Faith and Obedience

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
11,844
1,311
sg
✟217,541.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You have to understand that there was great puzzlement in the church about God's dealing with Israel. Had God's word failed?

The Jews said no, God would still use Israel to be a blessing to the world, based on Abraham's "works". So the Gentiles needed to become Jews. Paul said that Abraham didn't have anything to boast about before God, his being saved was because of God's grace!

Romans 4
1What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? 2For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3For what does the Scripture say? “ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS.” 4Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. 5But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, 6just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:


The Gentiles thought that their efforts at following their conscience was what moved God to include them in the promised blessing, but Paul again said no! They hadn't done better than Israel. It was again a gift.

Ephesians 2
8For it is by grace you have been saved throughfaith, and this not from yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9not by works, so that no one can boast.

Acts 15
11On the contrary, we believe it is through the grace of the Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”

You seem to be addressing another point from my post. But I agree that, prior to the Jews final rejection of God thru Stephen stoning, Gentiles had to be saved thru the Jews.

But after Stephen's death, we can now be saved independently without the Jews. But that is because God want to provoke the Jews to jealousy by doing that, as Paul explained in Romans 9-11
 
Upvote 0

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟91,080.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You seem to be addressing another point from my post. But I agree that, prior to the Jews final rejection of God thru Stephen stoning, Gentiles had to be saved thru the Jews.

But after Stephen's death, we can now be saved independently without the Jews. But that is because God want to provoke the Jews to jealousy by doing that, as Paul explained in Romans 9-11
But Acts of the Apostles 15:11 shows that Peter taught that those under law were saved by grace too!
 
  • Agree
Reactions: BukiRob
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
11,844
1,311
sg
✟217,541.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
But Acts of the Apostles 15:11 shows that Peter taught that those under law were saved by grace too!

Yes, Peter recognized that the grace dispensation has came, after the Jews did their final rejection of God the Holy Spirit. So Jews from mid Acts onward are to be saved like the Gentiles. That does not contradict what I stated.

James unfortunately did not agree and Acts 21 showed that.
 
Upvote 0

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟91,080.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yes, Peter recognized that the grace dispensation has came, after the Jews did their final rejection of God the Holy Spirit. So Jews from mid Acts onward are to be saved like the Gentiles. That does not contradict what I stated.

James unfortunately did not agree and Acts 21 showed that.
Wrong. Peter was talking about those under the Old Covenant. The burden couldn't be borne, the terms and condition couldn't be met, the law revealed sin, made transgression recognisable, killed,,,
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
11,844
1,311
sg
✟217,541.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Wrong. Peter was talking about those under the Old Covenant. The burden couldn't be borne, the terms and condition couldn't be met, the law revealed sin, made transgression recognisable, killed,,,

Peter didn't even realized that Gentiles could be accepted by God until the Cornelius incident. They weren't following the Law, they weren't circumcised but they received the Holy Spirit, which astonished all of the Jews then, including Peter.

As for the law revealing sin, Peter was not aware of all these until he read Paul's epistles.
 
Upvote 0

Kaon

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2018
5,676
2,349
Los Angeles
✟111,507.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Celibate
You are making a distinction where they do not exist between God's commands and commands communicated by the writers of Scripture. Are you saying NONE of the commands made by those writers are valid or only some are? If so how do you distinguish between them? Is the criteria given by God or the writers? If by the writers, what part does inspiration play?

And what do you make of the words of God, abrogating the food laws, reversing the prohibition made about eating of the flesh of unclean animals, recorded by Mark, a human, as are all the other commands of God, all recorded by humans, considered to be the words of God, by virtue of being included in Canon, curated and decided by humans??

Mark 7
14After He called the crowd to Him again, He began saying to them, “Listen to Me, all of you, and understand: 15there is nothing outside the man which can defile him if it goes into him; but the things which proceed out of the man are what defile the man. 16[“If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear.”]

17When he had left the crowd and entered the house, His disciples questioned Him about the parable. 18And He said to them, “Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, 19because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?” (Thus He declared all foods clean.)



Finally, are you going to continue to break the rules of the forum?

I am making the distinction that doesn't exist? I am not the one that read/heard from another human (not the Most High God) that He said we could consider His Law abolished or inoperable. I cross-referenced this idea with the canonical text, and there is no place where the Word of God even hints at the idea we can disobey or consider abolished any of His Law.

