Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

Clear examples of false belief in John & Epistles...?

Donations

Total amount
$1,592.00
Goal
$5,080.00
cybershark5886 said:
Well we cannot say the OT people had access to the full consequences of the sacrifice from the beginning of the world or Jesus would not have had to come in flesh at all. They were under a different "Dispensational Period" than us in the NT era. The redemption effects were not "complete" in the the OT, while in the NT we have "completeness" in Christ

Certainly. Jesus fulfills the Law and Jesus opened the gates of heaven to mankind - to include the righteous of the OT. I agree that if the sacrifices of the OT were sufficient, then Jesus would not have come in the flesh - or if He would have, it would have been for a different reason rather than as a self-oblation. As I told you before, the sacraments of the OT were not effective as the NT sacraments are. The difference between Baptism and Circumcision is vast in the spiritual realm. Physically, they bring us into the People of God. But circumcision does NOT give us the power to obey the Law. Baptism does give us the Spirit along with the sign. This is true also in sacraments of atonement. The Day of Atonement for the Jews was much different than what is available to us daily in the sacrament of Reconciliation. So yes, the OT signs and sacraments, in retrospect, pointed to the Perfect Sign and Sacrament, Jesus Christ, who is the perfect sign of God Himself. Not only does He gain forgiveness for us, though. His primary reason for coming is to show without doubt the depths of His love for us.

Please do not think that I am saying that the NT graces are without consequence vs. the OT. But I do believe that the Spirit was present and available to God's People BEFORE Jesus became incarnate because there were righteous men in the OT. NO ONE can be righteous without the Gift of Grace from God. And thus, if we put two and two together, we then know that God's Spirit came to men of the OT - albeit in a hidden and somewhat unknown manner. We are no longer infants in the faith, however. We exist on spiritual food, knowing what we worship. This knowledge of the Law of Love helps to fulfill the original intent of the Decalogue.

Regards
 
Alright Francis, since we agree on that I just wanted to point out that I wanted to make that clarification in relation to the issue of the "new creation" being present in the OT. If the work was not "complete" yet in the OT I don't know if there could be a "new creation" in the sense of a "new essential nature". Most commentators agree that the NT speaks of a new essential nature that we are given upon our salvation/regeneration, which is regarded in our positional justification/sanctification - something specific to the NT Dispensation.

So to clarify our view on this could you also please respond to my first point, above the one you quoted, to TanNinety in which I said:

Alot of what you said is true but we must clarify a difference between the OT and NT view of defilement and righteousness. There are no ritual defilements in the NT so-to-speak. We are defiled when we sin but in the OT the entire person was considered defiled until it was cleansed. But us with the Holy Spirit in us are not defiled in our inner man when we sin, but rather as Paul says "it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells". If we (the NT people) sin we have an advocate and Jesus will cleanse us from all unrighteousness (cleanse our soul from defilement - however I believe our "new man" remains untouched & undefiled since it is the nature from God constantly upheld by the Holy Spirit) while in the OT there was no such division (sin could not be accounted to the "flesh's" account) and the entire person was defiled (even David defiled himself with blood - thus not able to build the Temple). So how do we tie this OT way of accounting defilement with the clearly different way of accounting it in the NT. Paul said "It is no longer I who do it" (not absolving himself from responsibility - but rather pointing out the origin of the defilement).

I need to resolve this if we are to further come into agreement on this issue.

God Bless,

~Josh
 
cybershark said:
If we (the NT people) sin we have an advocate and Jesus will cleanse us from all unrighteousness
Not true. All repented unrighteousness.
Hebrews 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins.

however I believe our "new man" remains untouched & undefiled since it is the nature from God constantly upheld by the Holy Spirit)
The ‘new man’ is a goal to the NT people just as it was in the OT. Paul didn’t say we put on incorruption already but in a future event that we will be changed and then put on that which is incorruptible. That coming is the finality of the ‘new man’ that is decided at resurrection.

2 Corinthians 3:18 And all of us have had that veil removed so that we can be mirrors that brightly reflect the glory of the Lord. And as the Spirit of the Lord works within us, we become more and more like Him and reflect his glory even more.
The ‘new’ man is a progression as indicated above.

2 Timothy4:6 As for me, my life has already been poured out as an offering to God. The time of my death is near. 7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished the race, and I have remained faithful.
The race to become a new creation is not finished at the beginning but at death by remaining faithful.

And after death,
2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things [done] in [his] body, according to that he hath done, whether [it be] good or bad.
then if a believer died in Christ,
2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore if any man [be] in Christ, [he is] a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
And at that point ALL things are become new and the old things pass away at the judgment seat if any man be in Christ.

Well we cannot say the OT people had access to the full consequences of the sacrifice from the beginning of the world or Jesus would not have had to come in flesh at all.
Let’s say “six flags†opens at 9 am. There are people who bought tickets at 7 am and were waiting on the opening. Then at 9 am it opened and they got in and enjoyed the rides. Then some bought tickets at 10 am and got in and started enjoying the rides. Now just because the 7 am ticketers had to wait that doesn’t take away the same fun that is available for the people who got in at 10 am. The waiting has no bearing on the ride. The rides regardless started at 9 am and that is when every one got to enjoy them. The OT and NT people get their final “new creation†the same time. It is realized at the same time in resurrection for all. Even heaven and earth are made new at this time and the old things melt and pass away. That is when the “jot and tittle†of the Word of God fulfilled its purpose.

