Lukewarm believers and faith

[RandyK]

You preach being justified by faith alone. Are you saying it's not your faith? Are you saying you don't own it?

If justification by faith alone is not your own faith, then whose faith is it that you preach. Whose faith is it that alone justifies the soul?

Say that it is not your faith, nor do you own it, and I will not say you preach your own faith alone to justify your soul.

I've asked similar questions about your preaching before, that you either missed or refuse to answer. But since you are now personally accusing me of misrepresenting the faith you preach as your own, then you must answer deny it it is your own, and only the faith of another alone.

Then I will accept your word and go on from there. Such as, since it not your own faith alone, that you preach, then whose is it?

"Faith Alone" is a reference to Christ being the sole mystical application of righteousness to men that lasts. Christ is the sole redeemer, who alone made atonement for Eternal Life. And he is the supply of spirituality that adds to our obedience the essential nature and morality of God.

Therefore, only by Faith in Christ are we redeemed and able to please God for Eternal Life. Yes, it is *our Faith,* but the critical element is in who we place our Faith, namely Christ. If we place our trust in anything else, it is unable to provide what will last for Eternity.

"Belief" is not a replacement for our responsibility to act out what Faith in Christ means. Some feel that just "believing for forgiveness" trumps any need to be consistent in righteousness. But if we truly have Faith in Christ, we have chosen to live for him, and would demonstrate his righteousness regularly.

Faith in him will bring forgiveness, yes. But it recognizes the responsibility we have to obey him on a regular basis.

Living in "righteousness" apart from a focus on Christ is Legalism, and will not represent a righteousness that leads to Eternal Life. That is why we say it is "Faith Alone" that saves us and provides us with the righteousness that lasts forever. Our focus must truly be on Christ. And this is a matter of discernment--not guess-work.

 

[Hopeful 2]

Suit yourself. I was trying to help you with the *language.* If we get the language wrong, sometimes our theology ends up wrong too, because we try to fit our experience in with the language as we see it. But if the experience doesn't work, then we get discouraged.

But the experience did work !
By my water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of my past sins, my old man was killed and my new self was raised with Christ to walk in a new life.
What other expectation could one have ?

But you obviously don't want any help. Fine.

God supplied all the help I required to be free from my addictions and all other sin.
Has your belief done that for you ?

I don't think you understood much of what I was saying. That's okay. Have a nice day.

OK.

 

[RandyK]

But the experience did work !
By my water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of my past sins, my old man was killed and my new self was raised with Christ to walk in a new life.
What other expectation could one have ?

God supplied all the help I required to be free from my addictions and all other sin.
Has your belief done that for you ?

OK.

Yes, I have no problem with your turning from sin to live in righteousness through Christ. We all need to do that.

I was just wanting to help you clean up your language. I've struggled for many years with biblical language because it is, for whatever reason, difficult. And from my experience, many Christians take misunderstandings from the language and run with it, causing problems for both themselves and others.

Absolutely, take what you get from the Scriptures and apply it. We did die with Christ and rise with him. The only problem I had was with the language you used to describe it. It wasn't precisely what the Bible was saying, but it apparently was working for you. Don't want to get in the way of that.

 

[Hopeful 2]

Yes, I have no problem with your turning from sin to live in righteousness through Christ. We all need to do that.

I was just wanting to help you clean up your language. I've struggled for many years with biblical language because it is, for whatever reason, difficult. And from my experience, many Christians take misunderstandings from the language and run with it, causing problems for both themselves and others.

Absolutely, take what you get from the Scriptures and apply it. We did die with Christ and rise with him. The only problem I had was with the language you used to describe it. It wasn't precisely what the Bible was saying, but it apparently was working for you. Don't want to get in the way of that.

Ok.

 

[Free]

You preach being justified by faith alone. Are you saying it's not your faith? Are you saying you don't own it?

If justification by faith alone is not your own faith, then whose faith is it that you preach. Whose faith is it that alone justifies the soul?

Say that it is not your faith, nor do you own it, and I will not say you preach your own faith alone to justify your soul.

