THE circumcision thread

[Pythons]

I'm game, what does it say?

 

[JohnT]

I'm game, what does it say?

from the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (ISBE)

In the account of the institution of the covenant between Yahweh and Abraham which Priestly Code (P) gives (Ge 17), circumcision is looked upon as the ratification of the agreement. Yahweh undertook to be the God of Abraham and of his descendants. Abraham was to be the father of a multitude of nations and the founder of a line of kings. He and his descendants were to inherit Canaan.

The agreement thus formed was permanent; Abraham's posterity should come within the scope of it. But it was necessary to inclusion in the covenant that every male child should be circumcised on the 8th day. A foreigner who had attached himself as a slave to a Hebrew household had to undergo the rite--the punishment for its non-fulfilment being death or perhaps excommunication. According to Ex 12:48 (also P) no stranger could take part in the celebration of the Passover unless he had been circumcised. In the Book of Jos (Jos 5:2-9) we read that the Israelites were circumcised at Gilgal ("Rolling"), and thus the "reproach of Egypt" was "rolled away."

Apparently circumcision in the case of the Hebrews was prohibited during the Egyptian period--circumcision being a distinctive mark of the ruling race. It is noticeable that flint knives were used for the purpose. This use of an obsolete instrument is one of many proofs of conservatism in religion.

According to the strange and obscure account of the circumcision by Zipporah of her eldest son (Ex 4:25) the performance of the rite in the case of the son apparently possesses a vicarious value, for thereby Moses becomes a "bridegroom of blood." The marriage bond is ratified by the rite of blood (see 4 below). But it is possible that the author's meaning is that owing to the fact that Moses had not been circumcised (the "reproach of Egypt") he was not fit to enter the matrimonial estate (see 3 below)...

In Jer 9:25 and De 30:6 we find the spiritual significance of circumcision. A prophet like Jeremiah was not likely to attach much importance to an external act like circumcision. He bluntly tells his countrymen that they are no better than Egyptians, Edomites, Moabites and Ammonites. They are uncircumcised in heart.

Paul uses the term concision for this outward circumcision unaccompanied by any spiritual change (Php 3:2). The question of circumcision occasioned a protracted strife among the early Christians. Judaizing Christians argued for the necessity of circumcision. It was a reminiscence of the unrelenting particularism which had sprung up during the prolonged oppression of the Greek and Roman period. According to their view salvation was of the Jews and for the Jews. It was necessary to become a Jew in order to become a Christian.

Paul consented to circumcision in the case of Timothy "because of the Jews" (Ac 16:3). But he saw that a principle was at stake and in most of his epistles he points out the sheer futility of the contention of the Judaizers
​

For some of the Reformed tradition, baptism of a child is the NT equivalent of circumcision. We are free to disagree, but that is their position, and it is not a big deal.

Circumcision of the heart is required of all believers; it is the voluntary entering into a covenantal relationship with God the Father. He says "I will be your God, and you shall be my people.

One important aspect of physical circumcision is that is irreversible. Once circumcised, always circumcised.

 

[RND]

At this time the rite of circumcision was given to Abraham as "a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised." Romans 4:11. It was to be observed by the patriarch and his descendants as a token that they were devoted to the service of God and thus separated from idolaters, and that God accepted them as His peculiar treasure. By this rite they were pledged to fulfill, on their part, the conditions of the covenant made with Abraham. They were not to contract marriages with the heathen; for by so doing they would lose their reverence for God and His holy law; they would be tempted to engage in the sinful practices of other nations, and would be seduced into idolatry. {PP 138.1}

As men again departed from God, the Lord chose Abraham, of whom He declared, "Abraham obeyed My voice, and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws." To him was given the rite of circumcision, which was a sign that those who received it were devoted to the service of God,--a pledge that they would remain separate from idolatry, and would obey the law of God. The failure of Abraham's descendants to keep this pledge, as shown in their disposition to form alliances with the heathen and adopt their practises, was the cause of their sojourn and bondage in Egypt. {ST, February 1, 1910 par. 3}