They were under a different "Dispensational Period" than us in the NT era.
I do not subscribe to the dispensational theory in the strictest of sense. The only dispensation I know is of God’s word as commandments in the OT and in the flesh as Christ in the NT.

The redemption effects were not "complete" in the the OT
But they were sealed complete. “If you keep my commandments you WILL live in themâ€Â, is a closed deal even though the effects are a future tense.

So it would be a fallacy to say that they had all the same operations of justification, imputation, and redemption that we have.
Again, even if the operations were different this is available to us as a process not a one time justification, imputation and redemption. We cannot conclude this contrary to the evidence of the gospels and epistles. But it is a fallacy to say that they did not have the operations of justification, imputation and redemption.

I don't think anybody in the OT had the promise of being saved "to the uttermost".
So basically just because someone was born in the ‘wrong’ era they were not able to be saved to the uttermost and since we were lucky enough to be born in the fulfillment times that we get to enjoy this to the uttermost? God is not a respecter of persons regardless of what century they were born in. OT saints are saved to the uttermost following the Word of God which is realized in Christ. They looked forward and we look back, that’s the only difference.
 
TanNinety said:
So basically just because someone was born in the ‘wrong’ era they were not able to be saved to the uttermost and since we were lucky enough to be born in the fulfillment times that we get to enjoy this to the uttermost? God is not a respecter of persons regardless of what century they were born in. OT saints are saved to the uttermost following the Word of God which is realized in Christ. They looked forward and we look back, that’s the only difference.

Tan,

I think we make a very good tag team!!! Very good job.

Joe
 
Re: reply

francisdesales said:
That goes without saying. What you have forgotten is that God has ALWAYS given knowledge of Himself through OTHER men... The vast majority of us receive our faith in God through other events or things or people or books.

To say that God comes to us without the Church and without others is to totally ignore God's salvation plan described throughout the pages of the Scriptures.

Regards

The Lord has come to me through the right church, and that is the New Church. The doctrines of this church are from the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg. I was led to the writings in the year 1966.

Harry :fadein:
 
Re: reply

SpiritualSon said:
The Lord has come to me through the right church, and that is the New Church. The doctrines of this church are from the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg. I was led to the writings in the year 1966.

Harry :fadein:

So it took man nearly 2000 years AFTER Jesus to get everything squared away? God waited 1950 years to give birth to the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg so man could FINALLY enter the "right church"? Jesus created a Church in Matthew 16 - but it never took form until 1966?

Sorry, I am not buying that one.

Regards
 
I apologize in advance for the mere bulk of this post but please bear with me and consider all I have to say. This is some more "meat" like Francis gave to me, so please regard what I have to say.

Not true. All repented unrighteousness.
Hebrews 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins.

I know, I may have poorly worded that sentance but I had 1 John 1:9 in mind. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

The ‘new man’ is a goal to the NT people just as it was in the OT. Paul didn’t say we put on incorruption already but in a future event that we will be changed and then put on that which is incorruptible. That coming is the finality of the ‘new man’ that is decided at resurrection.

We do have a completely completed "new man", though you are right we do not always live in its nature. There is a past sense of the creation of this new man - so it is not an incomplete creation, "You have put off the old man with his deeds, and have put on the new man who is renewed in knowledge according to the image of Him who created him" (Colossians 3:9-10).

I do not deny that we are changed daily, but I propose we (our souls) are changed daily by putting on the new man which is infact perfect and from God - our defining nature according to covenant. However we stumble some times and put on the old man and dabble in the flesh. Thus the soul is the battle ground - however, we see Paul accounting his "new man" as his true nature while saying that "in his flesh dwells nothing good", and it is no longer him that sins (banking on his new nature as defined in Christ). The only reason I bring this up is that there is a new division that is completed in the NT that was not (in my understanding) present in the OT. We have been set free from the flesh legally (Romans 7:1-6), it having been crucified, and corruption & temptation comes from its remnants which we have the freewill to give into (because we have not yet recieved the redemption of our bodies (Romans 7:24-25)). However we also have the new creation in us which God desires us to put on for sanctification, and when we do sin we have an advocate if we confess and repent (1 John 1:9) and now there is therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1). And we are not of our own. This is the difference: we have that new nature and God commits judgement on our behalf in relation to that new creation (imputing sin & righteousness according to the terms of the new covenant) and the grace he has given us. We are responsible for giving in to the flesh (the consequences of which are stated in 1 Corinthians 3:11-15) but our new man is undefiled and is positionally clean. Being "in Christ" is also a NT phenomenon and defines a new nature and new way of living not present in the OT.

People were able to come near God (like Moses) and be a friend of God (like David) in the OT but they were not a new creation in the inside that partook of the Divine nature and who had crucified their flesh (also being legally seperated from it). God's mercy and grace as given in the OT accounted their faith as righteousness to preserve and save them for the day they could be fully redeemed in light of Jesus' sacrifice, but we live in in light of that presently (since we are legally divorced from the flesh in the NT). Jesus told his disciples that they were blessed for they were seeing what many prophets and righteous men had desired to see in their day yet who had died without seeing it come to pass (Matthew 13:17). The ultimate effects on the saints in the OT and the NT are no different but I propose that the way of current living is indeed different and not entirely parallel with the OT, for we are given a new nature which enables us to come closer to God without condemnation presently, and we are enabled to put on Christ himself (which is the essence of our new man) and sin will not be accounted to us who persevere because there is no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus.