I've asked similar questions about your preaching before, that you either missed or refuse to answer. But since you are now personally accusing me of misrepresenting the faith you preach as your own, then you must answer deny it it is your own, and only the faith of another alone.

Then I will accept your word and go on from there. Such as, since it not your own faith alone, that you preach, then whose is it?

I have repeatedly stated that we are justified by grace through faith and never by works, as that is exactly what Eph 2:8-9, and many other passages, state.

Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,
Eph 2:9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. (ESV)

Salvation is entirely of God from start to finish. Our works never justify or save us, they are evidence of having been justified. But even our works are enabled by God.

Php 2:12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling,
Php 2:13 for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure. (ESV)

It also seems that you are conflating different meanings of "faith," which is confusing.

 

[RBDERRICK]

No, I'm just arguing that a choice to follow Christ is "accepting him." What makes drawing logical conclusions "carnal?"

Making logical conclusions from Scripture, is making sense of what is quoted:

Neh 8:8So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.

No, I'm just arguing that a choice to follow Christ is "accepting him."

Arguing about the meaning of words not found in Scripture, is unscriptural.

I have given the Scriptures that we must be accepted by Christ. No Scripture says Christ is accepted by us.

If Scriptures call for us to "believe in Christ" the principles of the English language indicate we are being asked to "accept Christ.

That includes a non-Scripture argument about principles of language.

Since you can't give any Scripture speaking of any man accepting Christ, then perhaps you can show in Scripture where believing in Christ is accepting Him.

What we are told is that God will embrace us when we embrace Him.

Or, embracing Him. Which also is not in Scripture at all.

In accepting Him we are adopted by Him.

Or, accepting Him is being adopted by Him.

No Scripture speaks of God's adoption by our acceptance of Him as Father.

He reaches out to us, proposing that we accept Him.

Nor is there any Scriptural record of Christ proposing we accept Him.

All these wonderful sayings are just traditional Christian speak, without Scripture. And they are manifestly empty of substance and vague. Afterall, how exactly does anyone 'accept' and 'embrace' the Christ?

Jhn 3:8The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

Can we accept and embrace the wind? Nor can any man do so with the Spirit of Christ.

Acts 2:37Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?...Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;

There is nothing vague about this. All men that sin are made enemies of the crucified, buried, and resurrected Christ of God, and must repent of sinning against Him, that we may find mercy and be accepted of Him.

 

[RBDERRICK]

No, both can be true. He can choose us, and we can choose Him, as I see it.

Not according to Jesus' words on the matter:

Jhn 15:16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you...

This is going much farther than what I said. I said we "accept God." We "choose God."

And so, we see how any teaching without Scripture, if left unchecked, will always lead to teaching against Scripture:

Jhn 15:16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you...

Adding choosing Christ to accepting Him, forbids any man accepting Him, since He says no man chooses Him to do so.

It also introduces the will of man by choice to become sons of God:

Jhn 1:12But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name. Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

If any recieves Christ, he recieves His power to become sons of God. If any man wilfully chooses to accept Him, and He comes accordingly, then becoming born sons of God is by the will of man.

The will of man becomes the initiator of becoming adoptive sons by choice.

I said nothing about our need to make God "acceptable to us."

Do you separate accepting someone, from someone being acceptable to us? Is Christ accepted because He is acceptable to us, or unacceptable? Or, neither?

Scripture says willingly accepting someone into one's heart, home, ranks, or life, is because they are acceptable to us, and accepted of us.

Lev 22:20 But whatsoever hath a blemish, that shall ye not offer: for it shall not be acceptable for you.

God does not accept what is unacceptable to Him, but only accepts what is acceptable to Him.

Deu 33:24 And of Asher he said, Let Asher be blessed with children; let him be acceptable to his brethren, and let him dip his foot in oil.

Man also only accepts them that are acceptable to us. We do not accept Jesus Christ as brother, but He only accepts us as brethren by repentance for His sake.

Isa 49:8Thus saith the LORD, In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;

And He only accepts us at a time acceptable to Him, not at a time of man's will and choosing and acceptance.

