Some of the serious NT warnings to the churches

[Mitspa]

That's a relief. Some belief that after someone has accepted Jesus as there Lord and Savior, and wish to follow the ways of the Torah, they have fallen from grace. The only way to fall from grace, is to sin. So then that is saying the Torah is sin, and what was once considered perfect, holy and eternal (Psalms 119 and many other passages throughout the bible),

Poor Paul if he had only understood the "torah"
Phil 3:3-9 He said all he had worked from the torah he counted as "dung" That ONE THING! that he would be found in Christ not having his own righteousness which is by the law, but that which is through faith in Christ.

I wonder if he considered Psa 119 when he wrote Gal 5:4?
You who seek to be justified by Law, have fallen from grace!

And just so some of you can figure out Psa 119 is the Lord Jesus Christ, the only man who ever keep all the law.
For it was all about Him! The word made flesh.

 

[childeye]

Poor Paul if he had only understood the "torah"
Phil 3:3-9 He said all he had worked from the torah he counted as "dung" That ONE THING! that he would be found in Christ not having his own righteousness which is by the law, but that which is through faith in Christ.

I wonder if he considered Psa 119 when he wrote Gal 5:4?
You who seek to be justified by Law, have fallen from grace!

And just so some of you can figure out Psa 119 is the Lord Jesus Christ, the only man who ever keep all the law.
For it was all about Him! The word made flesh.

Is there no one left to argue your point Mitspa? In truth you spare no punches. You would not wish to be patronized nor do you patronize. Neither did Jesus.

 

[Deborah13]

Mitspa, these last post have been very informative and to the point, good teaching, good preaching.

 

[Deborah13]

Are you refering to the slander? This is the subtle slander that I see.
Genesis 3:4-5

New International Version (NIV)

4 “You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. 5 “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”


Note that Satan's words carry a subtle implication that god is a liar in verse 4. Satan then says in verse 5 that god doesn't want us to become like him. The implication is that god is holding us back from what we could become because that is what makes god better than us. This is the false Image of god that was sown into the subconcious of an innocent mankind.

satan then and now is the deceiver, I image the deception he used in the garden is the same that he used to entice the angels.
I don't want to go off topic so I'll just say that I think there is deception that goes on as to the nature of God and to what He controls.

 

[childeye]

satan then and now is the deceiver, I image the deception he used in the garden is the same that he used to entice the angels.
I don't want to go off topic so I'll just say that I think there is deception that goes on as to the nature of God and to what He controls.

Well said, after all why would God send a True Image of Himself that would heal us after believing in him if we didn't have a false image to begin with? The point I wish to make is that our moral wills are based upon our image of god and that image pre-determines our moral choices. Eve would not have eaten of the tree of knowledge of good and evil if she trusted God, and Satan using deception is who undermined that trust through a subtle lie.

But I don't think we are off topic. Scripture warns of being deceived. 2 Corinthians 11:3
New International Version (NIV)
3 But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ.

 

[francisdesales]

I believe we have "free will" and God will not violate that "free will". But we are not brought into submission by the law but by grace.

By submission, I take it you mean willing obedience to God? It seems like we agree.

I do think that "law" is meant derogatively in your statement, however. I don't agree with that. As I strived to say before, the Law itself is holy. It is not the Law that Paul has issues with, but rather, legalism to the Law. External obedience without internal disposition of love/mercy. I would say that the husband/wife relationship could go down the second path of "legalism", correct?

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Here I am left once again to question how "doing what I want" is verifiable.
Can a man do what he wants? Well no, not without Christ.

I think a man can "do what he wants" without Christ, in the sense of fulfilling the worldly definition. Since we tend towards evil, when left to our own devices, we will inevitably commit evil. We will WILLINGLY do it, justifying/rationalizing the behavior that it is for a "greater good", while in reality, we are confused about what really is good for us...

We can do nothing without Christ, so if our desire is to do the Will of God, then we must have Christ abiding within us. Even that VERY DESIRE to do God's Will is a result of grace. And we know we have God's abiding presence within us, proven by our obedience to the commandments. (in other words, saying it doesn't mean much if we aren't walking the walk) Christian freedom is fulfilled, since we participate in the divine nature and are given the ability to overcome our concupiscence (tendency towards evil).

Thank you, you are very kind on your compliments.

Regards

 

[Deborah13]

Well said, after all why would God send a True Image of Himself that would heal us after believing in him if we didn't have a false image to begin with? The point I wish to make is that our moral wills are based upon our image of god and that image pre-determines our moral choices. Eve would not have eaten of the tree of knowledge of good and evil if she trusted God, and Satan using deception is who undermined that trust through a subtle lie.

