The question of whether we are cut off or whether we are being prunned resides in the heart of the person experiencing the hardship. A person who is cut off has their heart set on the branch that falls to the ground, whereas the person being prunned remains in Him and accepts that the branch needed to be discarded for the greater good of the Vine.Then why does Scripture tell us to, “continue in God’s grace”? Or to “continue in the faith”? Or to “continue in his goodness, unless we are cut off”?
The fact that this teaching was probably done over a period of time in many different teaching situations is not nearly as important as the basic truth of these teachings. To put it a different way, the authority of scripture does not rely upon the details of its historicity but rather upon its ability to instruct us spiritually and point us in the direction of God.
I agree. The sermon was meant for those in the crowd. As such, I think the key interpretive question is: Who was Jesus' audience?
The crowd was largely (if not entirely) first-century Jews. This sermon took place before Jesus' death/resurrection which means these people were all under the Mosaic Law. No one in the audience (not even the disciples) were born-again or filled with the Holy Spirit.
So, to reframe your question. Why would modern Spirit-filled, born-again, New Covenant Christians believe this message is applicable to them?
I think this is debatable, though I can understand the conclusion.The Sermon on the Mount pointedly dispenses with the Mosaic covenant.
As do the 10 commandments that show how we should treat the various relationships in our lives.The Sermon on the Mount defines how citizens of the Kingdom of Heaven are to behave while assigned to this earth.
I don't. Jesus was letting folk know what God's standards for holy living were, and still are. But not, as some suppose, as prerequisites for salvation, but as guidelines for holy living for converted believers who are developing sanctification. They are reflections of God's moral law - the law that He lives by. Developing sanctification in the believer is the Holy Spirit's workmanship in the believer to conform him to the image of Christ. This is a life-long journey which comes to perfection when we meet Jesus face to face in glory.Do you reject the Sermon on the Mount as being applicable today?
If so, then what verses lead you to that conclusion?
~ (Also, please vote in the poll) ~
Do I reject it? No. How can I reject His worlds... then say that I love Him?Do you reject the Sermon on the Mount as being applicable today?
If so, then what verses lead you to that conclusion?
~ (Also, please vote in the poll) ~
The Sermon on the Mount is applicable as long as the sun continues to shine.Do you reject the Sermon on the Mount as being applicable today?
If so, then what verses lead you to that conclusion?
~ (Also, please vote in the poll) ~
Do I reject it? No. How can I reject His worlds... then say that I love Him?
John 14:23
Can I under my own strength keep His commands and obey? No. Without Christ I am nothing and the most strength I can ever possess is found in my flesh. A source that is weak, no natter how strong Id like to think myself, no matter how much weight I lift, it is weak.
However, IF the strength that I lean on is that of the Holy Spirit, then, THEN there is no weakness to be found in the endless power. However, that power is never about me, or I did... but what the Holy Spirit does THROUGH me.
Can I over come sins? No... I... as in myself alone am its slave, the flesh calls and I obey. HOWEVER by the power of the Holy Spirit I CAN overcome flesh, I c as n master my flesh and overcome sin, ALL sin. Just as the one I follow is without sin, so too am I too follow those footsteps.
Does it mean that I will EVER be in this flesh as perfect? No.... BUT I am to walk as the one I follow walked. I will stumble... yes, I will stumble a gteat many of times... but I get up from that failure and continue in my pursuit to be more like the one I follow, Jesus Christ.... otherwise... I have taken on the name/title of my Lord as Christ, attached it to myself... by calling myself Christian, but refused to follow Him as He instructed.
Is God the Father fair and just? Would Jesus ask one to do that which they had no way of fulfilling at all?
Jesus told tge woman at the well that He did not condemn her, "Go and sin no more." It wasnt the only time He told someone to sin no more... so either... we CAN be brought to a point where we no longer live and wallow in our sins... OR there is NO WAY a person could EVER do what is asked of them and that would mean that none could ever live up to those standards EVEN AFTER Jesus paid the price for us all.
