Bible Study 2 Tim. 2:15

[JM]

:bday:

 

[AVBunyan]

More Questions to aks yourself...

While we are asking questions try these...

1. Does everything in the scriptures apply to me doctrinally?

2. If everything does not apply to me doctrinally then what do I do with these scriptures? How do they apply to me?

3. Why is it important to find out what is meant for me doctrinally?

4 What happens when I take something that is not doctrinally for me and then apply it to me doctrinally?

God bless

 

[wavy]

You've already set up the reader. You're asking the questions in the context of this:

But a far deeper error is the of failure to distinguish between Jesus' earthly Gospel for Israel, and His heavenly Gospel for the Church.

This has to be proven first. Because, as you know, I believe there are hardly any greater lies.

 

[AVBunyan]

This has to be proven first. Because, as you know, I believe there are hardly any greater lies.

So, wavy - you are saying there is no difference?

How about...

Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

You don't see anything strange about that verse?

 

[JM]

:-D

 

[wavy]

Comparing, then, what is said in Scripture concerning Israel and the Church, he finds that in origin, calling, promise, worship, principles of conduct, and future destiny that all is contrast.

I don't believe this. But we'll see.

Compare first the calling of Israel with that of the church.

First mistake. Before you've proven it, you've already assumed there's a distinction between the congregation ("church" is not in scripture) and Israel.

In the church the distinction of Jew and Gentile disappears.

Thus you have simply refuted your own argument, totally and utterly.

The contrast between Israel and the church further appears in the rules given for the conduct of each.

Thus you contradict yourself above. The only way you do not contradict yourself is to place a choice before believers, or change the criteria of being considered the congregation.

So if a Jew becomes a Christian (and is therefore considered part of the "church" where there is no distinction), he gets the heavenly calling or heavenly aspect of the gospel.

But if a Jew does not become a Christian, he stays a Jew and becomes a part of the earthly calling and is considered Israel.

If this is not true, then you are saying that if you are a "gentile" and accept Messiah, you receive the aspect of "heavenly". If you are a Jew and and accept Messiah, you receive the aspect of "earthly. Therefore, still within the "church" (if being part of the "church" is defined as accepting Messiah) you have a division between Jew and Gentile even though you said there is none.

The last option you are left with that I can ascertain, is that you can make the choice of whether to be part of the "church" or considered Israel upon acceptance of Messiah. If you wish to do "Jewish" things, such as Torah (although it is not a "Jewish" thing) and dwell in the land as promised to Israel etc, you become part of the earthly by choice. Or, upon acceptance of Messiah, you can refrain from "Jewish" things and consider yourself to be destined for the "heavenly".

All this, imho, no offense, is silly and absurd. I want to see how you will explain why you have not contradicted yourself with the statements above...

ISRAEL
When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee . . . thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them: thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them (Deut. 7:1-2).

Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe (Exod. 21:24-25).

CHURCH
But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you (Matt. 5:44).

Being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we suffer it: being defamed, we entreat (I Cor. 4:12-13).

But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also (Matt. 5:39).

I found this to be interesting. The first one isn't in contradiction to the "church" (kirch) distinction. That was a specific command for Israel when they were to enter the land. That wasn't a principle. Secondly, is Yahshua contradicting his own self?

Because I was under the impression that he has many enemies and will destroy them accordingly at the end of the age. Many will also be thrown into the lake of fire. I wouldn't call that "doing good" to some one. Bad point.

The second one (eye for eye) has been interpreted many ways. By the Sadducees, for instance, as a literal judgment of maiming one another. The Pharisees thought it an idiomatic expression for equitable restitution. To do justice and judge rightly and fairly (this is probably correct).

Messiah was rejecting other interpretations by other teachers who may have said one thing or another reguarding this commandment. Some, obviously, were using this as a vengeance commandment.

Yahweh already said, however:

Leviticus 19:18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am YHWH.

Further proof that he is rather revealing the true intent (fulfilling) of the commandment and refuting rabbinic interpretation of that day, it's clear from his own words:

Matthew 5:43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

Torah does not say this, however. And he says "you have heard that it has been said", that is, by other people. He didn't say "you've read in Torah how that it says...".

