Why do people hate easy believism?

Bible Highlighter · Sep 21, 2020

Aussie Pete said:
Your concept of salvation is flawed. How many of your sins were future when Christ died? Simple. All of them. You cannot draw a line under life before salvation and say that no one can sin after that time. It's not true.

So then you believe in Universalism because Jesus paid for all future sins at the cross?
What applies the sacrifice of Christ to an individuals life? It's faith, but faith without works is dead. This is because there is a thing called a “work of faith” in the Bible (1 Thessalonians 1:3) (2 Thessalonians 1:11).

You said:
Anyone who says they do not sin is a liar (1 John 1:8).

What is helpful in understanding 1 John 1:8 is looking at its immediate context. 1 John 1:10 says if we say we have not sinned. 1 John 1:10 switches gears from 1 John 1:8 in regards to time; John talks about the declaration on committing sin in verse 8 (which is present tense) to a declaration on committing sin being a past declaration (with verse 10). Verse 10 is saying there are people who said they have not sinned (past tense). This is clearly a gnostic belief. Why? Well, most believers today hold to the idea that they have sinned as a part of their old life before coming to Christ (Regardless of whether they are “OSAS,” a “Sin and still be saved” type believer, or a “Conditional Salvationist”). So this clearly is a “gnostic belief” that John was warning the brethren about (See 1 John 2:26). 1 John 1:8 is a present declaration of sin. It is saying if we say we have no sin when we do sin (present tense). This has to be the interpretative understanding of this verse because 1 John 2:4 says if we say we know Him and do not keep His commandments we are a liar and the truth is not in us. The OSAS's interpretation on 1 John 1:8 does not work because it conflicts with a normal reading on 1 John 2:3-4. You cannot always be in sin (breaking God's commands) as a part of 1 John 1:8 and yet also fulfill 1 John 2:3 that says we can have an assurance of knowing Him if we keep His commandments. Especially when 1 John 2:4 says we are a liar and the truth is not in us if we break his commandments. In other words, if the OSAS interpretation on 1 John 1:8 was true, then I would be damned if I do by obeying God's commands (1 John 1:8) and yet I would be damned if I don't by not obeying God's commands (1 John 2:4).

In fact, the New English Translation says this for 1 John 1:8,

"If we say we do not bear the guilt of sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us." (1 John 1:8 NET).

In other words, this verse is saying that if a person sins and says they do not bear the guilt of sin (in the sense that they will not have to face any wrath or Judgment from God over their sin) then they would be deceiving themselves and the truth would not be in them. This is exactly what the Eternal Security proposes. They are saying that they do not bear the guilt of any sin (destruction of their soul and body in hell fire) if they do sin because they believe their future sins are paid for by Jesus. They are saying, they do not bear the guilt or the punishment of sin at the final Judgment because of their belief on Jesus. In short, 1 John 1:8 is a denial of the existence of sin on some level. “If we say we have no sin (in the sense that it does not exist) we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.” (1 John 1:8). Christian Scientists think sin is an illusion and does not exist at all. So this verse would apply to them. Eternal Security Proponents and those who deny that “Sin Can Separate a Believer from God” deny the existence of sin partially. They believe sin exists physically but they do not believe sin exists for them on a spiritual level because Jesus has forgiven them of all their sin by their belief on Jesus. In fact, to see just how silly your argument actually is for 1 John 1:8, you would have to believe that you are sinning right now at this very moment in order for such a verse to be true because 1 John 1:8 is speaking in the present tense.

John prescribes that we do not think that sin is an illusion, and we are automatically saved, but John is telling us to "sin not" and go to our advocate Jesus Christ (1 John 2:1), and confess our sins so as to be forgiven of sin and to be cleansed of all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9). How can you confess and be forgiven of sin if all your future sin is paid for? It makes no sense.

You can say that John is talking about a break of fellowship by one's sins and not a loss of salvation, but that would not be consistent with Scripture. 1 John 5:12 says he that has the Son has life, and he that does not have the Son does not have life.

You said:
I do not believe in the "invite Jesus into your heart" approach. If the heart is unclean, the individual can ask until his/her tongue drops off, but Lord Jesus is not coming in. We need to be born again.

What is your definition of being born again?

You said:
If you imagine that you no longer sin because you are saved, you are denying God's word and making yourself the judge of other's behaviour.

Paul says have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them (See: Ephesians 5:11). Perhaps you missed that verse and others like it in the Bible.

You said:
That is extremely risky because God will judge you as mercilessly as you judge others.

I have no doubt about it. But if things are as you say, then there is nothing for me to worry. I can sin and still be saved on some level. For you believe 1 John 1:8 teaches that a believer will always be in some kind of sin of some kind.