Let’s say “six flags†opens at 9 am. There are people who bought tickets at 7 am and were waiting on the opening. Then at 9 am it opened and they got in and enjoyed the rides. Then some bought tickets at 10 am and got in and started enjoying the rides. Now just because the 7 am ticketers had to wait that doesn’t take away the same fun that is available for the people who got in at 10 am. The waiting has no bearing on the ride. The rides regardless started at 9 am and that is when every one got to enjoy them. The OT and NT people get their final “new creation†the same time. It is realized at the same time in resurrection for all. Even heaven and earth are made new at this time and the old things melt and pass away. That is when the “jot and tittle†of the Word of God fulfilled its purpose.

Well if you are paralleling the "ride" to the blessing of our redemption after death, then yes, absolutely the effects are absolutely the same in the end - I never denied that. However I emphasise that we in the NT period experience those blessings and a new nature presently before we die by enjoying the mercifully given Spirit and our new nature so that God can begin saving to the uttermost & effectually presently by drawing people. And for those of us who make our election sure we recieve the basis for our rejoicing in hope presently in this life knowing that we will recieve the full reward in the end. God brought the beginnings of his Kingdom to us already, though it is not in its full form, we are presently living in it. That is what Jesus came to proclaim "Behold, the Kingdom of God is at hand." We have a measure of realized eschatology presently, though not in its full form. Many eternal, future promises and blessings are conveyed to the Saints presently in light of their regeneration and the present reality of being in the Kingdom of God and us dwelling in God and He in us. Jesus told us this plainly and said that the Kingdom of God is currently in us (Luke 17:21). This is different than the OT.

I only make this point to show - not that it is impossible to fall from this blessing after God has called you - but that we have more realized promises in the present, we have a new nature, and the constant indwelling Spirit as NT-covenant-specific blessings in accordance with God's grace and mercy which he promised the OT to give in the future. And even at Pentecost Peter realized the beginning of the fulfillment of such end times prophecies that were currently being realized (manifested) and lived in. The verse from Joel of God pouring out his Spirit on all flesh is not yet 100% realized (affected in full manifestation) yet Peter realized the beginnings of it, and how God during the Church age created a transitional period to gradually usher in his Kingdom by beginning to build it upon Jesus' death, ressurection, and ascension. We are beginning to experience and taste the begginings of the end time's promises because God is ushering in much of it presently (bringing the eschatological promises to us) since he is justified now in bestowing that level & amount of grace on us (For "The Lord longs to be gracious to you" - and now he is doing it more than ever before - and in more Power - which effects more liberty for those in the Spirit).

I do not subscribe to the dispensational theory in the strictest of sense. The only dispensation I know is of God’s word as commandments in the OT and in the flesh as Christ in the NT.

I wasn't specifically recalling the doctrines of "Dispensation" (however varied they may be), but rather was using the word in its ordinary dictionary sense, just to make the point that much has changed in God's dispensation and pouring out of blessing upon us because we are already begginning to be ushered into God's eternal kingdom, we are already assembling for the Bridegroom's wedding, it is already in the preparation stages right now and we are making our way towards that final Kingdom according to God's calling. Under the NT dispensation of God's blessings and His Spirit we can begin to do something never before possible until Jesus came: The Spirit and Bride crying "Come!" in unison, because God has already made us new (positionally - though there are exceptions for absolute apostacy), and called us into his marvelous light, and placed his Spirit in us, and is preparing us for the full manifestation of his kingdom which he is currently assembling his saints for (thus "Come!"). God looks at us with eternal eyes and we who are called and who have made our election sure can say like Paul one day "I have fought the good fight", and God has given to all such people present, and extremely real promises of the Kingdom and eternal life, according to the portion he has deemed proper, presently as we live. We live in the transitional period of God's Kingdom and are living in the beginning stages of a presently "realized eschatology", and thus have many blessings bestowed on us like never seen before.

Again, even if the operations were different this is available to us as a process not a one time justification, imputation and redemption. We cannot conclude this contrary to the evidence of the gospels and epistles. But it is a fallacy to say that they did not have the operations of justification, imputation and redemption.

I never said they were absent, I merely said it was dispensed differently. Things were veiled and held back in the OT, yet God has already begun to break open the storehouses of Heaven and pour his many promises down upon his people in the Church Age like never before, as I have spoken on extensively above. I argue this puts us in a slightly different position than the OT saints, and that we do have the beginnings of a new essential nature within us that the OT saints were promised but never experienced in their lifetime (the nature in constant communion with the Spirit - the "new man" - the new creation "in Christ" - partaking of the divine nature). The NT blessings are transitional as I mentioned above, and are not the fully completed eschatalogical blessings - not fully manifested - but we are in a special tranistional period where much of the eschatalogical blessings are poured out on us presently, thus future, eternal promises are atleast partially realized in us presently because of God's grace.

So basically just because someone was born in the ‘wrong’ era they were not able to be saved to the uttermost and since we were lucky enough to be born in the fulfillment times that we get to enjoy this to the uttermost? God is not a respecter of persons regardless of what century they were born in. OT saints are saved to the uttermost following the Word of God which is realized in Christ.

I hope I have answered this above. The effect is absolutely the same but I say we have experienced the grace of God coming to us presently, with a measure of his future promises given now, to such a degree that we are changed like never previously seen before Jesus came. That is why we have become a new creation, have the indwelling Spirit, and live presently with eternal life in us through abiding in God, and it is possible to live presently in hope and rejoicing, for those who have made their election sure.

