Interpreting Scripture in the Light of the Historical Gospel of Jesus Christ

R

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
The whole Bible is about Jesus Christ and his Gospel. In the Old Testament God is bringing forth a nation and a people from whom the savior of the world would come. All of the prophets and patriarchs spoke about the coming of their Messiah. Isaiah wrote,

"He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was laid upon him; and with his stripes we are healed" Isaiah 53:5.

Every generation hoped that they would witness the coming of their Messiah. Those that believed in God's promise of a savior were justified by faith, Romans 4:1-5. They believed God. Many died without seeing their Messiah.

Since the Gospel is the heart and the center of the Bible all scripture should be interpreted in the light of it. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the means by which we are saved and reconciled unto God. The whole New Testament concerns Jesus Christ and his Gospel. The New Testament is not another Jewish Torah. The New Testament is a witness to the Christ event.

If the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the means by which God has reconciled us and the world unto himself, 2 Corinthians 5:18, 19. Then all scripture should be interpreted in the light of this miraculous event. To interpret scripture in the light of Calvinism, Catholicism or any religion is a mistake. The Bible calls these religions into question simply because they are not in the Bible and are conceived in the mind of men.

In the Gospel Jesus comes into the world as God's new Adam and humanities new representative. Our old representative (Adam) sinned against God and brought sin and death upon us, Romans 5:12. Our new representative (Jesus Christ) brings righteousness, eternal life and justification, Romans 5:17. Jesus as our substitute and representative over comes sin, death and the devil and in doing so perfects our humanity. Having perfected our humanity through suffering, Hebrews 2:10, Jesus takes our humanity back to heaven. This is why Paul wrote,

"And you are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power" Colossians 2:10.

If Jesus has perfected our humanity and has taken it back to heaven, then why does anyone need a religion? Religion, whether it is the Calvinist religion, Catholic religion or whatever religion is a denial of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. No one needs to be predestinated. No one needs to join the Catholic church. No one needs to do anything, simply because we are justified by faith, Romans 4:5. If we will interpret the Bible in the light of this miraculous event we will find that the Bible makes sense.
 
R

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
There are some on the Forum that do not believe that Jesus fulfilled God's Holy Law for us.

The Bible teaches that he did.

Jesus said, "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" Matthew 5:18.

The question is, if Jesus did not fulfill the law for us, then who did he fulfill it for?

Before fallen man can be saved there are two requirements that must be made.

1. A life of perfect obedience according to God's law.
2. A total and perfect atonement for man's sins and the sins of the whole world.

Jesus, in our name and on our behalf, has met all of the requirements for the salvation of fallen man. This is why Paul could say... "You are complete in him" Colossians 2:10.
 
T

TrevorL

Well-known member
Greetings Robert,
Robert Pate said:
The whole Bible is about Jesus Christ and his Gospel.
Click to expand...
Robert Pate said:
Jesus, in our name and on our behalf, has met all of the requirements for the salvation of fallen man. This is why Paul could say... "You are complete in him" Colossians 2:10.
Click to expand...
I enjoyed reading your two posts and could agree with most of what you have stated. Nevertheless I am not confident that we would agree in our understanding of the gospel in its simplicity and purity.

For example when Philip preached Christ it is stated that the Samaritans believed certain things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ:
Acts 8:5-6,12: 5 Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them. 6 And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which Philip spake, hearing and seeing the miracles which he did. 12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
I would suggest that when we get down to discuss the detail of these “things”, including aspects of the Kingdom of God that we could disagree.
Robert Pate said:
Our new representative (Jesus Christ) brings righteousness, eternal life and justification, Romans 5:17. Jesus as our substitute and representative over comes sin, death and the devil and in doing so perfects our humanity.
Click to expand...
Even here on the details of the sacrifice of Christ I prefer to use the word representative and not substitute, as I consider that these two terms suggest different views of the Atonement.

Kind regards
Trevor
 
R

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
TrevorL said:
Greetings Robert,


I enjoyed reading your two posts and could agree with most of what you have stated. Nevertheless I am not confident that we would agree in our understanding of the gospel in its simplicity and purity.

For example when Philip preached Christ it is stated that the Samaritans believed certain things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ:
Acts 8:5-6,12: 5 Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them. 6 And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which Philip spake, hearing and seeing the miracles which he did. 12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
I would suggest that when we get down to discuss the detail of these “things”, including aspects of the Kingdom of God that we could disagree.
Even here on the details of the sacrifice of Christ I prefer to use the word representative and not substitute, as I consider that these two terms suggest different views of the Atonement.

Kind regards
Trevor
Click to expand...


Thank you for your comment.

Jesus is both our substitute and our representative.