So this is no proof at all. You also failed at the proof long ago when you started out creating the distinction.

See also: Deuteronomy 21:18-21 and Luke 15:20-23.

Both scriptures have nothing to do with eachother, and you have taken each completely out of context. In Luke is a parable about Yahweh forgiving Ephraim Israel who repents (the older brother being Judah). Deuteronomy was prophetic.

This is irrevelant and no comparison that distinguishes Israel from a "church" is present in these scriptures. They have nothing to do with eachother...

In the appointments for worship we still find contrast. Israel could worship in but one place and at a distance from God-only approaching Him through a priest. The church worships wherever two or three are gathered, has boldness to enter into the holiest, and is composed of priests. Compare Leviticus 17:8- 9 with Matthew 18:20, Luke 1:10 with Hebrews 10:19-20, Numbers 3:10 with I Peter 2:5.

All irrelevant and presented out of context, imo. First of all, what is this "one place" Israel had to worship in?

Secondly, as far as the priest comparison, that is a lie. There's a difference between YHWH literally coming down and SITTING somewhere, and him being in some one through the Spirit, which did not exist after Messiah came (contrary to how most people seem to view scripture).

Secondly, as far as all of us being priests in some type of dispensation you are presenting, you haven't read the scripture. Peter is actually quoting the scripture to prove who the people he is writing to are:

Exodus 19:5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:
Exodus 19:6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel. (also see 1 Peter 2:9).

Also, we STILL need a priest to appear before Yahweh for us: Yahshua Ha'Moshiach. He is our mediator. You also misquoted Hebrews 4:16 with this statement:

boldness to enter into the holiest

We don't enter the holiest, or most holy/holy of holies. We are considered spiritually in the holy place, not the most holy. According to Hebrews 9:24, Yahshua is considered as entered into the Most Holy for us. Had we been in there, we would not need him...

Comparing apples with oranges. The scriptures you "compare" with each other that prove some "distinction" don't compare at all and are propogated out of context.

In the predictions concerning the future of Israel and the church, the distinction is still more startling.

Again, you created the distinction from the beginning.

The church will be taken away from the earth entirely, but restored Israel is yet to have her greatest earthly splendor and power

I think this is a lie. But we'll see.


...I just read your "proof" texts. Again, yet more scriptures taken out of context. You even seem to support the rapture, seemingly. That is something else that needs to be proven. The whole basis for it, however, originated from the same separate entity, dispensationalist notion that you have not proven to be true in the first place.

There's really no difference at all, contrary to what you are attempting to prove with scripture. Rather, one is the revealing of the other in it's intended purpose.

I must admit that I cannot refute the points. Why? There are none, really. You create the distinction from the get-go and then proceed to separate the scriptures rather than reveal one scripture in the context of the former.

And again, you refuted your own self a long time ago above with the "Jew/Gentile" thing. You then proceeded to contradict yourself.

One of the scriptures you used (I'll use one as an example although I believe there were a couple more) as a distinguishing characteristic of Israel contradicted everything you are saying:

Isaiah 14:1 For YHWH will have mercy on Jacob and will yet choose Israel, and set them in their own land: and the strangers shall be joined with them, and they shall cleave to the house of Jacob.

Another one you used was in Acts 15, which also contradicts your whole point.

It may safely be said that the Judaizing of the church has done more to hinder her progress, pervert her mission, and destroy her spiritually than all other causes combined. Instead of pursuing her appointed path of separation from the world and following the Lord in her heavenly calling, she has used Jewish Scriptures to justify herself in lowering her purpose to the civilization of the world, the acquisition of wealth, the use of an imposing ritual, the erection of magnificent churches, the invocation of God's blessing upon the conflicts of armies, and the division of an equal brotherhood into "clergy" and "laity."

Sadly, you've proven none of this. Your assumptions from the start put the "church" on a loft as something different. Something that has to be proven first. You can't make up a concept and then look for threads of evidence to support it. This is nothing but a sugar-coated form of anti-semitism. Most separate entity and dispensationalist theology is one big cop-out mixed in with theological chaos, which is basically summed up in:

"God has a new people and they exceed the 'Jews' as the focal point of the Messiah's ministry, but God hasn't forgot the Jews. He's preseved something for them. This is because we don't want to make God a liar in the 'old testament'."

