages to support the most bizarre things... You have no idea what Romans 12:1 is even talking about, do you? So, it's this generic "service" that has nothing to do with salvation? You're very strange... I'll try to help you out a bit...

Why does Paul say, "I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God?" Because we are saved! Our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirt!

1 Cor 6:19 Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? 20 For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God’s.

The word "reasonable" in Romans 12:1 actually means "rational." What is our "rational service" for God? It's rational to present the dwelling place of the Holy Spirit as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God. Paul is referencing a specific "rational" purpose for our physical bodies, not some bizarre, generic "service" you allude to...


And "the law" was in regard to "serving" the Lord also.If the Jews kept the law then they would be a "holy nation" and a "kingdom of priests".The duty of a "priest" was always in regard to "service" for the Lord.

"Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation"(Ex.19:5,6).

Strange logic Jerry... What about the man in Numbers 15 who went to hell for breaking the law? If the law was not to be kept by faith to receive salvation, then that guy got a raw deal... :eek:


The Jews were to obey the law and if they did then they would be serving God by glorfying Him in front of the whole world.This is their destiny:

"Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.
15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.
16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven"(Mt.5:14-16).

Again, you fail to understand the meaning of the text. These statements come directly after the Sermon on the Mount. You attempt to use this passage to prove that Jews were keeping the law for service... The point of this passage is salt and light. They are "salt" because they keep the law by faith. They are special, and cause others to "thirst" for what they have. They are "light" because they keep the law by faith. They are like beacons in the night and point others to God. These men are not glorified by men for the service they do, but rather, their being "salt and light" drive people to God.


The "obedience of faith" of the Jews was in regard to "service" and not "salvation",just as it is for us.The Jews were to keep the law so that the whole world would see their "good works" and so that "all the people of the earth may know that the LORD is God, and that there is none else"(1Ki.8:60).

More ripping out of context Jerry? I'll help you with 1 Kings 8 as well. Back up to at least verse 56... God had given rest (peace)to His people and had kept all the good promises He Had given through Moses. Solomon reminded the people of this. Then he expressed his desire for three things: That the Lord would be with Solomon’s generation as He had been with his forefathers, that God would give His people the will to walk in all His ways, and that the requests Solomon had made in his prayer would remain close to the heart of God day by day. Solomon ultimately desired that all the peoples of the earth (v. 43) might know that God is the only true God. In order for all this to take place Solomon reminded the people that they must be fully committed to the Lord and obedient to His Word. What's interesting is, Solomon himself eventually failed to do this. Do a little research next time Jerry...


So the Lord has a reason why he tells man to "obey" Him,and that reason has nothing to do with "salvation" or demonstrating "faith".

So, we don't need to "obey" God for salvation? Do I need to obey Him and "believe in my Heart and confess that Jesus Christ was raised from the dead..." or not?


Yes,but submitting to the rite of water baptism was not in regard to "salvation" but in regard to "service".I will start a thread on the "General Theology" forum which demonstrates this truth.

I can't wait for this one... :doh: I guess "for the remission of sins," and "He who believes and is baptized will be saved," don't really mean what they say, huh Jerry?


I have addressed this question as to whether or not the Twelve were in the Body of Christ on a thread I started on the "Dispensational" forum.Please read my initial post on that thread and then you are free to make any comments which you have which you think demonstrates that what I say is in error.

What's the thread called? Next, I asked,


Originally posted by *Acts9_12Out*
Can a person have "faith" in God, but reject the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and still be saved?

You replied,


If a person has true "faith" in God then he will believe the truth concerning the death,burial and resurrection of of Jesus Christ.He will also believe the truth concerning the purpose of His death--"when we were enemies,we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son"(Ro.5:10).

Did Peter have true faith Jerry?

Matthew 16
20 Then He commanded His disciples that they should tell no one that He was Jesus the Christ.
21 From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised the third day.
22 Then Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, “Far be it from You, Lord; this shall not happen to You!”
23 But He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are an offense to Me...

Wow, by Jerry's logic, Peter was not saved... :kookoo:


But if he refuses to believe this message which comes in the power of the Holy Spirit then it is evident that he never really had true faith to begin with.He was never saved and by resisting the Holy Spirit he remains unsaved.

Jerry, what about the OT Saints who did not have the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit or the death, burial and resurrection? What did they have to do to be saved? If you say, "faith alone," then you must agree that NT believers needed to "have faith in" something different that OT Saints did, right? If this is true, then you must agree that God asks man to show faith in different ways...

Isn't that what I've been saying all along? :confused:

--Jeremy Finkenbinder

Zakath
February 15th, 2004, 07:24 AM
Originally posted by 1Way

Here’s some biblical food for thought. Jesus did NOT teach the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ prior to His resurection, He taught the message of the kingdom promised, offered, and rejected. Prior to Christ’s resurrection, faith in the resurrection of Christ was a forbidden message.
I find it fascinating that you believe that the alleged founder of Christianity did not teach the pivotal doctrine of that faith during his public ministry. :think:

Freak
February 15th, 2004, 09:17 AM
Originally posted by *Acts9_12Out*

1Way,

Yes, that's excatly where I was going. I'm trying to show Jerry that "salvation" is not something simplistic like, "Faith alone..." It seems that Jerry will have to concede that God has indeed changed the way He deals with man.
--Jeremy You're not very smart, when it comes to understanding basic biblical doctrine, are you?

Moses wrote:

Then the word of the LORD came to him: "This man will not be your heir, but a son coming from your own body will be your heir." He took him outside and said, "Look up at the heavens and count the stars-if indeed you can count them." Then he said to him, "So shall your offspring be."
Abram believed the LORD , and he credited it to him as righteousness.

The prophet of Old Habakkuk tells us:

For the revelation awaits an appointed time;
it speaks of the end
and will not prove false.
Though it linger, wait for it;
it will certainly come and will not delay.

"See, he is puffed up;
his desires are not upright-
but the righteous will live by his faith."

Then the great apostle Paul of the New Covenant said:

All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law." Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, "The man who does these things will live by them."

Jerry Shugart
February 15th, 2004, 11:53 AM
Originally posted by *Acts9_12Out*
No, you are still confused.
Jeremy,

It is you who remains confused and not me.According to you the Jewish believers would not receive eternal life until after the end of a faithful life.But the Lord Jesus old the Jews that whoever believed Him already had eternal life and were already passed from death unto life:

"He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life"(Jn.5:24).

That is so simple to understand but you cling to your bizarre beliefs that they could not possibly have eternal life until after a life of doing works.The Lord's words could not be more plain.Those who believed in their heart what the Lord said already possessed a life that the Lord describes as "everlasting"!

Again, God asks man to show faith in different ways.
Yes,but this "obedience of faith" comes after "faith".And according to the words of the Lord Jesus those with "faith" already possess everlasting life.You ignore what the Lord Jesus so plainly says.

Let's look at the Thief on the Cross as an example. I believe that God required water baptism for salvation at that time (more on this later). Now, we know that the Thief on the Cross was not water baptized. We agree that "God looks at the hearts of man..." I believe that God accepted the Thief on the Cross because, had that man not been nailed to a cross, he would have submitted to God's requirements for salvation, and would have been water baptized.
Your point about the thief on the cross proves absolutely nothing in regard to whether or not works are required for salvation.

I never said "works" were necessary for salvation, but I did say that works never saved anyone.
Jeremy,we must throw our reason to the wind in order to believe what you say.According to you the Jew could not be saved without "works" but then you turn around and say that "works never saved anyone"!

Since you miss the point again, I'll try again. God has grace. Man must have faith in God.
Yes,the sinner is saved by "faith" apart from the "obedience of faith".

God changes the way He asks man to show faith.
Since the Lord God knows who has faith or not because He knows the heart of man He is not asking man to show Him that He has faith.

In general, God asked the nation of Israel to show their faith in a physical way.
Again,He knows what is in the heart of man so anything that He tells believers to do is not so that they can "show their faith in a physical way".

The "works" were not active in the salvation process.
Finally you say something that makes sense.The "works" were not active in the salvation process!

But earlier you said that the Jewish believers could not be saved until they did works.But now you say that these "works" were not active in the salvation process.

Here's a really simple example Jerry...

Let's say you have a job in a factory. Your boss asks you to make 100 gizmos by the end of the week. If you complete the task, your boss will give you a $1,000 bonus. You work all week, and make all 100 gizmos. You're boss is pleased and hands you 10 brand new $100 bills. Now, your boss is God. Making the 100 gizmos is keeping God's law. The $1,000 bonus is salvation. Because you did what your boss asked you to do, you received the $1,000. The fact that you made the 100 gizmos did not in any way result in the $1,000.
Jeremy,if I did not make the 100 gizmos then it is obvious that I would not have received the $1,000.So it is obvious to anyone who will use their brain that my making the 100 gizmos was instrumental in receiving the $1000.

But you say:

The fact that you made the 100 gizmos did not in any way result in the $1,000.

Come on,Jeremy,try using your brain for a change.If I did not make the 100 gizmos then I would not have received the $1000.So the fact that I did make them is the only reason that I received the $1000.

The Jews were saved by faith after they did what God asked them to do. We are saved by faith after we do what God asks us to do.
No,the Jews were saved by "faith" before they did any works.

"He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live"(Jn.5:24,25).

No, but the Lord does ask man to do physical things to show faith. How much more physical can you get than circumcision? Why didn't God just look at Abram's heart and say, "Ok good. Abram has faith..." and let it be? Why did God require Abram to cut off the flesh of his foreskin to be saved?
The Lord used OT saints to teach us that "obedience" follow faith.This circumcision was a "sign" of the covenant which the Lord made with Abraham (Gen.17:13).

Genesis 17:14 “And the uncircumcised male child, who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.”
Those who were not circumcised had "faith".Those who refused to be circumcised had no faith in the first place.

Genesis 22:1 Now it came to pass after these things that God tested Abraham, and said to him, “Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.”
Abraham had already been declared righteous in the sight of God before these words were even spoken:

"And he believed the Lord,and it was counted to him for righteousness"(Gen.15:6).

Can a man reject "service" for God and still be saved?
Jeremy,are you not aware that after a siinner believes then at that time he is sealed by the Holy Spirit?Service comes after that "sealing" by the Holy Spirit.

Jerry, you are so bizarre. So, believers should be obedient in regard to "service" but not salvation?
No,Jeremy,what is bizarre is the fact that you just cannot believe that once the sinner believes then at that time he has eternal life and will not come into condemnation.All believers should be obedient in regard to "service" but that does not change the fact that he already possesses a life in Christ Jesus that will never end before he does any service at all.

Secondly, you use more passages to support the most bizarre things... You have no idea what Romans 12:1 is even talking about, do you? So, it's this generic "service" that has nothing to do with salvation?
No,it has nothing to do with salvation.After the sinner believes then at that time he is sealed with the Holy Spirit until the day of redemption--the redemption of our new,glorious immortal bodies.