You said:
I prefer mercy and grace myself.

This is not surprising. Most in the church believe as you do. But Jesus said narrow is the way and FEW be there that find it.

You said:
I delight in the fact that I only need to confess my sins and God is faithful and just to forgive me. I am thankful that Lord Jesus is everything I need in order to please the most Holy God. I have a righteousness that does not depend on my performance but on Christ, who IS my righteousness.

That's a nice mantra, but it does not fit Scripture.

Here is a short List on the Necessity of Works or Sanctification (after we are saved by God's grace):

We are justified by works and not by faith alone (James 2:24).
Faith without works is dead (James 2:17).
A person can deny God by a lack of works (Titus 1:16).
Jesus agreed with the lawyer that to love God, and to love your neighbor is a part of inheriting eternal life (Luke 10:25-28).
Those who have done good, shall come forth unto the resurrection of life; and those who have done evil, shall come forth unto the resurrection of damnation (John 5:29).
We have to continue in His goodness, otherwise we can be cut off [just like the Jews were cut off] (Romans 11:21-22).
Helping the poor, and the unfortunate relates to inheriting the Kingdom (Matthew 25:34-40), and not helping the poor, and the unfortunate relates to going away into everlasting punishment (Matthew 25:41-46).
Whoever does not righteousness or does not love his brother is not of God (1 John 3:10).
Whoever does what Jesus says is likened unto a wise man who built his house upon the rock, and when a storm came, it did not fall, (Matthew 7:24-25), but the person who does not do what Jesus says is likened unto a fool who built his house upon the sand, and when a storm came, great was the fall of that house (Matthew 7:26-27).
Abiding in Jesus will bear much fruit, but if a person does not abide in Jesus [thereby being unfruitful], they are cast out [or cut off] like a branch to be burned in the fire (John 15:5-6).
If the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear? Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing (1 Peter 4:18-19).
Pursue peace with all people, and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord (Hebrews 12:14) (NKJV).

Bible Highlighter · Sep 21, 2020

Danthemailman said:
I already read Hebrews 12:14 multiple times from the NASB. I’m perfectly fine with what it says and changed nothing. It says Pursue peace with all men, and the sanctification without which no one will see the Lord. Be sure to go back and read post #210 again.

I read it. It's nonsense. Sorry. It just is. The author of Hebrews is talking to believers and not unbelievers in Hebrews 12:14.

“Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,” (Hebrews 12:1).

Let us run the race that is set before us. This is talking to believers and not unbelievers.

Soyeong · Sep 21, 2020

klutedavid said:
Are you saying that a Gentile is to be circumcised as Jesus was circumcised?

You must confess your doctrine on this matter. Your doctrine must be clear and concise.
Are you stating that the Holy Spirit's instruction to Paul, that the Gentiles were not to be circumcised. Is in fact, contrary to what Jesus taught?

Please state whether you believe the witness of the Holy Spirit, is different to the witness of Jesus Christ.

Circumcision is critical to both the Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants. Anyone who denies circumcision is mandatory in both of these covenants, will be excommunicated.

You made the claim that it is a fact that Jesus taught against circumcisions and this shatters my whole argument, but you did not show and still have not shown where Jesus taught against it, so please either quote where he did that or retract your claim.

Either there are correct and incorrect reasons for becoming circumcised and Paul only spoke against the incorrect reasons, or according to Galatians 5:2, Paul caused Christ to be of no value to Timothy when he had him circumcised (Acts 16:3) and Christ is of no value to roughly 80% of the men in the US who are circumcised. In Acts 15:1, they were wanting to require all Gentiles to become circumcised for the purpose of becoming justified, however, that was never the purpose for which God commanded circumcision, so the problem was that circumcision was being used for a man-made purpose that went above and beyond the purpose for which God commanded it. So the Jerusalem Council upheld God's Torah by correctly ruling against that requirement, and a ruling against requiring something that God never commanded should not be mistaken as being a ruling against obeying what God has commanded as if the Jerusalem Council were in disagreement with God and had the authority to countermand Him.

While Paul said that circumcision has no value and that what matters is obeying the commandments of God (1 Corinthians 9:17), He is also said that circumcision has much value in every way (Romans 3:1-2), so the issue is that circumcision has no inherent value and that its value is entirely derived from whether someone obeys the Torah (Romans 2:25). The way to tell that a Gentile has circumcised heart is by observing their obedience to the Torah (Romans 2:26), which is the same way to tell for a Jew. In Deuteronomy 6:4-7, 10:12-22, 30:1-16, Jeremiah 9:1-26, Acts 7:51-53, and Romans 2:25-29, having a circumcised heart is associated with obeying the Torah, knowing God, walking in God's ways, and loving God with all of heart and soul, while having an uncircumcised heart is associated with forsaking the Torah and refusing to know God. So yes, there are both correct and incorrect reasons for why a Gentile could choose to become circumcised. In Romans 2:13, Paul said only doers of the Torah will be justified, but did not say that we earn our justification by obeying the Torah.