 

[RBDERRICK]

When we comply and accept Him, we benefit from that.

When we comply to the command to repent of sinning against Him, we are mercifully converted to Him by His Spirit of grace and faith, and accepted by the Father.

We don't choose to accept Jesus Christ (especially without repentance), as men choose to accept a religion, and by will become members thereof.

Jhn 1:12But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name. Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

This Scripture rebukes any belief in being born of God by the will of any man, that chooses to accept Christ and become sons of God.

We repent to recieve Him, and He comes by His own will and at His own time. Not when we determine the time is acceptable to us.

I believe this is also the cause and error of sincere believers, that go through all manner of sweaty antics to 'recieve' the baptism of the Holy Ghost. They want to accept Him now, and they think by their oft repeated prayers and girations, that He must come in answer to their state will. "Baptize him now in your Holy Ghost, O Lord!" "Baptize me now in your Spirit, O God!"

Yep. I've been there and done that too, with full faith, that was shaken when He did not come at my beck and call to accept Him. He did however come at a time acceptable to Him, when I was not even seeking to accept Him.

The simple problem of preaching accepting Christ, especially choosing Christ, is that it becomes the will of man with power to make Him come and be Lord and Savior. Is that not also what is said about accepting Him? And making Him our personal Christ and Savior...?

We don't make God anything. Only He makes us.

 

[RBDERRICK]

Predestined or not, my point was that we do accept God. God proposes we accept Him, and we can either comply or not. I personally believe the Bible teaches Predestination.

I know the Bible does, because Scripture says so.

Rom 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

He predestinates what is predetermined, not who is prechosen.

He has predestinated whose image we must be conformed to, not who will repent to become conformed to the Son Jesus Christ.

We are given a choice to repent of our deeds for Jesus's sake. It is only His choice to have mercy and accept them who do so acceptably by His will.

Mat 22:14For many are called, but few are chosen.

Once again, it is only Jesus Christ the righteous, that chooses who is acceptable to be adopted by the Father.

Again, He can choose us 1st, and afterwards we can indeed choose to follow Him.

Now you have changed from accepting Him, to doing our reasonable service, having been accepted by Him.

Only them chosen by Him with repentance, have the power to choose to serve and obey Him or not.

Jhn 1:12But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.

That is "accepting Him."

Choosing to serve Him, after being chosen and accepted of Him, is not accepting Him. It is accepting the conditions of His service.

And His service is more than acceptable to them that repent of evil, and are chosen to become sons of God with power to do good at all times.

But no man chooses Jesus Christ, and make themselves His servants. That is choosing and serving religions of man, not the body of Christ Jesus on earth.

 

[RandyK]

He predestinates what is predetermined, not who is prechosen.

He has predestinated whose image we must be conformed to, not who will repent to become conformed to the Son Jesus Christ.

I don't read that, so I can't say. I can, however, say what I believe the Bible to be saying. It is saying that God pre-planned a large number of people to live out their call to live in His image and likeness. That much is "predestined."

Sin was not predestined, so I'm certainly not saying that "repentance" was predestined. But if this X number of elect are predestined to succeed, then "repentance," once sin takes place, is built into the equation.

So I do believe that Predestination has baked into it repentance once people have chosen to sin. These would constitute the elect. The rest would be discarded as "dross."

It does not mean, however, that God predestined people to sin and remain unrepentant. God did not pre-plan people to become "dross." X number of people must, however, constitute God's elect and succeed.

Now you have changed from accepting Him, to doing our reasonable service, having been accepted by Him.

No, I'm not changing anything--just stating my position. We do, in fact, accept Jesus as our Savior the moment God's Word speaks to our heart and we determine to pick up on that Word and obey it.

When we are called to accept Jesus as our Lord, we simply accept the proposition, and so choose to accept him as such. This is, in fact, "acceptance."

Only them chosen by Him with repentance, have the power to choose to serve and obey Him or not.

As I said, God's Word makes the proposal 1st, and then we accept it. This applies to accepting Christ as Savior as well as in anything we do in obedience to His living Word residing within us, ie within our conscience.