A substitute is one that takes the place of another. When Jesus died on the cross he died in our place. "He who knew no sin became sin for us" 2 Corinthians 5:21. We are the guilty ones that should be crucified, but Jesus became our substitute and died in our place.

A representative is one that acts on behalf of another, but does not take the place of another. Jesus, in our name and on our behalf has fulfilled all of the demands of God's Holy law, Matthew 5:18. God requires a life of perfect obedience according to his law before fallen man can be saved. Jesus has fully met all of the requirements for the salvation of fallen man. This is why Paul could tell the Colossians that they were complete in him, Colossians 2:10.
 
T

TrevorL

Well-known member
Greetings again Robert,
Robert Pate said:
Jesus is both our substitute and our representative.

A substitute is one that takes the place of another. When Jesus died on the cross he died in our place. "He who knew no sin became sin for us" 2 Corinthians 5:21. We are the guilty ones that should be crucified, but Jesus became our substitute and died in our place.
Click to expand...
But this does not explain the suffering of Abel, Job, Joseph, the two thieves who were crucified. Also Paul and Peter, who also suffered and it appears died a violent death. If Jesus was simply a substitute all of these should not have suffered.

The concept of substitution in a simple way is sometimes explained as a murderer who is sentenced to die on the gallows, and at the last moment someone in the court offers to die instead, and the Judge agrees and hangs the volunteer, and releases the prisoner and proclaims justice has been done. But this is a travesty of justice. The gospel on the other hand is the means whereby God’s righteousness is revealed.
Romans 1:16-17 (KJV): 16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. 17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
Romans 3:24-26 (KJV): 24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: 25 Whom God hath set forthc to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; 26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
An acknowledgement of God’s righteousness establishes a basis for the forgiveness of sins, a concept not covered by a substitution view. If a debt is paid, how can you speak of forgiveness?
A representative is one that acts on behalf of another, but does not take the place of another. Jesus, in our name and on our behalf has fulfilled all of the demands of God's Holy law, Matthew 5:18. God requires a life of perfect obedience according to his law before fallen man can be saved. Jesus has fully met all of the requirements for the salvation of fallen man. This is why Paul could tell the Colossians that they were complete in him, Colossians 2:10.
Click to expand...
I can agree with this, but I also consider his suffering, death and resurrection as being representative, in that he opened the way for the reversal of the sentence of death upon Adam and his descendants. All that share with Jesus in belief in his death and resurrection and living the crucified life, will share in his resurrection at the return of Jesus from heaven. His sacrifice is representative, not as a substitute, and we must participate in this.
Galatians 2:20 (KJV): I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

Kind regards
Trevor
 
R

randomvim

New member
Robert Pate said:
The whole Bible is about Jesus Christ and his Gospel. In the Old Testament God is bringing forth a nation and a people from whom the savior of the world would come. All of the prophets and patriarchs spoke about the coming of their Messiah. Isaiah wrote,

"He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was laid upon him; and with his stripes we are healed" Isaiah 53:5.

Every generation hoped that they would witness the coming of their Messiah. Those that believed in God's promise of a savior were justified by faith, Romans 4:1-5. They believed God. Many died without seeing their Messiah.

Since the Gospel is the heart and the center of the Bible all scripture should be interpreted in the light of it. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the means by which we are saved and reconciled unto God. The whole New Testament concerns Jesus Christ and his Gospel. The New Testament is not another Jewish Torah. The New Testament is a witness to the Christ event.

If the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the means by which God has reconciled us and the world unto himself, 2 Corinthians 5:18, 19. Then all scripture should be interpreted in the light of this miraculous event. To interpret scripture in the light of Calvinism, Catholicism or any religion is a mistake. The Bible calls these religions into question simply because they are not in the Bible and are conceived in the mind of men.

In the Gospel Jesus comes into the world as God's new Adam and humanities new representative. Our old representative (Adam) sinned against God and brought sin and death upon us, Romans 5:12. Our new representative (Jesus Christ) brings righteousness, eternal life and justification, Romans 5:17. Jesus as our substitute and representative over comes sin, death and the devil and in doing so perfects our humanity. Having perfected our humanity through suffering, Hebrews 2:10, Jesus takes our humanity back to heaven. This is why Paul wrote,

"And you are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power" Colossians 2:10.

If Jesus has perfected our humanity and has taken it back to heaven, then why does anyone need a religion? Religion, whether it is the Calvinist religion, Catholic religion or whatever religion is a denial of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. No one needs to be predestinated. No one needs to join the Catholic church. No one needs to do anything, simply because we are justified by faith, Romans 4:5. If we will interpret the Bible in the light of this miraculous event we will find that the Bible makes sense.
Click to expand...

you make no sense.

1. you would not have a bible if it were not for a religion: a group of people in common faith; to have compiled or establish their holy book.

