Rightly dividing the word of truth: where the OT and NT dividing line is...

[Ceallaigh]

I believe chastisement is only for believers who have a proper view of sin and salvation whereby it does not allow for that person to justify the idea that they can abide in grievous sin and still be saved at the same time. For the goal of chastisement is to get the believer to stop sinning. Chastisement is to let the believer know that they headed towards destruction in the Lake of Fire if they do not seek forgiveness with the Lord and they do not forsake their sin. Why? Because what fellowship does light have with darkness? God cannot fellowship with anyone who abides in darkness because He is light and all that is good and holy, and just.

Listen to the words of Jesus.

“I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.
I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father. They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.” (John 8:37-39).

Several key take aways here.

#1. Jesus says you seek to kill me because my word has no place in you.
#2. Jesus says you do that which you have seen of your father.
#3. The Jews said, Abraham is our father.
#4. Jesus says if you were Abraham's father, you would do the works of Abraham.

So we can see that the Pharisees did not have a license to sin here. They sought to kill Jesus because the teachings of Jesus (his word) had no place inside them. They wanted to justify sin with the thinking they were saved because they thought Abraham was their father. Jesus says that the Pharisees do that which they have seen of their father. Their father was the devil. For Jesus said to these Pharisees, “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.” (John 8:44). This matches up with the apostle John saying: “He that committeth sin is of the devil;” (1 John 3:8). In fact, Jesus said, “For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.” (John 3:20). Did you hear that? Jesus says everyone who does evil hates the light. The light is obviously Jesus. So if somebody sins or justifies sin, they are actually hating Jesus according to His own words. So the idea that we can sin and still be saved is simply contrary to the Holy Bible. Jesus refutes their false belief in Belief Alone-ism in their saying they are Abraham's father by telling them that if they were Abraham's father truly, they would do the works of Abraham. Meaning, they would live righteously like Abraham and they would not justify sin or disobedience.

As for your sink or swim statement:

I believe God helps us to swim if we accept what His Word says and we fight and battle against sin. We are not alone. When we accept Jesus Christ as our Savior, and believe the gospel in 1 Corinthians 15;1-4, we receive the Holy Spirit to help us to battle against sin. For Romans 8:13 says if we live after the flesh (sin), we will die, but if we put to death the misdeeds of the body (sin) by the Holy Spirit, we shall live (live eternally).

I know you're battling the idea that there are all these Christians who think it's okay to "live like the devil and still be saved". But in my opinion those who are like that are going to be the last ones to listen to legalism. The ones who listen to it are the ones who are growing and don't need to be motivated by legalism. But they're still tender enough to become convinced that they have to save themselves by way of works. And what's supposed to be a labor of love, becomes just labor. Grinding for salvation.

BTW side note, my problem wasn't thinking it was okay to sin. I had just become lazy. Considering I'm a lifelong Christian who's spent time in the Word and received sound teaching, I should be at a certain level and continuing to grow. Spiritually speaking I had gone from being a bodybuilder to being a couch potato. Then one day I looked in the mirror and saw that I had become flabby and out of shape, so I started hitting the gym again.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I know you're battling the idea that there are all these Christians who think it's okay to "live like the devil and still be saved". But in my opinion those who are like that are going to be the last ones to listen to legalism. The ones who listen to it are the ones who are growing and don't need to be motivated by legalism. But they're still tender enough to become convinced that they have to save themselves by way of works. And what's supposed to be a labor of love, becomes just labor. Grinding for salvation.

BTW side note, my problem wasn't thinking it was okay to sin. I had just become lazy. Considering I'm a lifelong Christian who's spent time in the Word and received sound teaching, I should be at a certain level and continuing to grow. Spiritually speaking I had gone from being a bodybuilder to being a couch potato. Then one day I looked in the mirror and saw that I had become flabby and out of shape, so I started hitting the gym again.

How many sins did it take for Adam to start the fall of mankind? Just one sin. It did not take a whole bunch of sins and or a mindset to continually sin all the time. Ananias and Sapphira also committed one sin each. They lied to the Holy Spirit and they died each on the spot, and a great fear came upon the church when they heard about it. Now, think like detective here, my friend. Fear does not make any sense if they were....