The Holy Spirit has the role of leading us to obey the Torah (Ezekiel 36:26-27). The Spirit is not in disagreement with the Father about which laws we should follow. In Romans 8:4-7, those who walk in the Spirit are contrasted with those who have minds set on the flesh, who are enemies of God, who refuse to submit to the Torah. In Deuteronomy 13:4-5, the way that God instructed His people to determine that someone was a false prophet who was not speaking for Him is if they taught against obeying the Torah, so the clearest indication that someone is not being led by the Spirit is if they are teaching against submitting to the Torah, which is why neither Paul nor the Jerusalem Council ever did that, so the witness of the Spirit was not different. They were not enemies of God.

ewq1938 · Sep 21, 2020

Junia · Sep 22, 2020

Aussie Pete said:
Your concept of salvation is flawed. How many of your sins were future when Christ died? Simple. All of them. You cannot draw a line under life before salvation and say that no one can sin after that time. It's not true. Anyone who says they do not sin is a liar (1 John 1:8). I do not believe in the "invite Jesus into your heart" approach. If the heart is unclean, the individual can ask until his/her tongue drops off, but Lord Jesus is not coming in. We need to be born again.

If you imagine that you no longer sin because you are saved, you are denying God's word and making yourself the judge of other's behaviour. That is extremely risky because God will judge you as mercilessly as you judge others. I prefer mercy and grace myself. I delight in the fact that I only need to confess my sins and God is faithful and just to forgive me. I am thankful that Lord Jesus is everything I need in order to please the most Holy God. I have a righteousness that does not depend on my performance but on Christ, who IS my righteousness.

I

Amen

Junia · Sep 22, 2020

Soyeong said:
You made the claim that it is a fact that Jesus taught against circumcisions and this shatters my whole argument, but you did not show and still have not shown where Jesus taught against it, so please either quote where he did that or retract your claim.

Either there are correct and incorrect reasons for becoming circumcised and Paul only spoke against the incorrect reasons, or according to Galatians 5:2, Paul caused Christ to be of no value to Timothy when he had him circumcised (Acts 16:3) and Christ is of no value to roughly 80% of the men in the US who are circumcised. In Acts 15:1, they were wanting to require all Gentiles to become circumcised for the purpose of becoming justified, however, that was never the purpose for which God commanded circumcision, so the problem was that circumcision was being used for a man-made purpose that went above and beyond the purpose for which God commanded it. So the Jerusalem Council upheld God's Torah by correctly ruling against that requirement, and a ruling against requiring something that God never commanded should not be mistaken as being a ruling against obeying what God has commanded as if the Jerusalem Council were in disagreement with God and had the authority to countermand Him.

While Paul said that circumcision has no value and that what matters is obeying the commandments of God (1 Corinthians 9:17), He is also said that circumcision has much value in every way (Romans 3:1-2), so the issue is that circumcision has no inherent value and that its value is entirely derived from whether someone obeys the Torah (Romans 2:25). The way to tell that a Gentile has circumcised heart is by observing their obedience to the Torah (Romans 2:26), which is the same way to tell for a Jew. In Deuteronomy 6:4-7, 10:12-22, 30:1-16, Jeremiah 9:1-26, Acts 7:51-53, and Romans 2:25-29, having a circumcised heart is associated with obeying the Torah, knowing God, walking in God's ways, and loving God with all of heart and soul, while having an uncircumcised heart is associated with forsaking the Torah and refusing to know God. So yes, there are both correct and incorrect reasons for why a Gentile could choose to become circumcised. In Romans 2:13, Paul said only doers of the Torah will be justified, but did not say that we earn our justification by obeying the Torah.

The Holy Spirit has the role of leading us to obey the Torah (Ezekiel 36:26-27). The Spirit is not in disagreement with the Father about which laws we should follow. In Romans 8:4-7, those who walk in the Spirit are contrasted with those who have minds set on the flesh, who are enemies of God, who refuse to submit to the Torah. In Deuteronomy 13:4-5, the way that God instructed His people to determine that someone was a false prophet who was not speaking for Him is if they taught against obeying the Torah, so the clearest indication that someone is not being led by the Spirit is if they are teaching against submitting to the Torah, which is why neither Paul nor the Jerusalem Council ever did that, so the witness of the Spirit was not different. They were not enemies of God.