In addition, it seems "there is neither Jew nor gentile" only holds up when the "church" wants to usurp the true promises of Israel and our Messiah, but when it comes to the requirements, this is thrown out of the window in favor of all the "kissing cousins" of dispensationalism and separate entity theology.

I hope this will allow us to start? If not, I can pm you much, much more. AV, off to you.

You said this as if you've proven the assertion you've forced everyone to accept before the discussion can begin in the first place. You did this in the first post, and it continued in your last one.

Assumedly, the "much, much, more" you would send me is based off of the flawed (imo) interpretations above.

And no, no one will be able to start (not unless yhey already agree with you) because, as I said, you already want them to believe in your idea of dispensationalism before the discussion/"questions" begin.

Really, I didn't even need to say anything. Yahweh's Word is suffcient enough:

Isaiah 56:2 Blessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth hold on it; that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil.
Isaiah 56:3 Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to YHWH, speak, saying, YHWH hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree.
Isaiah 56:4 For thus saith YHWH unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;
Isaiah 56:5 Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.
Isaiah 56:6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to YHWH, to serve him, and to love the name of YHWH, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;
Isaiah 56:7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.
Isaiah 56:8 The Master YHWH which gathereth the outcasts of Israel saith, Yet will I gather others to him, beside those that are gathered unto him.

 

[wavy]

So, wavy - you are saying there is no difference?

No. I'm saying a separate entity called the "church" is non-existent.

How about...

Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

You don't see anything strange about that verse?

No, I do not.

 

[JM]

I'll have to place you on ignore Wavy, you leave me no choice. We asked that we have time to create a foundation and you ignored this request...besides, you won't even consider you might me in error.

JM

____________________________________________________________________

The command in 2 Tim. is for the most part either ignored or misunderstood. God commands us to divide his word, and I find this to be most difficult for traditionalists who's doctrine is often supported by there traditions. Example of right division is: We read that people shouldn’t eat pork or shellfish in Leviticus 11. But in 1 Timothy 4:1-5 says that it is permissible to eat anything.

But there are also divisions within the Old Testament and New Testament. And I'll head in that direction in my next post.

Peace,

JM

 

[wavy]

Of course, AV, I hope you can take into consideration what I said and see the problem with this doctrine of satan, planted by the enemy (see my short comments, here)

The evidence is far to overwhelming. I'm not afraid, AV, to admit error. However, JM has given me no reason to do so.

Be cool.

 

[Terral]

Paul's Gospel Is According To The Revelation Of The Mystery

Hi JM:

Thank you very much for starting this thread. I cannot quite make out the top part of your post, but your quote from Darby is found here: http://www.stempublishing.com/authors/d ... 2007E.html

JM >> This biblical line is being blurred by the teaching the Church has a part in Israel's earthly-kingdom New Covenant (Jer. 31:31,33; Ezek. 36:26,27; 37:14). But a far deeper error is the of failure to distinguish between Jesus' earthly Gospel for Israel, and His heavenly Gospel for the Church. If we set aside our traditions for just a moment and look into the word of God, we find that our traditions maybe incorrect. As one believer stated,

This part of your post is very profound indeed, where you have accurately connected the “New Covenant†directly to Israel (Hebrews 8:8 and Judah) and their earthly kingdom (Ezekiel 37:11-12). John the Baptist, Christ and the Twelve are preaching the “Gospel of the Kingdom†(Matthew 4:23, 9:35, etc.) to ISRAEL ONLY (Matthew 10:5-7, Matthew 15:24, Acts 2:14, Acts 2:22, Acts 2:36) in the Four Gospels and early Acts. The doctrinal components of that Gospel message look like this ( my thread on this topic is here: http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=20385 ):

-----------------
No one has been saved by this gospel message for almost 2000 years. Our gospel for today is #2 below:
-----------------

#1. Gospel of the Kingdom (Matthew 4:23 , Matthew 9:35, Matthew 24:14, Acts 8:12). Gospel to the Circumcised. Gal. 2:7.

