3- Transformation (Conversion) By beholding we become changed (What is called Antinomianism is not Lawlessness)

Josheb said:

In other words, you will ignore this forum's rules and the covenant you made with every member of this forum, usurp the mods, and arrogantly act as judge of those you've never met. Got it. I completely understand what was posted. I do not care. What I'm interested in is the subject matter of this op..... whose author also found it very difficult to stay on topic when problems in the op were cited.

Last chance: Do you have anything op-relevant to contribute to this discussion?

.

Click to expand...

There's no other words for what I'm telling you. Humble yourself.

Spiritual Jew said:

There's no other words for what I'm telling you. Humble yourself.

Click to expand...

Asked once, asked twice, asked a third time. Same with you, @Grip Docility.


Now here's why this question is important.

Titus 3:9-11
But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

This op is about 1) transformation/conversion and the premise by beholding Jesus' glory we are changed and 2) antinomianism is not lawlessness (even though the word "antinomian" literally means lawless). I made several valid points about this op and all them have been ignored. That's okay because any poster can post whatever they like as long as it adheres to the forum's tou. Sadly, none of the posts about the posters do so. Several requests were made to get the discussion back to the subject of the opening post and every single request was ignored.

Misinterpreting 2 Corinthians 3:18 should never happen but on the occasion that happens (like it did here in this op) that is an easily and readily corrected mistake. Grip could have readily and easily said something like, "Yes, of course. We see our own reflection and we are Christ's glory. We are being transformed and we observe that transformation seeing the changes wrought in ourselves by our Lord and Savior, Jesus." Then we all say, "Amen!" hug, and rejoice in the agreement with scripture that is had by all and we then all share in Psalm 133:1.

But that is not what happened. The simple and otherwise very easily corrected mistake was ignored in favor of a lot of subterfuge. Misinterpreting God's word is antinomian . It is an indication some portion with the mis-interpreter or has yet to be transformed . The refusal to examine the problem is bad enough but in this case the error is so objectively apparent that the refusal also means we've entered into the realm of foolishness or, as Titus 3 puts it, foolish controversy, dissention, or quarrels about the law. According to scripture, that is going to be unprofitable and worthless. Blessedly, the passage also gives us a potential remedy and/or a tool for further diagnosis. Let's call it the "three strikes" rule. Warn a person once and if that does not result in a more effective conversation then warn them a second time. After refusing a third warning have nothing to do with the other person because you have the witness of their own words confirming scripture's diagnoses: the person who stirs up dissension and will not stop after repeated requests is "warped," and "sinful," and "self-condemned. "

No humbleness or lack thereof is needed. That is all just a red herring, a subterfuge used to obfuscate the inherent divisiveness of the one refusing to discuss matter profitably.

• It shows a lack of transformation.
• It demonstrates lawlessness.

Such a person looking in the 2 Corinthians 3:18 mirror may still himself transformed by Christ, but not in the areas broached in this op. The author of this op couldn't even acknowledge the practice of proof-texting as a problem. Neither could the opening sentences of op be discussed without irrelevant appeals to his own humbleness.

In other words, the o itself ended up serving as an object lesson, and not merely the distribution of information for the sake of collaborative discussion.

And you, @Spiritual Jew got sucked into Grip's subterfuge.

These things do not come with neon signs announcing their existence. Who would possibly know Grip would have difficulty staying on topic in his own op? Who in all of heaven and earth would know he'd refuse to discuss his own op and make everything about himself and others until the opportunity to return to the op availed itself? Who knew either of you would have trouble obeying this forum's requirement to post topically unless or until the opportunity to do right (or disobey) availed itself.

I could be the least humble person on the planet and the most arrogant person to have every lived but that would not change the facts in evidence. You both argued ad hominem.




So, let's give it one more try. I raised five or six very valid and op-relevant concerns, any one of which can be discussed without ever mentioning another poster. Ever. Just keep the posts about the posts and not the posters. Or choose something stated in the op and open it up for topical discussion. Consider posting in a manner that demonstrates transformation in Christ and faithfulness.

Do either of you have anything op-relevant to contribute to this discussion?


.

Josheb said:

Asked once, asked twice, asked a third time. Same with you, @Grip Docility.