2. you express same notions as some religions you condemn. Jesus is new Adam? yeah, I heard that from a Catholic priest.

3. Can a group of humans come away from Bible and Jesus? yes. part of the issue is reading the bible according to only one self.
 
R

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
TrevorL said:
Greetings again Robert,
But this does not explain the suffering of Abel, Job, Joseph, the two thieves who were crucified. Also Paul and Peter, who also suffered and it appears died a violent death. If Jesus was simply a substitute all of these should not have suffered.

The concept of substitution in a simple way is sometimes explained as a murderer who is sentenced to die on the gallows, and at the last moment someone in the court offers to die instead, and the Judge agrees and hangs the volunteer, and releases the prisoner and proclaims justice has been done. But this is a travesty of justice. The gospel on the other hand is the means whereby God’s righteousness is revealed.
Romans 1:16-17 (KJV): 16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. 17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
Romans 3:24-26 (KJV): 24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: 25 Whom God hath set forthc to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; 26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
An acknowledgement of God’s righteousness establishes a basis for the forgiveness of sins, a concept not covered by a substitution view. If a debt is paid, how can you speak of forgiveness?
I can agree with this, but I also consider his suffering, death and resurrection as being representative, in that he opened the way for the reversal of the sentence of death upon Adam and his descendants. All that share with Jesus in belief in his death and resurrection and living the crucified life, will share in his resurrection at the return of Jesus from heaven. His sacrifice is representative, not as a substitute, and we must participate in this.
Galatians 2:20 (KJV): I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

Kind regards
Trevor
Click to expand...

Jesus died a substitutionary death. He was not representing anyone in his death. "He who knew no sin became sin for us" 2 Corinthians 5:21. Means that he died for us in our place.
 
R

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
randomvim said:
you make no sense.

1. you would not have a bible if it were not for a religion: a group of people in common faith; to have compiled or establish their holy book.

2. you express same notions as some religions you condemn. Jesus is new Adam? yeah, I heard that from a Catholic priest.

3. Can a group of humans come away from Bible and Jesus? yes. part of the issue is reading the bible according to only one self.
Click to expand...

There was no religion in the early church. The early Christians lived by faith in Christ and his Gospel. This is why Paul wrote, "The Just Shall Live By Faith" Romans 1:17. Living by faith does not mean living by laws, rules or religion.
 
R

randomvim

New member
Robert Pate said:
There was no religion in the early church. The early Christians lived by faith in Christ and his Gospel. This is why Paul wrote, "The Just Shall Live By Faith" Romans 1:17. Living by faith does not mean living by laws, rules or religion.
Click to expand...

False. By definition there were religions and early Christians were an organized group.
If as a group they do not match the definition of a religion, then we were as they were possibly refered to as, a cult.

We then come to the goal to spread.

Early Christians did not act alone and did not live by scripture alone but oral tradition. Which still comes to the issue that the bible is from an organized religion.

Furthermore, the idea of being "decentralized" or not apart of a group of (common) believers contradicts not just our natural social behavior but Apoatles' very call to spread the truth.

4. God has a law. all of nature has law. nothing is done with out structure and majority of groups (not just religions) can not operate with out.
 
T

TrevorL

Well-known member
Greetings again Robert,
Robert Pate said:
Jesus died a substitutionary death. He was not representing anyone in his death. "He who knew no sin became sin for us" 2 Corinthians 5:21. Means that he died for us in our place.
Click to expand...
Why then do we still die? "Sin" in 2 Corinthians 5:21 is an example of metonymy. Christ the sinless was made to be sin in sharing in the effect of sin in his life, and by his death providing the conditions for the forgiveness of sins and, finally, the removal of all the effects of sin. Our sins are removed when we identify with Jesus and are forgiven, in other words we are justified by faith. This whole process then is by representation not by substitution.

Kind regards
Trevor
 
Crucible

Crucible

BANNED
Banned
Interpreting Scripture in the Light of the Historical Gospel of Jesus Christ
Click to expand...

Words that should never reverberate from a heterodox extraordinaire's voice box.

In fact, the only word you'll never hear come from them is 'orthodox'- never heard it once from Pate or any of these 'evangelists'.
Because they know that they aren't orthodox :rolleyes:
 
R

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
Crucible said:
Words that should never reverberate from a heterodox extraordinaire's voice box.

In fact, the only word you'll never hear come from them is 'orthodox'- never heard it once from Pate or any of these 'evangelists'.
Because they know that they aren't orthodox :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

One of the reasons that the Pharisees crucified Jesus is because he was not religious. He was not an orthodox Jew. He violated many of their laws and religious traditions.
 
