The Mangling of Ephesians 2:8-9

[francisdesales]

Joe, what you are talking about is the process of sanctification. No one is denying man is being made righteous by the work of the Holy Spirit.

And I again ask you what the point is of being made righteous personally, before or after justification (using your mentality on this one) if Christ's righteousness covers me???

Is that such a difficult question to address, or is the answering of it impossible given the scenario you propose with the so called "imputed forensic righteousness"? You have yet to give precious little evidence of the idea from Scriptures. Repeattedly, I have asked for this evidence, and you have merely gone back to asserting the "company line", as if that will convince me of anything.

It is not, however, the righteousness whereby we are justified. We are not righteous enough to come before the throne apart from Christ's righteousness.

And here, you have provided no citation, either - that I cannot be justified without having a foreign righteousness applied to me.

Really. We have been discussing this issue for some time. I have provided numerous verses that tell us that man CAN come to God without a perfect righteousness "covering" someone. NOWHERE does the OT make such an implication - and yet, God saw fit to forgive men if they would ONLY TURN TO HIM in repentance...

You continue to misrepresent what's been said. I will add, for all your talk of humility, it isn't in evidence. Thus the need for the perfect righteousness of Christ.

Humility is put forth by patiently undergoing your misguided assertions and false accusations without verbally pounding you into the ground...

Again, your assertions without evidence. And again, I humbly ask you for evidence...

It is an ineffective means of debating a topic. If you can show what you are talking about, we can address it. If you just name some vague misrepresentation without naming it, the accusation is just childish and misdirection away from your REFUSAL to confront the questions that sink the forensic imputation idea.

You appear more interested in a theory than of the Bible, GD.

 

[glorydaz]

Actually it does not, as justification is instantaneous and given by the grace of God

Simply not possible, if you take Paul at his words. Which many here simply do not.

Here in Romans 2, Paul places justification in the future:

for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.

Note the future tense. This statement is made in the context of a description of a coming judgement. Now I am not denying that there is also a "present" justification.

But it cannot be denied- Paul also places justification in the future.

Behind all these discussions is the matter of whether we take Paul at his word - whether we actually listen to what he is telling us.

Here Paul describes justification as a future event. So rather than try to rationalize this statement away, we need to take it as written - there is a sense in which justification is a future event.

How about you admit that there are no "doers of the law" that will be justified by their "doing" since to fail in one point, is to fail in all? Which is actually Paul's argument. Christ is the only "Doer" that has ever walked this earth. He is the only JUST ONE.

Christ fulfilled the law, and we are partakers in His righteousness, because man is incapable of living the perfect life Jesus led. I see many here abouts who claim a righteousness that is belied with every post they make. I even hear boastings of humility as if those two can co-exist. :halo I have to admit, I get such a kick out of man's efforts to exhalt himself while simultaneously showing himself to be in such need of the righteousness of Christ. It's almost like the proof is presented for our viewing pleasure to refute the very argument being made. Ya gotta love it.

 

[francisdesales]

Christ is our MEDIATOR, not our covering. Big difference that you are overlooking. Do you know what a mediator is???

I do..it does not mean a negotiator, as you seem to think.

Maybe you should tell me what I think, then, so we can verify if you have any idea what you are talking about...

It is only by our position IN CHRIST that we can come before the throne of God.

What does "going before the throne of God" have to do with this discussion about justification??? We are not talking about final justification or entrance into heaven...

"Hebrews 9:13-15"For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

He appears in the presence of God FOR US.

As the High Priest, Mediating and Interceding for us, not covering us... You DO know what a High Priest's purpose is, correct??? Did the Jews think that the High Priest covered them and that the People were no longer subject to judgment and were all righteous and just because of the Priest???

The OT Covenant is a foreshadowing or prefigurement of what is to come. Hebrews, correct? So how can the NT take on THIS meaning if it is totally foreign to even the foreshadowing???