Now here's why this question is important.

Titus 3:9-11
But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

This op is about 1) transformation/conversion and the premise by beholding Jesus' glory we are changed and 2) antinomianism is not lawlessness (even though the word "antinomian" literally means lawless). I made several valid points about this op and all them have been ignored. That's okay because any poster can post whatever they like as long as it adheres to the forum's tou. Sadly, none of the posts about the posters do so. Several requests were made to get the discussion back to the subject of the opening post and every single request was ignored.

Misinterpreting 2 Corinthians 3:18 should never happen but on the occasion that happens (like it did here in this op) that is an easily and readily corrected mistake. Grip could have readily and easily said something like, "Yes, of course. We see our own reflection and we are Christ's glory. We are being transformed and we observe that transformation seeing the changes wrought in ourselves by our Lord and Savior, Jesus." Then we all say, "Amen!" hug, and rejoice in the agreement with scripture that is had by all and we then all share in Psalm 133:1.

But that is not what happened. The simple and otherwise very easily corrected mistake was ignored in favor of a lot of subterfuge. Misinterpreting God's word is antinomian . It is an indication some portion with the mis-interpreter or has yet to be transformed . The refusal to examine the problem is bad enough but in this case the error is so objectively apparent that the refusal also means we've entered into the realm of foolishness or, as Titus 3 puts it, foolish controversy, dissention, or quarrels about the law. According to scripture, that is going to be unprofitable and worthless. Blessedly, the passage also gives us a potential remedy and/or a tool for further diagnosis. Let's call it the "three strikes" rule. Warn a person once and if that does not result in a more effective conversation then warn them a second time. After refusing a third warning have nothing to do with the other person because you have the witness of their own words confirming scripture's diagnoses: the person who stirs up dissension and will not stop after repeated requests is "warped," and "sinful," and "self-condemned. "

No humbleness or lack thereof is needed. That is all just a red herring, a subterfuge used to obfuscate the inherent divisiveness of the one refusing to discuss matter profitably.

• It shows a lack of transformation.
• It demonstrates lawlessness.

Such a person looking in the 2 Corinthians 3:18 mirror may still himself transformed by Christ, but not in the areas broached in this op. The author of this op couldn't even acknowledge the practice of proof-texting as a problem. Neither could the opening sentences of op be discussed without irrelevant appeals to his own humbleness.

In other words, the o itself ended up serving as an object lesson, and not merely the distribution of information for the sake of collaborative discussion.

And you, @Spiritual Jew got sucked into Grip's subterfuge.

These things do not come with neon signs announcing their existence. Who would possibly know Grip would have difficulty staying on topic in his own op? Who in all of heaven and earth would know he'd refuse to discuss his own op and make everything about himself and others until the opportunity to return to the op availed itself? Who knew either of you would have trouble obeying this forum's requirement to post topically unless or until the opportunity to do right (or disobey) availed itself.

I could be the least humble person on the planet and the most arrogant person to have every lived but that would not change the facts in evidence. You both argued ad hominem.




So, let's give it one more try. I raised five or six very valid and op-relevant concerns, any one of which can be discussed without ever mentioning another poster. Ever. Just keep the posts about the posts and not the posters. Or choose something stated in the op and open it up for topical discussion. Consider posting in a manner that demonstrates transformation in Christ and faithfulness.

Do either of you have anything op-relevant to contribute to this discussion?


.

Click to expand...

You may have missed it the first 2 or 3 times I said this, but you need to humble yourself. As Jesus said, "For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.” Humble yourself before Jesus does. It's much better that way.

Spiritual Jew said:

You may have missed it the first 2 or 3 times I said this, but you need to humble yourself. As Jesus said, "For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.” Humble yourself before Jesus does. It's much better that way.

Click to expand...

You may have missed the first few times I expressed it is because these posts are arrogantly, rebelliously, and hypocritically off-topic that it is you who needs to humble himself and demonstrate the kind of transformation to which this op alludes.

It is hard to see the picture from within the frame.

Josheb said:

You may have missed the first few times I expressed it is because these posts are arrogantly, rebelliously, and hypocritically off-topic that it is you who needs to humble himself and demonstrate the kind of transformation to which this op alludes.