1, 5 (Rom. 2:24-29; Gal. 5:6; Eph. 2:14-16; Col. 2:14-17; Titus 1:9-11). Circumcision of No Value After the Cross.--[Titus 1:9-11, 13, 14 quoted.] There were those in Paul's day who were constantly dwelling upon circumcision, and they could bring plenty of proof from the Bible to show its obligation on the Jews; but this teaching was of no consequence at this time; for Christ had died upon Calvary's cross, and circumcision in the flesh could not be of any further value. {6BC 1061. 5}

The typical service and the ceremonies connected with it were abolished at the cross. The great antitypical Lamb of God had become an offering for guilty man, and the shadow ceased in the substance. Paul was seeking to bring the minds of men to the great truth for the time; but these who claimed to be followers of Jesus were wholly absorbed in teaching the tradition of the Jews, and the obligation of circumcision (RH May 29, 1888). {6BC 1061.6}


In the past, Christ had been approached through forms and ceremonies, but now He was upon the earth, calling attention directly to Himself, presenting a spiritual priesthood, and placing the sinful human agent at the footstool of mercy. "Ask, and it shall be given you," He promised; "seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." "If ye shall ask anything in My name, I will do it. If ye love Me, keep My commandments." "He that hath My commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth Me: . . . and I will love him, and will manifest Myself to him." "As the Father hath loved Me, so have I loved you: continue ye in My love. If ye keep My commandments, ye shall abide in My love; even as I have kept My Father's commandments, and abide in His love." {FE 399.2}
These lessons Christ gave in His teaching, showing that the ritual service was passing away, and possessed no virtue. "The hour cometh," He said, "and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship Him. God is a Spirit; and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth." True circumcision is the worship of Christ in spirit and truth, not in forms and ceremonies, with hypocritical pretense. {FE 399.3}

 

[JohnT]

At this time the rite of circumcision was given to Abraham as "a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised." Romans 4:11. It was to be observed by the patriarch and his descendants a a token that they were devoted to the service of God and thus separated from idolaters, and that God accepted them as His peculiar treasure.By this rite they were pledged to fulfill, on their part, the conditions of the covenant made with Abraham. They were not to contract marriages with the heathen; for by so doing they would lose their reverence for God and His holy law; they would be tempted to engage in the sinful practices of other nations, and would be seduced into idolatry. {PP 138.1}

Romans 4:9 Is this blessing then pronounced upon the circumcision, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say, To Abraham his faith was reckoned for righteousness.
10 How then was it reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision:
11 and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while he was in uncircumcision; that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be in uncircumcision, that righteousness might be reckoned unto them;
12 and the father of circumcision to them who not only are of the circumcision, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham which he had in uncircumcision.
13 For not through the law was the promise to Abraham or to his seed that he should be heir of the world, but through the righteousness of faith. ASV
​

Where is the OBEDIENCE of Abraham in focus here? His FAITH was reckoned (counted as) righteousness.

Please do not make up something that Scripture does not say! Use the CONTEXT, man.

As men again departed from God, the Lord chose Abraham, of whom He declared, "Abraham obeyed My voice, and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws." To him was given the rite of circumcision, which was a sign that those who received it were devoted to the service of God,--a pledge that they would remain separate from idolatry, and would obey the law of God. The failure of Abraham's descendants to keep this pledge, as shown in their disposition to form alliances with the heathen and adopt their practices, was the cause of their sojourn and bondage in Egypt. {ST, February 1, 1910 par. 3}

Genesis 26:1 And there was a famine in the land, besides the first famine that was in the days of Abraham. And Isaac went unto Abimelech king of the Philistines, unto Gerar.
2 And Jehovah appeared unto him, and said, Go not down into Egypt. Dwell in the land which I shall tell thee of.
3 Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee. For unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these lands, and I will establish the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father.
4 And I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these lands. And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.
5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws. ASV
​

The promise was FULFILLED with this promise restated to Isaac, and his son Joseph. There was no conditional statement made as you cut and paste job falsely alleges. It was unconditional because as seen above “Abraham BELIEVED and it was RECKONED to him as righteousness.