But I don't think we are off topic. Scripture warns of being deceived. 2 Corinthians 11:3
New International Version (NIV)
3 But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ.

And Paul had good reason to worry. I must tell you I am of the same ilk as Mitspa. The law can be used to hender our image of our loving and merciful God.

 

[Mitspa]

Is there no one left to argue your point Mitspa? In truth you spare no punches. You would not wish to be patronized nor do you patronize. Neither did Jesus.

Thank you, I will accept that as a honor. I would also say, I hope that those who love God, know that I do love His people, I can feel His Love for others and I have no doubt that those He loves so much, He desires them to always know and walk in the knowledge of His love. The biggest issue I have with those who use the law and the warnings of scripture in a unbiblical way, is that it puts a wall between us and God Love for us. This wall is a product of our own conscience for when we feel that we are condemned we are seperated from this Love. This is why Paul, after he wrote Romans 7 and 8 assured us that "nothing" could or should come between us and Gods love for us. If we only understood how sure His love is for us, we would correct yourselves and warn ourselves . He melts our heart "with His Love" and reshapes it into His Image.
Also on Psa 119 In the psalm it says "let those that fear thee TURN UNTO ME" throughout this psalm we see that only Christ could be speaking. Even consider that in revelation He says I AM THE ALPHA AND THE OMEGA, THE BEGINNING AND THE END. the Lord would have spoken to John in Hebrew and said I AM THE ALEPH AND THE TAU THE beginning "Genisis" and the ending "revelation"
The mystery of Godliness? God was manifest in the flesh, the Word made flesh.
Blessings

 

[Deborah13]

By submission, I take it you mean willing obedience to God? It seems like we agree.

I do think that "law" is meant derogatively in your statement, however. I don't agree with that. As I strived to say before, the Law itself is holy. It is not the Law that Paul has issues with, but rather, legalism to the Law. External obedience without internal disposition of love/mercy. I would say that the husband/wife relationship could go down the second path of "legalism", correct? Regards

I simply say that as our relationship to God should be reflected in a Godly marriage, we should be able to look at the image to discern the truth of our relationship with God. When God instructs for marriage He does not tell the husband to kick out the unsubmissive wife, or to abuse, or shame her with attitude or words, but to love her. We love God because He first loved us. It is the goodness of God that leads to repentance.

 

[francisdesales]

I am sorry, you must have misunderstood. I am not rationalizing eternal judgement, unending suffering,the lake of fire Into 2 Pet 2:20-22.

No, I meant you are rationalizing the Scriptures to fit your own opinion. Nowhere do we see any evidence that the man who returned to the vomit subsequently returned YET AGAIN to a life free of the pollution of sin. Hebrews 6 seems to indicate it is unlikely. Furthermore, my bolded text from my last post hammers the last nail into the coffin of that idea. IF there was evidence that he would return, Peter would CERTAINLY not write that his status was WORSE than BEFORE BEING SAVED!!! If Peter envisioned salvation as you do, he could never write that. He would state that HE IS STILL BETTER OFF THAN BEFORE, even while wallowing in the mire of sin, since his "status" is eternally secure. WHO CARES if life sucks and he is being punished - he is going to heaven and eternal "reward"...

This is a travesty of interpretation, and it just doesn't stand up to any sort of logical scrutiny. That is what I meant about "rationalizing".

In my opinion some are trying to force eternal things, or rationalize eternal judgement into these verses. And it is not there.

I have explained why it is more likely that he did not return from the text actually written. It seems to me Scripture does not support a return, does it?

Believers are held to a higher standard. More is required of these believers now.

why? According to OSAS, you are already secure. What standard do you have in mind that can make a difference??? It would seem quite the opposite, OSAS conveniently establishes that sanctification is inconsequential, since you are eternally covered with the blood of Christ, no matter what you do (despite Hebrews 10:26-30...) What is the purpose of this higher standard? Why must I bother "working out my salvation" as Paul wrote? It is already eternally done.

They would have been better off living the way they are as an unbeliever(before) because as a believer(now) much is required, and the discipline is more severe in this life.

Peter says nothing about this life of discipline in the verse you refer to. He is speaking of "pollutions of the world". He is speaking about whether this man is free or not. Not about the sacrifices of the person following Christ. The verses you post from Luke have little bearing, on the OSAS disciple, as I see it. WHY pick up your cross? WHY suffer? WHY die to self???

I don't see the point if salvation is eterally secure and nothing you can do/fail to do can change that.

And if it is all about "rewards in heaven", the lowest person in heaven will be eternally happy and at peace in Christ. Contrast that with the one who goes to hell. "Better" rewards are of little consequence when speaking of infinity vs infinity plus 1.

