Salvation in the OT before Christ, without the Spirit?

[PrettyboyAndy]

I know of no Presbyterian church that is arminian. What do you have in mind?



I mean to contrast Presbyterianism with Baptistic Theology. @PrettyboyAndy would already call himself a Calvinist, but he is a reformed Baptist. Baptists, I think, are particularly unequipped to understand the continuity of the church between the Old and New Testament. And so Presbyterian Ecclesiology can help explain the work of the Spirit in the OT, but Baptist Ecclesiology cannot.

Interesting because we are looking for a new church, and never even considered Presbyterian

 

[brightlights]

Interesting because we are looking for a new church, and never even considered Presbyterian

Look into the PCA!

And read this book.

 

[PrettyboyAndy]

Look into the PCA!

And read this book.

Where would Presbyterians differ from Baptists?

 

[brightlights]

Where would Presbyterians differ from Baptists?

Assuming you're talking about reformed baptists, in subtle ways. Mainly having to do with Ecclesiology, Covenant Theology, Hermeneutics, and how they view the OT Law's meaning for today.

The book that I linked will provide a good summary of Presbyterian theology. Also see the Westminster Confession of Faith.

 

[St_Worm2]

Look into the PCA!

And read this book.

Agreed. PCA or OPC, but definitely not PCUSA (which in its present day extreme liberalism seems to be moving in the direction of the Unitarians as they continue to increasingly embrace many heretical beliefs .. i.e. they allow for practices like SSM while denying that the word of God is infallible/inerrant (and they no longer hold to our Confessions). This is sad news for me because this was the denomination of my youth

 

[bsd058]

Filling is not indwelling.

Semantics.

I used the term indwelling because the Holy Spirit was living in John the Baptist his whole life. But I did earlier explain that it's not indwelling in the same sense that we are indwelt today.

 

[brightlights]

Semantics.

I used the term indwelling because the Holy Spirit was living in John the Baptist his whole life. But I did earlier explain that it's not indwelling in the same sense that we are indwelt today.

We have more of the Spirit today since we have a clearer revelation of who Jesus is than did our OT brethren.

 

[Open Heart]

In light of my views that the Lord must change the heart/give us faith, do the initial work in salvation, how can I reconcile Salvation in the OT prior to Christ and the Holy Spirit indwelling the believer.

What makes you think there was no Holy Spirit in the OT? King David had the Holy Spirit, and begs God not to remove His Spirit from him in Psalm 51.

 

[Open Heart]

Indwelling was not possible before Pentecost. The Spirit that was upon the OT believers could be likened more to a cloak or mantle covering. John the Baptist could be said to have the same mantle/cloak as Elijah

This is an example of what I call "Smug Theology." It's not really in the Bible, not taught, but really convenient to believe, it really makes us feel so much holier than those Jews.

 

[ToBeLoved]

This is an example of what I call "Smug Theology." It's not really in the Bible, not taught, but really convenient to believe, it really makes us feel so much holier than those Jews.

Is this not a racist response? I didn't see the other poster bring race into it only what DID indeed occur in the Old Testament.

Now who is pushing racism and semitism

'you did not read what was written

 

[Open Heart]

Is this not a racist response? I didn't see the other poster bring race into it only what DID indeed occur in the Old Testament.

Now who is pushing racism and semitism

'you did not read what was written

My response is not racist--it is protective of us Jews. Whether the Smug Theology is racist, you will have to decide for yourself. In my opinion and the opinion of Messianic Jews and many other Christians, Supersessionism is antisemitic.

 

[PROPHECYKID]

Hello brothers and sisters,


In light of my views that the Lord must change the heart/give us faith, do the initial work in salvation, how can I reconcile Salvation in the OT prior to Christ and the Holy Spirit indwelling the believer.

OT heroes were looking forward to the foreshadowing of the messiah to come, and had faith in God. Abram believed the LORD, and he credited it to him as righteousness. Genesis 15:16

Since the Holy Spirit, was not poured out till after Christ accomplished his work on the cross. and since man needs the Lord to open the eyes and ears of the individual in order that they can believe, How were OT believers saved?

Is the opening of the heart/eyes/ears not the work of the Spirit? Was the spirit indwelling the believer in the OT?

The Holy Spirit did exist in the OT but his role was not as prominent as it is after Jesus ascended. Remember that before Christ, God the Father wanted to dwell among his people and was able to do this by his presence in the temple. God also communicated directly with prophets who were to instruct the people in the ways of God. So in the OT, God the Father was the prominent figure as the one who was dwelling among his people. Then Jesus came and he became the prominent figure as the one who was dwelling among his people. Then after Jesus the Holy Spirit became the prominent figure. But all three members of the Godhead were in operation at all phases throughout the history of man.

In terms of how people got saved in the OT, it is the same as in the NT. Grace through Faith. That grace was administered by the blood of Jesus Christ. In the OT the blood of bulls and goats was used as a representation of the blood of Jesus. Despite popular opinion, men were never saved by keeping any law. Salvation was never by works because no work any man can do can earn them salvation. So only through the blood of Jesus could man be saved.