Which makes me believe the IDEA is wrong. But, no people don't say the idea is wrong; they call shenanigans without even ascertaining whether their idea is something verifiable and backed by the Word of God. The Word of God Himself said the exact opposite of the IDEA that is part of, in my opinion, the grand delusion - that we can disobey the Most High God and FORGET His commandments, and He will welcome.

I am just asking for you to show where the Most High God actually said this IDEA I have heard leader after leader tell their flock (with no Godly backing, and a lot of interpolation.)

Where did the Most High God ever say that we could consider His Word inoperable, null or void? If you can't show me a verse that begins with, "and the Lord God said..." then don't bother. As I said, you can say I am confused or ill-imformed as much as you like, but I remain open to the place in the canon, Apocrypha or Gnostics that confirm this IDEA via the Most High God Himself.
 
Upvote 0

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟91,080.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I am making the distinction that doesn't exist? I am not the one that read/heard from another human (not the Most High God) that He said we could consider His Law abolished or inoperable. I cross-referenced this idea with the canonical text, and there is no place where the Word of God even hints at the idea we can disobey or consider abolished any of His Law.

Which makes me believe the IDEA is wrong. But, no people don't say the idea is wrong; they call shenanigans without even ascertaining whether their idea is something verifiable and backed by the Word of God. The Word of God Himself said the exact opposite of the IDEA that is part of, in my opinion, the grand delusion - that we can disobey the Most High God and FORGET His commandments, and He will welcome.

I am just asking for you to show where the Most High God actually said this IDEA I have heard leader after leader tell their flock (with no Godly backing, and a lot of interpolation.)

Where did the Most High God ever say that we could consider His Word inoperable, null or void? If you can't show me a verse that begins with, "and the Lord God said..." then don't bother. As I said, you can say I am confused or ill-imformed as much as you like, but I remain open to the place in the canon, Apocrypha or Gnostics that confirm this IDEA via the Most High God Himself.

But all Scripture is written by human beings! How can you guarantee they got it right?
 
Upvote 0

Wordkeeper

Newbie
Oct 1, 2013
4,285
477
✟91,080.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Peter didn't even realized that Gentiles could be accepted by God until the Cornelius incident. They weren't following the Law, they weren't circumcised but they received the Holy Spirit, which astonished all of the Jews then, including Peter.
Exactly. Peter was ministering to Jews and he said they were always saved by grace! The law, even after searching through it with a fine toothcomb, couldn't be borne, fulfilled.
As for the law revealing sin, Peter was not aware of all these until he read Paul's epistles.
He said no one could bear it, from the time of its inception.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mkgal1
Upvote 0

Kaon

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2018
5,676
2,349
Los Angeles
✟111,507.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Celibate
But all Scripture is written by human beings! How can you guarantee they got it right?

That is where your relationship between the Most High God comes in - whether it is just a side show to your life, or whether or not you actually believe what 1) you know is true, and 2) what you have heard.

But, that has nothing to do with determine who is speaking in a canonical text, and verifying that someone actually said something (versus hearsay, or an interpolation of dogma and ideas).

Even atheists understand that the Most High God still demands obedience to His Law, and that none of it was abolished or done away with when the Redeemer resurrected. That is why they make fun of us as hypocrites when we eat bacon wrapped shrimp and cheeseburgers, ignore divorce, but viciously admonish people who have homosexual attraction.

Do you think the images of the Most High God are meant to be made a fool of concerning service to Him?
The Pharisees couldn't break the Redeemer because He spoke the Truth - no matter how much they tried to smear Him. They had to kill Him to prevent the burn of the Truth. We are growing in numbers and worldly embrace while our leaders are all but telling us they are wolves in sheep's clothing. We are handicapped by a misunderstanding of Romans 13, so we never challenge what another human leader has to say despite our right to as sovereign individuals under the Most High God. And, we kill anyone who tries to tell us otherwise. This has to stop - starting with a full understanding of the obedience expected of us by the Most High God.
 
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Site Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I am not dismissing anything.
These questions and statements of yours (below) infer that you see a way to dismiss certain parts of the Bible (like Hebrews 8:13 and Galatians 4:21-30) because YOU believe they are in opposition to God's words. If a person were to follow the story line of the Old Covenant transitioning to the New Covenant (including Jesus' words) they can see there are NO contradictions, because that IS the "plot" of the story.

You've posted:

Men say it is vanished, and that His law is abolished and inert; where does the Most High God say this?

