Right Division

[tdidymas]

People ask me loaded questions in this forum all the time. If you are confident of what you are believing and why, you won't care.

I'm not going to waste my time addressing straw man arguments. If I detect a loaded question, why should I answer it? Why are you trying to trap me? Unless it's because you're trying to justify yourself?

 

[tdidymas]

That is not the literal reading and understanding of Luke 10 to me, but if you rather spiritualize what Jesus actually meant in those words, I am fine.

Jesus never taught the doctrine of justification by faith, except to command Jews to believe. Jews didn't need explanation because they had the scriptures and should have understood it. But Paul was well versed in philosophy, and since he was apostle to the gentiles, he explained how to be justified very clearly so that gentiles would understand it. So there is no conflict between Jesus and Paul, and to think they taught different gospels is an unconscionable error. If you're a follower of Stam or someone else who taught that error, I recommend that you abandon their teaching and study the Bible exclusively until you understand what it actually means. When you read foreign ideas into the scripture, you're putting a big obstacle in your way. This is why Ja. 3:1 says don't teach if you don't know what you're talking about, since judgment will come hard on those who teach error.

 

[Dan Perez]

Many people want shortcuts to knowledge, so they go to every opinion to try sorting out truth, when they are completely unfamiliar with scripture. I recommend that you read scripture exclusively for about 10 years as I did, looking to God for how to interpret it (and not to your own imagination).

It appears to me that you are so prejudiced that you can't see that there is one gospel, described in many different ways in many different words. Here your questions show your prejudice, that you assume that different words automatically mean different gospels. I suggest you carefully read what I wrote earlier, and that will answer these questions.

I am assuming, of course, that your questions are sincere, and you're wanting information, rather than just trying to argue.

I have been to seven DIFFERENT churches , since 1936 and have NOT yet seen any short cuts .

This is why , I many times go with the Greek and Hebrew words , AND like to know your thoughts on the following ??

In Eph 3:9 And to MAKE // PHOTIZO is a verb in the AORIST TENSE and in the ACTIVE VOICE .

The AORIST TENSE s a verb in the Greek past tense , and in the ACTIVE VOICE , and that VOICE means that when

I write what what the HOLY SPIRIT wrote , for Paul to teach , THAT is what I have to explain and TEACH !!

To MAKE , also means to Enlighten , to give light , and to Illumine .

It does NOT make me prejudice , just because I believe that there are more than 7 GOSPELS , when Gospel

just means GOOD NEWS !!

Your thoughts on what RIGHT DIVISION , means to you ??

dan p

 

[Guojing]

Jesus never taught the doctrine of justification by faith, except to command Jews to believe.

Please be clear.

Do you mean believe only or believe and keep the law for salvation, aka Luke 10:25-28?

 

[Guojing]

I'm not going to waste my time addressing straw man arguments. If I detect a loaded question, why should I answer it? Why are you trying to trap me? Unless it's because you're trying to justify yourself?

No one cares about you enough to trap you, we are all strangers on Internet forums.

We are here to discuss Christian doctrines, that is all I care about.

 

[Guojing]

How could it not be?

Use common sense.

You preach that Christ will die for the sins of Israel and be resurrected for their justification.

Later on, when Christ is indeed about to die, you deny you ever knew him?

And on the 3rd day of his death, you don't even bother to camp outside his tomb counting down to his resurrection, when you have been preaching to Israel that he will be resurrected?

 

[ralliann]

Use common sense.

You preach that Christ will die for the sins of Israel and be resurrected for their justification.

Christ preached the kingdom of God promised to our father Abraham.

Later on, when Christ is indeed about to die, you deny you ever knew him?

And on the 3rd day of his death, you don't even bother to camp outside his tomb counting down to his resurrection, when you have been preaching to Israel that he will be resurrected?

His blood was the new covenant of the kingdom promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob....
Abraham is promised KINGS
Sarah is promised KINGS
Ge 17:5 Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee.
Ge 17:6 And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee.
Ge 17:16 And I will bless her, and give thee a son also of her: yea, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of people shall be of her.

Jacob, Heir with Abraham, and Isaac, of THE SAME PROMISE
Heb 11:9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:

Here it is..... The Same promise
Ge 35:11 And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins;

9 And God appeared unto Jacob again, when he came out of Padanaram, and blessed him.
10 And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob: thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name: and he called his name Israel.
11 And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins;
12 And the land which I gave Abraham and Isaac, to thee I will give it, and to thy seed after thee will I give the land.

These all died, not having received the land promised

Heb 11:13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. {in faith: Gr. according to faith }

They were strangers and sojourners on the eath.....
As acts here also says....