God Bless,

~Josh
 
Re: reply

francisdesales said:
So it took man nearly 2000 years AFTER Jesus to get everything squared away? God waited 1950 years to give birth to the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg so man could FINALLY enter the "right church"? Jesus created a Church in Matthew 16 - but it never took form until 1966?

Sorry, I am not buying that one.

Regards

It was written in Revelation that a New Church, which is meant by the New Jerusalem coming down from God out of heaven.

Revelation 12: 1. "And a great sign was seen in heaven" This signifies revelation from the Lord concerning His New Church in the heavens and on earth, and concerning the difficult reception of and resistance to its doctrine . "A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet." This signifies the Lord's New Church in the heavens, which is the New Heaven, and the Lord's New Church about to be upon earth, which is the New Jerusalem . "And upon the head a crown of twelve stars." This signifies its wisdom and intelligence from the knowledges of Divine Good and Divine Truth from the Word. The sun signifies love and the moon signifies faith. The woman signifies a church.

Verse 2. "And being with child, she cried travailing and pained to bring forth." This signifies the doctrine of the New Church about to come forth, and its difficult reception on account of the resistance by those who are meant by the dragon.

Verse 3. "And another sign was seen in heaven" This signifies revelation from the Lord concerning those who are against the New Church and its doctrine . "And behold a great red dragon." This signifies those in the Protestant Church, who make God three and the Lord two, and who separate charity from faith, and make faith saving, and not charity at the same time. "Having seven heads." This signifies insanity from the truths of the Word falsified and profaned. "And ten horns." This signifies much power . "And upon his heads seven diadems." This signifies all the truths of the Word falsified and profaned.

Revelation 19:7, Let us rejoice and exult and give glory to Him, for the Lamb's wedding has come. This signifies joy of soul and heart, and the consequent glorification of the Lord that henceforth there may be effected a full marriage of Himself with the Church. And His wife has made herself ready. This signifies that those who will belong to this Church, which is the New Jerusalem, are being assembled, inaugurated and instructed.

Revelation 21:2.And I John saw the holy city New Jerusalem coming down from God out of heaven. This signifies the New Church going to be set up by the Lord at the end of the former church, which [New Church] in companionship with the New Heaven will be in Divine Truths as to both doctrine and life. Prepared as a bride [adorned] for her husband. This signifies that Church conjoined with the Lord by means of the Word.

Harry :fadein:
 
Re: reply

SpiritualSon said:
It was written in Revelation that a New Church, which is meant by the New Jerusalem coming down from God out of heaven.

Harry,

That "new Church" refers to the one established by Jesus Christ, the one that John was an elder of, an apostle and follower and leader of the New Israel - which is what Revelation 12 is talking about. Note the context of Revelation 12 - it refers to an ONGOING and EXISTING community being persecuted.

Regards
 
Francis, would you mind replying to my most recent post above? I would appreciate any feedback on that. Thanks.

~Josh
 
Cyber,

I find your 'revelation' refreshing. For there ARE many that simply 'accept' the 'words' written in the BIBLE 'without' understanding their TRUTH. One reads 'revelation in letters of REBUKE' without ever being able to SEE the 'truth'.

I am VERY aware of the nature of the REASON for this thread. 'These signs shall follow them that believe' does NOT mean EVERYONE that 'appears' to produce these signs' ARE God's children in Spirit. Yet, MANY churches and individuals indicate that 'even the very NOTION' of such signs is an indication of 'believing'. FALSE. Believing, YES, but in God and His Son, NOT necessarily.

Your observation is a 'sure sign' that you ARE attempting to 'follow IN TRUTH'.

In response to those that doubt what has been offered here: There were TWELVE apostles, thirteen if you count Paul and FOURTEEN if we count the betrayer of Christ. NOW, WHAT evidence do we HAVE that even HALF Of these CONTINUED in their 'walk'. As far as we KNOW, ONLY the ones that we HAVE evidence of ACTUALLY continued in the 'faith'.

Jesus TRIED to offer this wisdom to US through the words SPOKEN to His VERY APOSTLES. When they 'acted' like they were 'special', Jesus pointed out that EVEN Judas had been 'chosen' BY HIM, and yet HE was to BETRAY Christ. A PURE indication to ALL who hear of or have READ His words that, EVEN though Jesus MAY choose one to 'reveal' the TRUTH of His Father to, THAT does NOT ensure that one will CONTINUE in 'the faith'. For EVEN Peter was FULL of 'doubt'. UNFAITHFUL over and over again.

And look at the 'message' that that sends to us today. So many SO SURE that they KNOW Christ yet doing SO LITTLE to 'follow after His example'. Drop a few bucks in the plate once a week and doze through a 'service', only to walk out the door and 'resume' their LIVES DEVOTED TO THIS WORLD and the THINGS IN IT. 'Talking' a 'good game' but living practically NONE OF IT.

Nice thread Cyber. Haven't had the opportunity to read through all the posts yet. This reply is to the OPENING statement. But I'll get to it as soon as possible.

MEC
 
Thank you Imagician for your input. You actually put us back on topic. :) Although, we have side tracked a bit from the oppening post I still want to continue the latest discussion. But yes I try to pay very close attention to what the Bible says without assuming too much, and thus I discovered some instances (with the help of a few reference materials) where belief was used in a questionable sense. I guess now we are debating on what true belief entails and I am specifically looking at (now, in the last couple posts) the effect of initial salvation on the NT believer. I think we are trying to distinguish how similar or dissimilar NT salvation is to OT salvation. I'm trying to err on the side of caution, so I am emphasising the differences, as to highlight the amazing impact that Christ had on salvation history.