1. The good news that the ‘kingdom of heaven’ is ‘at hand’ (Matthew 3:2, Matthew 4:17, Matthew 10:7). i.e., ‘preaching the kingdom.’ Acts 20:25.
2. According to Prophecy; seen by the OT Prophets. Isaiah 40:3, Malachi 3:1.
3. Repentance with the confession of sins. Mark 1:4
4. Water baptism (during confession) for the ‘forgiveness of sins.’ Mark 1:4, Acts 2:38. (John’s Baptism; Acts 19:3; name of the Father; John 1:6, 33, Matthew 28:19.)
5. Baptism in the ‘name of the Lord Jesus’ (Acts 8:16, 19:5), ‘name of the Son’ (Matthew 28:19)
6. Receive the Spirit through the baptism in the ‘name of the Holy Spirit’ (Matthew 28:19) through the laying of hands (Acts 8:17, Acts 19:6).
7. Justified by ‘works and not by faith alone.’ James 2:20-24.
8. Kingdom disciples are under Mosaic Law (Matthew 5:18, James 2:10).
-----------------

Darby >> "The testimony of Scripture is the only secure resting-place for man amid the darkness of this world. This, through the teaching of the Spirit, is the believer's light and security; from this his judgment flows; and, consequently, from this the rule and foundation of his conduct springs.

Yes, however, ‘Rightly Dividing’ the Word of Truth is the only way to find ‘the truth’ of God’s Living Word amid this same darkness. Many here FAIL to recognize the vast differences between the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ above and Paul’s ‘my gospel’ (Romans 16:25) for us today.

----------------
This is our “word of the cross†(1Corinthians 1:18) gospel for today, apart from borrowing any works from Gospel #1 above.
----------------

#2. Paul’s “my gospel†(Romans 2:16, Romans 16:25, etc.). Gospel to the Uncircumcised. Galatians 2:7.

1. The gospel of the grace of God. Acts 20:24. (Christ and Him crucified; 1 Corinthians 2:2)
2. According to the revelation of the Mystery (Ephesians 6:19); NOT seen by the OT prophets. Romans 16:25.
3. Saved by God’s grace through faith APART from works. Ephesians 2:8-9.
4. Sins forgiven through the redemption IN Christ (Romans 3:24) and His shed blood (Ephesians 1:7).
5. Our ‘one baptism’ (Ephesians 4:5) is done by the ‘one Spirit’ (Ephesians 4:4) into the ‘one body’ (1 Corinthians 12:13), which is into “Christ’s body.†1 Corinthians 12:27.
6. We receive the Spirit when hearing (Romans 10:17) and believing (Ephesians 1:13-14) Paul’s Gospel by ‘hearing with faith.’ Galatians 3:2.
7. We are justified by faith apart from works. Romans 4:4-6.
8. We are under grace and not under law. Romans 6:14.
--------------

Paul says that our gospel is veiled to those who are perishing (2 Corinthians 4:3-4) and that those rejecting this message of truth receiving the ‘deluding influence’ (2 Thessalonians 2:11) and continue believing “what is false.†The fact is that MANY among the denominations are mixing the two gospel messages into one gospel that God sent to NOBODY. Have you mixed the works of Gospel #1 above with Paul’s gospel for us today? This is a very serious topic that nobody here should take lightly. If you see only one gospel in the New Testament, then that means you have mixed these two gospels together. Peter warns that those distorting this ‘wisdom given him’ are doing so to their ‘own destruction’ (2 Peter 3:14-16).

Thank you again for starting this thread on a very important topic indeed.

In Christ Jesus through obedience to Gospel #2 above,

Terral

 

[JM]

Second look at my own position:

I made the claim repeatedly, that God has two peoples, the Church and Israel, and these two peoples were given two distinct ways to live. Israel was earthly and the Church heavenly. I was wrong about the details and missed the point of the covenants. Repenting of this error after coming to a fuller understanding of Scripture I only hope to correct the errors I have made, one being the false division of the word of God.