Choosing to serve Him, after being chosen and accepted of Him, is not accepting Him. It is accepting the conditions of His service.

I couldn't disagree more. Every time we respond positively to a word of Christ's command we are *accepting* that word by faith. The word is invisibly existing within our conscience, and we only have to believe we're hearing it and then choose to accept it, as well as its mandates.

But no man chooses Jesus Christ, and make themselves His servants. That is choosing and serving religions of man, not the body of Christ Jesus on earth.

I respectfully disagree. Everything we do comes down to our own will. But it must be inspired by God to be able to respond to God.

We would know nothing of God unless He made Himself known to us 1st. But He has chosen to have fellowship with Man, just as He did with Adam in the garden. He has chosen to place His own image within us such that He can communicate with us on friendly terms.

That is the proposal, and that is the proposal that we must, I believe, accept. Otherwise, we will be lost.

 

[YeshuaGlory]

I don't read that, so I can't say. I can, however, say what I believe the Bible to be saying. It is saying that God pre-planned a large number of people to live out their call to live in His image and likeness. That much is "predestined."

Sin was not predestined, so I'm certainly not saying that "repentance" was predestined. But if this X number of elect are predestined to succeed, then "repentance," once sin takes place, is built into the equation.

So I do believe that Predestination has baked into it repentance once people have chosen to sin. These would constitute the elect. The rest would be discarded as "dross."

It does not mean, however, that God predestined people to sin and remain unrepentant. God did not pre-plan people to become "dross." X number of people must, however, constitute God's elect and succeed.

No, I'm not changing anything--just stating my position. We do, in fact, accept Jesus as our Savior the moment God's Word speaks to our heart and we determine to pick up on that Word and obey it.

When we are called to accept Jesus as our Lord, we simply accept the proposition, and so choose to accept him as such. This is, in fact, "acceptance."

As I said, God's Word makes the proposal 1st, and then we accept it. This applies to accepting Christ as Savior as well as in anything we do in obedience to His living Word residing within us, ie within our conscience.

I couldn't disagree more. Every time we respond positively to a word of Christ's command we are *accepting* that word by faith. The word is invisibly existing within our conscience, and we only have to believe we're hearing it and then choose to accept it, as well as its mandates.

I respectfully disagree. Everything we do comes down to our own will. But it must be inspired by God to be able to respond to God.

We would know nothing of God unless He made Himself known to us 1st. But He has chosen to have fellowship with Man, just as He did with Adam in the garden. He has chosen to place His own image within us such that He can communicate with us on friendly terms.

That is the proposal, and that is the proposal that we must, I believe, accept. Otherwise, we will be lost.

I again agree with all you wrote, But have to qualify some in my own wording.
True God does call out His Chsen Few, The bible has countless verse which confirm this. Som people do not oike these verses, Thats their business, God did not intend we become robots.
God gives all men many opportunites to change and serve His Holy Kingdom.
So no man is w/o excuse.
I had better tie my post into TOPIC or else will be ELETEDDDDD
So I was listening to Maurice ravel's piano music,, and thought Id come back here.
This epoch is serious, we can all read the news,
Thus luke warm aint going to cut it.
Of course depends on ones age, you and I at later age phase, realize we can not be lukewarm at all.
God deals with each age group slightly dif, YOu and I have been here long enough to know not to play around with God's Holy Kingdom.
WE are to lead the younger men into God's paths.
Now if they choose to rebel, thats their business. Lukewarm can be found throughout the bible. Look at what happened to the Israelites after Exodus, The Golden calf,,, faithless at the gates to The Promised land. These are very serious infractions,, the results of which can be read in Exodus, other books.
These events are warnings to us living today NOW HERE.
Lukewarm,,, lets say God grants a certain man understandings in the bible,, anda certain group says **no way man, we got this, you can head on out the door***
Now how do you think it will go for that assembly here on earth???
I can tell you how things will go off.
Brother Paul
The above post may not seem to be **christian** OK Mods

 

[RandyK]