Negative. An intercessor relies on his relationship with the Father to "convince" the Father to withhold punishment upon the people. That is the purpose of the High Priest, to offer sacrifices for the sake of the people and intercede for them TO GOD. Where exactly do we find the idea from the prefigurement that the High Priest "covered" the People with their own holiness??? That is what we should expect to see, for Paul to make the connection between the limited "covering" of the OT Priests and the "FULL Covering" of the NT Priest...

Thus, as our Advocate, Christ INTERCEDES, based upon His UNIQUE relationship with God, which He could have done EVEN WITHOUT THE BLOOD! But WITH that sacrifice, it is even more effective to the Father, more pleasing - not the blood, per sec, but the inner obedience and love of the Son for the Father.

He "pleads the blood", an old Protestant saying. But the Father does not require this pleading before He forgives sin. ANY righteous man can plead to the Father. That is the entire point of praying to God. Certainly, men prayed to God before the Incarnation. The prayers of a righteous man are truly effective. James...

If Christ acts as you claim, then EVERY man is going to heaven. EVERY man is just and no matter what they do, God overlooks it. This is utterly ridiculous and totally unbiblical.

Think about it.

Hebrews 9:24-28"
For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Yes, Christ was a sin offering, an expiation. Note the last verse. There is a condition that God requires. The pleading and interceding does not help the obstinate sinner who refuses to "look for Him". This has ALWAYS been God's ways.

Really, have you read the OT??? Not just pastor Fred's homework of memorizing a few verses. I mean study and pray and reflect upon it. I am wondering, because I am at a loss to explain your missing this HUGE theme in the OT unless you are a semi-pro proof-texter....

The Bible doesn't call Jesus Christ OUR righteousness. The righteousness of God freely forgives us when we turn to Him. The righteousness of God is calling to mind that His mercy and forgiveness is ever present to those who imperfectly beg for forgiveness from Him. Grace reigns THROUGH His righteousness. We are seen righteous and just, throughout the Bible, when we have a pure heart and a humble disposition.

His NAME whereby He is called ...Our Righteousness.
"Jeremiah 23:6"In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

This is speaking about God the Father as Being Righteous, a Righteousness that IS NOT transfered to us, - God is the source of our salvation. Jeremiah never for a second thought that God's ALL POWERFUL HOLINESS was applied to HIM!!!

He is merely stating that God is the source of salvation.

I'd be very interested in meeting the man who has a pure heart and a humble disposition.

There are many people such as that. They are called "Blessed".

One doesn't have to be perfect to be pure and humble of heart. When Jesus spoke about the Beatitudes, He was clearly speaking of the possibility that men indeed WERE and COULD be humble and pure of heart. He calls them blessed. One of the most revered teachings of Christ is not relegated to the theoretical!!!

We are seen as righteous because we are IN CHRIST, not because we manage to show forth some righteous fruit on a regular basis.

I was thinking the same thing happens when we abide in Christ and He abides in us. There is no dichotomy here.

God doesn't require blood to enact forgiveness. We don't worship a blood thirsty God. That idea is very strange to Christianity. Perhaps at another time, we will discuss that. However, the Bible, oddly enough, never discusses WHY blood is 'required' or how such sacrifices appease God...

I'm sure God doesn't appreciate being called "blood thirsty" just because you don't understand the need for the blood sacrifice.

No, I think you don't understand the "need". Don't pretend to speak for God here. God has already spoken, and He said He doesn't require the blood of bulls. Christ's sacrifice was not REQUIRED! It was freely given out of love. What part of that don't you get? I have said it before...

The Bible does, indeed, tell us why blood is required and why God was appeased by the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross.

Sorry, it doesn't speak about blood as being REQUIRED. It merely relates the great love and expense that the God/Man went through to act as an expiation, a vicarious sacrifice for the sake of mankind. It doesn't say anywhere that it is REQUIRED. Christ's action appeased God because of the value of the action and the Person giving the sacrifice, not the element of BLOOD!!!

GOD HAS SAID HE DOES NOT REQUIRE BLOOD FOR HIMSELF!!!

As such, you end up making God a blood-thirsty God who can think of no better way to save man than kill His Son - and WHY He must do that remains unexplained by this silly theory... is there another "god" that God answers to???