Please do not make up something that Scripture does not say! Use the CONTEXT, man.

1, 5 (Rom. 2:24-29; Gal. 5:6; Eph. 2:14-16; Col. 2:14-17; Titus 1:9-11). Circumcision of No Value After the Cross.--[Titus 1:9-11, 13, 14 quoted.] There were those in Paul's day who were constantly dwelling upon circumcision, and they could bring plenty of proof from the Bible to show its obligation on the Jews; but this teaching was of no consequence at this time; for Christ had died upon Calvary's cross, and circumcision in the flesh could not be of any further value. {6BC 1061.

5}

I have no problem with this. It does not mean that circumcision is abolished for reasons discussed previously, and Paul tells us that the heart must be circumcised.

Colossians 2: 9 for in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily,
10 and in him ye are made full, who is the head of all principality and power:
11 in whom ye were also circumcised with a circumcision not made with hands, in the putting off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of Christ; ASV
​

The typical service and the ceremonies connected with it were abolished at the cross. The great antitypical Lamb of God had become an offering for guilty man, and the shadow ceased in the substance. Paul was seeking to bring the minds of men to the great truth for the time; but these who claimed to be followers of Jesus were wholly absorbed in teaching the tradition of the Jews, and the obligation of circumcision (RH May 29, 1888). {6BC 1061.6}

There is no such thing as “truth for the time”. Truth is truth, and it is timeless, or else it is not truth by definition.

Please do not make up something that Scripture does not say! Use the CONTEXT, man.

In the past, Christ had been approached through forms and ceremonies, but now He was upon the earth, calling attention directly to Himself, presenting a spiritual priesthood, and placing the sinful human agent at the footstool of mercy. "Ask, and it shall be given you," He promised; "seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." "If ye shall ask anything in My name, I will do it. If ye love Me, keep My commandments." "He that hath My commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth Me: . . . and I will love him, and will manifest Myself to him." "As the Father hath loved Me, so have I loved you: continue ye in My love. If ye keep My commandments, ye shall abide in My love; even as I have kept My Father's commandments, and abide in His love." {FE 399.2}

Please show ONE instance where “ In the past, Christ had been approached through forms and ceremonies.”
OR
“[Jesus was] calling attention directly to Himself, presenting a spiritual priesthood, and placing the sinful human agent at the footstool of mercy”

AND
How can any of that other stuff you quoted relate to circumcision?

Please do not make up something that Scripture does not say!

These lessons Christ gave in His teaching, showing that the ritual service was passing away, and possessed no virtue. "The hour cometh," He said, "and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship Him. God is a Spirit; and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth." True circumcision is the worship of Christ in spirit and truth, not in forms and ceremonies, with hypocritical pretense. {FE 399.3}

The passage you cite has NOTHING to do with circumcision! Jesus is talking to the Samaritan Woman in John 4.

Here is a snippet:
John 4:21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when neither in this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, shall ye worship the Father.
22 Ye worship that which ye know not: we worship that which we know; for salvation is from the Jews.
23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth: for such doth the Father seek to be his worshippers.
24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth.
25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messiah cometh (he that is called Christ): when he is come, he will declare unto us all things.
26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he. ASV
​

Who made up this balderdash? “True circumcision is the worship of Christ in spirit and truth, not in forms and ceremonies, with hypocritical pretense” It sounds as if it comes from someone hating formal worship, and never seen the beauty and holiness of a formal worship when people REALLY love Jesus, and his coming.