R

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
TrevorL said:
Greetings again Robert,
Why then do we still die? "Sin" in 2 Corinthians 5:21 is an example of metonymy. Christ the sinless was made to be sin in sharing in the effect of sin in his life, and by his death providing the conditions for the forgiveness of sins and, finally, the removal of all the effects of sin. Our sins are removed when we identify with Jesus and are forgiven, in other words we are justified by faith. This whole process then is by representation not by substitution.

Kind regards
Trevor
Click to expand...

There is a fine line between the words "substitute" and "representative".

Substitute: One who takes the place of another.
Representative: One who acts on behalf of another.

Jesus was actually doing both.
 
R

randomvim

New member
Robert Pate said:
One of the reasons that the Pharisees crucified Jesus is because he was not religious. He was not an orthodox Jew. He violated many of their laws and religious traditions.
Click to expand...
He did not violate God's law. please mention a few you think are examples?

bravo for having the Gospel in consideration when reading the Bible. thats good. no qualm there. But this concept of religion - may you explain what you think religion is?

Sent from my LG-K330 using Tapatalk
 
R

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
randomvim said:
He did not violate God's law. please mention a few you think are examples?

bravo for having the Gospel in consideration when reading the Bible. thats good. no qualm there. But this concept of religion - may you explain what you think religion is?

Sent from my LG-K330 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


Jesus and the disciples plucked and ate corn on the Sabbath, Matthew 12:1, 2.

Jesus drank wine and ate with sinners, Luke 7:34.

Jesus healed the sick on the Sabbath, Luke 14:2.

Jesus taught that it is good to do any thing on the Sabbath if it helps someone, Luke 14:5.

Religion is man's preoccupation with his own spirituality, who is a sinner.
 
R

randomvim

New member
Robert Pate said:
Jesus and the disciples plucked and ate corn on the Sabbath, Matthew 12:1, 2.

Jesus drank wine and ate with sinners, Luke 7:34.

Jesus healed the sick on the Sabbath, Luke 14:2.

Jesus taught that it is good to do any thing on the Sabbath if it helps someone, Luke 14:5.

Religion is man's preoccupation with his own spirituality, who is a sinner.
Click to expand...

1. plucked corn.
http://newadvent.org/bible/mat012.htm
Jesus is disputing the meaning of the law; doing so by referencing David and priests. This does not mean Jesus broke a law but rather the pharsees missinterpreted the law. hence Jesus' later remarks
"7*If you had found out what the words mean, It is mercy, not sacrifice, that wins favour with me, you would not have passed judgement on the guiltless."

2. Drinking wine, conversing with sinners. As Jesus explains, this is not wrong. I wish for better explaination to how it would be?

3. Healed the sick on Sabath? again Jesus later explains that we are not supposed to do completely NOTHING on the Sabath but works that put ourselves infront of God. Healing or taking care of the sick puts God and His people first. not the doctor.

4. Again. "religion" is not outright bad. Yes, sinners preoccupy churches and the such but all man are sinners including you so please stop putting your bias on me.



Sent from my LG-K330 using Tapatalk
 
R

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
randomvim said:
1. plucked corn.
http://newadvent.org/bible/mat012.htm
Jesus is disputing the meaning of the law; doing so by referencing David and priests. This does not mean Jesus broke a law but rather the pharsees missinterpreted the law. hence Jesus' later remarks
"7*If you had found out what the words mean, It is mercy, not sacrifice, that wins favour with me, you would not have passed judgement on the guiltless."

2. Drinking wine, conversing with sinners. As Jesus explains, this is not wrong. I wish for better explaination to how it would be?

3. Healed the sick on Sabath? again Jesus later explains that we are not supposed to do completely NOTHING on the Sabath but works that put ourselves infront of God. Healing or taking care of the sick puts God and His people first. not the doctor.

4. Again. "religion" is not outright bad. Yes, sinners preoccupy churches and the such but all man are sinners including you so please stop putting your bias on me.



Sent from my LG-K330 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You would not make a good Pharisee. The Pharisee considered all of those things that Jesus did as sin.

"But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man servant, nor thy maid servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates" Genesis 20:10.

The Pharisees were separationist. They would never eat with sinners. It was considered to be a sin.
 
R

randomvim

New member
Robert Pate said:
You would not make a good Pharisee. The Pharisee considered all of those things that Jesus did as sin.

"But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man servant, nor thy maid servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates" Genesis 20:10.

The Pharisees were separationist. They would never eat with sinners. It was considered to be a sin.
Click to expand...

But thats the point. People developed their image of the law, not bothering to understand the law.

What is work?! healing is work or are is it work as we describe it today as a job. We should focus on servant and cattle in provided passage and consider what people did for work.

we can then compare... one person taking one or two corn husks to eat for hunger vs. several laborers picking for profit. profit for land owner who has servants labor in and out of the house. whose cattle is traded and moved for profit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top