Did the Most High God say this, or a man? And, I mean the part of speech in the text - is it from The Lord God, or from a man?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Kaon

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2018
5,676
2,349
Los Angeles
✟111,507.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Celibate
These questions and statements of yours (below) infer that you see a way to dismiss certain parts of the Bible (like Hebrews 8:13 and Galatians 4:21-30) because YOU believe they are in opposition to God's words. If a person were to follow the story line of the Old Covenant transitioning to the New Covenant (including Jesus' words) they can see there are NO contradictions, because that IS the "plot" of the story.

You've posted:





How is it a dismissal of anything when I am trying to bring light to the fact that saying any part of the Law of the Most High God has been abolished, made inert, or made void is absolutely not what the Most High God says?

In other words, the dismissal is directly in the Word of God - that what He said would never be destroyed until heaven AND earth are removed is... actually abolished.

The Most High God is the Arbiter of the Law, so any human that says something contradictory to what He said is wrong at best. Moreover, an idea that contradicts what the Most High God said is also wrong, it may not be the person who is wrong, but the interpretation or interpolation. Something like a suggestion that we can disregard the Law of God in any way should be substantiated with language from the Arbiter Himself.

I want to skip the middle men and start with the Authority on all things: where does The Most High God ever say that any of His Law is null, void or inoperable? Where is the direct permission we were given to do this by our Father, or King?
 
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Site Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
How is it a dismissal of anything when I am trying to bring light to the fact that saying any part of the Law of the Most High God has been abolished, made inert, or made void is absolutely not what the Most High God says?

In other words, the dismissal
is directly in the Word of God - that what He said would never be destroyed until heaven AND earth are removed is... actually abolished.
So - you are saying you see a contradiction in the Holy Scriptures, so your conclusion is that it must be because the parts (Galatians 4:21-30; Hebrews 8:13; and Matthew 5:18) that are in opposition to what YOU believe "the Most High God" said were "written by men". Is that correct?

Maybe instead of dismissing parts of Scripture - you should, instead, adjust your understanding of Scripture (and wrestle with it until it all can be reconciled - not tossed out). Maybe your understanding of what "heaven and earth" actually is should be adjusted?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Site Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I want to skip the middle men and start with the Authority on all things
The "middle men"? You mean the biblical authors?

There's an important principal throughout the Bible - that the number "two" represents Truth. IOW...there has to be the agreement of two in order to testify to the Truth. You can't cut out the "middle men" if you wish to arrive at the Truth.
 
Upvote 0

Oldmantook

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2017
3,633
1,526
64
USA
✟99,173.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The definition of the word "gift" already means without payment. It is true that in order to give us this gift, Jesus had to die.

So you think salvation is conditional on ongoing performance. Okay, you have the right to hold that belief. We can agree to disagree then. As for the mark of the beast, I believe in the pre-tribulation rapture of the body of Christ.
You never dealt with the fact that Rom 8:13 is a 1st class CONDITIONAL sentence. You don't acknowledge that a gift though free can be CONDITIONAL and have strings attached as in the example I provided. I'll give you another verse to consider. James 5
19 My brothers and sisters, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring that person back, 20 remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins.
19 My brothers, if anyone among you wanders from the truth and someone brings him back, 20 let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.

Again, this is a conditional sentence. IF you wander from the truth, your soul faces death, unless someone brings you back to the truth. So yeah I think salvation is conditional. You must remain in the truth in order for salvation to be maintained but you are free to ignore these verses if you wish.

Regarding the pre-trib rapture when Jesus come as a thief. Another false teaching that you should not be deceived by. Yes I agree that Jesus one day returns as a thief; the only question is when? Let's allow Jesus to answer that question for himself: Rev 16
15“Look, I come like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake and remains clothed, so as not to go naked and be shamefully exposed.”
16Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.

Jesus plainly taught that he comes as a thief right before the battle of Armageddon between the 6th and 7th bowl judgments - not before the 7 year tribulation. I prefer to believe Jesus instead of the multitude of false pretrib rapture teachers.
 
Upvote 0

Kaon

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2018
5,676
2,349
Los Angeles
✟111,507.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Celibate
So - you are saying you see a contradiction in the Holy Scriptures, so your conclusion is that it must be because the parts (Galatians 4:21-30; Hebrews 8:13; and Matthew 5:18) that are in opposition to what YOU believe "the Most High God" said were "written by men". Is that correct?

No, I see a contradiction in the theology that we have permission to disobey ANY of the Most High God's commandments, statutes or laws.

I don't think anyone in the canon co tradicts Him at all.