Please do not make up something that Scripture does not say! Use the CONTEXT, man

 

[RND]

Romans 4:9 Is this blessing then pronounced upon the circumcision, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say, To Abraham his faith was reckoned for righteousness.
10 How then was it reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision:
11 and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while he was in uncircumcision; that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be in uncircumcision, that righteousness might be reckoned unto them;
12 and the father of circumcision to them who not only are of the circumcision, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham which he had in uncircumcision.
13 For not through the law was the promise to Abraham or to his seed that he should be heir of the world, but through the righteousness of faith. ASV
​

Where is the OBEDIENCE of Abraham in focus here? His FAITH was reckoned (counted as) righteousness.

Please do not make up something that Scripture does not say! Use the CONTEXT, man.

Sometimes I think we have to be honest enough with ourselves to admit when we don't understand something, that's my opinion.

Abraham's faith was reckoned as righteousness before he was circumcised, not after.

10 How then was it (Abraham's faith) reckoned? when he (Abraham) was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Notin circumcision, but in uncircumcision:

Genesis 26:1 And there was a famine in the land, besides the first famine that was in the days of Abraham. And Isaac went unto Abimelech king of the Philistines, unto Gerar.
2 And Jehovah appeared unto him, and said, Go not down into Egypt. Dwell in the land which I shall tell thee of.
3 Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee. For unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these lands, and I will establish the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father.
4 And I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these lands. And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.
5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws. ASV
​

The promise was FULFILLED with this promise restated to Isaac, and his son Joseph. There was no conditional statement made as you cut and paste job falsely alleges. It was unconditional because as seen above “Abraham BELIEVED and it was RECKONED to him as righteousness.

Please do not make up something that Scripture does not say! Use the CONTEXT, man.

Sometimes I think we have to be honest enough with ourselves to admit when we don't understand something, that's my opinion.

The promise that Abraham received regarding his faith being seen as righteouness was not fulfilled (made complete) with this promise restated to Isaac, and his son Joseph. It's clearly stated in verse 3 of Romans 4.

For what saith the scripture (the Old Testament)? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

Now we have to find out when did Abraham "believed" God.

The "original" promise that God made to Abraham is found way back in Genesis 12:1-3. When the "next" promise came to Abraham from God, the one mentioned in Romans 4, in Genesis 13:15-16 Abraham still hadn't been circumcised.

For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever.

Galatians 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

This is the promise that Paul was referring to in Romans 4.

I have no problem with this. It does not mean that circumcision is abolished for reasons discussed previously, and Paul tells us that the heart must be circumcised.

Colossians 2: 9 for in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily,
10 and in him ye are made full, who is the head of all principality and power:
11 in whom ye were also circumcised with a circumcision not made with hands, in the putting off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of Christ; ASV
​

There is no such thing as “truth for the time”. Truth is truth, and it is timeless, or else it is not truth by definition.

Please do not make up something that Scripture does not say! Use the CONTEXT, man.

It can be said, in truth, that at one time adulterers were at one time stoned to death. Likewise, in truth, it can be said that adulterers are not anymore stoned to death. Of course that's not to say that adultery doesn't still lead to death which is also equally true.

So in reality I guess we can say that there is a "truth for a time."

Please show ONE instance where “ In the past, Christ had been approached through forms and ceremonies.”
OR
“[Jesus was] calling attention directly to Himself, presenting a spiritual priesthood, and placing the sinful human agent at the footstool of mercy”

AND
How can any of that other stuff you quoted relate to circumcision?

Please do not make up something that Scripture does not say!

See what took place regarding the Sanctuary service and the Passover Lamb.

Psalms 77:13 Thy way (Jesus - "I am the Way, truth and life..."), O God, [is] in the sanctuary: who [is so] great a God as [our] God?

God's way is in the sanctuary.

The passage you cite has NOTHING to do with circumcision! Jesus is talking to the Samaritan Woman in John 4.