Ac 7:5 And he gave him none inheritance in it, no, not so much as to set his foot on: yet he promised that he would give it to him for a possession, and to his seed after him, when as yet he had no child.
I don't know what kingdom you are looking to inherit, But the Apostles attained to the promise as do we.
1Pe 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

By the blood of the new Covenant, The king promised is come, and waits for his enemies to be made his footstool....in his kingdom, the Israel of God
Ga 6:16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.


Which kingdom never ends Kings and priests.........
Re 1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
Re 5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

 

[Guojing]

Christ preached the kingdom of God promised to our father Abraham.

His blood was the new covenant of the kingdom promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob....
Abraham is promised KINGS
Sarah is promised KINGS
Ge 17:5 Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee.
Ge 17:6 And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee.
Ge 17:16 And I will bless her, and give thee a son also of her: yea, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of people shall be of her.

Jacob, Heir with Abraham, and Isaac, of THE SAME PROMISE
Heb 11:9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:

Here it is..... The Same promise
Ge 35:11 And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins;

9 And God appeared unto Jacob again, when he came out of Padanaram, and blessed him.
10 And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob: thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name: and he called his name Israel.
11 And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins;
12 And the land which I gave Abraham and Isaac, to thee I will give it, and to thy seed after thee will I give the land.

These all died, not having received the land promised

Heb 11:13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. {in faith: Gr. according to faith }

They were strangers and sojourners on the eath.....
As acts here also says....

Ac 7:5 And he gave him none inheritance in it, no, not so much as to set his foot on: yet he promised that he would give it to him for a possession, and to his seed after him, when as yet he had no child.
I don't know what kingdom you are looking to inherit, But the Apostles attained to the promise as do we.
1Pe 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

By the blood of the new Covenant, The king promised is come, and waits for his enemies to be made his footstool....in his kingdom, the Israel of God
Ga 6:16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.


Which kingdom never ends Kings and priests.........
Re 1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
Re 5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

We are discussing why Peter denied knowing Christ, just before the latter was placed on the cross.

Do you want to focus on that, instead of spamming all these irrelevant scriptures?

 

[ralliann]

We are discussing why Peter denied knowing Christ, just before the latter was placed on the cross.

Do you want to focus on that, instead of spamming all these irrelevant scriptures?

It speaks to the subject of Gospels as plural. Which you and others have put forth in this thread. It is not spamming. A gospel of an earthly worldly temporal kingdom, vs An heavenly eternal kingdom iun promise to Abraham, and all those in Christ.

 

[Dan Perez]

You're using antiquated KJV language to formulate doctrine, which is a very bad idea. "gospel of the circumcision" means good news PREACHED TO JEWS by Peter as the foremost apostle. "Gospel of the uncircumcision" means good news PREACHED TO THE GENTILES by Paul as the foremost apostle in that category. It doesn't mean two different gospels. It merely means that the SAME ETERNAL GOSPEL was preached to two different recipients. In those days there were two kinds of people in the world, Jews and gentiles, in the view of the Jews, just as today there are 2 kinds of people in the world in the view of Christians, believers and non-believers.

It's hard enough to understand the Bible when translated into modern common language, because of the 2000 year gap in language and culture. But a 500 year old language is an extra barrier to cross. So it's a good idea to look at several translations, even 10 or 20 of them, to get a good idea from a host of translators what the passage of scripture really means. It almost always leads to error when only 1 translation is used, and doctrine is formulated based on a single word.

Detailed explanation: your doctrine of 2 different gospels is based on the single word "of", which in antiquated KJV language means "to." It's the same as "the faith of Jesus Christ" in the KJV doesn't mean Jesus' faith, but rather means the Christian's faith IN Jesus. It means the faith concerning Jesus. The KJV is good to use, as long as you understand that you have to overcome the 500 years of language and culture changes, or 250 years if you're using the 1769 revision.

If you can , will you , give a verse that is Antiquated KJV verse that I can see what you mean , just asking ??

dan p

 

[tdidymas]

I have been to seven DIFFERENT churches , since 1936 and have NOT yet seen any short cuts .

This is why , I many times go with the Greek and Hebrew words , AND like to know your thoughts on the following ??

In Eph 3:9 And to MAKE // PHOTIZO is a verb in the AORIST TENSE and in the ACTIVE VOICE .

The AORIST TENSE s a verb in the Greek past tense , and in the ACTIVE VOICE , and that VOICE means that when

I write what what the HOLY SPIRIT wrote , for Paul to teach , THAT is what I have to explain and TEACH !!

To MAKE , also means to Enlighten , to give light , and to Illumine .

It does NOT make me prejudice , just because I believe that there are more than 7 GOSPELS , when Gospel

just means GOOD NEWS !!