Previously I placed Exodus 21:24 and Matthew 5:38-44 at odds and regulated those Scriptures to different peoples of God. On the surface these verses may seem to contradict each other, but after examining my presuppositions I see they’re not. The passage from Exodus should be seen as governing and for use by the magistrates while Matthew 5 is applied to the individual. This is proper division or right dividing. In Deuteronomy 19:18, 21 we see this point proven, “the judges shall investigate.†The standard given in Matthew 5 is found throughout the Bible, consider Exodus 23:4-5; Leviticus 19:18; 1 Samuel 25:33; Proverbs 20:22; 24:17-29; 25:21. Believe it or not, the apostle Paul re-states Christ’s teaching, “Repay no one evil for evil; providing that which is good before all men. If possible, as much as depends on you, keeping peace with all men. Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but give place to wrath; for it is written, "Vengeance is Mine, I will repay," says the Lord.†Romans 12:17-19

When I think about some of the posts I’ve made I grimace.

I believed O.T. salvation was performance based, a mixture of works and faith using texts such as Deuteronomy 6:25, but I was in grave error. Paul states, “Therefore by works of the law no flesh shall be justified in His sight, for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.†Deuteronomy 6 is based upon a believers walk while in covenant relationship with God, Romans 3 is a statement declared about all men with all men being sinners by nature and practice. My dispensational house of cards, which teaches works based salvation in the O.T., comes crashing down. Psalm 130:3; 71:16 Deuteronomy 6:25 is practical righteousness in the daily walk of the believers life and is related to Matthew 5, James 5:16 and 1 John 2:29. It’s was a ridiculous notion to think a person could earn or merit salvation (or hold onto it) by offering a goat or bull. Paul goes on to tell us how one is saved, this has nothing to do with dispensational bounds as some may claim. Salvation is always by Grace through faith in Jesus Christ, the Bible knows of no other way of salvation. Romans 3:25

Charles Ryrie, one of the pivital dispensational writters that influanced me greatly, said it was the “content†of there faith that saved them. This is simple word play. He claims the O.T. saints knew nothing of the redeemer but they offered sacifices out of faith and this is what saved them. What? This error I’ve repeated several times and apologize for.

We are saved by covenant. Only those who are called into a covenant relationship with God will be saved (see post on election), this covenant is everlasting as we read 2 Samuel 23:5; Hebrews 13:20. “And the Scripture foreseeing that God would iustifie the heathen through faith, preached before the Gospel vnto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.†AV 1611 The passage relates to the one and only Gospel and that Gospel was the same that now justifies us the heathen, this same Gospel was preached to Abraham. The same promise can be seen in Genesis 49:18 = Hebrews 11:16; 24-26. Job knew, “For I know that my Redeemer liueth, and that he shall stand at the latter day, vpon the earth: And though after my skin, wormes destroy this body, yet in my fleh shall I see God:†AV 1611

I need to do a lot of thinking and re-thinking.

Peace,

JM

 

[Terral]

Paul Is The Steward Of This "Dispensation Of God's Grac

Hi JM:

WoW. That was a nice post above and you appear to be going through spurts of Spiritual development, which is always tough on anyone. The hardest part is not learning something new, but learning how to let go of old interpretations that contradict God’s Living Word. Please allow me to make some comments:

JM >> Second look at my own position: I made the claim repeatedly, that God has two peoples, the Church and Israel, and these two peoples were given two distinct ways to live. Israel was earthly and the Church heavenly. I was wrong about the details and missed the point of the covenants. Repenting of this error after coming to a fuller understanding of Scripture I only hope to correct the errors I have made, one being the false division of the word of God.

Rightly dividing the Word of God requires us to recognize more than just two peoples. Please think this through very carefully: The Lord God called a righteous branch into existence through Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to whom He gave the Promised Land (Genesis 15:18) and also gave the Law (Romans 9:4) 400 years later. Where does that place all Gentiles in the world at that time, except in a totally separate ‘dispensation’ from Israel? Before you try and dismiss this truth, remember that even Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18) interceded for Gentiles to God long before any such thing as a Jew walked this earth. Therefore, you have ‘two peoples’ of God long before Christ died for anyone. Any new ‘dispensation’ called into existence in the New Testament becomes a ‘third’ people under God.

JM >> Previously I placed Exodus 21:24 and Matthew 5:38-44 at odds and regulated those Scriptures to different peoples of God. On the surface these verses may seem to contradict each other, but after examining my presuppositions I see they’re not. The passage from Exodus should be seen as governing and for use by the magistrates while Matthew 5 is applied to the individual.