Here is a snippet:
John 4:21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when neither in this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, shall ye worship the Father.
22 Ye worship that which ye know not: we worship that which we know; for salvation is from the Jews.
23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth: for such doth the Father seek to be his worshippers.
24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth.
25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messiah cometh (he that is called Christ): when he is come, he will declare unto us all things.
26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he. ASV
​

Who made up this balderdash? “True circumcision is the worship of Christ in spirit and truth, not in forms and ceremonies, with hypocritical pretense” It sounds as if it comes from someone hating formal worship, and never seen the beauty and holiness of a formal worship when people REALLY love Jesus, and his coming.

Please do not make up something that Scripture does not say! Use the CONTEXT, man

John, do you understand that metaphorically physical circumcision of the penis has always been related to the actual, spiritual circumcision of the heart?

Deu 10:16 Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked.

Deu 30:6 And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live.

Jer 4:4 Circumcise yourselves to the LORD, and take away the foreskins of your heart, ye men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem: lest my fury come forth like fire, and burn that none can quench [it], because of the evil of your doings.

“True circumcision is the worship of Christ in spirit and truth, not in forms and ceremonies, with hypocritical pretense”

A heart that has been truly circumcised is a heart that can now worship Christ in spirit and in truth.

John 4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. John 4:24 God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth.

 

[JohnT]

RND

In all my post, I never denied the connection between the physical act, and the symbolism of having a circumcised heart.

What I objected to was that your source made up things that were not in Scripture.

That is why I quoted the Scriptures in context so you could see how much in error your source actually was.

 

[RND]

RND

In all my post, I never denied the connection between the physical act, and the symbolism of having a circumcised heart.

Um, ok.

I was just adding that because of the confusion you seemed to have with respect as to when Abraham's faith was counted as righteousness. By quoting Gen 26 that would have been after his circumcision, not before as Paul states.

What I objected to was that your source made up things that were not in Scripture.

And I think I fairly pointed out that everything she stated was completely accurate with respect to scripture.

That is why I quoted the Scriptures in context so you could see how much in error your source actually was.

I think you need to go back and see how you actually mis-quoted the scriptures John.

Case in point:

Genesis 26:1 And there was a famine in the land, besides the first famine that was in the days of Abraham. And Isaac went unto Abimelech king of the Philistines, unto Gerar.
2 And Jehovah appeared unto him, and said, Go not down into Egypt. Dwell in the land which I shall tell thee of.
3 Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee. For unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these lands, and I will establish the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father.
4 And I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these lands. And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.
5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws. ASV
​

The promise was FULFILLED with this promise restated to Isaac, and his son Joseph. There was no conditional statement made as you cut and paste job falsely alleges. It was unconditional because as seen above “Abraham BELIEVED and it was RECKONED to him as righteousness.

By the time we reach Genesis 26 John, Abraham had already been circumcised so the promise could not have been "fulfilled" at that time according to Paul. The promise was fulfilled before Abraham was circumcised.

The "condition" that God had for Abraham and his descendants was that actual "circumcision" itself. Re-read Genesis 17 to find out.

He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.

Must be circumcised is a "condition" of the covenant. All the quotes offered from EGW are as accurate as can possibly be.

 

[JohnT]

Um, ok.

By the time we reach Genesis 26 John, Abraham had already been circumcised so the promise could not have been "fulfilled" at that time according to Paul. The promise was fulfilled before Abraham was circumcised.

You are mixing up the SIGN of the covenant, circumcision, with the REQUIREMENT for the covenant, belief. Your source negates this verse, and the ones I also pasted,

Romans 4:9 Is this blessing then pronounced upon the circumcision, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say, To Abraham his faith was reckoned for righteousness.
​

The "condition" that God had for Abraham and his descendants was that actual "circumcision" itself. Re-read Genesis 17 to find out.

Genesis 17:10 disagrees ENTIRELY with your source

10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.
11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.
12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you...
​

There was no "condition" except belief to be a member of the covenant.

He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.

See above

Must be circumcised is a "condition" of the covenant. All the quotes offered from EGW are as accurate as can possibly be.