Regards

 

[childeye]

And Paul had good reason to worry. I must tell you I am of the same ilk as Mitspa. The law can be used to hender our image of our loving and merciful God.

That is why Paul said the law is not of faith while the Glorius Gospel is from faith to faith.

 

[francisdesales]

I simply say that as our relationship to God should be reflected in a Godly marriage, we should be able to look at the image to discern the truth of our relationship with God. When God instructs for marriage He does not tell the husband to kick out the unsubmissive wife, or to abuse, or shame her with attitude or words, but to love her. We love God because He first loved us. It is the goodness of God that leads to repentance.

OK, I don't have any problems with that. However, I am not exactly sure what you are disagreeing with me on?

Regards

 

[Deborah13]

OK, I don't have any problems with that. However, I am not exactly sure what you are disagreeing with me on?

I am not disagreeing with you.

You said this..."I would say that the husband/wife relationship could go down the second path of "legalism", correct?

I was just clarifying what I meant. I suppose I could add that that yes, obey or else. This is what the law says, no grace, no mercy....

The Law is black and white, there are no shades of grey. It does not bend, twist, or sway.

 

[francisdesales]

I am not disagreeing with you.

You said this..."I would say that the husband/wife relationship could go down the second path of "legalism", correct?

I was just clarifying what I meant. I suppose I could add that that yes, obey or else. This is what the law says, no grace, no mercy....

The Law is black and white, there are no shades of grey. It does not bend, twist, or sway.

OK, thanks for the clarification.

Regards

 

[WIP]

Let's get back on topic. We had a couple pages of civil discussion but I don't want to go through this again.

Thanks.

 

[childeye]

Let's all tear down the barrier and not put our moderater to task. Patience wip.

 

[Mitspa]

I am not disagreeing with you.

You said this..."I would say that the husband/wife relationship could go down the second path of "legalism", correct?

I was just clarifying what I meant. I suppose I could add that that yes, obey or else. This is what the law says, no grace, no mercy....

The Law is black and white, there are no shades of grey. It does not bend, twist, or sway.

Good point Deb, the standard of the law, can not be made to bend to mans ideas of morality or abilty.
This is why the Lord said that "every jot and tittle" must be kept as a whole. The whole concept of taking part of the law is unbiblical in all respects. Paul makes this same point over and over, that the purpose of the law is to make all guilty! To bring the law down to mans level is to dishonor the law. When Paul said we make the law to stand, he means this very thing, it must maintain its complete standard or it has no power.

 

[gr8grace]

No, I meant you are rationalizing the Scriptures to fit your own opinion. Nowhere do we see any evidence that the man who returned to the vomit subsequently returned YET AGAIN to a life free of the pollution of sin. Hebrews 6 seems to indicate it is unlikely. Furthermore, my bolded text from my last post hammers the last nail into the coffin of that idea. IF there was evidence that he would return, Peter would CERTAINLY not write that his status was WORSE than BEFORE BEING SAVED!!! If Peter envisioned salvation as you do, he could never write that. He would state that HE IS STILL BETTER OFF THAN BEFORE, even while wallowing in the mire of sin, since his "status" is eternally secure. WHO CARES if life sucks and he is being punished - he is going to heaven and eternal "reward"...

This is a travesty of interpretation, and it just doesn't stand up to any sort of logical scrutiny. That is what I meant about "rationalizing".



I have explained why it is more likely that he did not return from the text actually written. It seems to me Scripture does not support a return, does it?





why? According to OSAS, you are already secure. What standard do you have in mind that can make a difference??? It would seem quite the opposite, OSAS conveniently establishes that sanctification is inconsequential, since you are eternally covered with the blood of Christ, no matter what you do (despite Hebrews 10:26-30...) What is the purpose of this higher standard? Why must I bother "working out my salvation" as Paul wrote? It is already eternally done.




Peter says nothing about this life of discipline in the verse you refer to. He is speaking of "pollutions of the world". He is speaking about whether this man is free or not. Not about the sacrifices of the person following Christ. The verses you post from Luke have little bearing, on the OSAS disciple, as I see it. WHY pick up your cross? WHY suffer? WHY die to self???

I don't see the point if salvation is eterally secure and nothing you can do/fail to do can change that.

And if it is all about "rewards in heaven", the lowest person in heaven will be eternally happy and at peace in Christ. Contrast that with the one who goes to hell. "Better" rewards are of little consequence when speaking of infinity vs infinity plus 1.

Regards

Experiential Sanctification.

God bless.

 

[gr8grace]

Wow you Guys, I must of missed some fireworks!