Really, the "Theory of Atonement" has several points of strangeness to it that are lacking biblical backing.

 

[glorydaz]

Amen...it is so refreshing to see the true message of the Gospel being put forth amidst so much confusion.

Do you mean the kind of confusion where posters think they have access to the true rendering of Romans 2:6-7, despite what all the translators have come up with (those silly old Bible scholars and their careful, studied approach)?

Do you mean the kind of confusion where the Romans 8:13 text is reworked so that it loses its clear specific directedness to believers?

Yes, I agree, there is indeed a lot of confusion here.

Actually, I'm talking about the wisdom of men that prefers to take verses out of context and give a higer regard to the rules of English composition than to the basic truths found throughout scripture.

Those who persist in doing good deeds will be given eternal life.

You tell me if there isn't something wrong with that picture. Anything missing?

Like sin, the cross, grace and faith? Oh yeah, that's why you can't form a doctrine based on one verse taken out of context. But, that's what you do, Drew. Over and over again. We are not given eternal life based on our persistance in well doing. Yet, that's what you claim.

And those who LIVE in the flesh will die....you call them believers, but Paul says those who live in the flesh are not believers. He says quite clearly, believers LIVE in the Spirit. We are even under the LAW OF THE SPIRIT OF LIFE, but you prefer to deny that and claim believers can live in the flesh. Paul says we do not live in the flesh if Christ lives in us. Christ condemned sin in the flesh for believers, but you prefer to say He "punished sin" instead of freeing us from the law of sin and death. I can't make you see what Paul is saying, but I certainly can point it out so others aren't taken in by your twisting of Paul's words. It's very important not to ignore the surrounding text lest you end up promoting false doctrine in your zeal to do good.

 

[francisdesales]

Well, well...so Christ just came for the fun of it, then?

Of course not. However, it is not because of your theory...

The Son of God was not required to sacrifice Himself. He vicariously offered Himself because He DESIRED to. He could have just as easily ASKED for the forgiveness of mankind by merely BECOMING one of us. Don't you think the Son of God had some intercessionary powers at that moment of the Incarnation? This is why the Fathers saw the Incarnation as more important, speaking soteriologically.

As the Ancient Fathers said, God became one of us so that we could become gods... To share in the Divine Nature. God has a history of forgiving those who ASK. WITHOUT any extravagant sacrifices. I have shown numerous verses OT and NT, to prove that. I can link you to them, if you forgotten.

St. Thomas Aquinas said that it was "fitting" that Christ died. I would say that is a fairly accurate estimation. A God of Love would do nothing less, since that is the PINNACLE of showing Love, to die for one's friends...

This "legal fiction" as you call it is the basis of the Gospel message.

There is no legal fiction in the Gospel, that's the point... God doesn't have to pretend WHAT HE DECLARES AND MAKES SO!!!

Have you not read, "without blood there is no remission of sin"?

Yes, and this is a legitimate response from you.

This goes back to the expression of the Mosaic Law. First, consider the Mosaic Law and Yom Kippur and the "Day of Atonement". What happened? The High Priest went into the Holy of Holies, THE presence of God Himself. Well, Chirst is doing something much more than a once a year invisible presence and meeting with God.

Paul is citing what the Jews did and understood in the MOSAIC Law. So He links Christ work as an expression of the fulfillment of that Law. However, we know that God forgave men before the Mosaic Law and even forgave men WITHOUT blood, as David in Psalm 51 - OR the Assyrians in Jonah... God does not REQUIRE that men offer blood. We know this and know Scriptures do not contradict, so we have to consider what Paul meant and what he was trying to do, keeping in mind that some people twist the words of Paul to their destruction (according to 2 Peter).

What is interesting to me is WHY blood has this supposed value. The Bible never states this, it presumes it. Perhaps to the ancients, it was taken for granted, but for us, we can only speculate. Perhaps that it "contains" the life of the creature. The animal sacrificed is a "replacement" for the person offering the sacrifice, being an external act that points to the inner movement of the heart. We need such expressions of deep emotions.

