How Are We Made Right With God?

[francisdesales]

So, it’s clear that scripture is not speaking of merely “recalling or thinking about a past eventâ€. The author then goes onto explains what “remembering†meant to the Hebrew culture . If one was to “remember†their wedding 10 years later, it would be active participation in reconstructing the event. They would go back to the synagogue where they were married, try and find the same rabbi who joined them, invite all their guests who had been there. Remembering then is more recreating a past event and more actively participating in it.

As Christians, that means not only when we take Communion we think about Jesus, but we actively recreate that moment at the table in the upper room, and become a part of the covenant meal, partaking and sharing in it the same way the disciples did. In that way, we also recall the blessings foretold in this Covenant are now ours. Jesus was not sharing just an intimate meal with his disciples; it was a meal to be shared with all future believers as well.

You are moving towards a Catholic understanding of the Eucharist, which, at the heart, is Jewish and mimics the "being made present" at the Passover. We also are re-presented with the Passion and Death of Christ at the Mass, which naturally requires that the elements of communion be more than just symbols, as signs merely point to something, they are NOT the reality that they point to. Thus, we view the Eucharist as something more than a sign, it is an actual, spiritual presence.

It is good that you have read this and understand this Jewish concept...

Regards

 

[JamesG]

.

LaCrum

This is the first time that I have heard of this Jewish understanding of the the term remembrance. But I tend to agree with it because it fits perfectly with what Jesus and Paul said about the Lord’s Table. But consider that to understand the Jewish understanding of the Jewish word for remembrance is only part way there.

We humans, having our experience too much in time and in the natural realm, tend to emphasize time and the natural realm too much. So I would add to this insight on remembrance that we are not just remembering a natural event. The remembrance is connected to a supernatural event that has a connection in human history. Thus we need to add something supernatural to this remembrance. We need to add the Spirit of God.

Through the Spirit of God, this remembrance is a connection to an actual event which exists in a supernatural venue and thus in a timeless venue. We are more than merely remembering a natural event that took place in the past, like George Washington’s birthday. We are more than recreating physical aspects of a natural event that took place in the past. In this remembrance we are participating in a supernatural event. This is a mystical experience, or I should say a Spiritual experience, since you are a Protestant. Protestants tend to equate mysticism with the occult. But the word only refers to something mysterious, something supernatural that the human mind alone can not understand. The occult is a form of mysticism, but it is not the only form.

The experience of the Lord’s Table is intended to be a true connection to a real event in which the body and blood of Christ is emphatically present. It is a participation in an actual event. It is an event that happened only once in the past from a natural perspective. But from a supernatural perspective, it is an event that always exists in the present. And it is described as a corporate experience. It is not something that we are to experience by ourselves.

The Catholic Church is the only denomination so far to see that this experience is intended to be a daily experience. Acts chapter 2 brings out the daily experience clearly. Today such a daily experience is considered an inconvenience, if not an impossibility. Thus weekly or twice a week is more convenient. But the first century believers saw the need to meet daily and they worked longer hours than we do today. They didn’t view it as an inconvienience.

We need to continually participate in this event for many reasons. And remembering in a Western sense what Jesus has done on our behalf is a reason, but only one reason. Protestants who have only that one aspect, experience only according to their faith, and consequently miss out on a much greater experience. When the Catholics say that the Lord’s Table has life giving qualities in relation to us in this life, they are entirely correct. It is an experience of a mystical connection wherein God and humanity touch in a very real way. And I know some Protestants who, having the right frame of mind, or perhaps more apt, a right Spiritual sense, have experienced this as well.

But with an experience that has life giving qualities, comes great responsibility. Paul warned against the misuse of the Lord’s Table and revealed that the misuse in the Corinthian church resulted in illness as a sign that it was being abused. In the Corinthian church the Lord’s Table was being abused, it was not absent altogether. I believe that there is a reason why that sign is not in evidence today in Christianity. But that is for another post.

The point that I want to make here is that participating in the Lord’s Table is participating in a timeless supernatural event. And I will say something here that Francisdesales will no doubt disagree with. The change that occurs is not in the physical elements, the bread and wine, themselves. The elements are merely physical focal points for the experience of what is a Spiritual reality. Like water is a focal point for the experience of Baptism that is a Spiritual reality. In both cases, the reality is through the Spirit of God. The change that occurs is in relation to us through our faith as we walk according to the Spirit of God. It is we who are changed so that we are able to participate in an event that from the human perspective is in the past, but through the Spirit of God is an experience of that which is continuously contemporary. And to me that is a true remembrance in the sense of what you are speaking of.

JamesG

 

[JamesG]

.

Francisdesales

““Ever been to a Greek Orthodox Mass?!!â€â€

I have attended on a number of occasions the Orthodox Liturgy in a very Westernized Greek Orthodox Church. It is partly in Greek and partly in English. So with some familiarity of the Orthodox Liturgy, it is easy to follow along. The Church itself is very ornate in a Western style of artwork. It has pews like any Western style Church. I understand that the actor Telly Sevalas, of Kojak fame, being of Greek ancestry, attended there when he was alive. But the “Wow†that you’re speaking of wasn’t present.

