What is the Gospel?

Sonnet

New member
The preaching of the Cross is foolishness to unbelievers. If and when they believe, they will have access to that blood He shed on the Cross, and will be saved. I realize you're slow to hear, but this is getting boring.

For you to suggest I'm playing "fast and loose with people's lives" is probably the most ridiculous statement of yours to date. You must be running out of material. :chuckle:

I assume you preach belief in the resurrection to unbelievers? - a resurrection that has no relevance to some of those you offer eternal life to through belief in it.

Paul didn't quote Deuteronomy 30 in relation to such a Gospel for no reason at all.

11 Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. 12 It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, “Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 13 Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, “Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 14 No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.

Obviously Paul didn't think belief in the resurrection was beyond their, or anyone else's reach. And obviously a man does not believe without being influenced, in some way, by the Holy Spirit.
 

Ask Mr. Religion

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
The preaching of the Cross is foolishness to unbelievers. If and when they believe, they will have access to that blood He shed on the Cross, and will be saved. I realize you're slow to hear, but this is getting boring.

For you to suggest I'm playing "fast and loose with people's lives" is probably the most ridiculous statement of yours to date. You must be running out of material. :chuckle:
Just as Jesus marveled that a smart fellow doesn’t understand (John 3:10).

The problem (John 3:11) is that, even though he is hearing our reliable testimony, Sonnet doesn’t “receive” the testimony. He is not yet (or may never be) among the number described in John 1:12— “But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God.”

We have taken him as far as we can by way of explanation. He cannot go any higher. “If we have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if we tell you heavenly things?” (John 3:12)

In effect, we, like Our Lord must say, “Sonnet, you keep pressing us for deeper and higher explanations of the new birth. But a heart of unbelief, an unregenerate heart, can’t ascend to the kinds of truth that we have to give you about the new birth.”

There are more obstacles to his entering the kingdom than merely his need to be born again. Something has to happen to remove the wrath of God so that he will release the power of the Spirit to cause Sonnet to be born again (see John 3:36). That’s what the Son of Man came to do (John 3:13).

Explaining what he came to do, Jesus picked an analogy, but it is shocking that he would pick it to describe his own work (John 3:14-15).

The shocking analogy used by Jesus relied upon the account of Moses who lifted up the serpent in the wilderness (Numbers 21:4–9); likewise must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

Jesus compares himself with a snake. Shocking.

- Note that the snake on the pole does not prevent anything at all. Rather it is for bitten people (Numbers 21:8). The poison is in them, and without divine intervention they will die.

- Also observe that the snakes in the camp are from the Lord. God sent them (Numbers 21:6). The wrath of God is on this people for their sin of ingratitude, murmuring, and rebellion.

- Further, we see that the means God chooses to rescue the people from his own curse is a picture [a type] of the curse itself.

- Now all the bitten ones have to do in order to be saved from God’s wrath is look at God's provision hanging on a pole. Now Moses is not being treated here as the rescuer, a savior. In Numbers, the one who saves is God by means of the snake. And in the Gospel of John, the one who saves is God by means of Jesus.

Of course we already know from Scripture's recording of Jesus' own words that he read the Old Testament believing that it was all pointing to him (John 5:39). There were types and foreshadows throughout the Old Testament. Jesus, in the place of the snake, is the source of healing, the source of rescue from the poison of sin and the wrath of God.

Yet observe that Jesus in the place of the snake is portrayed as evil and a curse. Shocking. The snake is evil. The snakes were killing people. The snake on the pole is a picture of God’s curse on the people. So it was with Jesus.

Paul writes in 2 Corinthians 5:2, “For our sake [God] made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” And in Galatians 3:13, Paul writes, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us.” In becoming like the snake, Jesus was the embodiment of our sin, and the embodiment of our curse. And in becoming sin and curse for us, Jesus took ours away.

Jesus gives us eternal life via the cross. John 3:14-15: “The Son of Man must be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.”

All of this Jesus is saying to Nicodemus in John 3, yet Nicodemus (Sonnet) is very confused about the new birth and how it happens. The above is what you say to a person who is not born again. Why? They are dead and blind and God ordains to open the eyes of the blind when they have something to see—a compelling picture of Jesus crucified for sinners.

And what should you do, Nicodemus (Sonnet)? What should you do today?

Believe in him. John 3:15: “that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.” What does that mean? What does it involve? What, in this comparison with the snake on a pole, does believe in him mean? It means look to Jesus. The grace of the new birth is our seeing Christ lifted up. We behold his glory as he is lifted up, and in that look we receive grace.

Nicodemus (Sonnet), do you want the grace of the new birth? Look!


AMR
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing

Just imagine. I knew what I was talking about without even having to quote from Scripture. :banana:



Those who are perishing are unbelievers. Paul shows that a couple of verse down.