(a) Pretenders and never knew God.
(b) They were saved and taken home early on account of their sin.​

The emotion of fear by fellow believers only makes sense because they knew that a similar sin could happen to them if they did not guard their hearts and minds from the enemy.

 

[Ceallaigh]

How many Sola Scriptura Christian church organizations do you know who promote the same view of sin and salvation as me that is shown in the Holy Bible?

Hopefully not many because I consider your view to be flawed. It seems full of tyranny and bereft of love. And it seems based on self achievement.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

John 6:28–29 (AV)
28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

But this is Old Covenant according to you. This is pre-cross in your view. So how could you truly trust what Jesus was saying here? Besides, believing in Jesus is more than just believing in the person of Jesus alone. When Peter failed to walk on the water, Jesus said, “O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?” (See: Matthew 14:31). So Peter failing to take the correct action was related to his faith. In fact, Paul says there is a “work of faith” (See: 1 Thessalonians 1:3, and 2 Thessalonians 1:11). This is why faith without works is dead (James 2:17). This is why we are justified by works and not by faith alone (James 2:24). For even the demons believe and tremble (James 2:19). So it is kind of odd that James would describe a belief alone as a faith of demons if this was to be the kind of faith that we are supposed to have later on by the teachings of Paul.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Hopefully not many because I consider your view to be flawed. It seems full of tyranny and bereft of love. And it seems based on self achievement.

Many say that the God of the Old Testament does not seem loving. But that does not mean that they are correct. For they are not looking deep enough into God's Word, and they are not looking at the whole counsel of His Word, either.

Jesus said if you love me, keep my commandments (John 14:15). Jesus said we can do nothing without Him (John 15:5). Philippians 2:13 says, “For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” So we cooperate with God in the good work He wants to do through us. So any good we do we give glory and praise to God and we do not pat ourselves on the back. For why did the 24 elders cast their crowns before Jesus? Because it was the Lord working in them.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Beware all who try to bring OT into NT.

And I say beware of those who teach “Belief Alone-ism” (Which can easily lead a person to turn God's grace into a license for immorality which Jude 1:4 warns us against). For if a person believes they are saved by a belief alone, then they can do all manner of sin in the name of God and think they are saved. But even Paul is against such a thing. Paul lists various sins and he says that they which do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God (Galatians 5:19-21).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

@JohnD70X7

Psalms 66:18 says, “If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me:”

2 Thessalonians 2:12 says, “That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”

Surely if we are saved by a belief alone in Jesus then we do not need to worry about sin and we can have pleasure in unrighteousness. But Paul says here that there are those who are damned who believed not the truth, and had pleasure in unrighteousness. They did not believe the truth of our Lord's words or the words of his followers (including the apostle Paul), and they had pleasure in sin instead. Surely sin is not the way of God. For God is holy, just, and good and He always wants us to do what is good and right. In Psalms 66:18, the Psalmist says that if he regards iniquity in his heart, the Lord will not even hear him. How can we truly believe that God changes so radically by the time of the New Covenant? Are we to truly rip Psalms 66:18 out of our Bible because it was simply Old Covenant? 2 Timothy 3:16-17 says all Scripture is given by inspiration of God is profitable for doctrine, reproof, and instruction in righteousness. How can Psalms 66:18 instruct you in righteousness, John?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

So bringing Old Testament legalism into the New Testament Grace is evil.

First, I agree that the 613 laws within the Old Testament Law of Moses no longer applies. We cannot apply the Law of Moses as a whole to the New Covenant. But that does not mean that Jesus taught primarily Old Covenant as you assume. Colossians 2:14-16 makes it clear that we are not under the Sabbath, holy days, and dietary laws because this comes from the Law of Moses. But nowhere will you find the followers of Christ teaching that we are to ignore the words of Jesus. On the contrary, Paul says in 1 Timothy 6:3-4 that if any man does not agree with the words of Jesus Christ and the doctrine according to godliness, he is proud and he knows nothing. James 4:6 says God resists the proud and he gives grace to the humble.