In Greece, there are no pews, just chairs on the side for the old. There is a certain freedom of Worshipful expression in this environment. It is a more ancient way to worship. If you have seen a worship service of Islam, it is the same.

I have attended the Liturgy of a Russian Orthodox Church on a number of occasions that is more in keeping with the ancient practice. It is a smaller Church. The Liturgy is fully in English. No pews, just chairs on the side. There are no ornate paintings on the walls. There are just icons done in the Eastern style. Not as “beautiful†as the ornate Greek Orthodox Church that I attended. But more Eastern in the way they did things. The experience there is definitely “Wowâ€.

There are Eastern rite Catholics, but I have never experienced one of their Liturgies. And I would be curious to see if there is a difference. Unfortunately, where I presently live, such Churches, Orthodox or Eastern rite, are not within the distance that I can get to. And I’m not as spry as I once was, so I don’t know how long I could continue standing if the practice is truly Eastern. But I agree that the Eastern Orthodox Liturgy does have elements that bring out the idea of Divine Worship. And the Traditional Mass tends to bring out that idea better in some ways than the contemporary Mass. I don’t know how a person who does not have a bilingual pre-Vatican II missal, which I happen to have, would fare in a Traditional Mass, if such doesn’t know Latin or is not that familiar with this Mass. According to what I have read concerning the pre-Vatican II era, the Mass in Latin was not really a problem because most of the Latin phrases used was familiar to everyone who participated. Perhaps the Bible readings would have posed a problem in understanding. Unless they were read in the common language.

I’ve heard about the changes coming up in the contemporary Mass. I heard that they will be implemented next year. I’ve seen some of the changes. It is apparently a return to a more literal translation of the Latin Mass. They did this with the NAB. The original translation put out in 1970 is a very thought for thought translation. When they revised the New Testament in 1986 and the Psalms in 1991, the revision is much more literal. The trend toward a literal approach is an improvement in my opinion. Sometimes a free approach can be too much of an interpretive approach. Not to say that a literal approach is not interpretive, but at least it is less so.

““Funny, I agree with you whole-heartedly, James... The turning of the priest towards the people was a mistake, in my opinion. Language has little to do with it, I think it is the "showmanship" of some of the priests, rather than about being an offering to the Father.â€â€

Be careful who you reveal that to. Some might think you’re something of a Traditionalist. (smiley face)

JamesG

 

[JamesG]

.

Francisdesales

I read some of the Muslim vs Christian ideas on the “Translation idolatry…†thread. That Islamic guy seems to have the same problem that he has accused the Islamic converts to Christianity of having. He doesn’t really understand Christianity. He admits to being of Protestant background. But says things about Protestantism that are not reflective of Protestantism. And he hasn’t a clue about a major difference between Protestantism and Catholicism. He mentioned that Christianity has no rituals. Protestants have rituals, but are not ritualistic. The Catholics (and the Orthodox) are very ritualistic, having rituals for just about every aspect of life. And for him to say that Protestants have a “believe once and your in†kind of mentality, without any worry about moral behavior… For someone who claims to have studied Christianity before becoming a part of Islam, he is seems terribly ignorant of Christianity. It is good he is on this forum. And I’m glad that you are talking to him. Hopefully, you can straighten him out about some of the ideas that Christians share that are more reflective of the Christianity that he apparently never knew. I would only caution you not to be anti-Protestant in respect of him, since it would only prove to be counter productive in his case. And Ignore the Protestants who would try to be anti-Catholic. When you don’t answer them, they can have little to say that would not make them appear foolish. They do not realize that there is a time and place for that kind of thinking.

And you can relay this to Jasoncrans and those who agree with him, if they are not already reading this thread, “If Islam is NOT worshipping the same God as the Christians, then neither is Judaism. And if that is true, then it may be the Christians who are worshipping the wrong God.†That is witch hunters, I mean cult hunters, kind of thinking. The God is the same. How we understand him and his relationship to us is different.

JamesG

 

[jasoncran]

uh, by your thinking then the rcc shouldnt deny the fact the JW's are correct then.
the jw accept christ,just deny the diety and the trinity. the jew the same. they call jesus a prophet.
but not the son.
for they worship the same god dont they?

what does the lord say?

deny me and i will deny you before the father,
and then theres this
for if ye had known THE FATHER, THEN YE WOULD HAVE KNOWN ME.

SO YOU TELL ME. how can they actually be worshipping the same God as us, and deny the father? confusion.? How do we get to the lord,but through the son.

 

[francisdesales]

.

LaCrum

This is the first time that I have heard of this Jewish understanding of the the term remembrance. But I tend to agree with it because it fits perfectly with what Jesus and Paul said about the Lord’s Table. But consider that to understand the Jewish understanding of the Jewish word for remembrance is only part way there.