Why sacrifices began, I think perhaps from an innate desire to appeal to God and offer Him thanks.
Note, Cain and Abel are offering sacrifices - but there is no command to do so. Note carefully.

Scriptures clearly tell us that God forgives sins by the mere asking. If blood is shed WITH that asking, so much the more of an appeal to God. That is my opinion on this verse. The Jews were used to offering blood sacrifices during Yom Kippur, the only time the High Priest entered into the Holy of Holies, the PRESENCE of GOD!

Repenting doesn't remove sin, but believing in the work of the cross means our sins are not imputed to us and Christ's righteousness is.

Repenting removes sin in as far as God sees it and is pleased with it, just as I see my children repent and I forgive them... I do not apply my own righteousness to my children. Having the power to do so, I forgive them. I am not bound by some "vague idea of perfect justice" where I must re-dress the cosmic balance. Nor does God. He forgives because He desires to. He binds people to sin because they did not turn to Him. Again, OT...

I'm really surprised you don't believe in the atonement of Christ for our sins.

GD, I do, but I do not see it as a REQUIREMENT. Christ's work could have effectively been completed at the BIRTH. Just by becoming one of us, He could have SAVED all of us. He could have been the Mediator just by THAT act, since He then was one of us. The death on the cross goes well beyond - and is fitting.

I'll be very disappointed to find out what you're preaching here is what the CC believes.

My discussions on blood are not in the Catholic Catechism, but do not contradict it. They are based upon my own readings of Scriptures and other theologians of the 20th century who find the Theory of Atonement lacking (and I agree, even though St. Anselm is given credit and has been part of the Catholic explanation for nearly 1000 years). The Theory of Atonement is listed as part of the works of Christ, but the Catechism implicitly admit that the theory does not adequately explain why the Father requested that the Son die on the cross. Nor Who or What God "owed" the Son as ransom... Thus, they go back further to the ancient idea of divinization as the primary reason why Christ became man...

 

[glorydaz]

Your "holiness" doesn't matter in regards to your salvation,....

Paul does not share your view on this matter:

6God "will give to each person according to what he has done." 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.

For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live,

I know that you have rather interesting ideas on what these texts mean, but I just thought I would present them again.

I am sure you agree that the word of God, whatever it actually means, is indeed powerful and authoritative.

Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saves us.

If you could just learn to check your "proof texts" with the whole Word of God, you'd see how truly off you are. Christ came to save sinners....some can admit their sins...others can't.

This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.

Simple statement of fact. Our position in Christ is very important to the understanding of the Word of God. If you don't see it, you will continue to be led far afield of the truth.

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you.

 

[Drew]

Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saves us.

Indeed, the works that save are not works done by moral self-effort - works which we can take credit for - rather they are the works generated by the activity of the Holy Spirit.

Which is, interestingly enough, the very message of a text whose truthfulness you deny: Romans 8:13

For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live,

Now I am sure readers are interested: why, precisely do you deny this text as well as Romans 2:6-7?

 

[Drew]

Actually, I'm talking about the wisdom of men that prefers to take verses out of context and give a higer regard to the rules of English composition than to the basic truths found throughout scripture.

Well, gd, people who have been following your arguments will know what your argument from context is.

It is the equivalent of saying this: "Because I believe this text is about dogs", the following statement must be about a dog:

"The cat ran along the path"

 

[Adullam]

God is a righteous God. God is a holy God. With the righteous He will show His righteousness. His righteousness is higher than a man's righteousness....as high as the sky is above the earth. His righteousness is according to His holiness. But there is a beautiful simplicity to righteousness so that even a child can please the Father. One need not have active holiness power on him in order to do what is right. Giving a cup of cold water to someone who thirsts does not require supernatural miraculous power. The natural man is not devoid of all kindness. With the pure all things are pure. With the polluted all things are polluted. It seems that only Christians are confused about this. This is due to a false balance and an indoctrination into a religious dogma that seeks to undermine both righteousness and holiness in our time.