I hope you continue with us in our discussions here Imagician.

God Bless,

~Josh
 
cybershark5886 said:
Francis, would you mind replying to my most recent post above? I would appreciate any feedback on that. Thanks.

~Josh

I will try, but my attention is focused in many different directions right now. It is a lot to swallow in one sitting. I will try after Stations of the Cross this evening.

Regards
 
I will try, but my attention is focused in many different directions right now. It is a lot to swallow in one sitting. I will try after Stations of the Cross this evening.

No rush. I appreciate it. Thanks.

~Josh
 
Imagican said:
In response to those that doubt what has been offered here: There were TWELVE apostles, thirteen if you count Paul and FOURTEEN if we count the betrayer of Christ. NOW, WHAT evidence do we HAVE that even HALF Of these CONTINUED in their 'walk'.

While I agree to the point of your previous post, I think there is evidence to what was addressed in the above quote.

Revelation 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

If the 12 apostles weren’t faithful and some left, I hardly believe their names still would be etched in the foundations of the city in Revelation.

cybershark – I have your post copied ..I will have to chew on it over the weekend and see what I can come up with.
 
cybershark – I have your post copied ..I will have to chew on it over the weekend and see what I can come up with.

Thanks. And please note that I was very sincere in writing it and note the (briefly mentioned - because it is not my main focus- though it is there) "exception" I made about apostacy, to make a fair balance, so that you don't think I'm trying to weigh the arguement all on one side. But I mustn't get ahead of myself. I honestly gave my sincere and sweeping vision/conviction of all of God's eternal promises in that post and tried to tie all my replies around that theme. But I'll just sit on my hands until next week and look forward to your replies.

P.S. I keep on going back and editing the post for typos and (small) additions/clarifications. But I'm done now. I would suggest that if you haven't copied the arguement in the last 5 minutes that you go back if you want everything that I have added. Sorry for any inconvenience.

God Bless,

~Josh
 
OK, I have some time and have looked over your long post. I will try to address a few things that I think you may be overlooking while my wife is at Confession.

First of all

cybershark5886 said:
We do have a completely completed "new man", though you are right we do not always live in its nature. There is a past sense of the creation of this new man - so it is not an incomplete creation, "You have put off the old man with his deeds, and have put on the new man who is renewed in knowledge according to the image of Him who created him" (Colossians 3:9-10).

Don't you think the first sentence contradicts itself? I agree with you regarding the "now - but not yet" - that we are living in a yet-unfulfilled eschatological sense. But your first sentence says we are a completed new man. That is not the experience of ANY Christian on this side of eternity, to include Paul (Romans 7). I think what you are stumbling upon is the idea that there is some ontological change that is added to us that is permanent - but is not part of us!

The idea "to put on Christ" is being made to sound like a permanent feature that cannot change - an ontological change within us. However, we KNOW this cannot be true because Christians CONTINUE to sin and some will not attain to the Kingdom. The idea "put on Christ" refers to the analogy Paul uses to the Greeks and an actor putting on a mask. Thus, the idea, "put on Christ" is to put on the attitude and value system of Jesus Christ. We are to practice the Law of Love, loving even our enemies. We are to become transformed - the more we "put on" Christ, the more we become like Him. Again, this is within the context of an actor in a play. The Scriptures over and over tell CHRISTIANS to be faithful, to persevere, to love, to forgive and so forth. Thus, Christians have the option of "putting on" this "mask", putting on the values of Jesus Christ - or not. The Spirit aides us in this, since we cannot do anything good without Him. But in the end, we must decide whether to transform into "another Christ", or remain in our spiritually dead bodies. Life or death - spiritually - is our choice. Thus, Paul exhorts Christians because he knows the choices and knows that God is not a respecter of persons - not even HIM! Paul HIMSELF knows HE must continue to run the race, to put on the mind of Christ - or HE may be disqualified (1 Cor 9:27)

When Paul says "in the flesh dwells nothing good", Paul is not making an absolute statement. He is making a comparison between the old self, the Paul who did not KNOW Christ, and the new self, the one that DOES know Christ. It is similar to the difference between having a jug of water - and then receiving a barrel of water. The one gallon jug has little importance or meaning because now I have a huge amount of water.

Yes, we are slaves to Christ - we are bought at a high price - and thus, we SHOULD put on the mind of Christ. That is what faithful servants do. They follow their master's commands.

I am still a bit confused on your anthropology of man. I do not find anywhere in Scripture off the top of my head where God will judge a "part of us" - the new man, according to you, while condemning or ignoring the "old man" that exists simultaneously within us. You would have man being possessed by an alternative man. Which will God judge? This judgment is based on our loving faith or lack thereof - but it is the WHOLE person that is judged. I am not aware of "part" of a man being cast into hell while the "other part" is going to heaven. Again, this difficulty goes away when we realize that God is turning our stony hearts into NATURAL ones (Ez 37) by the Spirit's presence. But this does NOT cast out our free will or desire to follow our own whims. Thus, what wars within us is not "two men" but two value systems, two desires within us - to serve God wholeheartedly - a Holy Abandonment to the will of God - or to our own selfish desires that are part of the result of original sin that remains within us.