We humans, having our experience too much in time and in the natural realm, tend to emphasize time and the natural realm too much. So I would add to this insight on remembrance that we are not just remembering a natural event. The remembrance is connected to a supernatural event that has a connection in human history. Thus we need to add something supernatural to this remembrance. We need to add the Spirit of God.

Through the Spirit of God, this remembrance is a connection to an actual event which exists in a supernatural venue and thus in a timeless venue. We are more than merely remembering a natural event that took place in the past, like George Washington’s birthday. We are more than recreating physical aspects of a natural event that took place in the past. In this remembrance we are participating in a supernatural event. This is a mystical experience, or I should say a Spiritual experience, since you are a Protestant. Protestants tend to equate mysticism with the occult. But the word only refers to something mysterious, something supernatural that the human mind alone can not understand. The occult is a form of mysticism, but it is not the only form.

The experience of the Lord’s Table is intended to be a true connection to a real event in which the body and blood of Christ is emphatically present. It is a participation in an actual event. It is an event that happened only once in the past from a natural perspective. But from a supernatural perspective, it is an event that always exists in the present. And it is described as a corporate experience. It is not something that we are to experience by ourselves.

The Catholic Church is the only denomination so far to see that this experience is intended to be a daily experience. Acts chapter 2 brings out the daily experience clearly. Today such a daily experience is considered an inconvenience, if not an impossibility. Thus weekly or twice a week is more convenient. But the first century believers saw the need to meet daily and they worked longer hours than we do today. They didn’t view it as an inconvienience.

We need to continually participate in this event for many reasons. And remembering in a Western sense what Jesus has done on our behalf is a reason, but only one reason. Protestants who have only that one aspect, experience only according to their faith, and consequently miss out on a much greater experience. When the Catholics say that the Lord’s Table has life giving qualities in relation to us in this life, they are entirely correct. It is an experience of a mystical connection wherein God and humanity touch in a very real way. And I know some Protestants who, having the right frame of mind, or perhaps more apt, a right Spiritual sense, have experienced this as well.

But with an experience that has life giving qualities, comes great responsibility. Paul warned against the misuse of the Lord’s Table and revealed that the misuse in the Corinthian church resulted in illness as a sign that it was being abused. In the Corinthian church the Lord’s Table was being abused, it was not absent altogether. I believe that there is a reason why that sign is not in evidence today in Christianity. But that is for another post.

A very good post, I hope more people read it... I think we have to add that Christ is God, and so everything He did as man was also done by God. Being God, those human activities are somehow tied to the eternity of God, and so those human moments are made available to us in time and space sacramentally.

.

The point that I want to make here is that participating in the Lord’s Table is participating in a timeless supernatural event. And I will say something here that Francisdesales will no doubt disagree with. The change that occurs is not in the physical elements, the bread and wine, themselves. The elements are merely physical focal points for the experience of what is a Spiritual reality. Like water is a focal point for the experience of Baptism that is a Spiritual reality. In both cases, the reality is through the Spirit of God. The change that occurs is in relation to us through our faith as we walk according to the Spirit of God. It is we who are changed so that we are able to participate in an event that from the human perspective is in the past, but through the Spirit of God is an experience of that which is continuously contemporary. And to me that is a true remembrance in the sense of what you are speaking of.

JamesG

I understand your emphasis, James, on the spiritual reality. You are on the road to understanding what a "sacrament" is. But the fact that it is a spiritual reality does not mean that the physical elements do not change, also. Just as the physical elements of Jesus' human body appeared as flesh, but the spiritual elements was God Himself, making the physical Christ Himself, the bread and wine appear as the ordinary, but are indeed a veil of the God Who comes to us and abides in us. Jesus indeed suffered, not just appeared to have suffered. Jesus experienced everything physically that we do, except sin, so it follows that there is a connection between the physical and the spiritual.

Christ is sacramentally present to us, both physically in the form of a piece of bread, and spiritually, in a local mode.

Yes, the bread and wine are focal points, but they are more than signs (as the other sacraments are signs of God's Work, they are not God Himself). Remember, Jesus said "this is my Body", so the bread is MORE than a sign (as in water for Baptism). Naturally, the effects of the Eucharist are spiritual, but that presence in the elements is real, physically and spiritually.

You would be hard pressed to find any of the Church Fathers disagreeing with that during the first millenium, whether East or West.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

.

Francisdesales

““Ever been to a Greek Orthodox Mass?!!â€â€

I have attended on a number of occasions the Orthodox Liturgy in a very Westernized Greek Orthodox Church. It is partly in Greek and partly in English. So with some familiarity of the Orthodox Liturgy, it is easy to follow along. The Church itself is very ornate in a Western style of artwork. It has pews like any Western style Church. I understand that the actor Telly Sevalas, of Kojak fame, being of Greek ancestry, attended there when he was alive. But the “Wow†that you’re speaking of wasn’t present.

