saved by grace or by works

[Soyeong]

If you really mean what you are saying here, you will also build an ark, because God commanded Noah to build one in Genesis 6:14.

But you don't, because somehow, you know that command was directed only to Noah and not to you.

God is not a respecter of persons, so if someone were in the same situation where the earth had been filled with violence and God was going to flood the world and spare the righteous, then we should build and ark.

 

[Guojing]

God is not a respecter of persons, so if someone were in the same situation where the earth had been filled with violence and God was going to flood the world and spare the righteous, then we should build and ark.

The point is, you don't obey Genesis 6:14 because you know that was not directed to you.

You agree with that at least?

That does not mean one cannot learn from Noah's faith in that passage, all scripture is for our learning.

 

[Soyeong]

The point is, you don't obey Genesis 6:14 because you know that was not directed to you.

You agree with that at least?

That does not mean one cannot learn from Noah's faith in that passage, all scripture is for our learning.

It is not good to focus on whom a command was given by so much so that you lose sight of what it teaches us about the nature of whom it was commanded by. The Bible often uses the same terms to describe the nature of God as it does to describe the nature of God's law, such as with it being holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12), and it could not be accurately described as such if it was not God's instructions for how to act in accordance with God's nature. So if a command teaches us about how to act in accordance with God's nurture and if it our goal to act in accordance with God's nature, then the issue of whom it was commanded to becomes of less importance.

Many of the people in the Bible lives long lives, so we are told about brief snippets of their lives our of the many stories that we could have been told about, but the purpose of relating those specific stories is that they teach us something important about the nature of who God is, and if the story of Noah's flood did not teach us something important about the nature of who God is, then it wouldn't be part of the Bible. If what we learn about the nature of God does not lead us to live in accordance with His nature, then we are missing the whole point, so the point of learning is to do.

 

[Guojing]

It is not good to focus on whom a command was given by so much so that you lose sight of what it teaches us about the nature of whom it was commanded by.

I already stated

That does not mean one cannot learn from Noah's faith in that passage, all scripture is for our learning.

How is that different from your sentence that I bolded?

 

[iwbswiaihl]

 

[iwbswiaihl]

What a way to say all but still allowing exceptions.

But my point has been established so lets move on

Only in your mind has this been established, but have a great day. It is finished.

 

[Guojing]

Only in your mind has this been established, but have a great day. It is finished.

I have established that when some people say all, they don't really mean all.

That is not obvious? =)

 

[earthmover]

So you still want to believe that all the commandments of Jesus are for us to obey.

Alright I can understand that. If you have read the previous exchange on Luke 12:33, you know that what many people do is that they convince themselves, "what Jesus really meant was...", hence allowing them to think they are obeying his commandments. =)

All true Christians have the Holy Spirit indwelling teaching them and guiding toward righteousness. This includes following the commandments of Jesus as given in the NT.

earthmover

 

[Guojing]

All true Christians have the Holy Spirit indwelling teaching them and guiding toward righteousness. This includes following the commandments of Jesus as given in the NT.

earthmover

Do you sell what you have as Jesus commanded you in luke 12:33?

 

[msortwell]

I have established that when some people say all, they don't really mean all.

That is not obvious? =)

Mark 4:33-34
And with many such parables He spoke the word to them as they were able to hear it. 34 But without a parable He did not speak to them. And when they were alone, He explained all things to His disciples. NKJV

Jesus did not explain all truths of all things. An intellgent interpretation considers the context and the clear intent of the author in making reference to "all" things. This does not render the inspired text inaccurate.

Similarly, when believers assert that they are subject to all of the commands of Scripture, they do so understand that some of the commands are to others. Ephesians 5 has a command to wives, another to husbands, and a third to children in chapter 6. A separate commandment applicable to separate positions within the family.

 

[Guojing]

Mark 4:33-34
And with many such parables He spoke the word to them as they were able to hear it. 34 But without a parable He did not speak to them. And when they were alone, He explained all things to His disciples. NKJV

Jesus did not expain all truths of all things. An intellgent interpretation considers the context and the clear intent of the author in making reference to "all" things. This does not render the inspired text inaccurate.

Actually, on a friendlier note, would it really weaken your position by simply saying the following?

"All scripture is for our learning, but not all scripture contains instructions for us to obey"

What is the difference in meaning between that statement and your "ALL Scripture is to be obeyed in so far as it applies to each individual."

 

[iwbswiaihl]

 

[msortwell]

Actually, on a friendlier note, would it really weaken your position by simply saying the following?

"All scripture is for our learning, but not all scripture contains instructions for us to obey"

What is the difference in meaning between that statement and your "ALL Scripture is to be obeyed in so far as it applies to each individual."