Second, you mention evil. Do you believe a Christian can sin and still be saved? Can a Christian murder, rape, steal, hate, and commit adultery and say they abide in God and his salvation? Surely not. See 1 John 2:3-4. For if you believe that a Christian can sin and still be saved, then there is no real standard of morality that you are upholding. So if you believe that a Christian can sin and still be saved, then when you speak of evil, it really does not carry any weight at all. Take for example: Superman. He is a good guy. He does good things. But if Superman started to act like a bad guy, he would then be the villain of the story and not the hero. But if you believe a Christian can sin and still be saved, then you want me to believe that Superman can be Superman even if he does evil. You want me to believe a hero can do wrong and yet still be good. This goes against everything we know about good vs. evil.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Well put. The Old Testament does not end until the cross of Christ (well into what the traditions of man deem "New Testament").

Understand my point was about making the New Testament subject to the Old. When it is the Old Testament that is subject to the New.

Galatians 3:24–25 (AV)
24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

The Old Testament Law still stands to establish good and evil, to point to the Messiah, and to condemn unbelievers in Christ Jesus.

2 Corinthians 3:6 (AV)
6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

So bringing Old Testament legalism into the New Testament Grace is evil.

I also believe the New Testament officially began with Christ's death. I do not believe we have to keep any of the ceremonial laws or civil laws in the Old Testament Law of Moses (i.e. the 613). In fact, I would not encourage a new Christian to even look to the Old Covenant Law of Moses until they had a more firm understanding on the commands of Jesus Christ and His followers. Why? Because we are New Covenant believers. Jesus taught New Covenant. He made changes to the Law at the sermon on the Mount. Instead of an eye for an eye, He said to turn the other cheek. Instead of making oaths, He said not to make them. This runs contary to the Law of Moses. Yet, Jesus was making these changes because they were New Covenant teachings.

Galatians 3:24-25 is in reference to the Law of Moses and not the New Covenant teachings of Jesus Christ pre-cross. The Old Law (the Law of Moses, i.e. the 613) brought us to Jesus Christ. When did Jesus Christ arrive? Before the cross. The Law brought us to Christ and Jesus brought the faith which included His followers. The foundation we build is not the apostles but it is Jesus Christ.

2 Corinthians 3:6 is in reference to the Torah and not the New Testament Scriptures. For the NT Scriptures were still being formed at this time. For if Paul was critcizing the written letter, his own words could not be trusted then, and we would have to go only by what we think the Spirit was saying to us. But anyone can claim they are operating by God, but such a thing is not consistent throughout time. We need a nailed down Word of God that cannot be altered. The letter killed because in the Torah, you could be stoned for disobeying God's laws. But this is not the case with the teachings of Jesus Christ. Jesus actually changed the Law in the situation with the woman who was caught in the act of adultery. The Jews wanted to stone her and they said according to the Law, she should have been stoned. But Jesus made a change. He made change of the Law and He went against the Law of Moses by not having her stoned. Hebrews 7:12 says the Law has changed, and Jesus did this before the cross. The changes at the sermon on the mount, and this one involving the adulterous woman being forgiven proves that Jesus was giving us primarily New Covenant teachings and not the Old ones. For nowhere will you find anywhere in the Old Law about giving a person an exception like this. But the Father and the Son (who are GOD) both have the authority to change the Law.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I think the OT totally goes into the NT, but only as the NT being the fulfilment of the OT, rather than a continuation of it. The veil is torn.

Right, I agree that the New Covenant (New Testament) began officially with Christ's death, and it was hard for the Jewish apostles to let go of the Old Covenant ways. They did not initially let go of John the Baptist's water baptism. The Jewish apostles had no idea initially that the Gentiles would be included in God's program. Paul had to rebuke Peter for getting the Gentile Christians to live as the Jews do. Paul was pressured by the Jewish elders in the church in going through with an Old Testament purification rite that involved an animal sacrifice (See: Acts of the Apostles 21). So it took time for them to come out from under the Old Law. But this does not mean that there are not laws we must obey as a part of the Kingdom. Jesus said if you love me, keep my commandments (John 14:15); And Paul says if any man loves not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be accursed (See: 1 Corinthians 16:22).

 

[Ceallaigh]

Grinding for salvation.

 

[JohnD70X7]

Well, people can use a metaphorical phrase in a literal sentence.

That wasn't the point.