In Greece, there are no pews, just chairs on the side for the old. There is a certain freedom of Worshipful expression in this environment. It is a more ancient way to worship. If you have seen a worship service of Islam, it is the same.

I have attended the Liturgy of a Russian Orthodox Church on a number of occasions that is more in keeping with the ancient practice. It is a smaller Church. The Liturgy is fully in English. No pews, just chairs on the side. There are no ornate paintings on the walls. There are just icons done in the Eastern style. Not as “beautiful†as the ornate Greek Orthodox Church that I attended. But more Eastern in the way they did things. The experience there is definitely “Wowâ€.

Again, I am impressed with your experiences that you have opened yourself to...

.

There are Eastern rite Catholics, but I have never experienced one of their Liturgies. And I would be curious to see if there is a difference. Unfortunately, where I presently live, such Churches, Orthodox or Eastern rite, are not within the distance that I can get to. And I’m not as spry as I once was, so I don’t know how long I could continue standing if the practice is truly Eastern. But I agree that the Eastern Orthodox Liturgy does have elements that bring out the idea of Divine Worship. And the Traditional Mass tends to bring out that idea better in some ways than the contemporary Mass. I don’t know how a person who does not have a bilingual pre-Vatican II missal, which I happen to have, would fare in a Traditional Mass, if such doesn’t know Latin or is not that familiar with this Mass. According to what I have read concerning the pre-Vatican II era, the Mass in Latin was not really a problem because most of the Latin phrases used was familiar to everyone who participated. Perhaps the Bible readings would have posed a problem in understanding. Unless they were read in the common language.

The only problem with merely knowing the phrases in rote repetition is that there is no true participation in the Mass, as Vatican 2 calls for. Merely being there is not participating, nor is moving the lips in auto pilot. The Council calls for a participation with the heart, just as the OT prophets called the People of Israel to do during their own Divine Liturgies. The Mass is not something we attend once a week, it is supposed to shape and transform our lives. Thus, I think saying the Mass in the vernacular is much more helpful to that end.

.

I’ve heard about the changes coming up in the contemporary Mass. I heard that they will be implemented next year. I’ve seen some of the changes. It is apparently a return to a more literal translation of the Latin Mass. They did this with the NAB. The original translation put out in 1970 is a very thought for thought translation. When they revised the New Testament in 1986 and the Psalms in 1991, the revision is much more literal. The trend toward a literal approach is an improvement in my opinion. Sometimes a free approach can be too much of an interpretive approach. Not to say that a literal approach is not interpretive, but at least it is less so.

Agree, we should not be unduly influenced by "dynamic" translations that can subtley take away the meaning of the original (as well as we can tell what the originals are...)

.

““Funny, I agree with you whole-heartedly, James... The turning of the priest towards the people was a mistake, in my opinion. Language has little to do with it, I think it is the "showmanship" of some of the priests, rather than about being an offering to the Father.â€â€

Be careful who you reveal that to. Some might think you’re something of a Traditionalist. (smiley face)

LOL! And I thought I said I like the Mass in English!!!

Overall, I am open to other people's opinions on the Liturgy, but I understand that "how we pray is how we believe". Perhaps the turning of the priest to face the people has lessened the idea in people's mind about the reverence due the Eucharist and what is actually taking place... Thus, anything that would make the Mass to appear more holy and reverant would be a good thing, if done with proper explanation and without scandal to the "weaker minded". We must not become overly fixated on rituals, as that can be idolatry itself. They are all meant to move the mind to God Himself. On the other hand, Lex orandi, Lex credendi.

Joe

 

[francisdesales]

uh, by your thinking then the rcc shouldnt deny the fact the JW's are correct then.
the jw accept christ,just deny the diety and the trinity. the jew the same. they call jesus a prophet.
but not the son.
for they worship the same god dont they?

Your logic doesn't follow. Catholics don't say that Islam is "correct", just that we recognize that they worship the same God of Abraham. Their understanding of that God is incorrect in many ways, but it is also true in other respects. They understand God as a personal God, all powerful and merciful. They understand that this God breaks into human history. They understand that this God will judge men based on what they did in life. They share a common understanding of what a virtue is and what is evil. JW's also have many correct understandings of Who God is.

So yes, they worship the same God, but they have incomplete knowledge of God, inaccurate knowledge. The JW are wrong, the Muslims are wrong on some of what God has revealed about Himself.

what does the lord say?

deny me and i will deny you before the father,
and then theres this
for if ye had known THE FATHER, THEN YE WOULD HAVE KNOWN ME.

Yes, this is a tricky verse for them, but I wonder if we are interpreting it correctly here. Is Jesus speaking to the Jews, who should have had an excellent working knowledge of God's revelations in the Old Testament, or is this to anyone who is likely ignorant of the OT Scriptures and rejects a caricature of Jesus.