Regarding participating in the divine nature...

Grace to you and peace be accomplished in the knowledge of God and of Christ Jesus our Lord: As all things of his divine power which appertain to life and godliness, are given us, through the knowledge of him who hath called us by his own proper glory and virtue. By whom he hath given us most great and precious promises: that by these you may be made partakers of the divine nature: flying the corruption of that concupiscence which is in the world. And you, employing all care, minister in your faith, virtue; and in virtue, knowledge; And in knowledge, abstinence; and in abstinence, patience; and in patience, godliness; And in godliness, love of brotherhood; and in love of brotherhood, charity. For if these things be with you and abound, they will make you to be neither empty nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.[/u] 2 Peter 1:2-8

I have underlined a common thread in this section - KNOWLEDGE. And that is the MAIN difference between the New Covenant promises and the Old Covenant. Knowledge of God and what He truly expects of us. Christ came to teach the fulfillment of the Law, not its abrogation. Thus, He EXPANDS the requirements of the Law upon His children - but at the same time, giving us the Spirit to enable us to obey this "light burden". Thus, when we read 2 Peter, we see that knowledge of Christ, THE way, THE truth, THE life, is the manner in which we grow in faith, grow in holiness, grow in virtue, grow in love, and so forth - the DIVINE NATURE manifest in man, just as Jesus Christ Himself manifest these traits. By putting on the mind of Christ, we, TOO, become Holy, Faithful, Loving, Virtuous, etc...

And finally, a comment regarding the "constant indwelliing Spirit". You are mistaking the Spirit given to the CHURCH, the entire community of believers, with the individual Christian. The constant dwelling of the Spirit refers to the WHOLE Body. If Christ's Body is the Church, then the Spirit is the Soul of the Church. The Church refers to the community and the Spirit dwells within her, making her a Holy Temple. All of this does not refer to the individual believer in that grand sense because the Holy Spirit does not dwell in the spirtually dead Christian, which you even admit exists during apostacy (and I would say many other crimes as listed in Gal 5 or 1 Cor 6)

An example is seen in 1 Cor 3:16-17

Know you not, that you[plural] are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you[plural] ? But if any man[single] violate the temple of God, him shall God destroy. For the temple of God is holy, which you[plural] are

Read carefully these verses. Note the "you" refers to a plural, not a singular. And thus, Paul condemns the individual who would try to destroy the community's peace and love through division. Paul elsewhere condemns the individual sinners, such as 1 Cor 5, for the sake of the rest of the Body. He doesn't say that the Spirit dwells in those persons - but defends the Spirit within the community as a whole.

Thus, with that in mind, perhaps you can see why I refute the idea that the Spirit never leaves the individual. Such discussion in Scripture refers to the Body of believers, Jesus Christ's mysterious Bride. Meanwhile, we see that individual Christians are cast out of the community AND can potentially LOSE their inheritance in the Kingdom (I have listed plenty of verses before, but again, Gal 5 and 1 Cor 6 are good examples of those Christian individuals who sin, do not repent, and lose their share of the Kingdom).

God's ways have NOT changed through the Covenants. What has changed is His further revelation and pouring of Himself upon His people in the end times. He has made Himself known, not just intermittently to few just in the OT, but now, to the world through the preaching and teaching of His Living Church. Revelation has grown. Our knowledge has changed. And with this, God has given us the Spirit in a more definite and universal manner to obey Him. This is the major difference between the Old and the New. The Old was a shadow of the good things to come. But the shadow DID bring people access to God.

Regards
 
reply

Fran, What you need to realize is that man is a three part being. We are spirit, soul, and body. When we are saved it is our spirits that are saved as a result of the New Birth. Our souls ( emotions intellect ) is in the process of being saved and won't be saved until we are given our glorified bodies. The body, the flesh is the part that is a covering for the spirit and soul. You see, the trouble with man now is the fact that he must renew his mind with the watering of the Word, so the soul ( our thinking) can have better control of the flesh. Therefore, the battleground is in our minds, which are not fully renewed yet. Our recreated spirits are perfect. This is where God resides in the heart of the believer. God is holy, annd we must be born again to be holy too ( our spirits).




May God bless, Golfjack
 
Don't you think the first sentence contradicts itself? I agree with you regarding the "now - but not yet" - that we are living in a yet-unfulfilled eschatological sense. But your first sentence says we are a completed new man. That is not the experience of ANY Christian on this side of eternity, to include Paul (Romans 7). I think what you are stumbling upon is the idea that there is some ontological change that is added to us that is permanent - but is not part of us!

I said that we "have" a new nature, the nature God looks at under covenant, yet because our bodies are not yet redeemed (Romans 7:24-25) we (our soul) can put on the old man as well as put on the new man. This also allows for your view that we can lose our salvation if we are not careful, because we have the freewill to follow after Jesus or not. The Bible says "Walk in the Spirit and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh", that is why we must put on our new man as Ephesians commands us. Now if we ultimately persevere, even if we stumble, our bad works will be burned (and we shall suffer loss) yet we will still be saved (1 Corinthians 3:11-15), and it is the new man who is created and justified by Jesus that will be looked at because the new nature is affected by the Spirit and Christ indwelling in us, thus God sees Christ in us and not ourselves (who are insufficient without Jesus): that is the essence of justification.

The idea "to put on Christ" is being made to sound like a permanent feature that cannot change - an ontological change within us. However, we KNOW this cannot be true because Christians CONTINUE to sin and some will not attain to the Kingdom.