God is not threatened by innate righteousness as modern evangelicals seem to be. There is a passive righteousness we have the capacity to walk in....that is natural to His creation. After all, we are created in His likeness. The problem is not with the righteousness done by humans but the sin and the bad attitudes that are cultivated in the absence of wisdom. Like the devil, men seek power and aggrandizement. But not all do so. He came to call sinners to repentance. Jesus did not come to call the righteous to repentance. He came to offer them a place in His kingdom. A higher place with Him. God's righteousness is needed for this fitting into the family of God. God's righteousness is not required for salvation. His mercy is required for that. His mercy triumphs over our deserved judgment. Therefore a man can operate in passive righteousness and receive mercy from God. It depends on the man's attitude. The publican was just a man with a humble attitude and sorrowful heart. God had mercy on him. His choice. Men , especially religious men, always disagree with God. They are looking for a new value system. Anything but to know God and His ways!

Jesus Christ taught men to be righteous...not just impart righteousness (holiness) through the Holy Spirit at a later time. The Good Samaritan was not a Christian, yet Jesus honours him. (We could say he was like a modern day Muslim and really get the religious ones in a snit!) The Samaritan was not walking in the Spirit in active power. But He was walking AFTER the Spirit in passive power as anyone can do if their heart is right before God. He was open for good influence from God. He did what was in his nature and training to do. He was obedient to the righteous urge to look after his fellow man. One need not be a Christian to walk after the Spirit. One need only be open, humble and have care for others. God can influence men in a variety of ways. This is according to the great commandment to love our neighbour as ourselves. This is the golden rule. God will justify one who obeys this law, whether he knows of the law or not. (especially not!)

The greatest law is to love God with all we are and have. Here we need the strength of God to do this. This is according to the imparting of divine life and power. A Christian is one who walks both in active AND where necessary, passive righteousness. He walks in holiness AND righteousness. He accomplishes ALL righteousness as His Master did. To treat righteousness as an adversary to holiness is wrong. It is sin that perverts what is done in purity of heart. A holiness without righteousness is spiritual sin. How can we love God whom we have not seen if we don't love His people whom we do see?

The righteous have not experienced the Lord as the holy have. The righteous follow their heart. The holy follow the Spirit according to knowledge. The holy will rule over the righteous in the next age. But righteousness will be in all.

 

[stranger]

Actually, I'm talking about the wisdom of men that prefers to take verses out of context and give a higer regard to the rules of English composition than to the basic truths found throughout scripture.

Well, gd, people who have been following your arguments will know what your argument from context is.

It is the equivalent of saying this: "Because I believe this text is about dogs", the following statement must be about a dog:

"The cat ran along the path"

Hi Drew,

A faulty hermenuetic has been the core of the problem all along. To apply a truth like 'no one can snatch a Christian from the palm of God's hand - to the disobedient believer walking in the flesh is not the way the scriptures handle disobedience. The call should be about warning, confession, repentance and restoration to communion with God and other believeres, the warning part being if you live according to the flesh you will die.

In the OT - the consequences of disobedience were spelt out in the covenant curses -- and the consequence of odedience followed covenant blessing. This paradigm is, I believe, transferred into the covenant of grace in the terms walking in the Spirit and walking in the flesh.

To walk in the Spirit is to keep faith with our Lord Jesus Christ and other believers.

To walk in the flesh is to break faith with our Lord Jesus Christ and other believers.

So in apologtics - which the reasoning and arguements are - the methods of interpretation are very important. A faulty hermenuetic leads to a faulty apologetic.

 

[francisdesales]

Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saves us.

There is no problem with this, if you understand what Paul means by "works". It is NOT ALL DEEDS. A work is something a person does to obligate God. Something to earn wages. Something one does just to "cover the bases" without any inner concern for the spirit of the law.

From your reading of the OT, don't you remember this enduring theme of the prophets, calling the kings and priests to stop sacrificing WITHOUT the innner disposition? What good is sacrifice if one's heart is wicked. This "doing the works of the Law", externals, is pointless, it does not earn anyone anything.