I thought it was her, but you gotta see she has a works-conditional approach to salvation. If salvation is free, then why do we have to work for it, or even "work to keep it effective?" That makes a mockery of Titus 3:5ff

5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life
​

Can't get more clearer, or freerer.

 

[RND]

You are mixing up the SIGN of the covenant, circumcision, with the REQUIREMENT for the covenant, belief. Your source negates this verse, and the ones I also pasted,

Romans 4:9 Is this blessing then pronounced upon the circumcision, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say, To Abraham his faith was reckoned for righteousness.​

For goodness sake John read verse 10:

How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.

Abraham was in "uncircumcision when he received God promises.

Genesis 17:10 disagrees ENTIRELY with your source

10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.
11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.
12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you...
​

There was no "condition" except belief to be a member of the covenant.

The "condition" of the covenant was "circumcision." There can't be a covenant unless there are two or more parties that agree to it. Abrahams acceptance (conditon) was in circumcision. C'mon John, this is basic Christianity.

I

thought it was her, but you gotta see she has a works-conditional approach to salvation. If salvation is free, then why do we have to work for it, or even "work to keep it effective?" That makes a mockery of Titus 3:5ff

5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life
​

Can't get more clearer, or freerer.

James 2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

James 2:20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

 

[Pythons]

One thing I would agree with EGW on is that works are a part of Faith. Abraham obeyed Natural Moral Law as well as a Decree of God he couldn't have understood (kill his precious Son).

God tells Abraham to kill his son (a command that makes no sense to Abraham) yet Abraham takes it on Faith and proceeds to slam the knife down and at the last second is halted by God. This is Faith - doing something that does not make sense to us. The "doing part is works".

 

[JohnT]

RND

Scripture disagrees with your assumption that circumcision is the covenant. It is a SIGN or TOKEN id the covenant; it is not the covenant itself. What is so hard to understand in the verse I cited in bold RED?

11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.

For goodness sake, how can you twist Romans 4:9-10 as you seem to do?

Romans 4:9 Is this blessing then pronounced upon the circumcision, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say, To Abraham his faith was reckoned for righteousness.
10 How then was it reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision:
​

It simply says that his faith was accounted to him as being righteous while he was uncircumcised.

Look what it says here:

Genesis 15:6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.
​

I can not see how it can be any clearer, RND. Circumcision came AFTER Abraham was declared righteous by God because of his faith, ALONE.


On another note, indeed, works are important, but they are ancillary to salvation, not a condition or proof of salvation. Many heathen do good works as part of a civic or fraternal organization, but none of them are concerned with the salvation of humanity.

On my monitor, it looks as if you take the position that only if one does good works PLUS having Jesus as his/her savior can any be assured of salvation.

Please clarify.

 

[RND]

RND

Scripture disagrees with your assumption that circumcision is the covenant. It is a SIGN or TOKEN id the covenant; it is not the covenant itself. What is so hard to understand in the verse I cited in bold RED?

11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.

The act of circumcision made the covenant conditional John. "I'll do this, if you do this." Without circumcision there would have been no covenant.

Abraham's faith was counted as righteousness because of his obedience.

Gen 22:18 And in thy seed (Jesus Christ) shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.

Gen 26:5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

For goodness sake, how can you twist Romans 4:9-10 as you seem to do?

Romans 4:9 Is this blessing then pronounced upon the circumcision, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say, To Abraham his faith was reckoned for righteousness.
10 How then was it reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision:
​

It simply says that his faith was accounted to him as being righteous while he was uncircumcised.

Yes, that's correct. It also says that Abraham's righteousness was counted as faith by promise John, not by covenant (law). If it was by law (covenant) then it wouldn't have been by promise.

That's why you keep messing this up John. The promise that Abraham was given were promises, not covenants. Covenants require a work by both parties of the covenant, not one.

I brought this up John because you had this backwards in your previous posts.

Can you answer the questions that Paul asks here in Romans 4:9-10?