The difference is that of being a hearer of the Word or a doer of the word.

 

[Guojing]

The difference is that of being a hearer of the Word or a doer of the word.

Don't give motherhood statements and assume your readers can read your mind

 

[msortwell]

Don't give motherhood statements and assume your readers can read your mind

I don’t expect any to read minds. I do expect those involved in discussions like these to read Scripture - including James 1:22.

 

[Guojing]

I don’t expect any to read minds. I do expect those involved in discussions like these to read Scripture - including James 1:22.

I am asking you "What is the difference in meaning between that statement and your "ALL Scripture is to be obeyed in so far as it applies to each individual."

If you feel there is a difference, please explain clearly. Otherwise, you don't need to reply and I will understand.

 

[msortwell]

Actually, on a friendlier note, would it really weaken your position by simply saying the following?

"All scripture is for our learning, but not all scripture contains instructions for us to obey"

What is the difference in meaning between that statement and your "ALL Scripture is to be obeyed in so far as it applies to each individual."

It is rare that God requires of us that we simply understand (learn). It is required of God’s people to act, to do, to walk in the light of His Word. Learning is important. But it is not sufficient.

 

[Guojing]

It is rare that God requires of us that we simply understand (learn). It is required of God’s people to act, to do, to walk in the light of His Word. Learning is important. But it is not sufficient.

But you yourself allow exceptions to obedience when you said "so far as it applies to each individual".

What else can that statement means?

To elaborate further, using your bolded exception above, what is the difference, in substance, between these 2 reasonings?

1. I don't have to obey Genesis 6:14, because God only told Noah to build an ark and not me. It only applies to Noah and not me
2. I don't have to obey Luke 12:33, nor Matthew 28:18-20, because Jesus only instructed members of the nation of Israel and not me. It only applies to Israel and not me

 

[msortwell]

But you yourself allow exceptions to obedience when you said "so far as it applies to each individual".

What else can that statement means?

To elaborate further, using your bolded exception above, what is the difference, in substance, between these 2 reasonings?

1. I don't have to obey Genesis 6:14, because God only told Noah to build an ark and not me. It only applies to Noah and not me
2. I don't have to obey Luke 12:33, nor Matthew 28:18-20, because Jesus only instructed members of the nation of Israel and not me. It only applies to Israel and not me

Matthew 28:16-20
16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had appointed for them. 17 When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some doubted. 18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen. NKJV

The disciples were instructed to go to all nations, making disciples, teaching them, among other things that Jesus taught them, to go unto all nations (all peoples, including gentiles – to us) making disciples – to observe, obey, follow, all things Jesus commanded of His 11 disciples.

Luke 12:33, [teaching His disciples] Sell that ye have, and give alms; provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither moth corrupteth. KJV

First, we ought not to read the word “all” into 12:33. The term translated as “that ye have” is the combination of two Greek words. The first word is a verb meaning “to be” in a plural participle form, so . . . “things being in existence.” The second word is the Greek equivalent of “yours” (plural). In combination, it refers to (speaking collectively to a group of hearers) “your belongings.” It does not commit to speaking of the total of all possessions held by the group being addressed, or to speaking of a portion of the things possessed by the group being addressed. It is the same words used when Jesus teaches in Matt 24:47 where he says, “Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods.” But Jesus, in the case of Matt 24 provides clarification by including the word “all” (pas in the Greek).

So, the command in 12:33 is not a command to sell everything but a command to sell from among one’s possessions. Jesus COULD has specifically added ALL. The language would have accepted it, just like in Matt 24. Moreover, there is clear evidence that Jesus’ disciples continued to have personal belongings,, and were, in fact, instructed to purchase items and maintain a satchel designed to carry personal belongings (Luke 22:36).

And Luke 12:33 is a transition verse. It moves from the topic of trusting in God for our needs to living generously, sacrificially, for the furtherance of God’s kingdom.

And, as already shown, Jesus taught the eleven that they are to make additional disciples, teaching them (teaching us) to do what they were taught to do.

Genesis 6:14-15a [God to Noah, and to no one else - no reasonable extrapolation or application to others, beyong the general teaching of the blessing of being God's obedient servant.]

14 Make yourself an ark of gopherwood; make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and outside with pitch. 15 And this is how you shall make it . . . NKJV

 

[Guojing]

Genesis 6:14-15a [God to Noah, and to no one else - no reasonable extrapolation or application to others, beyong the general teaching of the blessing of being God's obedient servant.]

Your point is saying the same as me.

Genesis 6:14 is a command to no one else but Noah, thus, we don't obey it.

Thus, not all scripture contains commands for us to obey.

Why is it that difficult for you to concede that?