It is hard to see the picture from within the frame.

Click to expand...

Hello there. I need to humble myself because I recognize that you need to humble yourself? That's interesting logic. Perhaps you missed it all the other times I said it, but you need to humble yourself. It is not possible to have a good discussion with you about any topic until you do.

Spiritual Jew said:

Hello there. I need to humble myself because I recognize that you need to humble yourself?

Click to expand...

No. You need to humble yourself because you assumed a position over others not yours to assume. A position to judge others was assumed. A position to be above the forum's rules was assumed. A position above scripture was assumed. All three were done in complete disregard for the subject of this op. Any one assumption would be bad but all three are the epitome of pride. No one can come into any thread and judge others without instantly hypocritically indicting themselves. It is one of the many reasons forums require posters to keep the posts about the posts, not the posters.

I would ask if you have anything op-relevant to contribute but I already know the answer to that question. You're trolling, and I don't feed trolls.

Josheb said:

No. You need to humble yourself because you assumed a position over others not yours to assume. A position to judge others was assumed. A position to be above the forum's rules was assumed. A position above scripture was assumed. All three were done in complete disregard for the subject of this op. Any one assumption would be bad but all three are the epitome of pride. No one can come into any thread and judge others without instantly hypocritically indicting themselves. It is one of the many reasons forums require posters to keep the posts about the posts, not the posters.

I would ask if you have anything op-relevant to contribute but I already know the answer to that question. You're trolling, and I don't feed trolls.

Click to expand...

You keep feeding me, so I guess I'm not a troll then. Humble yourself.

Let me see if I can re-gather the thread and re-address the opening post. This particular op is the third in a series that so far includes five ops that can be found HERE. They all occur in the Bibliology and Hermeneutics board, which is designated for "the study of the Bible and Scriptures through interpretation and translation," and hermeneutics is defined as "the interpretation of various types of literature in the Bible, and addressing scripture in [its] normal meaning, interpreting scripture historically, grammatically and contextually. The purpose of Hermeneutics is to prevent us from improperly applying scripture to a particular situation." That is how the ops in this board are supposed to be discussed.

Grip Docility said:

Continued from (2- Looking in a mirror) By beholding we become changed (What is called Antinomianism is not Lawlessness) <- Active Link

2 Corinthians 3:18 We all, with unveiled faces, are looking as in a mirror at the glory of the Lord and are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory; this is from the Lord who is the Spirit.​

Click to expand...

All five of the ops in this series are predicated upon 2 Corinthians 3:18. This is self-evident from the individual ops themselves. Each op quotes the verse and then builds its case on the interpretation of the verse. The interpretation of the verse is that we are looking at Jesus in the mirror. This is stated in point 2 of these ops.

Grip Docility said:

There are 4 major spiritual concepts being discussed within this Pauline sentence.

1- Having an unveiled face
2- Looking in a mirror at Jesus Christ (Jesus is the very Glory of God / Effulgence or Visible Light)
3- Transformation (Conversion)
4a- The inner working of the Holy Spirit
4b- The inner working of the Holy Spirit

Click to expand...

All three ops up to this point make the exact same assertion.

The problem is this is bad exegesis. First, let me acknowledge the "unveiled face" is a given. Paul asserts it as something already possessed by the saint, not something the saint puts on or takes off; it's not something that is a product of volitional agency or works of the now redeemed and regenerate believer. It is a given and, as far as I can tell from reading the threads, the ops correctly treat it as such. This is important because when we look in the mirror we see the unveiled face. The first op in the series did an adequate job of correctly tying this imagery of the unveiled face back to Moses and his experience in the tabernacle as the intermediary between God and the liberated Hebrews. The covenant people of that era could not look upon Moses after he'd been in the tabernacle with God because they could not look upon him with their naked eye.

Paul, writing to the Corinthian saints, has said they ALL have unveiled faced AND they can all look at themselves in a mirror and see the glory of the Lord present in them because it is visible in their reflection. These ops, however, say the person looking in the mirror is seeing Jesus. That may be true by extension, but that is not what the verse itself states. A liberty has been taken with the verse and that liberty has not been justified or substantiated in any of the individual ops (I've read them all).