We are saved, not by doing things that the law requires without a humble heart. Thus, the term, HYPOCRITES. Think about what that means. Jesus does not condemn people doing good deeds, UNLESS they are HYPOCRITES. Correct?

The issue that you overlook, blinded by the insane idea of "total depravity" is that God EXPECTS and COMMANDS man to obey. If this is not possible, then God is not just. A just God does not demand something from a being that cannot do it. Would God be just if He condemned me to hell because I didn't sprout wings and flew like a bird??? Really, the idea is crazy talk.

Man indeed can obey God - although not perfectly - with the aid of the Holy Spirit. There is no need to set up a God v man dichotomy. God is not at war with man, trying to one-up mankind on righteousness. God is not arrogant or lacking self-confidence where He has to shove our faces into our "filthy rags". Heck, even I don't do that to my children...

Those with a humble heart are doing good deeds that God judges and calls the man just. Thus, we have a combination of faith and works. You cannot separate the two and say one saves without the other. It just cannot happen, since faith without works is DEAD. And works without faith is hypocrisy.

We are saved by God's mercy as we respond positively to Him. Just as we love our children who respond positively but imperfectly, as well. There is no REQUIREMENT for perfection from God upon man, since God did not make us that way.

If you could just learn to check your "proof texts" with the whole Word of God, you'd see how truly off you are. Christ came to save sinners....some can admit their sins...others can't.

Those who cannot repent and rely on Christ's righteousness are in danger of making a ship wreck of their faith, because faith without love is dead.

Simple statement of fact. Our position in Christ is very important to the understanding of the Word of God. If you don't see it, you will continue to be led far afield of the truth. [/quote]

No one is saying otherwise. That is rhetoric, not logical arguments worthy of an adult.

 

[francisdesales]

Actually, I'm talking about the wisdom of men that prefers to take verses out of context and give a higer regard to the rules of English composition than to the basic truths found throughout scripture.

Well, gd, people who have been following your arguments will know what your argument from context is.

It is the equivalent of saying this: "Because I believe this text is about dogs", the following statement must be about a dog:

"The cat ran along the path"

Well, in my book, it says "dog", so everyone else is wrong... :biglol

I assert, therefore, it is true...

 

[Adullam]

Amen...it is so refreshing to see the true message of the Gospel being put forth amidst so much confusion.

Do you mean the kind of confusion where posters think they have access to the true rendering of Romans 2:6-7, despite what all the translators have come up with (those silly old Bible scholars and their careful, studied approach)?

Do you mean the kind of confusion where the Romans 8:13 text is reworked so that it loses its clear specific directedness to believers?

Yes, I agree, there is indeed a lot of confusion here.

Actually, I'm talking about the wisdom of men that prefers to take verses out of context and give a higer regard to the rules of English composition than to the basic truths found throughout scripture.

Those who persist in doing good deeds will be given eternal life.

You tell me if there isn't something wrong with that picture. Anything missing?

Like sin, the cross, grace and faith? Oh yeah, that's why you can't form a doctrine based on one verse taken out of context. But, that's what you do, Drew. Over and over again. We are not given eternal life based on our persistance in well doing. Yet, that's what you claim.

And those who LIVE in the flesh will die....you call them believers, but Paul says those who live in the flesh are not believers. He says quite clearly, believers LIVE in the Spirit. We are even under the LAW OF THE SPIRIT OF LIFE, but you prefer to deny that and claim believers can live in the flesh. Paul says we do not live in the flesh if Christ lives in us. Christ condemned sin in the flesh for believers, but you prefer to say He "punished sin" instead of freeing us from the law of sin and death. I can't make you see what Paul is saying, but I certainly can point it out so others aren't taken in by your twisting of Paul's words. It's very important not to ignore the surrounding text lest you end up promoting false doctrine in your zeal to do good.

Micah 6:8. He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly, and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God. ...

John 5:28Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

29And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Rom 2:7 He will give eternal life to those who keep on doing good, seeking after the glory and honor and immortality that God offers.

Mat 12:50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

Rom 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

 

[glorydaz]

Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saves us.