 

[Philip_B]

One of the problems that we seem to face at times, in my humble opinion, is that we have tended to prioritise the Holy Trinity, and sometimes even lurched toward the heresy of the pneumatomci who held that the Holy Spirit was a creation of Jesus the Son and as such part of creation and not divine. The substance of this was addressed in the revision of the Nicene Creed as promulgated by the 1st Council of Constantinople.

It is a clearly non biblical position to hold and is clearly out of step with the opening verses of Genesis where we are told of the Holy Spirit brooding over the face of the waters in creation.

Living, as I do, in the great southern land, where Christianity came to our shores accompanied by people in chains. Those of us who have wandered in the great expanse of this land ask themselves, did the Holy Spirit whistle in the gum trees and and whirl around the anthills long before.

The only conclusion I can reach is 'yes'. Our land hosts the oldest continuous cultural tradition on the planet today, and I do not believe that there was ever a time when they were outside the love, provision and care of almighty God. Their stories of the Dream Time, tell of an astounding openness to life beyond our life.

The challenge for us today is to keep this openness to the Spirit in our lives. The Holy Spirit is the third person of the Holy Trinity, and not to be understood as the sole preserve of the Christians or the Church.

How you understand this phrase is important.

Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus
Outside the Church there is no Salvation​

On the one hand this has been used to understand an ecclesial control of the dispensation of grace. In my view this has been unfortunate and has led to a number of approaches that have seen the Institution as more important that it ought to be, vessel of grace though she be, she is also the servant of grace.

On the other hand this has been used to embrace a wider understanding of Church to include those who have responded to grace however they have encountered it, even if they do not have the prescribed words and formulas, but as they have been given grace to respond they have encountered the everlasting of of God, and ultimately in the next world if not in this, Jesus Christ.

Romans 1:20
Ever since the creation of the world his eternal power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have been understood and seen through the things he has made.​

 

[ToBeLoved]

My response is not racist--it is protective of us Jews. Whether the Smug Theology is racist, you will have to decide for yourself. In my opinion and the opinion of Messianic Jews and many other Christians, Supersessionism is antisemitic.

There is no answering this. Except hate builds more hate.

And supersessionism is not the same as what the poster said when you called him and what he said smug racist theology.

So many people that talk about replacement theology have no idea what it even is, and then bat these words about with abandon.

Maybe we all missed Jesus saying to "Love your neighbor as yourself", once His Children break down and start these divisions, there is no end to it.

Wish it didn't happen everytime someone feels their toe got stepped on.

 

[Open Heart]

And supersessionism is not the same as what the poster said when you called him and what he said smug racist theology.

What do you think supersessionism is?

 

[bsd058]

I kind of want to see if anyone can show an honest logical connection to replacement theology and anti-semitism. As of yet, I've only seen assertions that it is. And anecdotes aren't proof either.

There needs to be a logical connection, otherwise it's useless name calling and abuse of brothers and sisters in Christ who honestly hold to this view of Scripture based upon the Scriptures themselves.

Debate whether it is true or not and try not to stoop to what many do and label those who disagree with you racist.

Of course, this thread is probably not the best to debate in regarding replacement theology. This thread is about Salvation in the OT.

 

[PROPHECYKID]

I kind of want to see if anyone can show an honest logical connection to replacement theology and anti-semitism. As of yet, I've only seen assertions that it is. And anecdotes aren't proof either.

There needs to be a logical connection, otherwise it's useless name calling and abuse of brothers and sisters in Christ who honestly hold to this view of Scripture based upon the Scriptures themselves.

Debate whether it is true or not and try not to stoop to what many do and label those who disagree with you racist.

Of course, this thread is probably not the best to debate in regarding replacement theology. This thread is about Salvation in the OT.

There is no logical connection or else Paul would have been one of the biggest antisemites in history.

Labels are thrown around in our society these days like frisbees. According to the bible, marriage is between a man and a woman and all of a sudden the homophobe label is thrown at me. Its ridiculous really.

I for one completely agree with the idea of replacement theology although I hate the name. God's chosen people have always been the people through whom God intends to use to evangelize the world. The end goal for God has always been to save as many people as possible and Israel was God's means to do that but they failed. I refuse to believe that when it comes to salvation, God is going to favour and give an advantage particular group of people based on superficial characteristics when God has always been shown to be a God interested in the heart of man as opposed to your nationality. If a Jew is going to have a better chance at being saved than me, just because they were born a Jew then that would make God terribly unfair.

 

[PrettyboyAndy]

What makes you think there was no Holy Spirit in the OT? King David had the Holy Spirit, and begs God not to remove His Spirit from him in Psalm 51.

I was under the impression that the holy Spirit wouldn't dwell inside the believer but rather would come and go?

 

[Open Heart]

There is no logical connection or else Paul would have been one of the biggest antisemites in history.

Not everyone who believes in supersessionism becomes an antisemite, just as not everyone who smokes gets lung cancer. But supersessionism is the root cause of Christian antisemitism as surely as cigarettes cause lung cancer.

And Paul was not supersessionist. "The gifts and callings are irrevocable." "Theirs is the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises." PRESENT TENSE.

 

[Open Heart]

I was under the impression that the holy Spirit wouldn't dwell inside the believer but rather would come and go?

It goes if someone commits a sin unto death, same as it does for us.