One of the important aspect of the tie-ins with Paul's epistolary content and the Mosaic experience as intermediary is that Moses walked into the tabernacle to be with God whereas the Christian is that tabernacle (1 Cor. 3:16). Jesus (Jn. 2:21) and the body of believers are the temple of God. We do not walk into and out of the temple or tabernacle like Moses and the old covenant Jew had to do. God does not dwell in houses built by human hands, nor is God in need of anything made by human hands (Acts 17:24-25).... we are the house of God that God Himsel built. These truths are part of the unveiling, constituent aspects of our unveiled faces upon which we can now look. In other words, as far as transformation goes, the transformation is also a given, not an option. We have been changed. We have been transformed to the point we can look at the glory of the Lord which is us.

The ops state we're seeing Jesus in the mirror. The logic employed is that because Jesus is the glory of God but that is not exactly what scripture teaches. The closest anyone will come to that position is Hebrews 1:3.

Hebrews 1:1-4
God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. And he is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When he had made purification of sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much better than the angels, as he has inherited a more excellent name than they.

Jesus is the radiance of God's glory, not the actual glory. Jesus is the exact representation, expression, or reproduction of God's nature. This is important because trinitarians will read these texts with ontological identity inherent in every word. To say Jesus is God's glory in any way that implies God does not possess glory in his own being or that God's glory is somehow, in any way, separate or separated from the Father (or Spirit) and found only in the Son leads to bad Theology, bad Christology, bad ecclesiology and it will also lead to bad soteriology and eschatology. It is, therefore, quite important that 2 Corinthians 3:18 be understood correctly. The exegesis and hermeneutics here are critical.

Because this post is lengthy, I'll conclude this portion with an observation and an inquiry, and then reiterate a previously made statement. The verse in question, 2 Corinthians 3:18, states we look as in a mirror (not actually looking into a mirror) at the glory of the Lord. Is that to be read as "LORD," or "Lord"? The glory of the Father, or the glory of the Son? The Greek word is "kyriou," the Greek term use for a lord, a master, an owner, or more generically a "sir," and more specifically (depending on context) the LORD. Throughout the epistolary (and Revelation) the Christian is called a "bondservant," someone whose debt has been bought and must then work off the debt, someone who (in the context of the gospel) who has had his period of endured service paid for and has pledged to serve his debt-buyer, or master, voluntarily out of love in perpetuity (I can explain that further for those not familiar with all the scriptures I just blew through in this paragraph). To put it succinctly, this is 1 Corinthians 6:19-20, and 1 Peter 1:18-20.

1 Corinthians 6:19-20
Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you have been bought with a price: therefore, glorify God in your body.

1 Peter 1:17-21
If you address as Father the One who impartially judges according to each one's work, conduct yourselves in fear during the time of your stay on earth; knowing that you were not redeemed with perishable things like silver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from your forefathers, but with precious blood, as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ. For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you who through Him are believers in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God.


In other words, Is Jesus the purchaser of our life, or is his Father the purchaser and the price the Father paid was the life of His Son? For the trinitarian this may be a difference without distinction, but it still necessarily informs the "Lord" and the "glory" observed by the saint looking at himself and the other saints as if looking into a mirror. I did not read anything in the series leading me to think the author is asserting cultic heresy but, having once (many decades ago) been a member of a Christian cult that taught the Christian is literally becoming Christ it is worth noting again that getting 2 Corinthians 3:18 correct is critical.

Case built on flawed premises end up being flawed cases and flawed cases necessarily lead to flawed conclusions. That is the essence of sound bibliography and hermeneutics. These ops have it wrong: we're not looking at Jesus; we're looking at God's glory in ourselves and each other.

John 8:54
Jesus answered, "If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing; it is my Father who glorifies me.....

Philippians 2:5-11
Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although he existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a bondservant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. For this reason also, God highly exalted him, and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.


Through Jesus, we do not share only in God's glory, we are God's glory. When every knew bows every tongue will confess Jesus as Lord, but they will not all confess him as Savior. God is glorified either way, but the glory the redeemed manifest is unique and different. No other creature in heaven or earth is privileged with the salvation found only in the resurrected Son.