You're very strange... I'll try to help you out a bit...
Perhaps you can teach me how to ignore the words of the Lord Jesus where He says that those who "believe" already possess a life that will never end and will not come into condemnation.

Strange logic Jerry... What about the man in Numbers 15 who went to hell for breaking the law?
There is no evidence that anyone at Numbers 15 went to hell for breaking the law.Your points are so waek that you are forced to take liberty with the Scriptures.

If the law was not to be kept by faith to receive salvation, then that guy got a raw deal..
According to your reasoning the Jews who received John's first epistle could not even receive salvation until after a life of "works".But John tells them that they already possess a life in Jesus Christ that will never end.

"And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son"(1Jn.5:11).

John tells these Jewish believers that they already possess a life in Christ Jesus that is eternal.The word "eternal" is translated from the Greek word "aionios" which means "without end,never to cease,everlasting"("Thayer's Greek English Lexicon").

So John is telling these Jewish believers that they already possess a life in Christ Jesus that will never end.If it could end then that would mean that it was never "eternal" to begin with.

And this is what the Lord Jesus Himself says about those who have been given eternal life:

"And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.My Father, Who gave them me..."(Jn.10:28,29).

We can see that the Lord Jesus says that those who have been given eternal life shall never perish.And those who have been given eternal life are given to the Son by the Father,as verse 29 says.This is what the Lord Jesus says about those who were given to Him by the Father:

"And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day"(Jn.6:39).

How much clearer could it be before you will believe,Jeremy?Your whole theology in regard to the Jewish believers is based on a denial that "faith" only was not enough for their salvation.But the Lord Jesus Himself told the Jews that those who believe already have everlasting life and will not come into condemnation.

And according to your theology the Jews would not receive eternal life until after a life of faithful service.But John tells the Jewish believers that they already possess a life in Christ Jesus that will never end.

Everyone of your arguments are a denial of the very words of the Lord Jesus Himself!

More later...

In His grace,--Jerry

1Way
February 15th, 2004, 12:39 PM
Zakath – I find it fascinating that you believe that the God of Christianity taught the pivotal doctrine of faith (the death burial and resurrection) during his public ministry.

I did not create this idea, I copied and pasted it from God’s word, Jesus flat out and particularly forbad teaching that He was to be killed and be raised the third day. Also, prior to the resurrection, although there may be some indirect hints about resurrection somehow being a part of the faith, it was not taught that the Messiah had to die, be buried and resurrect three days later. Here was my argument which was well presented by God. If you don’t agree with Him, then you have fingers and a keyboard and a somewhat intelligent mind, say why you don’t agree, don’t wonder about “me” since I am simply trusting in His message.
Mt 16:20 Then He commanded His disciples that they should tell no one that He was Jesus the Christ. 21 From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised the third day.

Mr 8:29 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Peter answered and said to Him, "You are the Christ." 30 Then He strictly warned them that they should tell no one about Him. 31 And He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.

Lu 9:18 And it happened, as He was alone praying, [that] His disciples joined Him, and He asked them, saying, "Who do the crowds say that I am?" 19 So they answered and said, "John the Baptist, but some say Elijah; and others say that one of the old prophets has risen again." 20 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Peter answered and said, "The Christ of God." 21 And He strictly warned and commanded them to tell this to no one, 22 saying, "The Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised the third day." I think Jeremy did not exactly mean to suggest that they rejected the death burial and resurrection, as much as the complete lack of faith in it because it was not previously taught for salvation, or as you said as being “the pivotal doctrine of faith during His earthly ministry” sans a few slight changes.

Jeremy and I do not simply teach Christianity from a traditional standpoint, we teach and believe Christianity from a biblical standpoint, there’s the difference. If you think that Jesus was not meaning what He said in the above quotation, then please, by all means, and even though you are a self proclaimed unbeliever in this faith, explain yourself.

1Way
February 15th, 2004, 01:29 PM
Freak – So you are agreeing with Jeremy? All your verses present no problems with what Jeremy is saying.

1) Abraham is the father of two groups, both the circumcision and the uncircumcision.

2) Faith is always necessary for a righteous relationship or salvation with God.

3) You said
Then the great apostle Paul of the New Covenant said:

(1) All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law." (2) Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, "The man who does these things will live by them."

God through Paul says that “the righteous” or “the just” shall live by faith several times, that much is true.

(1) The curse only operates against those who were 1) under the law, and 2) did not keep the law, thus you are not cursed if you are under the law and keep the law, and God commanded men and women for thousands of years to keep the law to “live” by His commandments.

(2) You contradict what you quote, God says that "The man who does these things will live by them." Such terminology, so that you will live ... otherwise you will be cut off, are the general OT equivalents of the NT terms for “salvation” and “damnation”, “eternal life” and “spiritual death”.

Paul is affirming that salvation was by keeping the law, but that you were cursed if you were under the law but did not keep it. Also, keeping the law (without faith) was not justifying before God. Here is your passage, only this time I provide references so that others can more easily search these things out as well.
Ga 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, "Cursed [is] everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them." 11 But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for "the just shall live by faith." 12 Yet the law is not of faith, but "the man who does them shall live by them." God through Paul backs up these teachings constantly.
Ro 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law [is] the knowledge of sin. 21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, Simply doing the deeds (outward obedience) was NEVER justifying, even the law of God requires faith and love in God and in Him only. See the 10 commandments for more.

But NOW righteousness apart from the law is revealed!!! That necessarily means that prior to this “but now” revelation, it used to be righteousness from the law.

Unfortunately, I’m speaking to “freak”, so anything I offer by way of a godly advice or biblical correction will be automatically rejected or ignored or contextually ripped. So I offer this more so in hopes of the benefit of everyone who would respond in a reasonable fashion.

Jerry Shugart
February 15th, 2004, 02:10 PM
Originally posted by *Acts9_12Out*
I can't wait for this one...
Jeremy,

If you cannot wait why have you not responded?The thread is on the "General Theology" forum.

I guess "for the remission of sins," and "He who believes and is baptized will be saved," don't really mean what they say, huh Jerry?
The Lord is merely describing those who are saved:

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved"(Mk.16:16).

The Lord knows that those with true faith will submit to the rite of water baptism.The Lord used words similiar to this at another place:

"And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life"(Mt.19:29).

Here the Lord is not saying that a "requirement" for receiving everlasting life is that they must forsake their family members,but instead He is "describing" those who will inherit eternal life.

What's the thread called?
The name of the thread in regard to whether or not the Twelve are in the "Body of Christ" is on the "Dispensational" forum and it is called "The meaning of the phrase 'In Christ' ".

Did Peter have true faith Jerry?

Matthew 16
20 Then He commanded His disciples that they should tell no one that He was Jesus the Christ.
21 From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised the third day.
22 Then Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, “Far be it from You, Lord; this shall not happen to You!”
23 But He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are an offense to Me...

Wow, by Jerry's logic, Peter was not saved...
The question you previously asked was in reference to a death and resurrection that was already accomplished.Now you attemnpt to turn the tables by using a death and resurrection that still remained in the future.

Jerry, what about the OT Saints who did not have the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit or the death, burial and resurrection?
I will give you the Scripture that is in regard to the OT saints,but I am sure that you will not believe what it says:

"For the LORD loveth judgment, and forsaketh not his saints; they are preserved for ever: but the seed of the wicked shall be cut off"(Ps.37:28).

What did they have to do to be saved? If you say, "faith alone," then you must agree that NT believers needed to "have faith in" something different that OT Saints did, right?
THe Jewish believers were "born of God" when they believed in their heart that Jesus is the promised Messiah:

"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.... For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith"(1Jn.5:1,4).

If this is true, then you must agree that God asks man to show faith in different ways...
You confuse the "obedience of faith" with the "object of faith".The object of faith has changed throughout time.The object of Abraham's faith was not the death and resurrection of Christ,but at the same time his "faith" was counted to him for righteousness.

And yes,throughout the ages the Lord has given different commandments which believers are to follow.

Jeremy,you will never come to the knowkledge of the truth in regard to how the Jewish believers were saved until you actually believe what the Lord Jesus Himself said to the Jews.

"He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life"(Jn.5:24).

In His grace,--Jerry

1Way
February 15th, 2004, 02:38 PM
Jeremy – Just so you know how far Jerry will go in disrespectful misleading argumentation, I present to you his post dated Jan 16 2004 post 91 of 134

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=438286#post438286



Originally posted by Jerry Shugart

Originally posted by 1Way
The evidence against the closed view just keeps stacking up while the open view stands on God's word, and people like Jerry now admit that he has not even tried to rebut our arguments, he just claims that he is right and we are wrong, wow, some iron clad argumentation/apologetis there.

The reason that I have not even attempted to rebut your arguments is because before you make your argument you "edit" what the Scriptures say.And then you base your argument on your new,revised and edited version of what the Scriptures actually say.

That is why it is a waste of time to argue these matters with you.You cannot deal with the Scriptures as they are written.

In His grace,--Jerry So, if you think that Jerry is not even trying to understand your view, even though he keeps up the false pretence engaging you as though understands your view, he habitually only does that simply to argue against you, he need not try to understand nor refute anything you say, he (constantly) only wants to argue against you. Thus he is not honestly part of a mutual discussion or point counter-point debate, he is mostly just using you as a decoy so that he can monologue. He’s very selfish and dishonest in this regard, excepting that after many weeks and ever months altogether, he finally actually admitted what you see above!

Not to dissuade you from your efforts, just to help clarify the sort of person you are dealing with. Like freak and many others, they readily confuse

a disagreement with
a refutation,

a truth claim with
an apologetically exposed support line of reasoning,

a point of view with
a point counter-point response.

quoting a scripture teaching, (their meaning, not otherwise)
with establishing the righteous truth of the matter

Just thought you might like to know.

1Way
February 15th, 2004, 02:45 PM
Jerry – You ALREADY gave the forum title in the first place! He asked
What's the thread called? Next, I asked, and so you reply with
Jeremy,

If you cannot wait why have you not responded?The thread is on the "General Theology" forum. For Jeremy’s sake, no, for goodness sake Jerry, he is asking for which thread amongst the hundreds are you referring to. :think:

Also, if the thread is very long, you might be so kind as to point out what post numbers or pages he should concentrate on. Or do you expect him to wade through 50 or 100 posts just because you won’t take the time to give a more pointed reference.

Freak
February 15th, 2004, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by 1Way

2) Faith is always necessary for a righteous relationship or salvation with God. This we already know. For the Scriptures are consistent with that message...

Moses wrote:

Then the word of the LORD came to him: "This man will not be your heir, but a son coming from your own body will be your heir." He took him outside and said, "Look up at the heavens and count the stars-if indeed you can count them." Then he said to him, "So shall your offspring be."
Abram believed the LORD , and he credited it to him as righteousness.