21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.​
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Why are you shoe-horning into the analogy those whom Jesus did not consider?
Read the story, hon.
Moses was not bitten.
Moses was not included in the healing from the serpent on the pole.

Jesus set the limits Himself: bitten Israelites
Right, bitten Israelites, not non-bitten Israelites like Moses.
Therefore, the serpent on the pole was not for ALL Israelites, but only a portion of Israelites (the ones bitten).

- which is a microcosm of fallen humanity.
You can claim it is microcosm of anything you want to, but you are still going to have to admit that it was not for ALL because of the simple fact that the serpent on the pole was not for ALL Israelites, but only those bitten.

To consider anyone else is to misuse Jesus's analogy.
What 'anyone else' are you talking about?????
The only people present with the serpent on the pole were Israelites.
And not ALL the Israelites were bitten.
So who is it that you think I am adding or leaving out?????
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
More for consideration:

Matthew 9:12-13
(12) But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.
(13) But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Verse 12 is not everyone, but only those that are sick (not those that are whole- ie. not sick).
Verse 12 is not for everyone, but only for the sinners (not the righteous).
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
I assume you preach belief in the resurrection to unbelievers? - a resurrection that has no relevance to some of those you offer eternal life to through belief in it.

Paul didn't quote Deuteronomy 30 in relation to such a Gospel for no reason at all.

11 Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. 12 It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, “Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 13 Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, “Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 14 No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.

Obviously Paul didn't think belief in the resurrection was beyond their, or anyone else's reach. And obviously a man does not believe without being influenced, in some way, by the Holy Spirit.

I've never said belief was beyond anyone's reach. :doh:
Why do you keep making such stupid statements?

Moses was talking about law keeping.

Deut. 30:10 If thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which are written in this book of the law, and if thou turn unto the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul.​

And Paul is talking about the righteousness of faith.

Romans 10:8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;​

And God only knows what you're going on about now.
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
When you're done... read your response and compare it again to 1 Timothy 4:10 ... then... see how one of the few people that defended Catholic in doctrine people here... is disgusted with your compromise to the clique...

You are truly disgusting.

Because Nihilo doesn't scrape and bow to you, you turn on him and accuse him of "compromise to the clique".

Nihilo doesn't even know there is a clique, you ignoramus. That's only a figment of your and Danoh's imagination. Once again, though, you're bent on sowing discord. This, "I stuck up for you" crap is about as self-serving and childish as it comes. What an embarrassment you are to those who have to read your drivel here on TOL.
 

Sonnet

New member
Read the story, hon.
Moses was not bitten.
Moses was not included in the healing from the serpent on the pole.

Right, bitten Israelites, not non-bitten Israelites like Moses.
Therefore, the serpent on the pole was not for ALL Israelites, but only a portion of Israelites (the ones bitten).

You can claim it is microcosm of anything you want to, but you are still going to have to admit that it was not for ALL because of the simple fact that the serpent on the pole was not for ALL Israelites, but only those bitten.

What 'anyone else' are you talking about?????
The only people present with the serpent on the pole were Israelites.
And not ALL the Israelites were bitten.
So who is it that you think I am adding or leaving out?????

Your interpretation does go beyond the scope of Jesus's analogy Tambora. He didn't include Israelites that were not bitten but you are. You are making an inference about what Jesus is trying to teaching us about his crucifixion based on this intrusion. Forcing them into the analogy leads to an anomaly - unbitten Israelites not needing a cure would translate (from source to target) to sinless humans not needing a crucified Jesus.

Jesus didn't include them for a good reason, I'd say.
 
Last edited:

Sonnet

New member
I answered your question:
http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?126873-What-is-the-Gospel&p=5111421&viewfull=1#post5111421

You then wave off my answer:
http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?126873-What-is-the-Gospel&p=5111424&viewfull=1#post5111424

Then you wonder why we are held to account:
http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?126873-What-is-the-Gospel&p=5111424&viewfull=1#post5111424

Of course, asking while ignoring all I have said earlier.

http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?126873-What-is-the-Gospel&p=5111410&viewfull=1#post5111410

Just going in circles because you are stuck on one verse you wrongly try to use as a locus classicus. Naturally once that verse falls, you are left with nothing else, so your resistance is understandable, yet lamentable. :AMR:

AMR

I have seen no response to #640 which was my response to your assertion.
 

Sonnet

New member
I've never said belief was beyond anyone's reach. :doh:
Why do you keep making such stupid statements?

Moses was talking about law keeping.

Deut. 30:10 If thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which are written in this book of the law, and if thou turn unto the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul.​

And Paul is talking about the righteousness of faith.

Romans 10:8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;​

And God only knows what you're going on about now.

It's always been through faith - Romans 4:1-6; 9:30-32; 10:2-3
 

Derf

Well-known member
The meaning here is as plain as plain could be.