I

Jesus never taught against circumcision. It is just optional these days. I don't think Jesus minds of men circumcise or not. some Christians keep holy days, others do not. We are told in Romans 14 to not judge on these matters

Junia · Sep 22, 2020

Danthemailman said:
Amen and well said!

I

This post wins!!!

Junia · Sep 22, 2020

Bible Highlighter said:
So then you believe in Universalism because Jesus paid for all future sins at the cross?
What applies the sacrifice of Christ to an individuals life? It's faith, but faith without works is dead. This is because there is a thing called a “work of faith” in the Bible (1 Thessalonians 1:3) (2 Thessalonians 1:11).

What is helpful in understanding 1 John 1:8 is looking at its immediate context. 1 John 1:10 says if we say we have not sinned. 1 John 1:10 switches gears from 1 John 1:8 in regards to time; John talks about the declaration on committing sin in verse 8 (which is present tense) to a declaration on committing sin being a past declaration (with verse 10). Verse 10 is saying there are people who said they have not sinned (past tense). This is clearly a gnostic belief. Why? Well, most believers today hold to the idea that they have sinned as a part of their old life before coming to Christ (Regardless of whether they are “OSAS,” a “Sin and still be saved” type believer, or a “Conditional Salvationist”). So this clearly is a “gnostic belief” that John was warning the brethren about (See 1 John 2:26). 1 John 1:8 is a present declaration of sin. It is saying if we say we have no sin when we do sin (present tense). This has to be the interpretative understanding of this verse because 1 John 2:4 says if we say we know Him and do not keep His commandments we are a liar and the truth is not in us. The OSAS's interpretation on 1 John 1:8 does not work because it conflicts with a normal reading on 1 John 2:3-4. You cannot always be in sin (breaking God's commands) as a part of 1 John 1:8 and yet also fulfill 1 John 2:3 that says we can have an assurance of knowing Him if we keep His commandments. Especially when 1 John 2:4 says we are a liar and the truth is not in us if we break his commandments. In other words, if the OSAS interpretation on 1 John 1:8 was true, then I would be damned if I do by obeying God's commands (1 John 1:8) and yet I would be damned if I don't by not obeying God's commands (1 John 2:4).

In fact, the New English Translation says this for 1 John 1:8,

"If we say we do not bear the guilt of sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us." (1 John 1:8 NET).

In other words, this verse is saying that if a person sins and says they do not bear the guilt of sin (in the sense that they will not have to face any wrath or Judgment from God over their sin) then they would be deceiving themselves and the truth would not be in them. This is exactly what the Eternal Security proposes. They are saying that they do not bear the guilt of any sin (destruction of their soul and body in hell fire) if they do sin because they believe their future sins are paid for by Jesus. They are saying, they do not bear the guilt or the punishment of sin at the final Judgment because of their belief on Jesus. In short, 1 John 1:8 is a denial of the existence of sin on some level. “If we say we have no sin (in the sense that it does not exist) we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.” (1 John 1:8). Christian Scientists think sin is an illusion and does not exist at all. So this verse would apply to them. Eternal Security Proponents and those who deny that “Sin Can Separate a Believer from God” deny the existence of sin partially. They believe sin exists physically but they do not believe sin exists for them on a spiritual level because Jesus has forgiven them of all their sin by their belief on Jesus. In fact, to see just how silly your argument actually is for 1 John 1:8, you would have to believe that you are sinning right now at this very moment in order for such a verse to be true because 1 John 1:8 is speaking in the present tense.

John prescribes that we do not think that sin is an illusion, and we are automatically saved, but John is telling us to "sin not" and go to our advocate Jesus Christ (1 John 2:1), and confess our sins so as to be forgiven of sin and to be cleansed of all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9). How can you confess and be forgiven of sin if all your future sin is paid for? It makes no sense.

You can say that John is talking about a break of fellowship by one's sins and not a loss of salvation, but that would not be consistent with Scripture. 1 John 5:12 says he that has the Son has life, and he that does not have the Son does not have life.

What is your definition of being born again?

Paul says have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them (See: Ephesians 5:11). Perhaps you missed that verse and others like it in the Bible.

I have no doubt about it. But if things are as you say, then there is nothing for me to worry. I can sin and still be saved on some level. For you believe 1 John 1:8 teaches that a believer will always be in some kind of sin of some kind.

This is not surprising. Most in the church believe as you do. But Jesus said narrow is the way and FEW be there that find it.

That's a nice mantra, but it does not fit Scripture.

Here is a short List on the Necessity of Works or Sanctification (after we are saved by God's grace):

We are justified by works and not by faith alone (James 2:24).

Faith without works is dead (James 2:17).

A person can deny God by a lack of works (Titus 1:16).

Jesus agreed with the lawyer that to love God, and to love your neighbor is a part of inheriting eternal life (Luke 10:25-28).