I again agree with all you wrote, But have to qualify some in my own wording.
True God does call out His Chsen Few, The bible has countless verse which confirm this. Som people do not oike these verses, Thats their business, God did not intend we become robots.
God gives all men many opportunites to change and serve His Holy Kingdom.
So no man is w/o excuse.
I had better tie my post into TOPIC or else will be ELETEDDDDD
So I was listening to Maurice ravel's piano music,, and thought Id come back here.
This epoch is serious, we can all read the news,
Thus luke warm aint going to cut it.
Of course depends on ones age, you and I at later age phase, realize we can not be lukewarm at all.
God deals with each age group slightly dif, YOu and I have been here long enough to know not to play around with God's Holy Kingdom.
WE are to lead the younger men into God's paths.
Now if they choose to rebel, thats their business. Lukewarm can be found throughout the bible. Look at what happened to the Israelites after Exodus, The Golden calf,,, faithless at the gates to The Promised land. These are very serious infractions,, the results of which can be read in Exodus, other books.
These events are warnings to us living today NOW HERE.
Lukewarm,,, lets say God grants a certain man understandings in the bible,, anda certain group says **no way man, we got this, you can head on out the door***
Now how do you think it will go for that assembly here on earth???
I can tell you how things will go off.
Brother Paul
The above post may not seem to be **christian** OK Mods

I prefer to leave the Mods out of it--it could end up being a self-inflicted wound. I agree with much of what you say.

For example, does God deal differently with different age groups? Of course! God Himself valued the people of Israel under the Law by their ages! Sadly, you and I may be losing value fast! ;)

I've discovered that the older I get the more I recognize my own inherent sinfulness. Only those who've come this far understand that. I can't hope to convince younger Christians that they have sin in them because they think it's a matter of choice. They do not recognize their own sin!

Anyway, I don't understand this part of your post, and will probably need more clarification?....

"But have to qualify some in my own wording.
True God does call out His Chsen Few, The bible has countless verse which confirm this. Som people do not oike these verses, Thats their business, God did not intend we become robots.
God gives all men many opportunites to change and serve His Holy Kingdom.
So no man is w/o excuse."

Don't know whether I agree or not because you've indicated it may be controversial. On the face of it, it sounds fine. Where is the "rub?"

 

[RBDERRICK]

Obviously, if Jesus had not arisen from the dead on the 3rd day, no amount of believing on Jesus' atoning death would've had any value at all, with respect to obtaining eternal life. If Jesus did not rise from the dead, then neither will we.

Well said, which is giving sense of Scripture than can be quoted.

It was necessary that He die on earth, that He should rise again, but His death alone does not redeem any man, nor any faith in His death alone.

Rom 4:24But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

No man is imputed righteous and justified at the cross of Jesus' death, before His resurrection from the dead.

But it is the mere fact that Jesus' death was an *atonement* indicates that it in itself provided the redemption necessary to participate in a resurrection when, after 3 days, Jesus showed that he would rise 1st.

True again. The only way of redemption for sinners is opened by Jesus dying for our sins. But redeeming any sinner that repent, is only obtained by His resurrection.

He is the propitation for the sins of the whole world by His death, but only by His resurrection from the dead, can He propitiate the sins of them that repent for His mercies sake.

In other words, Jesus' resurrection was embedded in his death such that his atoning death was already an atonement, implying that Jesus had to rise from the dead 3 days later. Both his death and his resurrection were obviously needed. But the resurrection of Jesus was intrinsically part of his death.

This is a return to more philosophic analysis, rather than statements of Scripture.

Such things may be intellectually challenging to argue, but are unimportant to the justification of man by the faith of Jesus Christ.

So long we believe the gospel of Jesus Christ, that He died for our sins, was buried, and raised again on the 3rd day, and confess Him Lord with our mouth, then we shall be saved.

 

[RandyK]

It was necessary that He die on earth, that He should rise again, but His death alone does not redeem any man, nor any faith in His death alone.

I don't agree, and didn't say that. I believe that Christ's death is our atonement, and that faith in his atonement is what redeems us from death.