Is Jesus speaking about Knowing Him through our actions of Love, or about knowing the Person in an historical sense? The NT seems to say that those who Love are born of God and know God...

To say the least, I am not utterly convinced that your verses say what you think they do.

SO YOU TELL ME. how can they actually be worshipping the same God as us, and deny the father? confusion.? How do we get to the lord,but through the son.

Does this mean that billions of people have no access to the Father because they never heard of Jesus of Nazareth??? I am thinking that God works a bit differently than that, sending His Logos out to ALL men of ALL ages. Remember, the Logos became Jesus Christ, but He was present in different forms to the Jews, and likely, to other men throughout the ages. Jesus is the perfect and complete manifestation of the image of God, Wisdom Itself personified. But could He not have come in lesser ways and means to other men, since God desires all men to be saved? Thus, those who love abide in the Logos, even if they never heard of Jesus - it is Jesus who is saving him.

 

[MarkT]

Well we're made right by God. He made us. This is elementary stuff.

Those who belong to Christ don't need to be told who their Master is. They literally know him. They keep his words close to their hearts and they follow him. They don't follow anyone else. They don't follow the scholars. They don't follow mystics. They have their root in themselves.

The thing is, the good and the bad are drawn into the church and then the questions arise and they argue about the meanings of words.

We're not saved by works but by God. We're knocked down when we sin but we get up. We live by faith, literally. There's no doubt in our mind about who our Master is. We have one Teacher, Jesus Christ and One Counsellor, the Holy Spirit, and we serve One God, the Father.

Concerning this question about justification and judgment, God is good. He gives good things to people even though they don't deserve it. Do good to those who hate you - that's the teaching we received. Forgive those who trespass against you. Love your neighbour. This is what Paul means by well-doing. This is what God gave him to say, and it is consistent with what Jesus said.

Concerning the law; the law is in effect until the day of judgment. On that day there will be the transgressors who forgave men their trespasses and the trangressors who didn't forgive. There will be the transgressors who loved doing good to be seen by men and the transgressors who did good in secret to be seen by God who sees in secret. There will be transgressors who showed mercy and those who did not. So on the day of judgment everyone answers for their deeds. For the ones who build on the words of God there's a reward.

 

[jasoncran]

uh, by your thinking then the rcc shouldnt deny the fact the JW's are correct then.
the jw accept christ,just deny the diety and the trinity. the jew the same. they call jesus a prophet.
but not the son.
for they worship the same god dont they?

Your logic doesn't follow. Catholics don't say that Islam is "correct", just that we recognize that they worship the same God of Abraham. Their understanding of that God is incorrect in many ways, but it is also true in other respects. They understand God as a personal God, all powerful and merciful. They understand that this God breaks into human history. They understand that this God will judge men based on what they did in life. They share a common understanding of what a virtue is and what is evil. JW's also have many correct understandings of Who God is.

So yes, they worship the same God, but they have incomplete knowledge of God, inaccurate knowledge. The JW are wrong, the Muslims are wrong on some of what God has revealed about Himself.

what does the lord say?

deny me and i will deny you before the father,
and then theres this
for if ye had known THE FATHER, THEN YE WOULD HAVE KNOWN ME.

Yes, this is a tricky verse for them, but I wonder if we are interpreting it correctly here. Is Jesus speaking to the Jews, who should have had an excellent working knowledge of God's revelations in the Old Testament, or is this to anyone who is likely ignorant of the OT Scriptures and rejects a caricature of Jesus.

Is Jesus speaking about Knowing Him through our actions of Love, or about knowing the Person in an historical sense? The NT seems to say that those who Love are born of God and know God...

To say the least, I am not utterly convinced that your verses say what you think they do.

SO YOU TELL ME. how can they actually be worshipping the same God as us, and deny the father? confusion.? How do we get to the lord,but through the son.

Does this mean that billions of people have no access to the Father because they never heard of Jesus of Nazareth??? I am thinking that God works a bit differently than that, sending His Logos out to ALL men of ALL ages. Remember, the Logos became Jesus Christ, but He was present in different forms to the Jews, and likely, to other men throughout the ages. Jesus is the perfect and complete manifestation of the image of God, Wisdom Itself personified. But could He not have come in lesser ways and means to other men, since God desires all men to be saved? Thus, those who love abide in the Logos, even if they never heard of Jesus - it is Jesus who is saving him.

muslims who have never been told about christ have seen him and accept, you believe mary vists us mortals, why not jesus!

via visions. ie paul.

 

[francisdesales]

muslims who have never been told about christ have seen him and accept, you believe mary vists us mortals, why not jesus!

via visions. ie paul.

Yes, I have heard of such things, and have heard of Marian visions to the Middle East, as well. i do not deny that such things happen. However, we must not forget that the death penalty hangs over anyone who leaves the Muslim faith, so we can sit here comfortably in our chairs and talk about conversion, but it is a different thing for a Muslim to actually do it, given all the brainwashing and threats to maintain their numbers. We must trust in God's mercy that He will take this into account at Judgment day.