The prophet of Old Habakkuk tells us:

For the revelation awaits an appointed time;
it speaks of the end
and will not prove false.
Though it linger, wait for it;
it will certainly come and will not delay.

"See, he is puffed up;
his desires are not upright-
but the righteous will live by his faith."

Then the great apostle Paul of the New Covenant said:

All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law." Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, "The man who does these things will live by them."


Paul is affirming that salvation was by keeping the law, 1Way, your theology needs some fine tuning....

David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:
“Blessed are they
whose transgressions are forgiven,
whose sins are covered.
Blessed is the man
whose sin the Lord will never count against him."


That necessarily means that prior to this “but now” revelation, it used to be righteousness from the law. Righteousness comes only through God not through anything. For only God is righteous and only He can bestow it upon humanity.


...so anything I offer by way of a godly advice or biblical correction will be automatically rejected or ignored or contextually ripped. You remind me much of the those who are in cults. You are convinced in your darknened mind that you are correct, when in reality you have been deceived by your faulty understanding of God's revealed message found in Scripture. There is hope for you, however, if you repent and place your faith in Christ who is God.

1Way
February 15th, 2004, 10:18 PM
Freak – This time you only partly ripped what I said, but still the violence is severe, so my repeat post will serve to remind everyone what I actually said and how you did not address my points with their contextual development, nor significant biblical demonstrations of my view. Enjoy!
Freak – So you are agreeing with Jeremy? All your verses present no problems with what Jeremy is saying.

1) Abraham is the father of two groups, both the circumcision and the uncircumcision.

2) Faith is always necessary for a righteous relationship or salvation with God.

3) You said
Then the great apostle Paul of the New Covenant said:

(1) All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law." (2) Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, "The man who does these things will live by them."

God through Paul says that “the righteous” or “the just” shall live by faith several times, that much is true.

(1) The curse only operates against those who were 1) under the law, and 2) did not keep the law, thus you are not cursed if you are under the law and keep the law, and God commanded men and women for thousands of years to keep the law to “live” by His commandments.

(2) You contradict what you quote, God says that "The man who does these things will live by them." Such terminology, so that you will live ... otherwise you will be cut off, are the general OT equivalents of the NT terms for “salvation” and “damnation”, “eternal life” and “spiritual death”.

Paul is affirming that salvation was by keeping the law, but that you were cursed if you were under the law but did not keep it. Also, keeping the law (without faith) was not justifying before God. Here is your passage, only this time I provide references so that others can more easily search these things out as well.
Ga 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, "Cursed [is] everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them." 11 But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for "the just shall live by faith." 12 Yet the law is not of faith, but "the man who does them shall live by them." God through Paul backs up these teachings constantly.
Ro 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law [is] the knowledge of sin. 21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, Simply doing the deeds (outward obedience) was NEVER justifying, even the law of God requires faith and love in God and in Him only. See the 10 commandments for more.

But NOW righteousness apart from the law is revealed!!! That necessarily means that prior to this “but now” revelation, it used to be righteousness from the law.

Unfortunately, I’m speaking to “freak”, so anything I offer by way of a godly advice or biblical correction will be automatically rejected or ignored or contextually ripped. So I offer this more so in hopes of the benefit of everyone who would respond in a reasonable fashion. There, now if someone wanted to know what I actually said and meant after reading your violent post, they have my original post right here for anyone to see for themselves.

The devil is much like you freak, taking only parts and bits of the truth, or if he takes the whole truth, then he just twists it until it suites his fancy, or ignores whatever is convenient for him, just like you do!

Jerry Shugart
February 16th, 2004, 09:13 AM
Originally posted by 1Way
Thus he (JerrY) is not honestly part of a mutual discussion or point counter-point debate, he is mostly just using you as a decoy so that he can monologue.
When 1Way cannot answer the verses that prove his views are in error he reverts to character assassination.

He’s very selfish and dishonest in this regard, excepting that after many weeks and ever months altogether, he finally actually admitted what you see above!
I guess that he hopes that his smear campaign will cause me to leave so that he will not have to look at the verses which he cannot answer.

In His grace,--Jerry

Jerry Shugart
February 16th, 2004, 09:21 AM
Originally posted by 1Way
Jerry – You ALREADY gave the forum title in the first place! He asked and so you reply with For Jeremy’s sake, no, for goodness sake Jerry, he is asking for which thread amongst the hundreds are you referring to.
It is you who needs to "think" for a change,1Way.The subject of the particular discussion in this instance is in regard to "water baptism".If he will go to the "General Theology" forum it is not difficult (for anyone but you) to find a thread I started on "water baptism".Try it and you might surprise yourself and you might actually find it.

Also, if the thread is very long, you might be so kind as to point out what post numbers or pages he should concentrate on.
It is the initial post on the thread.

In His grace,--Jerry

Jerry Shugart
February 16th, 2004, 10:07 AM
Originally posted by 1Way
But NOW righteousness apart from the law is revealed!!! That necessarily means that prior to this “but now” revelation, it used to be righteousness from the law.
1Way,

Yes,prior to this revelation it was revealed that the Jew could be justified by keeping the law,but in order to be justified in this way one must keep all the law without fail.And since all the Jews failed to keep all the law,they were guilty of breaking the law:

"For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith"(Gal.3:10,11).

As Paul says,it is evident that no one is justified by law keeping.Seems that it is evident to almost everyone but you.

You say that in the past that "it used to be righteousness from the law",but Paul says that "no man is justified by the law in the sight of God".

Unfortunately, I’m speaking to “freak”, so anything I offer by way of a godly advice or biblical correction will be automatically rejected or ignored or contextually ripped.
Unfortunately I am speaking to "1Way" so anything I offer by the way of godly advice or bibical correction will be automatically rejected or ignored or contextually ripped.

In His grace,--Jerry

1Way
February 16th, 2004, 02:12 PM
Jerry – The law requires, it does not ask for obedience. God never had to say, you have to keep the whole law or be in trouble, because every single command, is a “command”, it was not optional, it was mandatory, obedience to God and His commands is always required for being accepted by God and for eternal life. Fortunately today God removed the law as the way of demonstrating our faith for us in this dispensation.

Your right in that righteousness used to be from keeping the law. But then you say that no one kept the law. You have some real problems supporting that from scripture, especially without contradicting other passages, consider.
De 4:2 "You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you . See, God commands not to alter His commands so that they MAY be kept. It is pure nonsense for a wise and just God to command anyone to do anything that they simply can not do. God did not say, Jerry, go jump over the Rocky mountains, from one side to the other, and if you keep this commandment, then you shall live and be a part of my people. That is much like you are trying to say God actually did do. He knew that the people could NOT keep the entire law of God, so He commanded them to do it anyway. That violates in so many ways. Here’s more scripture to conform your faith to, not to contradict your faith to.

Consider the Pslamist teaching that man can and should keep God’s law.
Ps 119:34 Give me understanding, and I shall keep Your law; Indeed, I shall observe it with [my] whole heart.
The Pslamist continues by purely contradicting your error by saying that he keep God’s law.

Ps 119:44 So shall I keep Your law continually , Forever and ever.
and again

Ps 119:55 I remember Your name in the night, O LORD, And I keep Your law.
and again

Ps 119:115 Depart from me, you evildoers, For I will keep the commandments of my God!
And same in the Proverbs

Pr 28:4 Those who forsake the law praise the wicked, But such as keep the law contend with them .
Same with Jesus

Mt 19:17 So He said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one [is] good but One, [that is], God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments ."
Same with James just before the Jerusalem council.

Ac 21:24 "Take them and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave [their] heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but [that] you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law .
And here Jesus describes people who kept the law.

Re 12:17 And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
and again here

Re 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints; here [are] those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.
As to God’s development of what He meant when Paul said that “a man shall live by (keeping the law)” consider the follow

Le 18:5 ‘You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, which if a man does, he shall live by them: I [am] the LORD.
and again

Eze 20:11 "And I gave them My statutes and showed them My judgments, ‘which, [if] a man does, he shall live by them.’
and again

Ro 10:5 For Moses writes about the righteousness which is of the law, "The man who does those things shall live by them."
and again

Ga 3:12 Yet the law is not of faith, but "the man who does them shall live by them ."
Even a Satanist could obey a law of God, like not working on the Sabbath and have no godly faith in God. Outward obedience to a command is thus easily understand as not being “of faith”, keeping the law has it’s being “of works” of obedience. But God gave His laws expecting them to believe as well, and not just do the works without faith in God. I know you do not disagree with faith being required by God, so that much is granted.

So, please consider this wider contextual development of how God taught about keeping the law, and that man did indeed keep it.

Also, remember, this is not to say that no one broke the law, keeping the law means continuing/purposing to keep God’s law, and within God’s law, was an entire system of coverings for sins, the sacrificial system which supported God’s priesthood and even a yearly sacrifice which pointed to the spiritual reality that God ultimately uses grace as the means for salvation even in the dispensation of law! The priest gave a special “automatic” sacrifice for all sins done without even knowing about it! Isn’t that something. God provided a complete catch all system so that man did NOT have to perfectly keep every single law or else go directly to hell, there was forgiveness of sins constantly being executed upon repentance and sacrifices made and personal perseverance to continue keeping the law.

Thus, when you include God’s system of grace and forgiveness through the sacrificial system, we know that “keeping His law” was not a humanly impossible task, and God was more than reasonable in commanding His people to live by keeping them. At the same time, no one kept the law “perfectly” without ever breaking any of them, but keeping the law allowed for forgiveness of sin, a rich supply of grace and mercy. Also, I think Christ broke the law, technically speaking, but was not guilty because He obeyed overriding godly commands, some laws naturally conflicted with each other, like don’t work on the Sabboth, yet circumcise on the eighth day, who could control when your baby would be born? So sometimes people were forced to make godly concessions to keep some commands by braking another less moral or weighty command, which of course God allowed since His own law created the need.

Also, God rounded this gospel requirement for keeping the law for life, that a man of God could NOT have just faith alone and remain saved.
Heb 9:7 But into the second part the high priest [went] alone once a year, not without blood, which he offered for himself and [for] the people’s sins [committed] in ignorance;

Nu 15:27 ‘And if a person sins unintentionally , then he shall bring a female goat in its first year as a sin offering. 28 ‘So the priest shall make atonement for the person who sins unintentionally, when he sins unintentionally before the LORD, to make atonement for him; and it shall be forgiven him. 29 ‘You shall have one law for him who sins unintentionally, for him who is native-born among the children of Israel and for the stranger who dwells among them. 30 ‘But the person who does [anything] presumptuously, [whether he is] native-born or a stranger, that one brings reproach on the LORD, and he shall be cut off from among his people. 31 ‘Because he has despised the word of the LORD, and has broken His commandment, that person shall be completely cut off; his guilt [shall be] upon him.’" 32 Now while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day. 33 And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron, and to all the congregation. 34 They put him under guard, because it had not been explained what should be done to him. 35 Then the LORD said to Moses, "The man must surely be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp." 36 So, as the LORD commanded Moses, all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him with stones, and he died. Note also, that if a person had unresolved sin and then died prior to the upcoming yearly catch all sins sacrifice, it does not remotely seem plausible that God would send them to hell because the sacrifice was not made prior to them dying. God used grace to make the whole thing work, just like the conflicting laws bit, and similarly God also demonstrated His grace and mercy by forgiving such people as David, a murderer and adulterous. So keeping the law was a very humanly doable situation it had a significant element of grace supporting the entire thing. Same with the criminal on the cross, he was surely not in good standing with God’s law, and yet he was saved, God’s grace and mercy backed the entire program, but you could not reject God’s commands, they were a requirement for life, not an option.