I was careful in my post to balance things out I admitted downsides and exceptions. First of all I wrote, "We are responsible for giving in to the flesh (the consequences of which are stated in 1 Corinthians 3:11-15)" here I show a consequence for giving into the flesh (which we all do - no matter how "good" a Christian you are) yet then note that I said "but our new man is undefiled and is positionally clean" (for those who persevere Christ will cover our failures and that is our justification - as I said above). I also said "I only make this point to show - not that it is impossible to fall from this blessing after God has called you - but that...." showing that I allow for that possibility yet am not focusing on it. I also noted, "God has already made us new (positionally - though there are exceptions for absolute apostacy)". Thus you can see that I was not partial, and showed both sides of the coin while only extensively focusing on one specific side of it in detail.

The idea "put on Christ" refers to the analogy Paul uses to the Greeks and an actor putting on a mask. Thus, the idea, "put on Christ" is to put on the attitude and value system of Jesus Christ. We are to practice the Law of Love, loving even our enemies. We are to become transformed - the more we "put on" Christ, the more we become like Him. Again, this is within the context of an actor in a play. The Scriptures over and over tell CHRISTIANS to be faithful, to persevere, to love, to forgive and so forth. Thus, Christians have the option of "putting on" this "mask", putting on the values of Jesus Christ - or not. The Spirit aides us in this, since we cannot do anything good without Him. But in the end, we must decide whether to transform into "another Christ", or remain in our spiritually dead bodies. Life or death - spiritually - is our choice.

The idea of "putting on Christ" is a little more rich than you (seem) to make it out to be. It's not just an external cover but an inward changing reality. Hypocrits also draw on the analogy of actors who pretend one thing but whose inward nature is another. Putting on Christ is an inward effectual thing. And it brings along with it all the promises of being "in Christ" and Christ abiding in us. God had to change us to save us in the first place but once he has saved us he gave us a new nature so that we can remain in communion with him, yet we can ignore that connection now by not remaining in the power of our new nature indwelt by Christ but instead by dabbling with the flesh, the "old man". Our new nature is not to blame when we sin (lest we say Christ shared in that sin - since he indwells it). It ceratinly grieves him but I say the new nature remains undefiled, but it is our souls that are defiled by giving into the old system of the world and of the flesh. Golfjack is right that we are a 3 part being, that must be taken into account. Note in my post I said that the soul is the battleground between our new nature and our old one. But since I try to look at both sides of the coin I allow for apostacy and a possible losing of our new nature if we utterly forsake it (forsake God the indwelling Spirit - Hebrews 6:4-6). But while we remain in God, even if we do stumble sometimes, we can overcome and Jesus will cover us if we repent - that is the heart of justification. Beleivers who do so will recieve the White Throne judgement in the end, as judgement not for sins but the deeds of the saints (refered to in 1 Corinthians 3:11-15) in order to determine rewards.

When Paul says "in the flesh dwells nothing good", Paul is not making an absolute statement. He is making a comparison between the old self, the Paul who did not KNOW Christ, and the new self, the one that DOES know Christ.

Romans 7 reveals the struggle Paul had with his flesh presently and in chapter 8 he proposes the solution, to kill the deeds of the body with the Spirit (Romans 8:13). In the evil flesh nature there is nothing good. He wasn't speaking about his physical flesh (his body) for Paul later mentions how his body can be used to honor and glorify God (thus neutral in that respect - able to be used for good or evil), but in the evil flesh nature dwells nothing good at all, and it is dying daily when we walk in the Spirit.

I am still a bit confused on your anthropology of man. I do not find anywhere in Scripture off the top of my head where God will judge a "part of us" - the new man, according to you, while condemning or ignoring the "old man" that exists simultaneously within us. You would have man being possessed by an alternative man. Which will God judge? This judgment is based on our loving faith or lack thereof - but it is the WHOLE person that is judged. I am not aware of "part" of a man being cast into hell while the "other part" is going to heaven. Again, this difficulty goes away when we realize that God is turning our stony hearts into NATURAL ones (Ez 37) by the Spirit's presence.

This is the transforming work of God: We have a new nature which he has given us which is indwelt by the Spirit, and when we put on our new man we are also putting on Christ (both phrases are used with similar meanings) and are transforming our minds (our soul, our heart - OT usage) daily when we walk in the Spirit, yet we also have the lingering old nature, the flesh in us hecause our body has not been fully redeemed from its evil nature from birth (for we were concieved in sin) and yet the old nature is corrupted daily/constantly since believers walk in the Spirit (Ephesians 4:22). Now the flesh has been crucified but it has not died fully. When we walk in the Spirit we drive the nails in firmer into our old flesh nature (Romans 6:6) by claiming our legal seperation from it by NT covenant law and instead excercising our privelege & right to walk in the Spirit who has been graciously given to us to indwell in our new nature which we put on before God in righteousness. The struggle and command to choose between these two natures battling in us is summed up well in the Bible's command, "And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind" (Romans 12:2). Ultimately those who persevere will overcome as Christ perfects them and their flesh will die more and more each day until we die physically and upon Jesus' full redmption of us we shall be like him in glory, having no corrupt flesh nature.

And finally, a comment regarding the "constant indwelliing Spirit". You are mistaking the Spirit given to the CHURCH, the entire community of believers, with the individual Christian. The constant dwelling of the Spirit refers to the WHOLE Body. If Christ's Body is the Church, then the Spirit is the Soul of the Church.