Again, a person can not fight the desires of flesh, with flesh.... but.. WITH prayer AND the power of the Holy Spirit, the heart and mind of a man can be renewed and changed.
What is impossible for man... is possible with God.
Luke 18:27
Some may think the pursuit of of God dealing with the sins in your life may be extreme.... but the path is narrow and few find it..... its better to seek trying to enter through the narrow gate.... than going the way that is wide.
Luke 13:23-28
Matthew 7:13-27
Apparently there's a controversy over this? In looking up Brayan Denlinger, I found the term "lordship salvation" that, as I'm understanding, is a John MacArthur teaching that Denlinger is denying he, himself, is teaching. But I don't understand the controversy in this ( I'm going to have to do more digging into this). This is what I find about "Lordship salvation":
According to one website advocating Lordship Salvation, "the doctrine of Lordship salvation teaches that submitting to Christ as Lord goes hand-in-hand with trusting in Christ as Savior
I also believe one cannot obey the commands or teachings on the Sermon on the Mount without God doing the good work in us to help us to obey them. Jesus said without me, we can do nothing (John 15:5). My problem is when folks attempt to either outright ignore the entire sermon on the Mount as being applicable or they say they accept it and yet they do not accept all parts of it. For example: Most believe Jesus was not referring to the NT believer when He warned against how sin can spiritually destroy us in Matthew 5:28-30 and Matthew 6:15, etc.
You are right. It would be cruel. Which is why Christ died to give us the new birth. It is the power of the Holy Spirit within all who are born again, to obey his directive. His grace is given us for that process since obedience is not automatic.I believe it would be cruel on the part of GOD to tell us to do something that was impossible for us to do without any explanation.
I don't see what the fuss about the sermon on the mount is. I'm fairly certain that 90% of what Jesus spoke about in it was already listed as commands elsewhere in the NT--it was just reaffirmed in a more orderly way, with a sense of urgency it would seem. The verses about lust, I think, get flack because it sets an 'impossible' standard to most. Most people get lustful thoughts, and a lot of the time it just happens(especially to men). The point is, however, that instead of willfully entertaining the thoughts with the pretense of 'oh, I keep the other commandments so it's fine', if it happens(you sin), then you should repent each time it happens. Lots of good people struggle with sin(some for the rest of their lives)as none can be perfect; the point is that you keep trying to follow ALL of the commandments as best you can, not writing them off as 'OK' because you think you're right with God in other ways.
It was the 5th chapter of the first book in the New Testament. The apostles didn't come first, Jesus did!
He says that the Sermon on the Mount applies to the Millennial Kingdom because you cannot possibly obey all of the things on the Sermon on the Mount.
Yet other Christians on the forums imply that we can only glorify God by believing in the finished work of the cross
I didn't realize it was only the 5th book(I'm still learning the layout of scripture pfff), but my point was that people who disagree with the sermon on the mount probably quote similar verses from other parts of the NT--and it's pretty much the same thing. Dunno why the sermon on the mount causes a ruckus : P
No, 5th chapter of the FIRST book of the New Testament. It was His first sermon, that His New Covenant would be based on. But anyway, there is a false doctrine that because we are not under the Old Testament Law, we have no laws to keep. That the blood of Jesus covers us while we keep sinning, and the Father only sees His Son's blood. You can see that is obviously what the New Testament calls a doctrine of demons - a twisting of Scripture and taking one verse out of the context of the surrounding chapters and verses.
What the Sermon on the Mount shows us is that sin is not just surface, what others can see, like in the Ten Commandments. Jesus' commandments are deeper straight to the cause of sin - the heart. But the gift of Jesus is power to keep them, even though they are harder. He baptizes us with His own sinless Spirit to keep his laws through us. That is called being born again. It is our sin nature that is born again into the divine nature 2 Peter 1
I've never heard of anyone rejecting the Sermon on the Mount as being applicable. what manner of heresy is this?Do you reject the Sermon on the Mount as being applicable today?
If so, then what verses lead you to that conclusion?
~ (Also, please vote in the poll) ~
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?