(Jerry, please don’t become like freak, I was just demonstrating the circular self refuting nature of his remark.)

In God's grace, and by His word,
:1Way:

Jerry Shugart
February 16th, 2004, 03:31 PM
Originally posted by 1Way
Your right in that righteousness used to be from keeping the law.
I said that if a man kept the law perfectly then he could earn eternal life.But if he broke even one commandment he was guilty of all:

"For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all"(Jms.2:10).

How is being guilty of all going to save anyone?

But then you say that no one kept the law. You have some real problems supporting that from scripture, especially without contradicting other passages, consider.
There is no difficulty in proving this.The Lord Jesus Himself told the Jews that none of them kept the law (Jn.7:19).Also,Paul says that those who keep the law earn eternal life (Ro.2:6,7,12) but at the same time he says that he has proved that both Jews and Gentiles are under sin,"There is none righteous,no,not one"(Ro.3:9,10).

Here is what the law says to them who are under the law:

"Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God"(Ro.3:19).

All those who were under the law were guilty because none of them could keep the law.Therefore,Paul says,"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"(Ro.3:20).

See, God commands not that alter His commands so that you MAY keep them, and note, He emphasizes that He commands them to keep them. It is pure nonsense for a wise and just God to command anyone to do anything that they simply can not do.
When man sins he sins with his eyes open.There is nothing that compels him to do something which he knows is wrong.So it is entirely possible for him to live a life without sin.But despite this all men choose to go their own way at times.If man could not resist the urge to sin then he would not be considered to be guilty when he does sin.But the Scriptures make it plain that he is guilty of his sins.

He knew that the people could NOT keep the entire law of God, so He commanded them to do it anyway. That violates in so many ways. Here’s more scripture to conform your faith to, not to contradict your faith to.
The Lord knows that there is no reasonable excuse for sinning.He gave the law so that the people would know that they do in fact sin and therefore in need of One who can deliver them from the guilt and defilement of sin.And that is exacctly what Paul says:

"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"(Ro.3:20).

Ps 119:34 Give me understanding, and I shall keep Your law; Indeed, I shall observe it with [my] whole heart.
The Jew wanted to keep the law,but despite this they all sinned.And all of the verses in Psalms that you mention are to be understood in this way.

Same with Jesus...
Yes,the Lord Jesus told the rich man that if he wanted to inherit eternal life by his "works" then he can if he keeps all the commandments.But since he knew that he could not he left.So the Lord Jesus was using the commandments to give the rich man the knowledge of his sinfulness--by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Same with James just before the Jerusalem council.James meant that Paul was to demonstrate that he still followed the law,not that he kept it perfectly.And it is interesting that Paul says that at the time he was "persecuting the church" that he was "blameless" in regard to the law (Phil.3:6).But he was not even saved at the time he was persecuting the church.

And here Jesus describes people who kept the law.
These verses are in reference to the future when the Lord will put His Spirit in the Jews who believe and He will "cause" them to walk in His statutes (Ez.36:27).

As to God’s development of what He meant when Paul said that “a man shall live by (keeping the law)” consider the follow
Yes,this is in regard to temporal living,as the following verse demonstrates:

"This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success"(Josh.1:8).

Why cannot you believe the words of Paul when he says that "by the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified in His sight"(Ro.3:20).

You go about attempting to prove that Paul is in error!He says that no flesh is justified by the deeds of the law but you are attempting to prove that Paul is in error.

But God gave His laws expecting them to believe as well, and not just do the works without faith in God. I know you do not disagree with faith being required by God, so that much is granted.
The law was given so that even the faithful should attempt to keep it.But it was never given so that anyone could make themselves righteous before God.

Instead it was given so that the Jews would have the "knowledge" of sin.

So, please consider this wider contextual development of how God taught about keeping the law, and that man did indeed keep it.
None of them kept it perfectly and that it what it took in order to be considered righteous before the Lord God.

Also, remember, this is not to say that no one broke the law, keeping the law means continuing/purposing to keep God’s law, and within God’s law, was an entire system of coverings for sins, the sacrificial system which supported God’s priesthood and even a yearly sacrifice which pointed to the spiritual reality that God ultimately uses grace as the means for salvation even in the dispensation of law!
You are right that the Lord made provisions for those who broke the law,but all this was entirely by "grace" and nothing else.

In His grace,--Jerry

1Way
February 16th, 2004, 04:14 PM
Jerry – You self contradict, you were pretty much consistent until your last concept where you said
You are right that the Lord made provisions for those who broke the law,but all this was entirely by "grace" and nothing else. Right, God forgave men when they broke His commandments, and then they continued “keeping the law”, if they latter broke it again, then by God’s gracious provision for forgivness of sins, they were forgiven, that is all part of what it means to keep the law, the sacrificial system is part of the law.

So your last point totally validated my entire post that it was possible to “keep the law”, that was the way for salvation. Just as the picking up the sticks illustration showed, if you did not obey God’s Sabboth (a capitol offense), God required your life with your sin guilt upon you, God totally cut him off completely because he sinned presumptuously, intentionally, denying that he need obey God’s commandments, he became a law breaker, not a law keeper. God required keeping the law for righteousness, for life eternal, you could not have faith only, you had to do the works too, it was faith plus works.

You agree with my understanding of God’s grace in it’s relationship with the people who were under God’s law, and then you turn around and say that they could not keep His law. You are being inconsistent, we have no idea which you mean to be true, since you affirm them both.

Resting in Him, by His word, without dissimilation,
:1Way:

Freak
February 16th, 2004, 04:36 PM
Originally posted by 1Way

Freak –
The devil is much like you freak, taking only parts and bits of the truth, or if he takes the whole truth, then he just twists it until it suites his fancy, or ignores whatever is convenient for him, just like you do! They accused Jesus of working in the power of Satan too. Nothing has changed as the unGodly continue to accuse the geuine believers with being in the league with the enemy. You're sort of like the hell-bound homosexuals who have turned the truth into a lie. Stop communing with the wicked and come out of their wickedness, 1Way. Being Nicer then God isn't the 1Way, it's the wrong way.

Scripture states clearly:

David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:
“Blessed are they
whose transgressions are forgiven,
whose sins are covered.
Blessed is the man
whose sin the Lord will never count against him."

Get off the plot materials and get into God's Word.

1Way
February 16th, 2004, 05:11 PM
It may seem like an impossible task, but we can love God with all our heart and soul and mind, that was the overriding theme of the Law of God. Keeping God’s law was required, it was not optional.

“1 "Now this is the commandment, and these are the statutes and judgments which the LORD your God has commanded to teach you, that you may observe them in the land which you are crossing over to possess, 2 "that you may fear the LORD your God, to keep all His statutes and His commandments which I command you, you and your son and your grandson, all the days of your life, and that your days may be prolonged. 3 "Therefore hear, O Israel, and be careful to observe it, that it may be well with you, and that you may multiply greatly as the LORD God of your fathers has promised you—‘a land flowing with milk and honey.’”

“4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one! 5 "You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength.” (De 6:1-5 NKJV)

“35 Then one of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, and saying, 36 "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?" 37 Jesus said to him," ‘You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 "This is the first and great commandment. 39 "And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 "On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets."” (Mt 22:35-40 NKJV)

“25 And behold, a certain lawyer stood up and tested Him, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" 26 He said to him, "What is written in the law? What is your reading of it?" 27 So he answered and said," ‘You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind,’ and ‘your neighbor as yourself.’" 28 And He said to him, "You have answered rightly; do this and you will live."” (Lu 10:25-28 NKJV)

Ne 1:5 And I said: "I pray, LORD God of heaven, O great and awesome God, [You] who keep [Your] covenant and mercy with those who love You and observe Your commandments,
The nature of the law was in love for God, those who love and observe His commandments received God’s mercy.

Jerry Shugart
February 17th, 2004, 10:14 AM
Originally posted by 1Way
It may seem like an impossible task, but we can love God with all our heart and soul and mind, that was the overriding theme of the Law of God. Keeping God’s law was required, it was not optional.
1Way,

You left out one part of the overriding theme of the Law of God:

"And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these"(Mk.12:30,31).

That is "the Law" summed up by the Lord Jesus Himself.Are you able to give me an example of any man who has ever kept this commandment perfectly?

The nature of the law was in love for God, those who love and observe His commandments received God’s mercy.
Then according to your logic then only those who perfectly love their neighbors as themselves can receive God's mercy.

And besides according to your argument no one would receive eternal life until after a life of faithfully observing His commandments.But the Apostle John tells the Christian that we already have a life in Christ Jesus,and he describes that life as "eternal":

"And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son"(1Jn.5:11).

The word "eternal" is translated from the Greek word "aionios",which means "without end,never to cease,everlasting"("Thayer's Greek English Lexicon").

If those who already possess eternal life could somehow lose it then that would mean that that life was never "eternal" to begin with.But John says that we do in fact possess a life in Christ Jesus that is "eternal".And this is what the Lord Jesus said about those who have been given eternal life:

"And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand"(Jn.10:28).

The Lord Jesus Himself proves that your ideas are in error.Those who "believe" already possess eternal life,so the reward of eternal life is not reckoned of "works" but instead according to "faith":

"Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law"(Ro.3:28).

In His grace,--Jerry

1Way
February 17th, 2004, 06:16 PM
Jerry - You missed the last two points of my last two posts to you.

I said that God does not command and expect unreasonable things from man. God had a system for forgiveness back then just like He does now. That being the case, God’s repeated commands to “keep the law” for righteousness, for life, for salvation, was honest, sincere, righteous and possible.

God did not say that you had to obey His commands perfectly or go to hell, He said obey all of them
and
if you fail
and repent
and do what I command you to do,

then you will be forgiven.

Jerry Shugart
February 17th, 2004, 06:43 PM
Originally posted by 1Way
God did not say that you had to obey His commands perfectly or go to hell, He said obey all of them
and
if you fail
and repent
and do what I command you to do,

then you will be forgiven.
1Way,

According to your idea the Jews who lived under the law will not be forgiven until they have lived a life of obeying the law.

But John tells them that they already possess a life in Jesus Christ that will never end!

"And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son"(1Jn.5:11).