Indeed, the works that save are not works done by moral self-effort - works which we can take credit for - rather they are the works generated by the activity of the Holy Spirit.

Which is, interestingly enough, the very message of a text whose truthfulness you deny: Romans 8:13

For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live,

Now I am sure readers are interested: why, precisely do you deny this text as well as Romans 2:6-7?

The works that save are not done by man...even those generated by the activity of the Holy Spirit. The person who has works generated by the Holy Spirit is saved already...he has been born of God or he wouldn't have the Holy Spirit in his life to begin with. We are saved by Christ's obedience unto death...not your obedience, Drew.

Those who are alive in Christ do not LIVE according to the flesh.
If you live according to the flesh, you are not a son of God.

Do you understand the word LIVE? The natural man is not "alive". He is dead in his trespasses and sin ..he lives in the flesh without having been regenerated and raised into life. Those who live in the flesh are not sons of God. Don't you believe what Paul has said quite clearly? Is that why you work so hard to twist what he has said? Or do you do so on purpose to promote your false doctrine of salvation by works?

We are subjects of the King of Glory...no longer subjects of satan.
We are no longer in the same domain as unregenerate man...as much as you'd like to put us there, it won't happen. What Christ has freed, you may no longer put back into bondage.

Paul explains...believers are not in the flesh...they have the Spirit of LIFE dwelling in them.
You can claim those who LIVE according to the sinful nature are believers, but Paul says NOT.

"But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you."

Paul makes the distinction between believers and unbelievers. Unbelievers are carnally minded...enemies of God...not SUBJECT to the law of God...nor can they be. They are not sons. This verse is showing the exact same things as the verse you keep quoting and misrepresenting. Paul is showing the natural man versus the spiritual man.

For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

You are blind to the truth of what Paul is teaching.

The believer is a citizen of the kingdom of God. He is no longer under the dominion of sin and death. We still inhabit these bodies of flesh, but we are not subject to the law of sin and death. Christ has set the captives free. So if a believer listens to his human reasoning and reacts in the flesh, he will not die as you claim. Paul is not talking about believers who are filled with the Spirit of Life. Paul is talking about people who are still under the dominion of sin and are still subject to death because they have not been filled with the Holy Spirit and have not been given eternal life. You continue to preach error by twisting Paul's words to fit your Wright Doctrine. You heap fire on your own head by claiming such...since you obviously walk in the flesh often enough for the rest of us to see quite clearly. You'd be wise to keep that in mind.

 

[glorydaz]

Micah 6:8. He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly, and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God. ...

John 5:28Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

29And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Rom 2:7 He will give eternal life to those who keep on doing good, seeking after the glory and honor and immortality that God offers.

Mat 12:50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

Rom 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

Any true believer has a God-given desire to please his Master. We please Him...not because our obedience saves us, but because we have been forgiven and are now free to love Him as our Father. We are new creatures...given a clean heart. Those who fear and doubt the power of God to save and keep His own have not yet entered into the rest. Strive to enter into that rest and then you will have a peace that passes all understanding.

 

[francisdesales]

Any true believer has a God-given desire to please his Master. We please Him...not because our obedience saves us, but because we have been forgiven and are now free to love Him as our Father. We are new creatures...given a clean heart. Those who fear and doubt the power of God to save and keep His own have not yet entered into the rest. Strive to enter into that rest and then you will have a peace that passes all understanding.

Exactly. Toss aside the filthy rags, already, stop going back and forth... We are given a clean heart, we don't HAVE to be perfect to go before our Father... Christ takes care of that with His Mediation and High Priest Intercession. No one's rightouesness is applied to anyone.

 

[Adullam]

But God is looking for a return on His investment. He is righteous not having any favourites. Grace is a tool to build righteous character with. We are not simply spoiled objects of God's pampering.

 

[francisdesales]

But God is looking for a return on His investment. He is righteous not having any favourites. Grace is a tool to build righteous character with. We are not simply spoiled objects of God's pampering.

Exactly, the "talents" parable focuses on the fact that God expects some response from us after ALL He has done for us, every day.