Rom 4:24But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

No man is imputed righteous and justified at the cross of Jesus' death, before His resurrection from the dead.

I dont' agree. Jesus imputed his righteousness to all who repent in his name when he died on the cross. He was dying for all so that he could give righteousness to those who express an interest in it.

Obviously, it was critical that Jesus also rise from the dead, following his death. But the legal work was accomplished on the cross, when Jesus demonstrated his forgiveness for all who repent in his name.

True again. The only way of redemption for sinners is opened by Jesus dying for our sins. But redeeming any sinner that repent, is only obtained by His resurrection.

Jesus' resurrection was, of course, necessary, or his work of atonement on the cross would be worthless. But inasmuch as Jesus *had to* rise from the dead, being the Son of God, what he did on the cross was a valid atonement.

He is the propitation for the sins of the whole world by His death, but only by His resurrection from the dead, can He propitiate the sins of them that repent for His mercies sake.

I don't know where you get this from? It isn't biblical. Propitiation comes from the atoning sacrifice--not from the resurrection of the thing sacrificed.

This is a return to more philosophic analysis, rather than statements of Scripture.

No, it is not "philosophical" to say that Jesus' resurrection was "baked into" his life even as he died. He would not have died for our sins unless it was fully understood that he would rise from the dead.

And this gives the atonement meaning on the Cross because in dying for our sins he is at the same time promising resurrection from the dead as he would invariably prove in his own resurrection.

It was his death that provided for our atonement. His resurrection was just confirmation that his legal work, already provided on the cross, would be good for our own resurrection in the future.

The resurrection was not the forgiveness of sins. His death was!

Such things may be intellectually challenging to argue, but are unimportant to the justification of man by the faith of Jesus Christ.

So long we believe the gospel of Jesus Christ, that He died for our sins, was buried, and raised again on the 3rd day, and confess Him Lord with our mouth, then we shall be saved.

If you believe he died for our sins, then you believe he atoned for your sins on the cross! Why then do you divert away from the cross to the Resurrection?

Obiouvsly, we must believe in Christ's resurrection. But for forgiveness you need to believe in Christ's cross, where he atoned for our sins. When we believe in his death for our sins we simultaneously believe that he would rise from the dead, or forgiveness of sins would mean nothing.

 

[RBDERRICK]

His blood atoned for our sins precisely because it was the blood of Deity, of God become flesh.

God the Word becoming flesh, is Jesus Christ coming in the flesh of man, with the same one natural blood of all men.

Act 17:26And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

Some Christians preach Jesus Christ coming in immortal flesh and 'pure' blood of God, not that of man. Denying Jesus Christ coming in the flesh of man, is denying He is come in the flesh.

It's a Christianized throw back to the pagan myths of demigod heroes born of the Gods, who have supernatural bodies rather than naural bodies of other men.

Romans{1:3} Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

Heb 2:16For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
Jesus was God in the same flesh and blood of all man, born of a woman, made by the seed of David and Abraham, and Noah and Adam. He did not have the 'ichor' of the Gods flowing through immortal veins.

And, no wicked hand having Jesus' natural blood on it, is washed clean while crucifying Him.

1Pe 1:2Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

The only pure and eternal blood of the Lamb of God, that washes aways sins, is that of His resurrection and quickening Spirit. His cleansing blood is sprinkled on them that repent, and drank with obedience to the Son.

Jhn 6:53Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

No Scripture speaks of anyone drinking Jesus' natural blood shed by striping and crucifying Him. Which is contrary to the law in the old and new testament.

Drinking the natural blood of the slain enemies, is another throw back to pagan warrior rites, including the blood of ritual goats, lambs, and bulls. And some hunters still practice the rite of drinking the blood and eating the liver of slain beasts, for power of life from the slain.

Jhn 6:63It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

The profit to man is Jesus Christ coming in the flesh, not in the natural flesh He came in. The profit of His death on the cross, was not in His blood that was shed, but by His resurrection from the dead.

 

[RBDERRICK]

As such, it was a death by one who could not stay dead.

Well said again. Teaching combined Scripture as simple as possible, is rarer than people think.