The word "eternal" is translated from the Greek word "aionios",which means "without end,never to cease,everlasting"("Thayer's Greek English Lexicon").

This is what the Lord Jesus said about those who have been given eternal life:

"And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand"(Jn.10:28).

I do not see how you can miss the meaning of these words.And they prove that they already had their sins forgiven and they already possessed a life in Christ Jesus that will never end.This is so simple that it is hard for me to believe that you cannot understand that your ideas are in direct conflict with what the Scriptures actually say.

In His grace,--Jerry

1Way
February 17th, 2004, 11:53 PM
Jerry – One train of thought at a time, please. We have been working on the idea about the Jews being under the law and what it means for them to “keep the law”. You wrote an entire post disagreeing with me, and then at the end of your post, you agreed with me.

Jerry, I don’t want for us to argue and argue and argue for no good reason, I want for us to try to help each other. We have a difference of opinion, and we both know that one or both of us is wrong, so hopefully we can work to resolve this conflict in a caring and straightforward fashion.

We almost had our differences nailed down concerning what it means to keep the law, and then you go change the topic to what it means to be saved, without even addressing our unresolved and ongoing discussion about “law keeping” and what that means.


I’ll gladly address your new points when we have time, but we have unfinished business to resolve. Back to our discussion where we last left off.


God did not command unreasonable or impossible things for them to obey and remain saved. They could not obey every law perfectly and continually, but God’s sacrificial system for forgiveness combined with the sufficient backing of His grace allowed for the “law keepers” to “keep the law” and be saved as long as they continued observing the law.

Do you agree with all that much? If not, please explain how so.

Jerry Shugart
February 18th, 2004, 10:31 AM
Originally posted by 1Way
They could not obey every law perfectly and continually, but God’s sacrificial system for forgiveness combined with the sufficient backing of His grace allowed for the “law keepers” to “keep the law” and be saved as long as they continued observing the law.

Do you agree with all that much? If not, please explain how so.
1Way,

The thing that you do not seem to realize is that the "sacrifical system" was for a people already redeemed and in covenant relationship with the Lord God.

The "sacrifical system" was put in place to keep the children of Israel in fellowship with the Lord.It did not provide a way whereby they were saved and that is because they were already under the blood of the Covenant (see Ex.24:5-8).

Before this blood was sprinkled on them,they could not even approach the mount where the Lord was.If they did they would be put to death.But after the blood was sprinkled upon the people there were able to have communion in His presence (Ex.24:9-11).

It was not until then was the Mosaic priesthood put into place in order to keep the children of Israel in "fellowship" with the Lord.So the sacrifical system had nothing whatsoever to do with their salvation but instead was in regard to "fellowship".

And we an see the same principle ast work in regard to those who received John's epistle.They already possessed "eternal life" (1Jn.5:11) but at the same time John tells them that sin breaks their fellowship with the Lord (1Jn.1:6).Sin defiles the Christian but if he will only confess the sin then the Lord will forgive that sin and cleanse him of the defilement which that sin causes.

In His grace,--Jerry

1Way
February 18th, 2004, 05:54 PM
So you deny validity of all the many passages that say to keep God's law or be cut off from His people? Those who sin presumptuously died in their sin guilt, they went to hell. Again, I am NOT saying that their works of obedience to God's commands saved them, I am saying that the works of obedience were not optional, they were required. And secondly, that if you were a part of God's people, i.e. going to life forever with God, and you sinned against God presuming you did not have to obey God, then God says you will be completely cut off from Him and His people. Obey God and live, means disobey and have eternal damnation.

Maybe I’ll have to stop this for a while, this is going no where.

Jerry Shugart
February 18th, 2004, 06:52 PM
Originally posted by 1Way
So you deny validity of all the many passages that say to keep God's law or be cut off from His people?
It was in the people--the nation of Israel--where the Israelite enjoyed "fellowship" with the Lord.

Those who sin presumptuously died in their sin guilt, they went to hell.
Again,there is no evidence that the penalty of the "sin of presumption" is "hell".

Physical death does not always lead to hell,as the following verse demonstrates:

"To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus"(1Cor.5:5).

Again, I am NOT saying that their works of obedience to God's commands saved them, I am saying that the works of obedience were not optional, they were required.
Your reasoning is flawed.

You say that "works" were required for salvation,but that these "works" did not save them.




And secondly, that if you were a part of God's people, i.e. going to life forever with God, and you sinned against God presuming you did not have to obey God, then God says you will be completely cut off from Him and His people. Obey God and live, means disobey and have eternal damnation.
Again,the words in regard to the sin of presumption say nothing about being "eternal damnation".

You seem to have a difficult time distinguishing between being saved and being in "fellowship" with the LOrd.

Maybe I’ll have to stop this for a while, this is going no where.
But I answered the points which you raised.Do you not think that it is your turn to answer my points?

Earlier I said:

According to your idea the Jews who lived under the law will not be forgiven until they have lived a life of obeying the law.

But John tells them that they already possess a life in Jesus Christ that will never end!

"And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son"(1Jn.5:11).

The word "eternal" is translated from the Greek word "aionios",which means "without end,never to cease,everlasting"("Thayer's Greek English Lexicon").

This is what the Lord Jesus said about those who have been given eternal life:

"And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand"(Jn.10:28).

I do not see how you can miss the meaning of these words.And they prove that they already had their sins forgiven and they already possessed a life in Christ Jesus that will never end.

It is your turn to answer these points,1Way.I have already answered yours.If the words of John at 1Jn.5:11 and the words of our Lord and Savior at John 10:28 are not saying that the Jewish believers were already saved and possessed eternal security,then they must have another meaning.

I am asking you for your interpretation of the meaning of those two verses.

In His grace,--Jerry

Freak
February 18th, 2004, 07:16 PM
Jerry, the Scriptures are clear. Appreciate the clarity you have presented your case in. :up:

Lucky
February 18th, 2004, 07:28 PM
Aw man, I can't believe I just found this thread! :doh:

I'll have to read it, but I don't think I'll jump in. :eek:

1Way
February 18th, 2004, 10:07 PM
Jerry you are a lost cause. I corrected you and keeping the law perfectly, yet you have not shown the decency to stand corrected, I did not say nor imply physical death, the covenant relationship of the law and circumcision with Israel was NOT to stay alive physically, but to live forever with God, it was life eternal, and to violate God’s commandments meant not being saved. The breaking of the Sabbath passage by the man picking up the sticks said that He would be completely cut off from being part of God’s people, and his sins would be upon him. Do you argue with yourself too? I can just see you when you get to heaven, you will argue with God for teaching life eternal by keeping the law in the dispensation of the law. :rolleyes:

Freak
February 19th, 2004, 06:04 AM
Originally posted by 1Way

The braking of the Sabboth passage by the man picking up the sticks... Your spelling is horrific. :down:

*Acts9_12Out*
February 19th, 2004, 07:32 AM
1Way,

As usual, outstanding! Post #135 was excellent. As usual, Jerry fails to respond to the fact that the man in Numbers 15 sinned presumptuously, was cut of completely, and his guilt was upon him when he died. Jerry would like us to believe that this man who was cut off completely, guilt upon him, lost only his "fellowship" with God, but was still saved... Unbelievable...

Jerry,

You continually quote 1 John 5:11. I will respond in full later... I recommend that you continue reading the following verses to gain a better perspective. With that said Jerry, take a look at the following passages (along with the numerous passages 1Way has shared)... *Blue is my emphasis...

Here's what you said to me (and 1Way)...


It is you who remains confused and not me.According to you the Jewish believers would not receive eternal life until after the end of a faithful life.But the Lord Jesus old the Jews that whoever believed Him already had eternal life and were already passed from death unto life:

"He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life"(Jn.5:24).

Guess what Jerry, Peter says exactly what you condemn me for saying which is quoted in blue by you above.


1 Peter 1:9
9 receiving the end of your faith--the salvation of your souls.

Seems to me that circumcision believers receive their salvation at the end of a faithful life. This is why they must "endure to the end" to be saved... Remember, Jesus told them,


Matthew 24:13
13 But he who endures to the end shall be saved.

This is a consistent theme throughout the circumcision epistles. In fact, John tells the circumcision that "those who overcome" will not have their names blotted out of the Book of Life...


Revelation 3:5
5 He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.

This implies that those who do not "overcome" (remain faithful until the end of their physical life) will have their names blotted out. In fact, loss of salvation is a common theme throughout the circumcision epistles. Here are just a few...


John 15:1-6
15:1 "I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser.
15:2 Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit.
15:3 You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you.
15:4 Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me.
15:5 I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing.
15:6 If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.

Now, the context of these words spoken by Jesus are to the remaining 11 Apostles. Judas has already betrayed Christ, and has gone out from among them (John 13:30). Christ is admonishing the remaining 11 to continue to "abide" in Him, or else they will suffer the same fate as Judas. Judas is a great example of one who believed in Christ, and then fell away.


2 Peter 2:20, 21
2:20 For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the latter end is worse for them than the beginning.
2:21 For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them.

Notice verse 20 Jerry... Peter is describing people who "escaped" the pollutions of the world by an experential knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ. If they are "again entangled" in the pollutions of this world, "the latter end is worse than the beginning..." Why is it worse for them after they fall away? Because they can no longer be saved (Heb 6:4-6). Verse 21 expounds on this idea. Why would it have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them? Again, because they still would have had a future opportunity to become saved. How about another passage from Peter?


2 Peter 1:10, 11
1:10 Therefore, brethren, [b]be even more diligent to make your call and election sure, for if you do these things you will never stumble;
1:11 for so an entrance will be supplied to you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Notice Jerry, even the "elect" of the circumcision must "make their call and election sure." If they "do these things" (the things described in the first 9 verses), they will never stumble. If they hang in there, and remain faithful until he end of their physical life, an entrance will be supplied into the everlasting Kingdom of Christ. Check your greek dictionary again Jerry... "Will be supplied" is in the future tense, which is in total agreement with what Peter wrote in 1 Peter 1:9.


1 Peter 1:9
9 receiving the end of your faith--the salvation of your souls.

Stop kicking against the goads Jerry, and open your heart to what God's Word has to say. When God was dealing with the circumcision, He required them to show their faith n a physical way. If they "endured to the end," they would receive their reward for a faithful life. They would receive their salvation...

--Jeremy Finkenbinder

Jerry Shugart
February 19th, 2004, 10:46 AM
Originally posted by *Acts9_12Out*
As usual, Jerry fails to respond to the fact that the man in Numbers 15 sinned presumptuously, was cut of completely, and his guilt was upon him when he died.
Jeremy,

I did respond to the verses in regard to the sin of presumption.But of course no one has an answer to what I said and instead of admitting that there is no answer I am accused of not responding!

But despite this I will answer again.There was someone in the church at Cornith who was committing the sin of presumption by "having his father's wife"(1Cor.5:1).But Paul does not say that this man was going to hell.Instead,he says that this man will receive the punishment of committing this sin of presumption which is "physical" death.But at the same time that man will not lose his salvation.Here are Paul's own words in regard to this man:

"To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus"(1Cor.5:5).