The value of using dispensationalists as your tutors can be very good, because God knows they are in love with dividing this from that. However, ‘dividing’ the word of truth is not “rightly†dividing anything and the same tutors can get you into a ton of trouble. The Law is given TO ISRAEL and Exodus 21:24 is one example of Mosaic Law. You stopped quoting Christ in His address to the Disciples of the Kingdom taken FROM ISRAEL, where He qualifies everything He said above, saying, “so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven . . .†Matthew 5:45 a.

You can clearly see the chief priests, scribes and Pharisees are member of the same “house of Israel†(Matthew 15:24) to whom Christ was sent. However, does that make them ‘sons of your Father in heaven’ like those obedient to the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 4:23, Matthew 9:35, etc.)? No. John the Baptist (John 3:1-6) and Christ (Matthew 4:17-23) and the Twelve (Matthew 10:5-7) are all preaching the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ to Israel ONLY, as they all are gathering members to the prophetic kingdom ‘bride’ (John 3:29) over which Christ’s disciples are called the “sons of the bridal chamber.†Mark 2:19. Are you going to toss all of those yelling “Crucify Him†(Matthew 27:22) and “Crucify Him†(Matthew 27:23) into the same group with Peter and the Twelve? No. Here again you MUST recognize that God is calling some to the Kingdom of heaven AND some are being hardened. Paul writes on this topic, saying,

“What then? What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened*; just as it is written, "God gave them* a spirit of stupor, eyes to see not and ears to hear not, down to this very day." Romans 11:7-8.

Peter and the Twelve (minus Judas) and all of those saved in Acts 2 AND the Samarians of Acts 8 with the Eunuch AND Cornelius in Acts 10 AND the Disciples of Acts 19:1-6 were all gathered to the prophetic kingdom ‘bride’ through obedience to the “Gospel of the Kingdom.†Here is where you get to ask yourself another question. Should you add these believers in the thousands all ‘zealous for the Law’ (Acts 20:21) to the Gentiles in the OT? No. Would you count them among the chief priests, scribes, etc. who still very much belong to Israel of the flesh? No again. The realization should be setting in right now that the Kingdom ‘bride’ under Peter (Matthew 16:16-19) and that kingdom ‘church’ (Matthew 18:17-18) is a totally new ‘dispensation’ under God. Otherwise, you have God dealing with the ‘saved’ and the ‘unsaved’ of Israel in the very same way. That gives you ‘three’ dispensations under God, before we ever get to Paul’s ‘word of the cross’ gospel message from his Gentile Epistles, as Christ has yet to die for anyone in Matthew 5.

JM >> This is proper division or right dividing. In Deuteronomy 19:18, 21 we see this point proven, “the judges shall investigate.†The standard given in Matthew 5 is found throughout the Bible, consider Exodus 23:4-5; Leviticus 19:18; 1 Samuel 25:33; Proverbs 20:22; 24:17-29; 25:21. Believe it or not, the apostle Paul re-states Christ’s teaching, “Repay no one evil for evil; providing that which is good before all men. If possible, as much as depends on you, keeping peace with all men. Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but give place to wrath; for it is written, "Vengeance is Mine, I will repay," says the Lord.†Romans 12:17-19 When I think about some of the posts I’ve made I grimace.

Mosaic Law is still given to Israel of the flesh and the second dispensation under God called out of the Gentiles through Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Every word of Leviticus and Deuteronomy is given TO ISRAEL. That includes the chief priests AND Peter, if each represents the leader of these two separate dispensations under the ‘gospel of the kingdom.’ Christ tells even those gathered through the gospel of the kingdom that the Law would remain, until heaven and earth pass away (Matthew 5:18). If you are a Gentile, then neither the commands of Deuteronomy OR Christ’s commands to the kingdom ‘bride’ have any direct application to you, as Gentiles have been “without the Law†(Romans 2:14-15) from the beginning. You are giving Christ’s commands an improper context by assuming He is addressing the whole wide world in Matthew 5, when God sent Him ONLY to the ‘lost sheep of the house of Israel’ (Matthew 15:24).