Regards

 

[jasoncran]

i will discuss more with you joe on this via pm.

 

[Albert Finch]

Romans 10:10 - For with the heart man beleiveth unto righteousness.......

Romans 5:17 - For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.

Paul makes two significant statements about righteousness:

1. With the heart man believes unto righteousness.

2. When we receive Jesus and we are born again, we receive "the gift of righteousness."

Righteousness is a gift. Too often we have associated righteousness with "good works." The Bible teaches good works and right conduct, but all of our good works and right conduct will never make us righteous. If good works made us righteous, we wouldn't need Jesus.

Another fallacy about righteousness is that we've thought we had to grow into some kind of "high spiritual state" to be righteous. We can grow in the Lord and we can develop spiritually, but we cannot grow in righteousness. We will never be any more righteous than we are right now!

2 Corinthians 5:17,21 - Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. For he hath made him (God has made Jesus) to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.

Matthew 6:33 -- "But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you.

In Christ we become new creatures. In Him we become the righteousness of God when we are born again (verse 21).

This righteousness we are told to seek is not right behavior, but RIGHT STANDING before God, which comes to us as a gift when we receive salvation.

Romans 4:5 -- But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness.

We are not righteous because of how morally upright we are.
We are not righteous because we exercise self-control.
We are not righteous because we read 10 chapters of the Bible daily.
We are not righteous because we feel righteous.

We are the righteousness of God in Christ solely because the sacrifice of Jesus made us so. When we believe this, our faith is accounted for righteousness.

If we are righteous by our deeds, we don't need faith. We also don't need faith to know that we are sinful. But we do need faith to believe and declare that we are the righteousness of God in Christ, in the midst of our struggles with temptation and sin.

At the cross, Jesus didn't just remove our sins, He also gave us His righteousness so that today, we can come boldly before the throne of God and receive freely everything that He died to give us!

Albert Finch
http://afministry.ning.com (New Studies Every Day)

 

[Adullam]

Romans 10:10 - For with the heart man beleiveth unto righteousness.......

Romans 5:17 - For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.

Paul makes two significant statements about righteousness:

1. With the heart man believes unto righteousness.

2. When we receive Jesus and we are born again, we receive "the gift of righteousness."

Righteousness is a gift. Too often we have associated righteousness with "good works." The Bible teaches good works and right conduct, but all of our good works and right conduct will never make us righteous. If good works made us righteous, we wouldn't need Jesus.

Another fallacy about righteousness is that we've thought we had to grow into some kind of "high spiritual state" to be righteous. We can grow in the Lord and we can develop spiritually, but we cannot grow in righteousness. We will never be any more righteous than we are right now!

2 Corinthians 5:17,21 - Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. For he hath made him (God has made Jesus) to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.

Matthew 6:33 -- "But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you.

In Christ we become new creatures. In Him we become the righteousness of God when we are born again (verse 21).

This righteousness we are told to seek is not right behavior, but RIGHT STANDING before God, which comes to us as a gift when we receive salvation.

Romans 4:5 -- But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness.

We are not righteous because of how morally upright we are.
We are not righteous because we exercise self-control.
We are not righteous because we read 10 chapters of the Bible daily.
We are not righteous because we feel righteous.

We are the righteousness of God in Christ solely because the sacrifice of Jesus made us so. When we believe this, our faith is accounted for righteousness.

If we are righteous by our deeds, we don't need faith. We also don't need faith to know that we are sinful. But we do need faith to believe and declare that we are the righteousness of God in Christ, in the midst of our struggles with temptation and sin.

At the cross, Jesus didn't just remove our sins, He also gave us His righteousness so that today, we can come boldly before the throne of God and receive freely everything that He died to give us!

Albert Finch
http://afministry.ning.com (New Studies Every Day)

The self-justification comes in when we smugly include ourselves in the "we' we are exalting. "See, we are doing it better than those others.."we" think." This is a common error among they who justify thenselves through their own estimation of faith.

Are "we" more righteous than "them" because we don't try to do what is right?

The thief on the cross is usually cited to illustrate a salvation without doing anything. However, in order for the interpretation that is so often made to fit, the thief would have to have had a one sided conversation with Jesus.

Today, I will be in paradise with you. "I" have saved myself through MY faith in You.

Jesus apparently has no say in that scheme. "We" just take a verse and apply it as "we" wish.

Is this how Abraham was justified???? ...by declaring that his faith justified him?????

How about putting God back into the equation?

It was Jesus who personally vouched for the thief on the cross. It is God who justifies Abraham. So, we must wait on the Lord and allow Him to justify...and not "we" ourselves through our bible perusings.