I am sure that that man died physically while his sin was unconfessed and forgivenBut according to Paul that man was saved nonetheless.

Next,I will go to the crux of our disagreement.Earlier I said:


According to you the Jewish believers would not receive eternal life until after the end of a faithful life.But the Lord Jesus old the Jews that whoever believed Him already had eternal life and were already passed from death unto life.
Instead of addressing the verses I provided you go to something else that you think answers the verses I gave.You said:

Guess what Jerry, Peter says exactly what you condemn me for saying which is quoted in blue by you above.

1 Peter 1:9
9 receiving the end of your faith--the salvation of your souls.
At 1Peter 1:9 the word translated "end" can mean "the end to which all things relate,the aim,the purpose"("Thayer's Greek English Lexicon").

So in effect Peter is saying,"receiving the purpose of your faith,even the salvation of your souls"(1Pet.1:9).

Jeremy,if you would have investigated the meaning of this verse you would have found out the the word "receiving" here is in the present tense.They have already received the purpose of their faith--the salvation of their souls.

The word "receiving" is translated from the Greek word "komizo,and that word is used here in the "present" tense.Here is an explanation of the Greek "present" tense:

The present tense represents a simple statement of fact
or reality viewed as occurring in actual time. In most cases this corresponds directly with the English present tense.

Some phrases which might be rendered as past tense in English
will often occur in the present tense in Greek. These are
termed "historical presents," and such occurrences dramatize
the event described as if the reader were there watching the
event occur. Some English translations render such historical
presents in the English past tense, while others permit the
tense to remain in the present.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/strongs/1077206936-6626.html

So Peter is telling these believers that they have already received the purpose of the faith which is the salvation of their souls.This verse that you think proves your point only demonstrates that these men had already received the salvation of their souls.

Next,you say:

Seems to me that circumcision believers receive their salvation at the end of a faithful life. This is why they must "endure to the end" to be saved... Remember, Jesus told them,

Matthew 24:13
13 But he who endures to the end shall be saved.
If we examine this verse in its context it is clear that the reference in regard to "being saved" means "physically saved".Just a few verses before the LOrd Jesus said:

"Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake"(Mt.24:9).

The Lord's words at Matthew 24:13 are not in reference to "enduring to the end" in order to receive everlasting life,and that is because the Lord Jesus told the Jews that when they "believed" they were passed from death unto life and possessed eternal life:

"He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life"(Jn.5:24).

Next you say:

This is a consistent theme throughout the circumcision epistles. In fact, John tells the circumcision that "those who overcome" will not have their names blotted out of the Book of Life...


quote:
Revelation 3:5
5 He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.
You prove that you do not undersatand that it is by "faith" and "faith" alone whereby one "overcomes":

"For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith"(1Jn.5:4).

The Jewish believers who received the Lord Jesus Christ were "born of God"(Jn.1:12,13) so therefore they can be described as having "overcome".And here is what the LOrd Jesus said about "overcomers":

"He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels"(Rev.3:5).

You continually quote 1 John 5:11. I will respond in full later...
Jeremy,you say that you will respond later to 1Jn.5:11.I am still waiting.Anyone can go back to my previous posts on this thread and they will see that I have answered fully and Scriptually to every single point which you and 1Way have made.On this posts I have answered several of the verses which you have provided.But now it is your time to answer the following verses that prove conclusively that the Jewish believers already possessed a life in Christ Jesus that will never end:

"And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son"(1Jn.5:11).

The word "eternal" is translated from the Greek word "aionios",which means "without end,never to cease,everlasting"("Thayer's Greek English Lexicon").

This is what the Lord Jesus said about those who have been given eternal life:

"And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand"(Jn.10:28).

The Lord Jesus had already told the Jews that once they believed they were "passed from death unto life" and possessed "eternal life" at John 5:24.Now John tells these same believers that they already possessed a life in Christ Jesus that will never end.And the Lord Jesus Himself said that those who had been given eternal life "shall never perish".

If these words do not mean what they seem to be saying,then they must have another meaning.I am asking you for your interpretation of the meaning of those words.After you finish that then I will answer the remaining verses which you provided.

But now it is your time to give your interpretation of the meaning of John's words at 1John 5:11 and the words of the Lord and Savior at John 10:28.

In His grace,--Jerry

Jerry Shugart
February 24th, 2004, 12:05 PM
Jeremy,

I have been waiting patiently for you interpretation of the meaning of 1 John 5:11 and John 10:28.It has now been five days since I asked you for your interpretation of the meaning of those verses.

Now that you are back and responding to other posts on this forum perhaps you will now give me your interpretation of the meaning of those verses.

In His grace,--Jerry

*Acts9_12Out*
February 25th, 2004, 04:54 AM
Jerry,

You said,


Originally posted by Jerry Shugart

Jeremy,

I did respond to the verses in regard to the sin of presumption.But of course no one has an answer to what I said and instead of admitting that there is no answer I am accused of not responding!

Actually, you didn't respond. You pull the 'ol "but over here it says..." trick. You never told us what it meant in Numbers when it says, "that person shall be completely cut off; his iniquity shall be upon him." (Numbers 15:31b)

Instead of admitting that this man was completely cut off from God, you hope we will believe he was only partially cut off. He was cut off physically, but not spiritually? How is that completely? Secondly, what does it mean that he is completely cut off; his iniquity (sin) being upon him? His iniquity is counted against him, he's killed physically (not completely though) and still goes to heaven? Unbelievable... You think you responded by saying,


But despite this I will answer again.There was someone in the church at Cornith who was committing the sin of presumption by "having his father's wife"(1Cor.5:1).But Paul does not say that this man was going to hell.Instead,he says that this man will receive the punishment of committing this sin of presumption which is "physical" death.But at the same time that man will not lose his salvation.Here are Paul's own words in regard to this man:

How does 1 Corinthians 5 answer Numbers 15:32? I thought you were a dispensationalist Jerry... I hope you realize that God was dealing with this event in Corinth differently than He dealt with the nation of Israel. What's interesting is, by your logic, if this man would have remained in the church, he never could have been saved. He needed to be "turned over to satan" to be saved. Since this is not our topic, I will not exegete 1 Cor 5. We have enough to deal with as it is... You continue,


I am sure that that man died physically while his sin was unconfessed and forgivenBut according to Paul that man was saved nonetheless.

Actually, you're wrong. Paul never says this man "is saved." Paul hopes that he "may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." Huge difference Jerry. However, according to you, this man was already saved if he had "faith" at some point in his life. Unfortunately, Paul's admonition to "throw the bum out" was for his own good. If that man continued sleeping with is father's wife, he would not have been saved... Another interesting point is as follows...

Under the circumcision gospel, if a person sinned presumptously, he died in his sins. This is shown clearly in Numbers 15, which you have yet to respond to. Secondly, the author of Hebrews addresses this same topic...


Hebrews 10
26 For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins,
27 but a certain fearful expectation of judgement, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries.

If circumcision believers "sinned willfully" after they received the knowledge of the truth there was no sacrifice available for them, not even Jesus Christ. Their "hope" was a certain fearful expectation of judgement, and firey indignation which will devour the adversaries. Now Jerry, are you really going to try and say that this is a description of "physical death?" I sure hope not. Wait, it gets better...


28 Anyone who has rejected Moses' law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses.

Let me guess... Those who reject Moses' law die physically, but are still saved, right? Maybe if you rub hard enough, you can erase "without mercy" from your Bible Jerry. :doh: Wait, it gets better...


29 Of how much worse punishment , do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?

Notice Jerry, this is referring to a person who had faith, was sanctified by the blood of Christ, but insulted the Spirit of grace. In your perfect world, this person somehow makes it to heaven... :confused: You continue,


At 1Peter 1:9 the word translated "end" can mean "the end to which all things relate,the aim,the purpose"("Thayer's Greek English Lexicon").

So in effect Peter is saying,"receiving the purpose of your faith,even the salvation of your souls"(1Pet.1:9).

Jerry, are you serious? Before I pass judgement, I will give you an opportunity to save face. Feel free to post the entire definition of teloV "end" in 1 Peter 1:9. Secondly, show me just one translation that says... "Receiving the purpose of your faith..." Good luck... You continue with your exhaustive knowledge of Greek and say,


Jeremy,if you would have investigated the meaning of this verse you would have found out the the word "receiving" here is in the present tense.They have already received the purpose of their faith--the salvation of their souls.

Read what you wrote Jerry... If the tense of komizomenoi is present (which it is), then how can you say they already possess eternal life? Wouldn't that be past tense? Secondly, I would recommend that you do a little research on the usage of participles... You continue,


The word "receiving" is translated from the Greek word "komizo,and that word is used here in the "present" tense.Here is an explanation of the Greek "present" tense:

The present tense represents a simple statement of fact
or reality viewed as occurring in actual time. In most cases this corresponds directly with the English present tense.

Some phrases which might be rendered as past tense in English
will often occur in the present tense in Greek. These are
termed "historical presents," and such occurrences dramatize
the event described as if the reader were there watching the
event occur. Some English translations render such historical
presents in the English past tense, while others permit the
tense to remain in the present.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/strongs/1077206936-6626.html

Um, thanks for the lesson... :confused: How long have you been teaching Greek Jerry? You continue,


So Peter is telling these believers that they have already received the purpose of the faith which is the salvation of their souls.This verse that you think proves your point only demonstrates that these men had already received the salvation of their souls.

Wait, I thought it was a present participle, not past tense? Feel free to teach me again... :eek: Concerning Matthew 24:13, you say,


If we examine this verse in its context it is clear that the reference in regard to "being saved" means "physically saved".Just a few verses before the LOrd Jesus said:

"Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake"(Mt.24:9).

The Lord's words at Matthew 24:13 are not in reference to "enduring to the end" in order to receive everlasting life,

I never said that they wouldn't be saved physically. You are wrong whan you say it had nothing to do with eternal life. That's why I referenced John 15:1-8... You didn't respond to that yet either...


and that is because the Lord Jesus told the Jews that when they "believed" they were passed from death unto life and possessed eternal life:

"He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life"(Jn.5:24).

Hmmm... Just like those described in Hebrews 10 & 2 Peter 2, right?

Concerning Revelation 3:5 you say,


You prove that you do not undersatand that it is by "faith" and "faith" alone whereby one "overcomes":

"For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith"(1Jn.5:4).

This is circular... Their faith was dependent upon keeping God's law. If they did not abide in His law, they were not "overcomers" and their names were blotted out... You continue,


The Jewish believers who received the Lord Jesus Christ were "born of God"(Jn.1:12,13) so therefore they can be described as having "overcome".And here is what the LOrd Jesus said about "overcomers":

"He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels"(Rev.3:5).

