I for one, really abhor the emphasis on laws'-keeping in order to merit salvation. I abhor that because it is foreign to the Bible, and antithetical to the doctrine of free grace, which is clearly taught in the Bible. Therefore this is an exposing and denunciation of the Galatian heresy that some cults practice
Usually cults like the SDA, Mormons, Oneness, etc will cobble together some verses from Scripture and ask questions like this: "How do you separate faith and repentance when James 2:18 and Acts 26:20 show there's a parallel in how both are shown by what one does?"
So, since they are wishing to pit Bible verses against each other, and to create ungodly confusion, I begin with Scripture:
.
Genesis 15:6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness
Psalm 32:1 Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.
2 Blessed is the man unto whom the LORD imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile
Romans 1:16 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 4: 3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
5 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.
8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.
9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.
10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.
11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
12 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
.
Those cult guys (and gals) focus on two verses that SEEM to support what they want because you take them out of context. However, I focused on FOUR DIFFERENT PASSAGES all of which contain FIFTEEN verses that clearly state differently
In case you may not understand the meaning of the word "impute" it means to charge someone with something, such as a crime, in general, it means an attribute, to a another person, such as claiming Harry Houdini had magical powers.
But since this is theology, it is important to understand that any attribution such as righteousness IS ALWAYS DONE VICARIOUSLY. That means that the attribution ALWAYS COMES FROM SOMEONE ELSE. So in the cases of Abraham and of David, the attribution of righteousness came from Messiah. In both of these cases, the foundation is simple belief, and has ZERO to do with works, Also notice that David specifically links the imputation of righteousness with salvation, which is what he is saying when he says, "His sin is covered". The individual cannot cover his own sins, the individual cannot receive forgiveness by and of himself because covering of one's sins requires by definition that Someone else must do the covering.
Notice the parallel that Paul uses: circumcision. I am not attempting to be gross here, but it is well-known that a man will not circumcise himself, and if that is attempted, the result is a mutilation. The proper name for that is called "concision" and that is how Paul describes the Galatian heresy. That is because they are attempting to "circumcise themselves" by preforming good works, "works of arrogation" [ presumptuously and arrogantly assuming something that rightfully belongs to another] by which their false concept of "salvation" which comes from self efforts and not total resting on the vicarious works of Jesus Christ. No one can do anything to be declared righteous, and it MUST be done by God, and THAT must rest on the faith and trust that Jesus Christ has done all that is necessary for one's salvation.
So essentially when anyone, such as the posters seem to do and links works as a requirement for faith then that person is attempting self-circumcision, and the result is a botched job called "concision", or a mutilation. For indeed that particular theology is mutilating the concept of free and unconditional (pardon the redundancy) grace given to us by a loving Father because we believe in whar the Son of God has done for us.
Really, it could not be much clearer, or simpler.
Edit Post Reply Reply With Quote 
Blog this Post
Usually cults like the SDA, Mormons, Oneness, etc will cobble together some verses from Scripture and ask questions like this: "How do you separate faith and repentance when James 2:18 and Acts 26:20 show there's a parallel in how both are shown by what one does?"
So, since they are wishing to pit Bible verses against each other, and to create ungodly confusion, I begin with Scripture:
.
Genesis 15:6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness
Psalm 32:1 Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.
2 Blessed is the man unto whom the LORD imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile
Romans 1:16 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 4: 3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
5 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.
8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.
9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.
10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.
11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
12 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
.
Those cult guys (and gals) focus on two verses that SEEM to support what they want because you take them out of context. However, I focused on FOUR DIFFERENT PASSAGES all of which contain FIFTEEN verses that clearly state differently
In case you may not understand the meaning of the word "impute" it means to charge someone with something, such as a crime, in general, it means an attribute, to a another person, such as claiming Harry Houdini had magical powers.
But since this is theology, it is important to understand that any attribution such as righteousness IS ALWAYS DONE VICARIOUSLY. That means that the attribution ALWAYS COMES FROM SOMEONE ELSE. So in the cases of Abraham and of David, the attribution of righteousness came from Messiah. In both of these cases, the foundation is simple belief, and has ZERO to do with works, Also notice that David specifically links the imputation of righteousness with salvation, which is what he is saying when he says, "His sin is covered". The individual cannot cover his own sins, the individual cannot receive forgiveness by and of himself because covering of one's sins requires by definition that Someone else must do the covering.
Notice the parallel that Paul uses: circumcision. I am not attempting to be gross here, but it is well-known that a man will not circumcise himself, and if that is attempted, the result is a mutilation. The proper name for that is called "concision" and that is how Paul describes the Galatian heresy. That is because they are attempting to "circumcise themselves" by preforming good works, "works of arrogation" [ presumptuously and arrogantly assuming something that rightfully belongs to another] by which their false concept of "salvation" which comes from self efforts and not total resting on the vicarious works of Jesus Christ. No one can do anything to be declared righteous, and it MUST be done by God, and THAT must rest on the faith and trust that Jesus Christ has done all that is necessary for one's salvation.
So essentially when anyone, such as the posters seem to do and links works as a requirement for faith then that person is attempting self-circumcision, and the result is a botched job called "concision", or a mutilation. For indeed that particular theology is mutilating the concept of free and unconditional (pardon the redundancy) grace given to us by a loving Father because we believe in whar the Son of God has done for us.
Really, it could not be much clearer, or simpler.
Edit Post Reply Reply With Quote Blog this Post 