"Brevity is the soul of wit, and a pithy sentence ends debate..."

When Abel was slain, and the righteous blood of saints and prophets was shed, none of them could rise again from the dead, and command repentance with mercy.

Only Jesus Christ the righteous, who knew no sin, could rise again and offer mercy with repentance of His death.

The purpose of His death on a cursed cross is twofold: that our sins should become exceeding sinful, so that when He rises again from the dead, we should be exceeding sorrowful unto repentance.

Rom 7:13Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
2 Cor 7:10For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the

He that was good was made death unto the sinful, that any man's sin should appear worthy of death, and work repentance by Him that did no evil. Who rose again to command repentance of His enemies unto mercy, forgiveness, and reconciliation to the holy Father of the good and righteous Son, Jesus Christ.

Psa 110:1The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

Act 10:38How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.

3Jo 1:11Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God.

 

[RandyK]

God the Word becoming flesh, is Jesus Christ coming in the flesh of man, with the same one natural blood of all men.

Act 17:26And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

The Stephanos Greek has "blood," but Westcot Hort Greek does not. The latter is just saying from "one" all nations were made to dwell on earth.

Obviously, Jesus' physical DNA and spiritual DNA were different from other men. Jesus shared blood in common with other men, but I would never say his blood was exclusively like that of other men. He was sinless, and in my view, he was God.

Why do you declare that Jesus' blood is as common as all other men? Clearly, he was unlike all other men, being sinless and able to operate with an unlimited supply of divine power--well beyond what Elijah and Elisha could do, or Moses could do, or any saint could do.

Have you ever compared Jesus' miracles with the miracles performed by the saints before him, or even after him? Jesus seemed to have an endless supply, limited only by his Father's will. Nobody could raise themselves from the dead except for Jesus.

Some Christians preach Jesus Christ coming in immortal flesh and 'pure' blood of God, not that of man. Denying Jesus Christ coming in the flesh of man, is denying He is come in the flesh.

I don't think Christians deny that Jesus came in the flesh. But they would deny that he was strictly man.

There may be some language problems in describing how Jesus' blood represents Divine atonement, but it results in the same truth. Jesus' blood represented God's means of forgiving sin. When Jesus forgave sin, God his Father simultaneously forgave sin.

It really has nothing to do with "immortal flesh," because the immortal body happened for Jesus after the cross, and it begins for us at Jesus' Coming. But it was important that Jesus' blood be "pure" because an atoning sacrificed required purity. If purity was required of animal sacrifices it represented Jesus as a sinless sacrifice.

The Apostle John in 1 John warned against Gnostics who believed in Docetism. Greek philosophy seemed to deny that any sense of a transcendant God can appear in flesh within our own domain. He could be viewed as a phantom creature, but not as a real, physical being.

Who is denying, in the Christian world, that Jesus came as a man, as physical flesh? Jesus' spiritual being as a man is conjoined to his Being as God such that his physical blood properly represents atoning blood on behalf of God.

This is normal human blood, but Jesus' human spirit was anything but a normal human spirit. His spirit was conjoined to the transcendent deity of his Father. They were one.

It's a Christianized throw back to the pagan myths of demigod heroes born of the Gods, who have supernatural bodies rather than naural bodies of other men.

Jesus was supernatural. The tales and legends of the Greek and Roman gods is paganism.

The supernatural God is not paganism. God has conferred divine powers upon prophets in the past. The powers He conferred upon Jesus was certainly supernatural.

The extent of his powers rendered him beyond humanity entirely. He was God in human flesh. He not only had Divine powers, but he carried the Divine identity.

Romans{1:3} Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

Heb 2:16For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
Jesus was God in the same flesh and blood of all man, born of a woman, made by the seed of David and Abraham, and Noah and Adam. He did not have the 'ichor' of the Gods flowing through immortal veins.

And, no wicked hand having Jesus' natural blood on it, is washed clean while crucifying Him.

1Pe 1:2Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

The only pure and eternal blood of the Lamb of God, that washes aways sins, is that of His resurrection and quickening Spirit. His cleansing blood is sprinkled on them that repent, and drank with obedience to the Son.