What if they don't overcome Jerry? I would say the believers who fell away in Hebrews 6:4-6, 10:26-29 and 2 Peter 2:20,21 (which you haven't responded to either), were not overcomers, and had their names blotted out.


Jeremy,you say that you will respond later to 1Jn.5:11.I am still waiting.Anyone can go back to my previous posts on this thread and they will see that I have answered fully and Scriptually to every single point which you and 1Way have made.On this posts I have answered several of the verses which you have provided.But now it is your time to answer the following verses that prove conclusively that the Jewish believers already possessed a life in Christ Jesus that will never end:

"And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son"(1Jn.5:11).

The reason I have delayed in my response to you Jerry is, I asked myself, "Is it really worth it?" You are an enigma to me Jerry. I agree with 1Way's comments about your arguing with yourself for the sake of arguing... However, I realize there are many "lurkers" here who read and may appreciate the efforts... So, here goes...

The theme of 1 John continually shows endurance. In fact, 1 John 1:9 shows continual confession of sins to be forgiven. The "If we confess" is a Present Active Subjunctive 1st Person Plural omologwmen. Since you know Greek Jerry, this shows that "confessing" is continual present action. Verse 9 is literally, "If we keep on confessing our sins..."

Now, if they keep on confessing, what happens? "He (Christ) is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."

Since you know Greek, you realize that this is a 1st Class Condition. The "then" portion of the statement is true only if the "if" portion has been met. "If" they do not continually confess their sins, then the "then" portion will not come to pass. He (Christ) is not faithful and just to forgive them their sins and to cleanse them from all unrighteouness. Due to lack of space, I will try to limit the proof texts. There are many more, but I'll hit the important ones... Notice 1 John 2:4, 5 Jerry...


1 John 2
2:4 He who says, "I know Him," and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
2:5 But whoever keeps His word, truly the love of God is perfected in him. By this we know that we are in Him.

John says he knows who is "in Him" because they keep His commandments. Let's jump forward to your verse Jerry... I'll pick up the context...


1 John 5
5:6 This is He who came by water and blood--Jesus Christ; not only by water, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth.
5:7 For there are three that bear witness
5:8 the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.

Now, what is the "Witness" described here? Jesus Christ endured water baptism and Spirit baptism "to fulfill all righteousness (Matthew 3:13-17). The Father was "well pleased in His Son. Thirdly, Jesus endured the "death baptism" for the sin of the world (Luke 12:50). The "Witness" here Jerry is the three baptisms Christ endured agree as one.



5:9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater; for this is the witness of God which He has testified of His Son.

Again, God was "well pleased" with His Son when Christ "fulfilled all righteousness."


5:10 He who believes in the Son of God has the witness in himself; he who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed the testimony that God has given of His Son.

Sounds good so far... Those who believe in the Son have the witness (water, Spirit and Blood) in them. This next point is crucial for your verse Jerry. Those who do not believe do not have the "testimony" that God has given of His Son. On to your verse...


5:11 And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son.
5:12 He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.

Sounds good, doesn't it Jerry? The "testimony" is that God has given eternal life? This life is in His Son. How was this accomplished? Jesus was water and Spirit baptized to "fulfill all righteousness," and endured the "death baptism" so that we can have eternal life. Those three agree as one as God's witness and God's testimony. Let's continue reading the context (which I suggested you do)...


5:13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.

Jerry, what if they did not continue to believe? This describes perfectly the men in 2 Peter 2:20, 21 doesn't it? They had access to eternal life, fell away, and were lost. The same is true as described by the writer of Hebrews (6:4-6, 10:26-29). Let's keep reading...


5:14 Now this is the confidence that we have in Him, that if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us.
5:15 And if we know that He hears us, whatever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we have asked of Him.

When was the last time God answered a "whatever prayer" Jerry? He doesn't do that anymore does He? I hope you agree that this is because of a dispensational change... You continue,


The word "eternal" is translated from the Greek word "aionios",which means "without end,never to cease,everlasting"("Thayer's Greek English Lexicon").

Ah, more Greek... Thanks...


This is what the Lord Jesus said about those who have been given eternal life:

"And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand"(Jn.10:28).

Yes Jerry, the "life" is eternal. God "gives" them eternal life. However, as I've already shown, they were not secure. They could "stop believing" and lose eternal life. Concerning John 10:28, you are right... No man shall pluck one possessing eternal life out of God's hand. However, using that same analogy, a circumcision believer who possessed eternal life could jump out of God's hand and lose it...


The Lord Jesus had already told the Jews that once they believed they were "passed from death unto life" and possessed "eternal life" at John 5:24.Now John tells these same believers that they already possessed a life in Christ Jesus that will never end.And the Lord Jesus Himself said that those who had been given eternal life "shall never perish".

Again Jerry, their salvation was not secure. They possessed eternal life as long as they remained faithful. Again, Christ admonished the 11 to continue to abide in Him, or they would be lost. Judas was saved, fell away, and will be burned...


If these words do not mean what they seem to be saying,then they must have another meaning.I am asking you for your interpretation of the meaning of those words.After you finish that then I will answer the remaining verses which you provided.

I just responded. Now, I'll wait for a thorough response from you...

One more passage to throw into the mix Jerry... It seems that Peter understood "doing works of righteousness" to be accepted by God...


Acts 10
10:34 Then Peter opened his mouth and said: "In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality.
10:35 But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him.

Was Peter wrong too Jerry?

In Christ,
--Jeremy Finkenbinder

Freak
February 25th, 2004, 05:58 AM
Originally posted by *Acts9_12Out*

Jerry,
However, using that same analogy, a circumcision believer who possessed eternal life could jump out of God's hand and lose it...

In Christ,
--Jeremy Finkenbinder You say this despite what Jesus Christ Himself declared:

...that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

Jesus was speaking to those under the Law and was pretty clear that simple belief in Him would allow them the promise of never perishing.

*Acts9_12Out*
February 25th, 2004, 06:59 AM
Freak,

Try to offer something with substance. If what you say is true, then feel free to respond to the rest of my points. Unfortunately, you do not understand the conditional nature of the circumcision gospel. If your verse is a supposed "catch all," then I ask you also to respond to John 15:1-6.

I'll even help you out a little... Jesus is speaking to the remaining 11 Apostles. Judas "went out" in John 13:30. Here's what Christ tells the remaining 11 Apostles...


John 15
15:1 "I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser.
15:2 Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit.
15:3 You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you.
15:4 Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me.
15:5 I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing.
15:6 If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.

Now, Freak, if they "have eternal life" and "will never perish," why does Jesus warn them to remain faithful? They are in danger of suffering the same fate as Judas. According to your logic, Judas "has eternal life" and "will never perish" because he was at one time a believer in Christ. As I said before, you fail to understand the conditions set upon the circumcision.

While you're at it, feel free to respond to Hebrews 6:4-6, 10:26-29 and 2 Peter 2:20,21. I know you won't, but it was woth a shot...

--Jeremy Finkenbinder

Jerry Shugart
February 25th, 2004, 11:15 AM
Jeremy,

You say that you believe what is written in the Scripturers and then you turn around and deny what the Scriptures say.John tells the Jewish believers that they already possess a life in Christ Jesus,and he describes this life as being "ETERNAL"!

THe word "eternal" is translated from the Greek word ""aionios",which means "without end,never to cease,everlasting"("Thayer's Greek English Lexicon").

All you can say to this meaning given by a Greek expert is:

Ah, more Greek... Thanks...

Instead of answering as a mature Christian all you can say is "Ah,more Greek...Thanks".Jeremy,if you can provide any Greek expert that says "aionios" does not mean "without end,never to cease,everlasting" then I would suggest that you cite that expert.But instead all you can say is "Ah,more Greek...Thanks..."

With those types of responses how can you expect anyone to take you seriously?

But since that meaning does not match your ideas,you go about to prove that the life in Christ Jesus that can never end can indeed end!Unfortunately you put your ideas above what the Scriptures actually say.

You say that they could lose that life even though John says that this life they have in Christ Jesus is without end.Anyone can change the meaning of the words used in the Scriptures to make them fit their ideas.And that is exactly what you are doing.

If they could possibly lose their eternal life then that would mean that this "eternal" life was never "eternal" to begin with.But you will not be persuaded by what the Scriptures actually say.You just will not believe that "eternal" means "without end,never to cease,everlasting".

Here is what you say about 1Jn.5:11:

Sounds good, doesn't it Jerry? The "testimony" is that God has given eternal life?
Yes,it does "sound" good.In fact,it sounds so good that these men know that they possessed a life in Christ Jesus that can never end,despite the fact that you say that it can end.

You continue:

This life is in His Son. How was this accomplished? Jesus was water and Spirit baptized to "fulfill all righteousness," and endured the "death baptism" so that we can have eternal life.
Yes,you and I have a life in Christ Jesus that can never end.But you say that despite the fact that these believers have eternal life that their life in Christ Jesus can end!You throw your reason to the wind and then go about to prove that a life in Christ Jesus that is "without end" can in fact end!

Those three agree as one as God's witness and God's testimony. Let's continue reading the context (which I suggested you do)...

5:13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.
First of all,the Greek word that is translated "continue" is not even in this verse.Secondly,the "New Scofield Study Bible" states that "the words 'and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God' do not appear in most of the early mss."

Therefore,the NLT,NASB,RSV and Darby's translation of the Bible do not even include those words.Here is the translation from the NASB:

"These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life"(1Jn.5:13;NASB).

There are no "conditions" placed on this "unconditional" statement:

"And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son"(1Jn.5:11).

In order to keep your false ideas you are forced to deny that "eternal" means "withourt end,never to cease,everlasting" and then you are forced to attempt to place "conditions" on an "unconditional" statements.

And here is what the Lord Jesus Himself says about those who have been given aternal life:

"And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand"(Jn.10:28).

Despite the fact that the Lord Jesus Himself says that those who have been given eternal life shall never perish you go about attempting to prove that they could indeed perish.You say:

Yes Jerry, the "life" is eternal. God "gives" them eternal life. However, as I've already shown, they were not secure.
You say that you have already shown that they were not secure,but you were forced to deny the meaning of the word "eternal" in order to do so.And despite the words of the Lord Jesus that those who have received eternal life "shall never perish" you say that they can perish!

I asked you to give me your interpretation of the meaning of this verse,but all you do is deny what the Lord Jesus Himself says!You continue:

They could "stop believing" and lose eternal life.
Again,if they stopped believing and lost their eternal life then that would mean that they never had an eternal life to begin with!

And how can one who believes in their heart ever stop believing the "truth"?Here is what John says about that:

"...all they that have known the truth;For the truth's sake, which dwelleth in us, and shall be with us for ever"(2Jn.1,2).