JM >> I believed O.T. salvation was performance based, a mixture of works and faith using texts such as Deuteronomy 6:25, but I was in grave error. Paul states, “Therefore by works of the law no flesh shall be justified in His sight, for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.â€Â

Paul’s statements have NOTHING to do with those addressed by Deuteronomy OR Christ in Matthew 5. Do you believe Paul is addressing OT Israel OR the ‘bride’ (John 3:29) in his Gentile Epistles? NEITHER, unless he specifies differently like in Romans 2:17 and other places. You cannot borrow context from Paul’s teaching on justification to transport that anywhere in Scripture you wish, because he is teaching on how ‘believers’ in “my gospel†(Romans 16:25) obtain the ‘righteousness of God.’ That concept is not taught in the Old Testament, where one could indeed be justified by keeping Mosaic Law. Paul writes about those souls, saying,

“For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law; for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.†Romans 2:12-13.

Why does Paul appear to be contradicting Himself in Romans 3:20 you quoted above? The answer is that the OT saints will indeed be justified for keeping the Law, but they are NOT members of the ‘body of Christ’ (Ephesians 4:12) who will judge the world and the angels (1 Corinthians 6:2-3). Paul is talking about those from the Old Testament who are judged in Revelation 20:11-15, as part of a totally different ‘dispensation’ under Mosaic Law. They never had the opportunity to hear (Romans 10:17) and believe (Ephesians 1:13-14) our gospel for today and shall be part of the ‘second resurrection’ at the very ‘end of the age’ (Daniel 12:11-13). Only New Testament saints saved through the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (bride) and Paul’s gospel (body) participate in the ‘first resurrection’ that STARTS (2 Thessalonians 2:2) the 1000 Years “Day of the Lord.†Everyone else is raised on the last day to be judged in Revelation 20:11-15.

JM >> Deuteronomy 6 is based upon a believers walk while in covenant relationship with God, Romans 3 is a statement declared about all men with all men being sinners by nature and practice. My dispensational house of cards, which teaches works based salvation in the O.T., comes crashing down.

Deuteronomy is Mosaic Law given to Israel of the flesh (Romans 9:4). Romans 3 is grace doctrine for the members of “Christ’s body†(1 Corinthians 12:27 = Romans 12:4-5) saved by obedience to Paul’s “word of the cross†(1 Corinthians 1:18) gospel message still in the world today. Peter’s ‘bride’ was ‘cut off’ (Revelation 20:4) and shall be resurrected with the “body,†which represent ‘two’ peoples under God gathered under these two gospel messages of the NT. That gives you ‘four’ dispensations under God. Gentiles (1), Israel under Moses (2), Kingdom ‘bride’ under Peter (3), Grace ‘body’ under Paul (4). The grace body submitted the “gospel I preach among the Gentiles†(Galatians 2:2) to the kingdom ‘bride’ in Acts 15 and Galatians 2. : 0 ).

JM >> Psalm 130:3; 71:16 Deuteronomy 6:25 is practical righteousness in the daily walk of the believers life and is related to Matthew 5, James 5:16 and 1 John 2:29. It’s was a ridiculous notion to think a person could earn or merit salvation (or hold onto it) by offering a goat or bull. Paul goes on to tell us how one is saved, this has nothing to do with dispensational bounds as some may claim. Salvation is always by Grace through faith in Jesus Christ, the Bible knows of no other way of salvation. Romans 3:25

You are all over the map here JM and following your attempts to connect God’s commands to OT Israel and the grace ‘body’ (Ephesians 5:30), using Matthew 5 and James 5 is not going very smoothly. Your efforts certainly represent a work in progress . . .

JM >> Charles Ryrie, one of the pivotal dispensational writers that influenced me greatly, said it was the “content†of their faith that saved them. This is simple word play. He claims the O.T. saints knew nothing of the redeemer but they offered sacrifices out of faith and this is what saved them. What? This error I’ve repeated several times and apologize for.