No I think you are partly confused. In 1 Corinthians Paul mentions both senses of the Sprit indwelling. 1 Corinthians 3:11 is talking to the Church as a whole, but 1 Corinthians 6:19 talks about our personal indwelling by the Spirit, something Christ promised to do (John 14:23), "making his abode with them".

P.S. Notice how I emphasised above our legal seperation from the flesh. I made quite a point of this in that initial post. Go back and look at it if you missed my point on how there are legal differences between the OT and NT and how it effects the nature of things. I also mentioned how God has already set his Kingdom among us and in us, a realized promise (eschatalogical promise) in the present for abiding in Christ and the Spirit - a specific NT promise. I was quite clear that there is no difference in the end effect, between the inheritance of the OT and NT saints, I just emphasized the differences in nature (legally & spiritually) and in present living (regarding the promises) - to sum up some of my points in short.

God Bless,

~Josh
 
cybershark5886 said:
I said that we "have" a new nature, the nature God looks at under covenant, yet because our bodies are not yet redeemed (Romans 7:24-25) we (our soul) can put on the old man as well as put on the new man. This also allows for your view that we can lose our salvation if we are not careful, because we have the freewill to follow after Jesus or not.

It seems like your are saying something different then you last few posts. I would tend to agree with this explanation much more than your initial ones - for example, that Christians CAN and DO fall away. This PROVES that the Spirit does not abide in those who choose to NOT put on Christ. Also, our bodies are not redeemed yet. True. Thus the exhortation to persevere throughout Scriptures.

cybershark5886 said:
I was careful in my post to balance things out I admitted downsides and exceptions. First of all I wrote, "We are responsible for giving in to the flesh (the consequences of which are stated in 1 Corinthians 3:11-15)" here I show a consequence for giving into the flesh (which we all do - no matter how "good" a Christian you are) yet then note that I said "but our new man is undefiled and is positionally clean" (for those who persevere Christ will cover our failures and that is our justification - as I said above). I also said "I only make this point to show - not that it is impossible to fall from this blessing after God has called you - but that...." showing that I allow for that possibility yet am not focusing on it. I also noted, "God has already made us new (positionally - though there are exceptions for absolute apostacy)". Thus you can see that I was not partial, and showed both sides of the coin while only extensively focusing on one specific side of it in detail.


I, too, believe that God does more than IMPUTE justice to us. We are infused with the Spirit. But is this permanent? Not if we can spiritually die. Again, you appear to be leaning in the direction that I have layed out. I again say that Scriptures clearly tell us that absolute apostacy is not the only thing that prevents us from inheriting the Kingdom.


cybershark5886 said:
The idea of "putting on Christ" is a little more rich than you (seem) to make it out to be. It's not just an external cover but an inward changing reality.

Yes, you are correct - but I was just trying to point out that the Spirit does not permanently dwell in us. The change in us is not irreversible, and it is limited ontologically. Sure, we are marked. But ALL children will not inherit what God has freely offered. The Jews are a good example of this, as Paul says in 1 Cor 10 and Heb 3-4. THEY TOO received aid from the "spiritual rock" which was/is the Son of God. Again, I believe we are closer in agreement when we throw aside the idea that we are merely imputed justice - and that we realize that God REALLY DOES begin to change us. But this justification, this sanctification, is ongoing. We are urged to continue to build upon the faith and virtue that God places within us.

cybershark5886 said:
Paul later mentions how his body can be used to honor and glorify God (thus neutral in that respect - able to be used for good or evil), but in the evil flesh nature dwells nothing good at all, and it is dying daily when we walk in the Spirit.

And again, you seem to be changing positions, in my view. Perhaps I just misunderstood you... Previously, it sounded like this "new nature" was something apart from us - and that God would judge THIS new nature. Again, the "fleshy nature" refers to our own "lust of eyes, lust of body, and pride of life" of 1 John. It is ANY attitude that differs and contradicts our Lord and Savior's WAY. Thus, we fight it. Paul is not saying, however, that there are two actual beings or creations within us fighting. It is US who must choose to follow or not the ways of Christ. Will we put on Christ?


cybershark5886 said:
In 1 Corinthians Paul mentions both senses of the Sprit indwelling. 1 Corinthians 3:11 is talking to the Church as a whole, but 1 Corinthians 6:19 talks about our personal indwelling by the Spirit, something Christ promised to do (John 14:23), "making his abode with them".


Of course the Spirit dwells in us personally!!! I never said He didn't. I merely was denying that your take is correct - that the Spirit never will leave the individual. When Paul speaks in such way, he is refering to the community - just as Jesus did. He said the Spirit would come to THEM. This does not preclude the coming individually. But the promise of the Spirit remaining, the promise of the Spirit imbuing within the Church infallibility (since the Church is the pillar of the truth and cannot be wrong), we realize that such promises are given to the entire community - not to the individual. The Church is the Temple - and as long as we are part of the Community, we are part of the Temple in which the Spirit inhabits. BUT - when the individual spiritually dies, the Spirit - LIFE - leaves that person. This can NEVER happen to the Church, the community. To the individual, it can and does happen. Thus, you are incorrect to appropriate the promises made to the community and give them to the individual. The idea of individual salvation to heaven that can never be lost is not found in Scriptures.

Regards
 

Donations

Total amount
$1,592.00
Goal
$5,080.00
Back
Top