Those who have done good, shall come forth unto the resurrection of life; and those who have done evil, shall come forth unto the resurrection of damnation (John 5:29).

We have to continue in His goodness, otherwise we can be cut off [just like the Jews were cut off] (Romans 11:21-22).

Helping the poor, and the unfortunate relates to inheriting the Kingdom (Matthew 25:34-40), and not helping the poor, and the unfortunate relates to going away into everlasting punishment (Matthew 25:41-46).

Whoever does not righteousness or does not love his brother is not of God (1 John 3:10).

Whoever does what Jesus says is likened unto a wise man who built his house upon the rock, and when a storm came, it did not fall, (Matthew 7:24-25), but the person who does not do what Jesus says is likened unto a fool who built his house upon the sand, and when a storm came, great was the fall of that house (Matthew 7:26-27).

Abiding in Jesus will bear much fruit, but if a person does not abide in Jesus [thereby being unfruitful], they are cast out [or cut off] like a branch to be burned in the fire (John 15:5-6).

If the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear? Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing (1 Peter 4:18-19).

Pursue peace with all people, and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord (Hebrews 12:14) (NKJV).

Good works and growing in them are evidence of salvation that we have. Evidence that we.are sealed by the holy spiri,

The tax collector after he got saved stopped cheating people and returned what he had stolen.

Soyeong · Sep 22, 2020

WrappedUpinHisLove3 said:
I

Jesus never taught against circumcision. It is just optional these days. I don't think Jesus minds of men circumcise or not. some Christians keep holy days, others do not. We are told in Romans 14 to not judge on these matters

The topic of Romans 14 stated in the first verses is in regard to how to handle disputable matters of opinion, not in regard to whether followers of God should follow God, so nothing in the chapter should be mistaken as saying that following God's commands is optional. For example, God gave no command to fast twice a week, but in the 1st century that had become a common practice, and those who were choosing to do that were passing judgement on those who were not (Luke 18:12), so it was exactly this sort of judging each other over opinions that Paul was addressing in this chapter. He was not suggesting that we are free to commit adultery, theft, idolatry, murder, or disobey an of God's other commands as long as we are convinced in our own minds that it is ok, but rather that was only said in regard to things that were disputable matters of opinion. The reason why we are to keep the Sabbath holy is not because man esteemed it as a disputable matter of opinion, but because God blessed it, made it holy, commanded His followers to keep it holy, and because what is holy to God should not be profaned by man.

Junia · Sep 22, 2020

Soyeong said:
The topic of Romans 14 stated in the first verses is in regard to how to handle disputable matters of opinion, not in regard to whether followers of God should follow God, so nothing in the chapter should be mistaken as saying that following God's commands is optional. For example, God gave no command to fast twice a week, but in the 1st century that had become a common practice, and those who were choosing to do that were passing judgement on those who were not (Luke 18:12), so it was exactly this sort of judging each other over opinions that Paul was addressing in this chapter. He was not suggesting that we are free to commit adultery, theft, idolatry, murder, or disobey an of God's other commands as long as we are convinced in our own minds that it is ok, but rather that was only said in regard to things that were disputable matters of opinion. The reason why we are to keep the Sabbath holy is not because man esteemed it as a disputable matter of opinion, but because God blessed it, made it holy, commanded His followers to keep it holy, and because what is holy to God should not be profaned by man.

True. We are to follow the commands Jesus gave us. The moral law. Loving others and God. and the 10 commandments arsenal about that. We rest in Jesus who.is our Sabbath and completed the law for us so we rest in His finished work and are free.to obey Him out of love for Him

Junia · Sep 22, 2020

Good works follow those who are born again. It is that way round. Salvation was given to us 2000years ago. We just receive it by faith and then the Spirit within wills is to do good...

Soyeong · Sep 22, 2020

WrappedUpinHisLove3 said:
True. We are to follow the commands Jesus gave us. The moral law. Loving others and God. and the 10 commandments arsenal about that. We rest in Jesus who.is our Sabbath and completed the law for us so we rest in His finished work and are free.to obey Him out of love for Him

Jesus set a sinless example of how to walk in obedience to the Torah, so he would have still taught full obedience to it by example even if he had said nothing, and as his followers we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22). Furthermore, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand (Matthew 4:17-23) and the Torah was how his audience knew what sin is, so repenting from our disobedience to it is an integral part of the Gospel message, which he prophesied would be proclaimed to all nations (Matthew 24:12-14). So Jesus did not hypocritically preach something other than what he practiced, but rather he taught obedience to the Torah both by word and by example.