Your thoughts on what RIGHT DIVISION , means to you ??

dan p

So now you finally reveal your error when you said "Gospel just means GOOD NEWS." In the NT the term "gospel" is not used as a common term like you are doing. Therefore, your definition is flat wrong, and this is why you can't understand scripture. Interpretation is only correct when you define words the way scripture uses them, but you're not doing that here.

NT gospel is "the way" of salvation, this is the way the NT is using the term. If you continue to use the term defined the way you want and insist there are 7 different gospels, then people understand that you are in error, because we know that there is only one way of salvation. One of the strategies of the adversary is to redefine terms differently than the way God's word defines them, as a way of confusing people. This is how it was from the beginning in the garden, and how it happens today by the adversary's messengers, as clearly seen in the political and social realms, and is exactly what is done in cults.

 

[tdidymas]

Please be clear.

Do you mean believe only or believe and keep the law for salvation, aka Luke 10:25-28?

You apparently didn't get the point I was making. When Jesus commanded Jews to believe and repent, He was relying on what they had already been taught in the OT scriptures. Then when people responded in faith, He focused on them because He saw what His Father was doing in them. John 5:19 "Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does." God is the one who brings out faith in people, and this the Jews should have understood. So then, Jesus telling the lawyer in Lk. 10 "do this and you will live" is a command and advice, and in part is also a test. If he has faith, he will obey it. It doesn't mean law-keeping is the way to salvation. It means obedience to God's will is the outcome of faith.

 

[tdidymas]

No one cares about you enough to trap you, we are all strangers on Internet forums.

We are here to discuss Christian doctrines, that is all I care about.

There are plenty of people in this forum who ask questions for the purpose of winning an argument. I respond to sincere questions, but if it looks like a question with an agenda, I don't care to answer it.

 

[tdidymas]

If you can , will you , give a verse that is Antiquated KJV verse that I can see what you mean , just asking ??

dan p

I thought I explained that very clearly in my previous response. Did you read it?

 

[Guojing]

So then, Jesus telling the lawyer in Lk. 10 "do this and you will live" is a command and advice, and in part is also a test. If he has faith, he will obey it. It doesn't mean law-keeping is the way to salvation. It means obedience to God's will is the outcome of faith.

And He said to him, “You have answered rightly; do this and you will live.”

You don't want to understand the statement literally?

Do this AND you will live?

 

[Guojing]

It speaks to the subject of Gospels as plural. Which you and others have put forth in this thread. It is not spamming. A gospel of an earthly worldly temporal kingdom, vs An heavenly eternal kingdom iun promise to Abraham, and all those in Christ.

Again, irrelevant to the actual question

 

[tdidymas]

And He said to him, “You have answered rightly; do this and you will live.”

You don't want to understand the statement literally?

Do this AND you will live?

You're making the same mistake that the Pharisees made, which Paul spent a lot of time and effort trying to correct. It's not a different gospel, and Jesus is not teaching salvation by works. If you think so, then your reading of scripture is shallow, without understanding. In Luke 10, Jesus was making a simple statement of fact, not giving a dissertation on theology. In comparison, Paul's dissertation on theology (with emphasis on soteriology) in Rom. ch. 1-8 is a full and systematic explanation of how to think about the nature of our relationship with God. Since Paul got his gospel directly from Jesus, he then teaches the same way of salvation that Jesus taught. God (Jesus) is not two-faced, and there is not a different way of salvation for the Jews than for the gentiles. The one and only gospel of grace is "to the Jew first, and also to the Greek." (Rom. 1:16, 2:10)

But then, perhaps you make the same mistake about how the NT uses the term "faith," as those people did in the 1st Century church that James wrote about. Notice that he uses the term "faith" in two different ways. When he said "faith without works is dead" (2:26), examine the context - he is talking about people of whom Jesus said "why do you call me 'Lord' and do not do what I say?" (Lk. 6:46). It is because they were misusing the word "faith." They were claiming to believe in Jesus, but their hearts were not circumcised, and so they weren't repentive in their attitude.

But James also uses the word "faith" in its proper gospel usage, and this can be seen by comparing the context and usage of the term between Ja. 1:3 and 2:20. When James says "faith without works is dead," he is using the term in the same way that the false believers were using it, meaning: mere mental acknowledgement of Jesus, disregarding what Jesus commanded of His disciples. But true NT faith is not only an acknowledgement of Christ, but to the extent that one is willing to do what He commanded and pay close attention to what He said. If one truly believes in the grace of God and is born of Him, then they will be willing to do God's will, won't they?