 

[Adullam]

There is much gobbledigook that passes for doctrine these days. The 'name it claim it' crowd seem to exert a lot of influence on us. We passively accept their twisted arguments since they are simply reciting the bible...or so it seems. Just take your favourite bible promise....believe it means you...and voila...it is YOU! Is wishful thinking the same as faith??? I thought David wanted to be saved from presumptuous sin? Shall we rather embrace it? For the sake of Jesus? In the bible when we read "we" that means us!!!????? Do "we" speak Greek as the biblical "we" do? Why can't we claim that too???

The problem lies with our way of thinking. We want to be sure of the race before we run it. We want the assurance of success up front. We want the benefits unconditionally. We don't trust God since He rejected so many Israelites. We want Jesus to protect us from a righteous God. And we want it NOW!! So we throw out the verses that say "if" and declare ourselves righteous through faith in our protector Jesus. Is this not just another way of justifying ourselves???? A new and better phariseeism???

Does this not dishonour God who is love??? Can't we trust the future to God...to judge us as He sees fit? Where is the humility?

 

[MarkT]

by Adullam on Sat Jun 05, 2010 5:38 am

There is much gobbledigook that passes for doctrine these days. The 'name it claim it' crowd seem to exert a lot of influence on us. We passively accept their twisted arguments since they are simply reciting the bible...or so it seems. Just take your favourite bible promise....believe it means you...and voila...it is YOU! Is wishful thinking the same as faith??? I thought David wanted to be saved from presumptuous sin? Shall we rather embrace it? For the sake of Jesus? In the bible when we read "we" that means us!!!????? Do "we" speak Greek as the biblical "we" do? Why can't we claim that too???

The problem lies with our way of thinking. We want to be sure of the race before we run it. We want the assurance of success up front. We want the benefits unconditionally. We don't trust God since He rejected so many Israelites. We want Jesus to protect us from a righteous God. And we want it NOW!! So we throw out the verses that say "if" and declare ourselves righteous through faith in our protector Jesus. Is this not just another way of justifying ourselves???? A new and better phariseeism???

Does this not dishonour God who is love??? Can't we trust the future to God...to judge us as He sees fit? Where is the humility?

He’s right in the basics, what Paul calls the foundation - Jesus Christ and him crucified. The problem is people don’t build on the foundation - too many other things in life to think about, too many concerns - politics, money, the desire for riches, etc. - these things cut them off from God. Branches wither because the tree isn’t watered. Many only hear what they want to hear.

The root of 'justified' is 'just'. God is just. That means all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law and everyone will get what they deserve according to the law. Sinners deserve death. But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law - the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe.

You say there will be a future judgment. You’re right. But are you denying the assurance of the Spirit of God? Faith was reckoned to Abraham as righteousness, and it will be reckoned to us as well who believe in God, who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead, who was put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification. Ro. 4:22-25

That’s not to say the race is over. We will prevail through patient endurance. Therefore hold fast to what you have. But we should not be tearing down. We should be building up. You say we want it now? We do have it now. We have faith. We have the love of God. We have the assurance of the Holy Spirit. We have the promise of eternal life.

 

[Adullam]

by Adullam on Sat Jun 05, 2010 5:38 am

There is much gobbledigook that passes for doctrine these days. The 'name it claim it' crowd seem to exert a lot of influence on us. We passively accept their twisted arguments since they are simply reciting the bible...or so it seems. Just take your favourite bible promise....believe it means you...and voila...it is YOU! Is wishful thinking the same as faith??? I thought David wanted to be saved from presumptuous sin? Shall we rather embrace it? For the sake of Jesus? In the bible when we read "we" that means us!!!????? Do "we" speak Greek as the biblical "we" do? Why can't we claim that too???

The problem lies with our way of thinking. We want to be sure of the race before we run it. We want the assurance of success up front. We want the benefits unconditionally. We don't trust God since He rejected so many Israelites. We want Jesus to protect us from a righteous God. And we want it NOW!! So we throw out the verses that say "if" and declare ourselves righteous through faith in our protector Jesus. Is this not just another way of justifying ourselves???? A new and better phariseeism???

Does this not dishonour God who is love??? Can't we trust the future to God...to judge us as He sees fit? Where is the humility?

He’s right in the basics, what Paul calls the foundation - Jesus Christ and him crucified. The problem is people don’t build on the foundation - too many other things in life to think about, too many concerns - politics, money, the desire for riches, etc. - these things cut them off from God. Branches wither because the tree isn’t watered. Many only hear what they want to hear.

The root of 'justified' is 'just'. God is just. That means all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law and everyone will get what they deserve according to the law. Sinners deserve death. But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law - the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe.

You say there will be a future judgment. You’re right. But are you denying the assurance of the Spirit of God? Faith was reckoned to Abraham as righteousness, and it will be reckoned to us as well who believe in God, who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead, who was put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification. Ro. 4:22-25

That’s not to say the race is over. We will prevail through patient endurance. Therefore hold fast to what you have. But we should not be tearing down. We should be building up. You say we want it now? We do have it now. We have faith. We have the love of God. We have the assurance of the Holy Spirit. We have the promise of eternal life.