All of the laws of the Torah are examples of what it looks like to love God and our neighbor, which is why Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 that those are the greatest two commandments and that all of the other commandments hang on them, so they are all connected. For example, obedience to the command to help the poor looks like obedience to the command to love our neighbor, so the command to love does not replace the other commandments, but rather it is the essence of them. Someone who was living in obedience to the Torah would look the same as someone who was living in obedience to the greatest two commandments because they would both be following the same example that Jesus set for us to follow. Morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to obey God, so all of God's laws are inherently moral laws and there are no examples in the Bible of disobedience to any of God's laws being considered to be moral.

In Matthew 11:28-30, Jesus was inviting people to come to him for rest and to learn from him and nowhere does it suggest that we rest in Him by refusing to learn what he taught by word and by example. By saying that we would find rest for our souls, Jesus was referencing Jeremiah 6:16-19, where the Torah is described as the good way where we will find rest for our souls. This rest from our souls comes from having faith in God to guide us in how to rightly live through His law, not from taking a break from following God's guidance. In Hebrews 4:9, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, and in 4:11, we should strive to enter into God's rest so that no one many fall away by the same sort of disobedience, so using entering into God's rest to justify the same sort of disobedience is exactly the opposite of what was being said.

Nowhere does it say that Jesus completed the law for us. That would be like saying that he loved the Father and our neighbor for us so that we don't have to, but rather he did so in part so that we would have an example to follow. In Titus 2:14, it describes the finished work of Christ by saying that he gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so resting in the finished work of Christ looks like becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Torah (Acts 21:20).

Junia · Sep 22, 2020

Soyeong said:
Jesus set a sinless example of how to walk in obedience to the Torah, so he would have still taught full obedience to it by example even if he had said nothing, and as his followers we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22). Furthermore, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand (Matthew 4:17-23) and the Torah was how his audience knew what sin is, so repenting from our disobedience to it is an integral part of the Gospel message, which he prophesied would be proclaimed to all nations (Matthew 24:12-14). So Jesus did not hypocritically preach something other than what he practiced, but rather he taught obedience to the Torah both by word and by example.

All of the laws of the Torah are examples of what it looks like to love God and our neighbor, which is why Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 that those are the greatest two commandments and that all of the other commandments hang on them, so they are all connected. For example, obedience to the command to help the poor looks like obedience to the command to love our neighbor, so the command to love does not replace the other commandments, but rather it is the essence of them. Someone who was living in obedience to the Torah would look the same as someone who was living in obedience to the greatest two commandments because they would both be following the same example that Jesus set for us to follow. Morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to obey God, so all of God's laws are inherently moral laws and there are no examples in the Bible of disobedience to any of God's laws being considered to be moral.

In Matthew 11:28-30, Jesus was inviting people to come to him for rest and to learn from him and nowhere does it suggest that we rest in Him by refusing to learn what he taught by word and by example. By saying that we would find rest for our souls, Jesus was referencing Jeremiah 6:16-19, where the Torah is described as the good way where we will find rest for our souls. This rest from our souls comes from having faith in God to guide us in how to rightly live through His law, not from taking a break from following God's guidance. In Hebrews 4:9, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, and in 4:11, we should strive to enter into God's rest so that no one many fall away by the same sort of disobedience, so using entering into God's rest to justify the same sort of disobedience is exactly the opposite of what was being said.

Nowhere does it say that Jesus completed the law for us. That would be like saying that he loved the Father and our neighbor for us so that we don't have to, but rather he did so in part so that we would have an example to follow. In Titus 2:14, it describes the finished work of Christ by saying that he gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so resting in the finished work of Christ looks like becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Torah (Acts 21:20).

Yes we continue to obey God. Because we are saved the Spirit helps us to do that. It is impossible to do that without the Spirit which is why we get saved and let Jesus.transform us. Now we are accepted into
His kingdom he wants us to shine our lght to the world by living for Him. We do this from love for ?Him. He has given us a wonderufl.gift and we are to live inn the fullness of that everyday

Junia · Sep 22, 2020

Soyeong said:
Jesus set a sinless example of how to walk in obedience to the Torah, so he would have still taught full obedience to it by example even if he had said nothing, and as his followers we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22). Furthermore, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand (Matthew 4:17-23) and the Torah was how his audience knew what sin is, so repenting from our disobedience to it is an integral part of the Gospel message, which he prophesied would be proclaimed to all nations (Matthew 24:12-14). So Jesus did not hypocritically preach something other than what he practiced, but rather he taught obedience to the Torah both by word and by example.