Can you see that Paul taught the very same thing Jesus taught, and that both were teaching salvation by the grace of God, as John testifies that Jesus was "full of grace and truth"? When Jesus said "do this and you will live" to a Jewish lawyer, He was leaving it to the lawyer to figure out and understand that his efforts to obey the law enough to be saved was not possible, and that he would have to eventually concede that only God Himself can save him (or anyone) from their sins. Thus we have statements of Jesus such as "with men it is impossible, but with God it is possible" (Mk. 10:27), and from Paul, "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes" (Rom. 10:4).

Furthermore, if Jesus was teaching the same salvation by law-keeping that the Pharisees taught (contrary to the gospel Paul taught), then why would the Pharisees say that Jesus was "misleading the people" ("he deceiveth the people") - John 7:12? The fact that legalism ends in condemnation should tell anyone with sense that Jesus didn't teach that. The doctrine of salvation by law-keeping leads to self-righteousness, and Jesus told parables against those "who thought they were righteous" (Lk. 18:9).

We have to conclude, then, that Paul taught the same gospel as Jesus.

 

[ralliann]

You're making the same mistake that the Pharisees made, which Paul spent a lot of time and effort trying to correct. It's not a different gospel, and Jesus is not teaching salvation by works. If you think so, then your reading of scripture is shallow, without understanding. In Luke 10, Jesus was making a simple statement of fact, not giving a dissertation on theology. In comparison, Paul's dissertation on theology (with emphasis on soteriology) in Rom. ch. 1-8 is a full and systematic explanation of how to think about the nature of our relationship with God. Since Paul got his gospel directly from Jesus, he then teaches the same way of salvation that Jesus taught. God (Jesus) is not two-faced, and there is not a different way of salvation for the Jews than for the gentiles. The one and only gospel of grace is "to the Jew first, and also to the Greek." (Rom. 1:16, 2:10)

But then, perhaps you make the same mistake about how the NT uses the term "faith," as those people did in the 1st Century church that James wrote about. Notice that he uses the term "faith" in two different ways. When he said "faith without works is dead" (2:26), examine the context - he is talking about people of whom Jesus said "why do you call me 'Lord' and do not do what I say?" (Lk. 6:46). It is because they were misusing the word "faith." They were claiming to believe in Jesus, but their hearts were not circumcised, and so they weren't repentive in their attitude.

But James also uses the word "faith" in its proper gospel usage, and this can be seen by comparing the context and usage of the term between Ja. 1:3 and 2:20. When James says "faith without works is dead," he is using the term in the same way that the false believers were using it, meaning: mere mental acknowledgement of Jesus, disregarding what Jesus commanded of His disciples. But true NT faith is not only an acknowledgement of Christ, but to the extent that one is willing to do what He commanded and pay close attention to what He said. If one truly believes in the grace of God and is born of Him, then they will be willing to do God's will, won't they?

Can you see that Paul taught the very same thing Jesus taught, and that both were teaching salvation by the grace of God, as John testifies that Jesus was "full of grace and truth"? When Jesus said "do this and you will live" to a Jewish lawyer, He was leaving it to the lawyer to figure out and understand that his efforts to obey the law enough to be saved was not possible, and that he would have to eventually concede that only God Himself can save him (or anyone) from their sins. Thus we have statements of Jesus such as "with men it is impossible, but with God it is possible" (Mk. 10:27), and from Paul, "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes" (Rom. 10:4).

Furthermore, if Jesus was teaching the same salvation by law-keeping that the Pharisees taught (contrary to the gospel Paul taught), then why would the Pharisees say that Jesus was "misleading the people" ("he deceiveth the people") - John 7:12? The fact that legalism ends in condemnation should tell anyone with sense that Jesus didn't teach that. The doctrine of salvation by law-keeping leads to self-righteousness, and Jesus told parables against those "who thought they were righteous" (Lk. 18:9).

We have to conclude, then, that Paul taught the same gospel as Jesus.

He taught the new covenant. Making the old obsolete

 

[Dan Perez]

He taught the new covenant. Making the old obsolete

And do you have a verse where the NEW COVENANT was preached BY Jesus and am interested in studying that verse ?

And what does the NEW COVENANT be in operation and how is anyone SAVED by the NEW COVENANT ?

dan p

 

[tdidymas]

He taught the new covenant. Making the old obsolete

The Old Covenant is obsolete, which means "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness for everyone who believes," in which God works His holiness in the individual's soul - "I will write My law in their minds and put it in their hearts." So then Jesus replaced the high priests, and His own body on the cross replaced all the animal sacrifices. There is a change of law, which means the only law we have today to measure ourselves by is the moral law of God, since that law must be used to convict us of sin and motivate us to repentance, since the Holy Spirit uses it to convict. Agreed?