All means all.
And both alls mean the same thing - all.

All humans are related to Adam and will physically die.
All Christians will be made alive (resurrected).

The limiter is "in Adam" or "in Christ", not in the "all".
Why is this even a question?


Thank you both. You've made my point for me. There are two parts to Jesus' salvation. The first part is a resurrection. The second part, I think, is entering His kingdom (or Canaan).

One way we can tell if Jesus sacrifice did any good for someone is if they are (will be) resurrected. Can you honestly say that some will NOT be resurrected? Who? Name just one.

Yet there are quite a few who will not enter His kingdom/Canaan. They will be left in outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth, or they will be cast into the eternal fire (are those the same thing??)

Can we say, based on this, that those who claim Jesus' death is for every single person, and those that say Jesus' death is not efficacious for every single person, are both correct, despite the apparent contradiction in the statements?

And doesn't this make glorious sense of the rather "foolish" idea that mere belief can change one's status?

Look at it this way: To say that all will NOT be made alive (after death) is to put a different meaning on the word "alive" than is customary. I'm suggesting that isn't necessary, as scripture is clear that ALL will be made alive. But some will be resurrected to "life", and some will be resurrected to "damnation".

And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. [Jhn 5:29 KJV]

Jesus didn't just come to give "life", but to give it more abundantly (Jhn 10:10). We don't really want anybody to have that less abundant option, but some will, unfortunately. I don't think God does either--that's not what He predestined for man; but man chose otherwise.
 

Sonnet

New member
No, I have not.

No, I am not.
I specifically said that those that were not bitten (such as Moses) were not included.


You have included unbitten Israelites in the analogy. I was not referring to your assertion that such unbitten Israelites were not included in this way:

Moses was not included in the healing from the serpent on the pole.
Therefore, the serpent on the pole was not for ALL Israelites, but only a portion of Israelites (the ones bitten).


You include them in the analogy to then claim that the bronze serpent was not raised up for them - and so conclude that Jesus did not die for all...but Jesus did not make them part of the analogy in the first place.
 

Nihilo

BANNED
Banned
There are three English words used to translate one Hebrew and one Greek word. The English words are faith, believe and trust. Only one of these words conveys what is savingly wrought in a guilty sinner and is necessary for salvation. When received it is like having the mains power connected to a property that has been off grid since it was built..."Let there be light".
Trust Easter.

This next quote isn't in your post, but it's in your signature today, so I'm going to copy and paste it into the text of this post (Post #2 in this million-post thread), and address it.
Anyone who thinks that salvation is conditioned on anything a man thinks, does or says is atheist.
Is trusting doing something?
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
Thank you both. You've made my point for me. There are two parts to Jesus' salvation. The first part is a resurrection. The second part, I think, is entering His kingdom (or Canaan).

One way we can tell if Jesus sacrifice did any good for someone is if they are (will be) resurrected. Can you honestly say that some will NOT be resurrected? Who? Name just one.

Yet there are quite a few who will not enter His kingdom/Canaan. They will be left in outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth, or they will be cast into the eternal fire (are those the same thing??)

Can we say, based on this, that those who claim Jesus' death is for every single person, and those that say Jesus' death is not efficacious for every single person, are both correct, despite the apparent contradiction in the statements?

And doesn't this make glorious sense of the rather "foolish" idea that mere belief can change one's status?

Look at it this way: To say that all will NOT be made alive (after death) is to put a different meaning on the word "alive" than is customary. I'm suggesting that isn't necessary, as scripture is clear that ALL will be made alive. But some will be resurrected to "life", and some will be resurrected to "damnation".

And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. [Jhn 5:29 KJV]

Jesus didn't just come to give "life", but to give it more abundantly (Jhn 10:10). We don't really want anybody to have that less abundant option, but some will, unfortunately. I don't think God does either--that's not what He predestined for man; but man chose otherwise.

That, in turn, means the Good News is for those who believe.
 

Nihilo

BANNED
Banned
So why are you so reluctant to tell unbelievers that Christ died for them? Every time I focus on as much you avoid declaring it.
I already answered your OP:
I am a non-believer interested in knowing what the good news is. I ask because, in my experience, Christians do not seem to agree on the specifics. One might point to the issue of the scope of Christ's salvific provision as being particularly relevant.

If the Gospel isn't clearly defined then, surely, the non-believer may legitimately ask, 'Believe in what?'
THE LORD JESUS CHRIST IS RISEN. Matthew 28:6 (KJV) Mark 16:6 (KJV) Luke 24:6 (KJV)

Romans 10:9 (KJV) 1st Corinthians 15:14 (KJV)

This is the Gospel.
1 Cor.15:11 is clear and Paul takes no steps, as some posters here do, to limit the scope for whom Christ's blood is relevant.
That's nice. I answered your OP.
 
Top