All of the laws of the Torah are examples of what it looks like to love God and our neighbor, which is why Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 that those are the greatest two commandments and that all of the other commandments hang on them, so they are all connected. For example, obedience to the command to help the poor looks like obedience to the command to love our neighbor, so the command to love does not replace the other commandments, but rather it is the essence of them. Someone who was living in obedience to the Torah would look the same as someone who was living in obedience to the greatest two commandments because they would both be following the same example that Jesus set for us to follow. Morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to obey God, so all of God's laws are inherently moral laws and there are no examples in the Bible of disobedience to any of God's laws being considered to be moral.

In Matthew 11:28-30, Jesus was inviting people to come to him for rest and to learn from him and nowhere does it suggest that we rest in Him by refusing to learn what he taught by word and by example. By saying that we would find rest for our souls, Jesus was referencing Jeremiah 6:16-19, where the Torah is described as the good way where we will find rest for our souls. This rest from our souls comes from having faith in God to guide us in how to rightly live through His law, not from taking a break from following God's guidance. In Hebrews 4:9, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, and in 4:11, we should strive to enter into God's rest so that no one many fall away by the same sort of disobedience, so using entering into God's rest to justify the same sort of disobedience is exactly the opposite of what was being said.

Nowhere does it say that Jesus completed the law for us. That would be like saying that he loved the Father and our neighbor for us so that we don't have to, but rather he did so in part so that we would have an example to follow. In Titus 2:14, it describes the finished work of Christ by saying that he gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so resting in the finished work of Christ looks like becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Torah (Acts 21:20).

I

We love God and press the gospel Nd help the needy If We can. Every day is the day of worship and honouring him.

Soyeong · Sep 22, 2020

WrappedUpinHisLove3 said:
I

We love God and press the gospel Nd help the needy If We can. Every day is the day of worship and honouring him.

The command to keep the 7th day holy is not the command to only worship God on the 7th day, but rather worshiping God on every day is inclusive of obeying God's command to keep the 7th day holy. Worshiping God did not involve refusing to submit to His commands.

Junia · Sep 22, 2020

Soyeong said:
The command to keep the 7th day holy is not the command to only worship God on the 7th day, but rather worshiping God on every day is inclusive of obeying God's command to keep the 7th day holy. Worshiping God did not involve refusing to submit to His commands.

I

I never said we don't keep God's commandments. But we do it out of love for Him not fear because we have had that judgement removed from us. If we keep.trusting in Jesus for Him to complete His work in us we have nothing to fear, ever. We can be glad He has us sealed in Him always.

Bless you sister, nice to hear from a fellow Jewish believer too

Junia · Sep 22, 2020

When we born again we walk in the Spirit and there is no more condemnation for us. any condemnation we hear is not God's voice. he corrects and convicts but never leaves us despairing because He sees is as the righteousness of Jesus. This is the gospel, for all who receive Him

klutedavid · Sep 22, 2020

Soyeong said:
You made the claim that it is a fact that Jesus taught against circumcisions and this shatters my whole argument, but you did not show and still have not shown where Jesus taught against it, so please either quote where he did that or retract your claim.

Please state whether you believe the witness of the Holy Spirit, is different to the witness of Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit directed Paul to forbid circumcision in the letter to the Galatians.

Galatians 5:2
Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you.

Either there are correct and incorrect reasons for becoming circumcised

You need to sit down and read the letter to the Galatians, without any preconceived ideas.

Galatians 5:5
It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.

The works of the law (including circumcision) amounts to nothing more than slavery.

Galatians 5:4
You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

This is a very, very serious issue.

fhansen · Sep 22, 2020

BibleBeliever1611 said:
The only reason why someone would dislike the fact that salvation is easy is because they are prideful. Think about this. Whenever you do something that isn't easy, don't you become prideful? It was not easy for me to do my first job interview. But after I was done I was proud about the fact that I managed to do it anyway. I was prideful because I did something that was not easy. But that's not salvation. Salvation is the easiest thing in the world. You don't get saved by accomplishing anything (let alone something that isn't easy), you get saved by receiving a free gift that is freely given to everyone. The only way to get saved is by believing in Jesus, not by believing in yourself. That's why it's impossible for prideful people to get saved.

Whenever someone dislikes the term "easy believism", that is a sign that you are dealing with a prideful person. The more prideful you are, the more you hate easy believism. The prideful person delights in the fact that they earned their salvation by their own efforts, and hates the idea that salvation could be easy. The prideful person gives glory to himself rather than giving glory to God.

But the truly humble person loves it. He loves the fact that salvation is so easy and so simple. They don't mind the fact that they can't take any glory out of their own salvation, but that God takes all the glory.

Jesus's burden for us is light, not non-existent. We must carry our part, participate to the extent that, as Scripture tells us, we strive, we're vigilant, persevere, invest our talents, refrain from sin, remain in Christ, live by the Spirit and not the flesh, be holy, etc.