So we see that you deny the meaning of the word "eternal" and then you go about to add "conditions" to "unconditional" statement so that you can attempt to prove that those who have eternal life can perish despite the words of the Lord Jesus that they "shall never perish".You continue:

Concerning John 10:28, you are right... No man shall pluck one possessing eternal life out of God's hand.
Why do you not say that I am right that those who possess eternal life "shall never perish"?

That is because if you did then you would have to admit that all your ideas concerning the eternal salvation of Jewish believers is in error.So you admit that a part of what the Lord Jesus said is correct,but you deny the rest!

However, using that same analogy, a circumcision believer who possessed eternal life could jump out of God's hand and lose it...
How could they lose it in light of the fact that the Lord Jesus said that they "shall never perish"?

You fail to realize that all those who have a life in Jesus Christ (life is in the Son--1Jn.5:11) are "preserved" in Jesus Christ:

"Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them who are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ"(Jude1).

So in summary we can see that in order to keep your false ideas you must deny that the Greek word translated "eternal" means "without end,never to cease,everlasting".Then on top of that you must deny the words of the Lord Jesus when He says that those possessing eternal life "shall never perish".You say that they can perish.Then you must deny the words of Jude where he says that those who have a life in the Son are "preserved".You say that they have no eternal security and therefore they are not "preserved".

Jeremy,all you prove is that you are willing to deny the words of the Lord Jesus Himself in order that you can cling to your false beliefs.No matter what the Lord says you will not believe it if it is in conflict with your false ideas.

More later...

In His grace,--Jerry

Jerry Shugart
February 25th, 2004, 01:01 PM
Jeremy,

Earlier I said:

"According to you the Jewish believers would not receive eternal life until after the end of a faithful life.But the Lord Jesus told the Jews that whoever believed Him already had eternal life and were already passed from death unto life..

This statement of mine is supported by the words of the Lord Jesus Christ:

"He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life"(Jn.5:24).

All you can say about the words of the Lord Jersus in this verse is:

Hmmm... Just like those described in Hebrews 10 & 2 Peter 2, right?
You think that your misunderstanding of the verses at Hebrew 10 and 2Peter 2 somehow changes the meaning of the words of the Lord Jesus?

That is all you do.You continue to deny what the LOrd Jesus Himself says based on your false views of other verses.

The word "hath" in this verse is in the "present" tense.Here is the meaning of the Greek "present" tense:

"The present tense represents a simple statement of fact
or reality viewed as occurring in actual time. In most cases
this corresponds directly with the English present tense."

http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/strongs/1077732319-7661.html

So if we will but simply believe the words of the Lord Jesus then we can only conclude that upon belief the Jews possessed (hath) a life that the Lord Jesus describes as "everlasting" ("aionios" = "eternal").

But you attempt to use the following words to prove that they would not be saved until the end of a faithful life:

1 Peter 1:9
9 receiving the end of your faith--the salvation of your souls.
If you are correct then Peter would have used a tense that denotes a "receiving" in the "future".But the word "receiving" is in the "present" tense and therefore the "receiving" is not in reference to the "future".

I said,"Jeremy,if you would have investigated the meaning of this verse you would have found out the the word "receiving" here is in the present tense.They have already received the purpose of their faith--the salvation of their souls."

And since you could not refute the fact that the word "receiving" is in the "present" tense you say:

Read what you wrote Jerry... If the tense of komizomenoi is present (which it is), then how can you say they already possess eternal life? Wouldn't that be past tense?
What Peter is saying is that at the time he was writing his words (at that "present" time) that they were the receipents of "the salvation of their souls".

But you would have us believe that even though Peter used the word "receiving" in the "present" tense that the salvation of their souls would not happen until the future.

You have no answer to this so you must say something,no matter how ridiculous.I then said:

At 1Peter 1:9 the word translated "end" can mean "the end to which all things relate,the aim,the purpose"("Thayer's Greek English Lexicon").

So in effect Peter is saying,"receiving the purpose of your faith,even the salvation of your souls"(1Pet.1:9).
But you continue to insist that the "receiving" takes place in the "future".You say:

Jerry, are you serious? Before I pass judgement, I will give you an opportunity to save face.
What a joke!You will give me the opportunity to save face.How you can say this with a straight faith is beyond me.You even admit that the "receiving" is in the "present" tense but then you go on to insist that the "receiving" will not take place until the end of a faithful life.

Feel free to post the entire definition of teloV "end" in 1 Peter 1:9.
If we are to believe that the phrase "the end of your faith" is in reference to receiving salvation at the end of a faithful life then we must believe that they were the receipents of the salvation of their souls at the time Peter wrote those words but at thge same time they would not receive it until later!

Secondly, show me just one translation that says... "Receiving the purpose of your faith..." Good luck...
These verses do not use the word "purpose" but instead uses the word "result" and "outcome":

"obtaining as the outcome of your faith the salvation of your souls."(NASB).

"receiving the result of your faith, the salvation of your souls."(HNV).

The Jewish believers were the receipents ( at the time they heard and believed--"the present tense") of the result of their faith which is the salvation of their souls.

I think that before you give others lectures on the Greek language you should first go back and study the meaning of the tenses in the English language.I do not think that a study of the Greek language will be much use to you until you come to an understanding of the meaning of the "present" tense in English.

In His grace,--Jerry

Jerry Shugart
February 25th, 2004, 02:09 PM
Jeremy,

Earlier you said that it is only the "overcomers" who will not lose their salvation.Then I said:

You prove that you do not undersatand that it is by "faith" and "faith" alone whereby one "overcomes":

"For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith"(1Jn.5:4).
But you say:

This is circular... Their faith was dependent upon keeping God's law. If they did not abide in His law, they were not "overcomers" and their names were blotted out...
You say that their "faith" was dependent on works,or keeping God's law.But Paul says that a man is justified before God by "faith" apart from works:

"Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law....Seeing it is one God, Who shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith"(Ro.3:28,30).

He says:

"Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith"(Ro.3:27).

These things are so elementary but you prove over and over that you do not even understand the elementary revelations of God.

The Apostles says that "whosoever is born of God overcometh the world".And it was those who believed that the Lord Jesus is the Christ,the Son of the LIving God,who were "born of God":

"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God...and this is the victory that overcometh the world,even our faith"(1Jn.5:1,4).

It is their "faith" and "faith" alone that overcomes the world.But despite the clear words of John you add to the Scriptures by saying that it was not only their "faith" that was required but also the "law keeping".

"...this is the victory which overcomes the world,even our faith"(1Jn.5:4).

A man's "faith" is "the substance of things hoped for,the evidence of things not seen"(Heb.11:1).

A man's "faith" is not dependent on doing works.Works follows "faith",and that is why "works" are described as the "obedience of faith"[/i].

Those who received the Lord because they believed His words were "born of God"(Jn.1:12,13).And John says that those who are "born of God" are "overcomers".And this is what the Lord Jesus says to those who are "overcomers":

"He that overcometh...I will not blot his name out of the book of life"(Rev.3:5).

But you say that it is possible that the Lord may blot these men out of the book of life despite the fact that they are "born of God" and "overcomers".

In His grace,--Jerry

Jerry Shugart
February 26th, 2004, 11:10 AM
Jeremy,

I have started a new thread in reply to your mis-use of John 15.It is on the "General Thelogy" forum and it is titled "Does the Parable of 'The Vine and the Branches' Teach a Loss of Salvation?".

In His grace,--Jerry

Jerry Shugart
February 26th, 2004, 01:05 PM
Jeremy,

You said:

One more passage to throw into the mix Jerry... It seems that Peter understood "doing works of righteousness" to be accepted by God...


quote:
Acts 10
10:34 Then Peter opened his mouth and said: "In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality.
10:35 But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him.



Was Peter wrong too Jerry?
What you fail to realize is the fact that Peter is merely describing those who are accepted by the Lord.Those who fear God live a life according to their conscience.Therefore,the words "works righteousness" are in regard to the "obedience of faith".But these "works" do not save him.

Here is a Scriptual passages where the Lord Jesus describes those who will be saved:

"And every one that hath forsaken houses,or brethren,or sisters,or father,or mother,or wife,or children,or lands,for My sake,shall receive an hundredfold,and shall inherit everlasting life"(Mt.19:29).

The Lord Jesus surely is not saying that a requirement of eternal life is that we must forsake our families,but instead He is describing those who will be saved.

You say that this is teaching that "works of righteousness" are necessary in order to be accepted of God.But that directly contradicts the words of Paul:

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done,but according to His mercy He saved us..."(Titus5:5).

In His grace,--Jerry

Freak
February 26th, 2004, 05:59 PM
Originally posted by *Acts9_12Out*

Freak,

Try to offer something with substance. I offered the words of Jesus. I find it puzzling that you would remark in such manner when I rested my points of the words of the Lord Jesus. Speaks much of your cold heart.


If what you say is true, What do you mean if is true? Jesus Christ Himself declared:

...that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.

Jesus was speaking to those under the Law and was pretty clear that simple belief in Him would allow them the promise of never perishing. Is this true or not???


Unfortunately, you do not understand the conditional nature of the circumcision gospel. I understand the clear words of Jesus in John 3:15-17. Do you?


If your verse is a supposed "catch all," Dohhh. It is in fact a "catch all" for Jesus said, "Whoever." Imagine that.


Now, Freak, if they "have eternal life" and "will never perish," why does Jesus warn them to remain faithful? Because He desires believers who serve Him not those who simply rest upon their justification and whom do not serve. This isn't a issue of salvation, however, for Christ taught that those who believe in him have crossed from death into life. Jesus was teaching on the issue of service.


According to your logic, Judas "has eternal life" and "will never perish" because he was at one time a believer in Christ. Only God knows the heart. I can't judge Judas and his salvation.


While you're at it, feel free to respond to Hebrews 6:4-6, 10:26-29 and 2 Peter 2:20,21. I know you won't, but it was woth a shot...

--Jeremy Finkenbinder What about it? I have no problem with those passages, apparently you do. :chuckle:

1Way
February 29th, 2004, 05:37 PM
Freak - You cut up what Jeremy said such that you ripped the context. I read Jeremy's post and I read your response, your reflections on Jeremy’s thoughts do not resemble what Jeremy gave you to consider.

The reason we string letters into words into phrases and sentences and quotes and examples and paragraphs and such is to convey the meaning of the entire thing. The fact that so may posters do violence to the context of God’s word and the posts they quote from every day, is not an excuse to continue doing it yourself.

Dont rip the context. Deal uprightly with the truth of a matter, the truth is that you did not reflect what Jeremy wrote for your consideration, you chops his words such that much of his conveyed meaning is lost.

geralduk
March 2nd, 2004, 05:13 AM
I thought we were to be folowers of CHRIST?

Jerry Shugart
March 20th, 2004, 11:26 AM
Jeremy,

I was told that you were going to debate these issues with me on Battle Royale VIII.

Are you ready to rumble?

In HIs grace,--Jerry

*Acts9_12Out*
March 21st, 2004, 12:57 AM
Fo sho...

Let's do it...

--Jeremy