People mistake the starting line for the finish line and declare that they have won.

It is like a kindergarden class getting hold of a university valedictorian address and think it is meant for them at their level. So then going out into the world is equated with the recess period....etc

 

[MarkT]

People mistake the starting line for the finish line and declare that they have won.

It is like a kindergarden class getting hold of a university valedictorian address and think it is meant for them at their level. So then going out into the world is equated with the recess period....etc

I have heard people fall. Yet we exist! We have the word, the life and the Spirit of God. We have the water - the word of God. We have the blood - the life of God. We have the Spirit. The Spirit is the witness because the Spirit is the truth. We have the three witnesses. Our confidence in the Lord Jesus Christ just keeps growing.

We have eternal life now - 11 And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 He who has the Son has life; he who has not the Son of God has not life. 13 I write this to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life

We trust in the LORD, and we keep his word of patient endurance. We will conquer.

1John 5
4 For whatever is born of God overcomes the world; and this is the victory that overcomes the world, our faith.

5 Who is it that overcomes the world but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God? 6 This is he who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ, not with the water only but with the water and the blood. 7 And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth. 8 There are three witnesses, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree. 9 If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for this is the testimony of God that he has borne witness to his Son. 10 He who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. He who does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne to his Son. 11 And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 He who has the Son has life; he who has not the Son of God has not life. 13 I write this to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life.

 

[Adullam]

People mistake the starting line for the finish line and declare that they have won.

It is like a kindergarden class getting hold of a university valedictorian address and think it is meant for them at their level. So then going out into the world is equated with the recess period....etc

I have heard people fall. Yet we exist! We have the word, the life and the Spirit of God. We have the water - the word of God. We have the blood - the life of God. We have the Spirit. The Spirit is the witness because the Spirit is the truth. We have the three witnesses. Our confidence in the Lord Jesus Christ just keeps growing.

We have eternal life now - 11 And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 He who has the Son has life; he who has not the Son of God has not life. 13 I write this to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life

We trust in the LORD, and we keep his word of patient endurance. We will conquer.

1John 5
4 For whatever is born of God overcomes the world; and this is the victory that overcomes the world, our faith.

5 Who is it that overcomes the world but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God? 6 This is he who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ, not with the water only but with the water and the blood. 7 And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth. 8 There are three witnesses, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree. 9 If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for this is the testimony of God that he has borne witness to his Son. 10 He who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. He who does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne to his Son. 11 And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 He who has the Son has life; he who has not the Son of God has not life. 13 I write this to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life.

The people who wrote those verses actually experienced what they wrote about. Their message is a testimony for others to seek for and struggle for...not just claim for themselves as a done deal. We do a dis-service to the gospel by laying it out as a dogma to read and claim as our own without the process of the cross. Our lives are to be a testimony through a living experience of God. Otherwise we merely pay lip service.

 

[MarkT]

The people who wrote those verses actually experienced what they wrote about. Their message is a testimony for others to seek for and struggle for...not just claim for themselves as a done deal. We do a dis-service to the gospel by laying it out as a dogma to read and claim as our own without the process of the cross. Our lives are to be a testimony through a living experience of God. Otherwise we merely pay lip service.

Our faith is rooted in the gospel, in things we did not see or experience.

We didn’t see Jesus or talk to him. We didn’t see him raised from the dead. But Jesus pronounced a blessing on us, saying, ‘Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.’ John 20:29 We are blessed. Is that a done deal? Yes.

There are various gifts, and various levels of faith and understanding. As living branches we continue to grow in the knowledge of God; in faith, hope, love and understanding.

What else is a done deal? Jesus said anyone who enters by me will be saved and he will go in and out and find pasture.
I am the door; if any one enters by me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. John 10:9

Sure enough it is so. Pasture to us is the word of God. It's food. It's what we live and breath. As it is written, 'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.' Mt. 4:4

‘You are already made clean by the word I have spoken to you.’ John 15:3 Done deal? Yes.

But then he said, abide in me. If a man does not abide in me he is cast forth as a branch and withers. John 15:4-6

In that respect you are right. Jesus said if you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love. John 15:10

There are the things that are done deals and then there are the things that we as the sons of the kingdom do. To keep things in order, first, Jesus taught the disciples, then he sent them out into the world to preach the good news.

The question which is being put to the forum, as I understand it, is how are we made right with God in the first place? How are we justified? We are justified apart from the law by faith in the Son of God. If we abide in him and we keep his commandments, then we will abide in his love. Then we will endure. 'For we share in Christ if only we hold our first confidence to the end'. Hebrews 3:14

There are three things that attest to the fact that we have eternal life - his teachings (his word), his sacrifice (his blood) and the Spirit of truth (besides understanding, we tend to have an aversion to lies). These three agree.