To do anything other than believe is Old Covenant or an attempt to bring legalism into Grace.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Grinding for salvation.

Except that the man is not alone. It is synergistic. The man cooperates with GOD. For nothing is impossible with GOD. Both God's grace through faith in Jesus is by GOD by our free will accceptance of that gift, and Sanctification (the next step in the salvation process) is also ultimately of GOD. Romans 8:13 says that if we live after the flesh (sin), we will die, but if we put to death the misdeeds of the body (sin) by the Spirit, we will live. Romans 8:13 does not say we put to death the misdeeds of the body without the Spirit.

Anyways, the Bible does tell you to STRIVE TO ENTER THE NARROW GATE.

Including verse 25, another translation says...

 

[Ceallaigh]

Except that the man is not alone. It is synergistic. The man cooperates with GOD. For nothing is impossible with GOD. Both God's grace through faith in Jesus is by GOD by our free will accceptance of that gift, and Sanctification (the next step in the salvation process) is also ultimately of GOD. Romans 8:13 says that if we live after the flesh (sin), we will die, but if we put to death the misdeeds of the body (sin) by the Spirit, we will live. Romans 8:13 does not say we put to death the misdeeds of the body without the Spirit.

Anyways, the Bible does tell you to STRIVE TO ENTER THE NARROW GATE.



Including verse 25, another translation says...

IIRC you said that Lordship Salvation is a false man-made doctrine that you don't subscribe to, but most everything you present is pretty much identical to what I've seen those who teach Lordship Salvation
present. So I'm at a bit at a loss as to why you consider them wrong. And more specifically why I should consider your basically identical teaching to be correct.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

That wasn't the point.

To do anything other than believe is Old Covenant or an attempt to bring legalism into Grace.

Well, saying that Jesus was talking metaphorically entirely in Matthew 5:28-30 is not correct. From my perspective it looks like an attempt to undo what He said.

First, while Jesus did teach during the time under the Old Covenant, you falsely assume that Jesus taught only Old Covenant and not New Covenant. This is just patently false.

#1. Old way says: An eye for an eye.
Jesus says: Turn the other cheek.
(Matthew 5:38-39).
#2. Old way says: To kill is to be in danger of judgment.
Jesus says: To say to your brother, “You fool” is to be in danger of the judgment.
(Matthew 5:21-22).
#3. Old way says: Perform unto the Lord your oaths.
Jesus says: Make no oaths at all.
(Matthew 5:34-37).
#4. Old way says: The men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she has wrought folly in Israel, to play the harlot in her father's house (Deuteronomy 22:21).
Jesus says: He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. (John 8:7).​

Second, you falsely think Paul taught Belief Alone-ism and he did not support living righteously as a part of being in God's good kingdom.

#1. Paul said:
"They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate." (Titus 1:16).
Conclusion: You can deny God by a lack of good works. So it's not Belief Alone-ism.

#2. Paul said: “That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” (2 Thessalonians 2:12).
Conclusion: Obviously those who commit sin have pleasure in unrighteousness. Paul says here that those who do so are damned. Paul does not mention another group of people (like believers) who can also have pleasure in unrighteousness and yet they can still be saved (if you believe a Christian can sin and still be saved).

#3. Paul said:
“Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these ; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” (Galatians 5:19-21).
Conclusion: Paul listed various grievous sins and he said that they which do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. So there is no such thing as a sin and still be saved type belief (if you believe a Christian can sin and still be saved).

#4. Paul said:
For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.” (Romans 8:13).
Conclusion: This is saying that if you live one way after the flesh or sin, you will die. But if you mortify or put to death the deeds of the body (sin) by the power of the Holy Spirit, you will live. Two ways of living here. One is living in sin and dying, and the other way of living is putting away sin by the power of the Holy Spirit in living. There is no third option that says we can sin and still be saved (if you believe a Christian can sin and still be saved).