Mr. Ryrie is wrong. We cannot transform the ‘atonement’ (covering) characteristics of animal sacrifices into the ‘forgiveness’ (acquittal) we receive through obedience to the Gospel today. There is NO COMPARISION whatsoever. You and I have citizenship in heaven (Philippians 3:20) right now as we speak, but everyone in the OT (save Enoch and Elijah) descended down to Sheol. There was no ‘eternal redemption’ (Romans 3:24) and salvation as the ‘gift of God’ by God’s grace through faith apart from works (Ephesians 2:8-9) in the Old Testament. Those ‘saved’ in the Old Testament did not have lives ‘hidden with Christ IN God†(Colossians 3:3). That concept has no meaning to Israel of the flesh. They anticipate the resurrection to be led into the Promised Land (Ezekiel 37:11-12) ON THIS EARTH (Genesis 15:18).

JM >> We are saved by covenant. Only those who are called into a covenant relationship with God will be saved (see post on election), this covenant is everlasting as we read 2 Samuel 23:5; Hebrews 13:20.

Wooo horsy. We are saved by God’s grace through faith apart from works (Ephesians 2:8-9) and obedience to Paul’s ‘message of truth’ (Ephesians 1:13-14). The “New Covenant†has everything to do with the houses of Israel and Judah (Hebrews 8:8) and NOTHING to do with the members of “Christ’s body†(1 Corinthians 12:27). How much closer can we get to Christ, when we are “IN†Christ Jesus (Ephesians 2:6-7) even now through the Gospel? Those seeking a covenant with the Lord are NOT “IN†Him already, which is what Israel and Judah represent on this earth. I can hardly believe you can type out the words that ‘We are saved’ by ANYTHING other than the “Gospel.†Romans 1:16-17.

JM >> “And the Scripture foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the Gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.†AV 1611 The passage relates to the one and only Gospel and that Gospel was the same that now justifies us the heathen, this same Gospel was preached to Abraham. The same promise can be seen in Genesis 49:18 = Hebrews 11:16; 24-26. Job knew, “For I know that my Redeemer liueth, and that he shall stand at the latter day, vpon the earth: And though after my skin, wormes destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:†AV 1611

Now we are approaching the borderline between bad doctrine and ridiculous. Please forgive, brother, but these words right here need a lot of work. Our testimony either agrees 100 percent with the Word of God, or we are teaching something else. Paul’s ‘my gospel’ is ‘according to the revelation of the mystery.’ Romans 16:25. That means the gospel itself was “hidden IN God†(Ephesians 3:9), until revealed through the ministry of the Apostle Paul as the “wisdom given him†(2 Peter 3:14-16). Paul’s gospel is that Christ died for our sins and that God raised Him from the dead (Romans 10:9) on the third day (1 Corinthians 15:3-4); that our redemption is “IN†Christ (Romans 3:24) and our forgiveness is through His precious blood (Ephesians 1:7). If that good news were part of the OT or even the Four Gospels, then Satan would have laughed in God’s face and never crucified the Lord of Glory (1 Corinthians 2:6-8).

You are confusing the ‘prophecy’ of ‘good news’ to Abraham with Paul’s ‘word of the cross’ gospel message through which we are indeed saved today. You cannot find one person ‘saved’ by God’s ‘grace’ through ‘faith’ in the ‘blood’ sacrifice of Jesus Christ anywhere in the Four Gospels; much less in the Old Testament. Christ’s own disciples refused to believe that “He has risen!,†even when eyewitnesses reported that to them. Mark 16:10-14. How could they ‘preach’ any good news that they did not believe themselves? And, the sons of the OT saints you are calling ‘saved’ (no such thing in the OT), crucified Christ having all of the Old Testament at their disposal. What makes you believe that their ‘fathers’ (Acts 7:51-52) would have done anything different? Those Jews living in Christ’s day killed animals as their sacrifices, just like their fathers before them. Did the fact that they crucified Christ make the provision for their own salvation? No. Please think about what you are saying . . .

JM >> I need to do a lot of thinking and re-thinking.

On this point, brother, we can find agreement. Please highlight any statement from my post you found errant or anything you would like for me to clarify using Scripture. You appear to have the right attitude and also appear to have your feet on the right path, but still far from your destination. The statements you are making require a great deal of courage and conviction in the first place and for that I offer congratulations.

Thank you again for writing,

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

 

[JM]

Wooo horsy.

That's all I can say to your post.

 

[JM]

I made a post under New Covenant in the apologetics forum.