This is weird doctrine, and I don't know where you get it or what it even means? How is Jesus' resurrection and quickening Spirit his only pure and eternal blood.

I've told you this before, and I'll tell you again: the only thing that brings redemption to man is the cross, upon which Jesus shed his blood. That was an atonement for the sins of man. And it is this that we put our faith in for forgiveness, for atonement, for Salvation.

The resurrection follows. The giving of the NT Spirit follows, although the Spirit had already been given previously in some measure.

It's just that the Spirit had to be given after the resurrection in order to apply the work of the cross in the context of Jesus' resurrection. Atonement took place at the cross, but the purpose was to give us resurrection and Eternal Life.

Jhn 6:53Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

No Scripture speaks of anyone drinking Jesus' natural blood shed by striping and crucifying Him. Which is contrary to the law in the old and new testament.

Nobody but Catholics say anything remotely like this, and Catholics do not really even mean that! Nobody has to drink Jesus' actual blood.

I believe Communion to be a reenactment of what Jesus did to atone for our sins for purposes of *remembering it.* We have to remember that the basis of our forgiveness was Jesus' death for our sins, including our need to participate in it spiritually.

The cross has already happened, and Pentecost has already happened. We just need to remember those things.

 

[RandyK]

Well said again.

I wish I could say we really agree. It may be the we only agree in part?

The purpose of His death on a cursed cross is twofold: that our sins should become exceeding sinful, so that when He rises again from the dead, we should be exceeding sorrowful unto repentance.

This is the half-truth we may partly agree on. But it tends to confuse the other half of the truth, without which your doctrine appears wayward.

Yes, the resurrection is important. Yes Jesus' death marks all sin as evil. Yes, we're all supposed to repent. But you're leaving out the important part, that it is the atonement that is central to our forgiveness.

If we know our sins put Jesus to death, we have to know that he died to forgive us. That is the atonement--it should not be conflated with the resurrection, with repentance, with recognition of how great our sins are.

We simply need to put our trust in Jesus' death for our sins, so that by his Spirit we can walk in forgiveness, in a righteousness that will never end.

 

[RBDERRICK]

I have repeatedly stated that we are justified by grace through faith

This is the first time I have ever seen you preach justification by grace through faith, and not justification through faith alone. If you ever have preached it to me, then quote from where you did.

In any case, you can also still answer my fair challenge against your accusation, that I misrepresent the justifying faith that you teach.

When you have preached justification by faith alone, I have called it justification by your own faith alone. You deny it is your own faith alone.

Therefore, once again, is it not your faith? re you saying it's not your faith? Do you not have and possess it as your own? Are you saying it's not your own faith? If it is not your faith, nor do you own it for yourself, then whose faith alone are you preaching? If not your own faith alone, then whose faith alone is it?

To show your accusation is not false, then simply confirm it is not your own faith alone, that justifies you, but another's own faith alone, not yours.

If so, then I gladly accept your word, and stand corrected and will never again believe nor say you preach your own faith alone, to justify you. I would only want to know exactly whose faith alone it is, that you preach justifies the soul.

Rom 13:7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour is due.

 

[RandyK]

This is the first time I have ever seen you preach justification by grace through faith, and not justification through faith alone. If you ever have preached it to me, then quote from where you did.

I can't answer for someone else, but I see little difference in "justification by faith alone," and "justification by grace alone?" If only my faith in Christ counts, and not faith in anything else, including myself, the implication is that I'm relying on Christ, ie I'm relying on his grace.

What on earth do you mean, "Is this your faith?" How can it be anybody else's faith?

The real concern is being waved off as if it isn't the central matter. And that's the object of our faith, which is Christ. If it is our faith, and it is Faith Alone, then it isn't, by process of elimination, by any other kind of faith or anybody else's faith. It is strictly my "faith alone" in Christ.

Faith is opposed to our works without Christ. We have faith in Christ because faith in ourselves doesn't work. We have to trust in someone outside of ourselves, and that is Christ alone!