#5. Paul said,
“There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” (Romans 8:1).
Conclusion: This erases any doubt here that this is not talking about physical death only if we sin. Taking into account Romans 8:13, we must conclude that there is no condemnation for those in Jesus who walk after the Spirit, but if they walk after the flesh, naturally there would be condemnation for they will die if they live after the flesh or sin. For Galatians 5:19 defines the works of the flesh as certain sins. So Romans 8:1 does not give us an alternative route that we can live after the flesh and be in Christ Jesus and still be saved.​

I believe Belief Alone Proponents fail to understand that Paul is referring to Works ALONE Salvationism that did not include God's grace in Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 4:3-5, and Titus 3:5. I believe they fail to understand that there are two aspects of salvation. The first aspect of salvation is God's grace without the deeds of the Law, and the second aspect of salvation is by Sanctification (i.e. living holy by God working through you) (Philippians 2:13, John 15:5).

Three, also Belief Alone-ism (Which in most cases suggests a sin and still be saved type belief) really does not resolve the problem of evil. We are supposed to be children of light and not children of darkness or of the devil. By our actions determines what kind of person we are. For do you not think Superman is good based on him being a hero or in doing good? Does not the villain do evil or wrong? How can Superman be the good guy if he did evil? That is what you are asking me to accept if you hold to a sin and still be saved type belief. You speak of evil, but you really cannot borrow from morality if you believe that a believer can sin and still be saved (Which is a violation of basic morality).

 

[JohnD70X7]

Well, saying that Jesus was talking metaphorically entirely in Matthew 5:28-30 is not correct. From my perspective it looks like an attempt to undo what He said.

Once again, all I was saying is that Jesus taught the Law while under the Law which was the Covenant he and the Jews were under until his death on the cross.

You are the one who has gone berserk trying to disprove what God said:

Hebrews 9:16–17 (AV)
16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

I'm done trying to convince you of something as simple as this point.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

IIRC

For those who do not know (so as to clarify what is being said). IIRC means ”If I recall correctly.”

you said that Lordship Salvation is a false man-made doctrine that you don't subscribe to, but most everything you present is pretty much identical to what I've seen those who teach Lordship Salvation present. So I'm at a bit at a loss as to why you consider them wrong. And more specifically why I should consider your basically identical teaching to be correct.

The Lordship Salvation doctrine may have started off good, but in recent years it has been colored by John MacArthur's ministry because of His Lordship Salvation books. He believes that a Christian can sin and still be saved. I already went into detail on this point with you before in this post here a while back.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Once again, all I was saying is that Jesus taught the Law while under the Law which was the Covenant he and the Jews were under until his death on the cross.

You are the one who has gone berserk trying to disprove what God said:

Hebrews 9:16–17 (AV)
16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

I'm done trying to convince you of something as simple as this point.

The Bible appears to be full of apparent contradictions at first glance. “All” does not always mean “all” in the Bible. We believe in a God who is three and yet He is one God. Yet, when it comes to being saved by God's grace without works and reconciling that with Sanctification that follows as a part of salvation, many today simply just refuses to accept such a truth. The question is.... why?

In Hebrews 9:16-17: I would take the testament (Old Testament) was in force overall (or for the most part) until Christ's death. This does not mean that Jesus cannot make new commands and or change certain Laws in the Old Testament or Old Covenant before the majority of the Old was done away with at the cross. For you cannot deny that Jesus was making changes to the Old Law with New teachings that contradict the Old Law. The Bible is not written in a way that we prefer it to be.

Besides, you also are not really addressing the problem of evil in a sin and still be saved type belief (if that is what you believe). You talk of evil, but you cannot be in support of any morality if you are in favor of breaking morality in some way. Well, that is if you believe that a believer can sin and still be saved. But I got that impression by what you said so far.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Once again, all I was saying is that Jesus taught the Law while under the Law which was the Covenant he and the Jews were under until his death on the cross.

You are the one who has gone berserk trying to disprove what God said:

Hebrews 9:16–17 (AV)
16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

I'm done trying to convince you of something as simple as this point.

You are also not really addressing the points I made with Scripture in post #95.
For the points I made in Scripture are just as true as the one you mentioned.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Once again, all I was saying is that Jesus taught the Law while under the Law which was the Covenant he and the Jews were under until his death on the cross.

You are the one who has gone berserk trying to disprove what God said:

Hebrews 9:16–17 (AV)
16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

I'm done trying to convince you of something as simple as this point.

You also have to understand that Jesus was not of the Aaronic priesthood order. Jesus was of the priesthood order of Melchizedek.