Maybe instead of dismissing parts of Scripture - you should, instead, adjust your understanding of Scripture (and wrestle with it until it all can be reconciled - not tossed out). Maybe your understanding of what "heaven and earth" actually is should be adjusted?

I am not dismissing anything but the theology that would have the audacity to suggest that we have permission to disobey ANY of the Most High God's laws, statutes or commandments - or that He has made any part of the aforementioned null, void and/or inoperable.

Humans are saying this; I have heard this for 25 years. I am "just" getting to the point where I actually looked for myself - and there is nothing in the canonical text, Gnostics or Apocrypha that even suggests the Most High God has different sets of laws for different peoples, or that He made any of His Law inoperable, abolished or void.

This is why I am asking people to show me where The Father gives these permissions - not where another human interpolated what they hear a human saying about the Law of God.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Site Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
No, I see a contradiction in the theology that we have permission to disobey ANY of the Most High God's commandments, statutes or laws.

I don't think anyone in the canon co tradicts Him at all.
When passages like Galatians 4:21-30 have been posted - your response was to ask "were those words written by men - or did those words come from the Most High God?" (paraphrased). So....if you are not dismissing those words - then what do YOU believe is the "right" theology for that passage that can be reconciled with your beliefs (that we must obey the Old Covenant laws). How do YOU choose what is obsolete and what is a current "command" for you to obey (because, obviously, animal sacrifices are obsolete, as He was the perfect sacrifice)?
 
Upvote 0

Kaon

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2018
5,676
2,349
Los Angeles
✟111,507.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Celibate
The "middle men"? You mean the biblical authors?

There's an important principal throughout the Bible - that the number "two" represents Truth. IOW...there has to be the agreement of two in order to testify to the Truth. You can't cut out the "middle men" if you wish to arrive at the Truth.

I don't think you understand what I am saying


Within the canonical text (assuming everything is 100% inspired) there are distinct literary devices used to let us know who is speaking. Often times, the entity identifies itself (e.g. "And the Lord God said...") In the case of a biblical author, the person is usually introduced in the beginning of the book.

This is how we know who is speaking, and who contributes to prophecy for example. It is how we know the Hebrews were ignorant of the Law because they didn't recognize the prophecies of the Word of God when He arrived and did fulfilled them (not abolished them).

Having said all of that, anything that begins with, "the Lord God said..." is to be taken in perpetuity unless [the Word of] God Himself adds or removes conditions. Moreover, the Most High God Himself is the Authority on all Law - and the operation and expectations of it in relation to His creation.

So, if the Most High God says that His Law is for generation and generations in perpetuity, and His Son says that He came NOT to abolish the Law, then who gave us the authority to dismiss any part of it?

That is why I am asking for anywhere in the Gnostics, Apocrypha or canonical text that directly shows the Most High God telling us we have permission to abolish or make inert any part of the Law. If a person says we can, that person is wrong at best unless someone can show where God actually gave the permission. Something so serious would be stated by the Most High God just like it was to Adam at Eden.
 
Upvote 0

Kaon

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2018
5,676
2,349
Los Angeles
✟111,507.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Celibate
When passages like Galatians 4:21-30 have been posted - your response was to ask "were those words written by men - or did those words come from the Most High God?" (paraphrased). So....if you are not dismissing those words - then what do YOU believe is the "right" theology for that passage that can be reconciled with your beliefs (that we must obey the Old Covenant laws). How do YOU choose what is obsolete and what is a current "command" for you to obey (because, obviously, animal sacrifices are obsolete, as He was the perfect sacrifice)?
See Post #177
 
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Site Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I don't think you understand what I am saying
I have understood you to be saying what you just explained in post #177. You are dismissing parts of the Scriptures.
So, if the Most High God says that His Law is for generation and generations in perpetuity, and His Son says that He came NOT to abolish the Law, then who gave us the authority to dismiss any part of it?
Right - Jesus fulfilled the Law as it was ALWAYS intended (He revealed God's perfect love). The Law (which is far more than a list of "commands" - it's the entire Pentateuch) was meant to reveal Christ - God incarnate.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Kaon

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2018
5,676
2,349
Los Angeles
✟111,507.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Celibate
I have understood you to be saying what you just explained in post #177. You are dismissing parts of the Scriptures.

Right - Jesus fulfilled the Law as it was ALWAYS intended (He revealed God's perfect love). The Law (which is far more than a list of "commands" - it's the entire Pentateuch) was meant to reveal Christ - God incarnate.

Ok.
 
Upvote 0