That's not pride; it's humility on our part in fact, before God's sovereign plan- of involving us-because He wants something good from- and for- us even as we must be stirred to cooperation and obedience by Him. The more we participate or cooperate in working out our salvation with Him, the greater our own worth, because now we're willing rightly, in line with His perfect will as we grow to see the value of goodness, of love, of Him. We can do nothing to save ourselves and yet we can still refuse to be saved. So God draws and appeals to our wills, without force, and continues to do so after our first response of "yes" since we can always turn back away from Him and say "no" later on. It's a struggle, and yet a very, very good one as we're tested, challenged, refined, and, hopefully, attain to the resurrection of the dead, receiving eternal life.

The Fall of man was no surprise to God, of course, Who had planned to use it, ultimately, to eventually bring an even greater good out of the evil that man involved himself in by his disobedience of His Creator, with his first or original sin. God's always been in the business of producing something, something great, of perfecting His beloved creation rather than just saving a certain bunch of otherwise worthless, sinful, wretches.

Soyeong · Sep 22, 2020

klutedavid said:
Please state whether you believe the witness of the Holy Spirit, is different to the witness of Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit directed Paul to forbid circumcision in the letter to the Galatians.

You are the one claiming that Jesus taught something while refusing to show where he did that.

I believe that both Jesus and Paul followed the leading of the Spirit, but I also believe that neither of them taught us to rebel against what the Father has commanded, and that if you think that they did that, then you should not consider them to be led by the Spirit because the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey God's law (Ezekiel 36:26-27), not the role of leading us to rebel against the Father. Again, according to Deuteronomy 13:4-5, if you think that either of Jesus or Paul taught against obeying the Torah, including circumcision, then according to God you should disregard them as being false prophets, but the reality is that they never did that. Furthermore, the two people can both be led by the Spirit, but that doesn't imply that everything one of them taught the other also taught. Paul only spoke against circumcision for the man-made purpose of earning our justification, but he never spoke against obeying God's command of circumcision.

Galatians 5:2
Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you.You need to sit down and read the letter to the Galatians, without any preconceived ideas.

Do you think that Galatians 5:2 means that Christ is of no value to Timothy and roughly 80% of men in the US? The only way I see to avoid that conclusion is if there were valid and invalid forms of circumcision and it is only the invalid form that causes Christ to be of no value. As I pointed out, Acts 15:1 is discussing an invalid from of circumcision that was not in accordance with what God had commanded.

Galatians 5:5
It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.

The works of the law (including circumcision) amounts to nothing more than slavery.

In Romans 3:27, Paul contrasted a law that is of works with a law that is of faith and said in Romans 3:31 that our faith upholds God's law, so God's law is of faith, which he contrasted with works of the law, which are of works. So I agree that works of the law are slavery, but it is for freedom that God sets us free, so the reason that God freed the Israelites out of slavery in Egypt was not in order to put them under slavery, but rather God's law was given to teach us how to live as those who have been freed from slavery, which is way it is a law of liberty (Psalms 119:45), while it is sin in transgression of God's law that puts us in slavery (John 8:31-33).

The opinion that someone has of the law matches the opinion that they have of the Lawgiver for giving it. For example, God is trustworthy, therefore His law is also trustworthy (Psalms 19:7, Nehemiah 9:13) and a law that isn't trustworthy can't come from a God who is trustworthy, so to put our faith in God's law is to put our faith in the One who gave it, while saying that God's law is not of faith is denying that God is trustworthy. In Matthew 23:23, faith is one of the weightier matters of God's law, so again it is of faith, while it is works of the law that are not of faith. The Psalms contain extremely high praise for God's law, such as with David repeatedly saying that he loved it and delighted in obeying it, which certainly matched his view of the Lawgiver, so if we consider the Psalms to be Scripture and to therefore express a correct view of God's law, then we will share it, as Paul did (Romans 7:22), while viewing God's law as being slavery is incompatible with the view that the Psalms are Scripture. Furthermore, if you have such a poor view of God's law that you consider it to be slavery, then you must have an equally poor view of God for giving it.

Galatians 5:4
You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

This is a very, very serious issue.

All throughout the Bible, God wanted His people to repent and to return to obedience to His law, and even Christ because his ministry with that message, so it would be absurd to interpret this verse as Paul warning us against doing that and saying that we will be cut off from Christ if we follow Christ. In Psalms 119:29, David wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey His law, so that is what being under grace looks like, while it is those who refuse to submit to God's law who have fallen from grace. Paul's problem again was with those who were wanting to require Gentiles to obey their works of the law in order to become justified, not with God's law.

Why do people hate easy believism?

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Well-Known Member

I love you three.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Oldbie

Well-Known Member

Similar threads