"Is this blessing then pronounced upon the circumcision, or upon the uncircumcision also?"

Both.

Why?

Because it came by promise, not law (covenant). The first few promises God gave to Abraham were not covenants, they were promises.

Romans 4:13-14 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if they which are of the law [be] heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:

The promises came because Abraham was faithful. And again, what made Abraham faithful.

Obedience!

Look what it says here:

Genesis 15:6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.
​

I can not see how it can be any clearer, RND. Circumcision came AFTER Abraham was declared righteous by God because of his faith, ALONE.

Right, I certainly haven't asserted anything different.

On another note, indeed, works are important, but they are ancillary to salvation, not a condition or proof of salvation. Many heathen do good works as part of a civic or fraternal organization, but none of them are concerned with the salvation of humanity.

How do you know what is in the heart of those that do good works? Only God knows that and God speak to people in a variety of ways John. Yet all are prompted by the Holy Spirit in some way.

On my monitor, it looks as if you take the position that only if one does good works PLUS having Jesus as his/her savior can any be assured of salvation.

Please clarify.

That's the same thing Luther thought about the book of James and why he hated it so much.

Good works alone will not save anyone, that's so true. Conversely faith alone is not evidence of salvation. Abraham obeyed God's voice indicating that Abraham did something in conjunction with his faith. In fact Abraham's obedience was a sign of his faith.

We can say we have faith all day long but if our actions speak otherwise then our faith isn't as strong as the person that does good works but doesn't know why they do them.

 

[JohnT]

The act of circumcision made the covenant conditional John. "I'll do this, if you do this." Without circumcision there would have been no covenant.

Abraham's faith was counted as righteousness because of his obedience. UTTERLY FALSE!

Gen 22:18 And in thy seed (Jesus Christ) shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.

Gen 26:5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

Again, you confuse the TOKEN/SIGN of the covenant with the Covenant itself, nor do the Scriptures you provide support that proposition

In neither verses is there a reference to the covenant made between God and Abraham

Yes, that's correct. It also says that Abraham's righteousness was counted as faith by promise John, not by covenant (law). If it was by law (covenant) then it wouldn't have been by promise.

That's why you keep messing this up John. The promise that Abraham was given were promises, not covenants. Covenants require a work by both parties of the covenant, not one.

That position assumes that mankind is capable of living a life that in total obedience to the law. We both know that is impossible.
Here are examples of the "one sided covenant":

Jeremiah 31:33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith Jehovah: I will put my law in their inward parts, and in their heart will I write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people American Standard Version.

Genesis 17: 8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land of thy sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God American Standard Version.

Jeremiah 24: 7 And I will give them a heart to know me, that I am Jehovah: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God; for they shall return unto me with their whole heart American Standard Version.


Zechariah 8:8and I will bring them, and they shall dwell in the midst of Jerusalem; and they shall be my people, and I will be their God, in truth and in righteousness. American Standard Version.​

Can you not see the unconditional in these (and there are others) Scriptures?


I brought this up RND because you had this backwards in your previous posts.

Can you answer the questions that Paul asks here in Romans 4:9-10?

"Is this blessing then pronounced upon the circumcision, or upon the uncircumcision also?"

Both.

Sorry, but it is an either/or question. That is given by the context that Abraham was justified by FAITH ALONE, and not by circumcision. The just shall live by faith.

Why?

Because it came by promise, not law (covenant). The first few promises God gave to Abraham were not covenants, they were promises.

Romans 4:13-14 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if they which are of the law [be] heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:

A promise of God IS a COVENANT, by definition. The promise, that he should be the heir of the world - Is the same as that he should be "the father of all nations," namely, of those in all nations who receive the blessing. The whole world was promised to him and them conjointly. Christ is the heir of the world, and of all things; and so are all Abraham's seed, all that believe in him with the faith of Abraham

You forgot the subsequent verses, and that is why CONTEXT is so important

Romans 4:15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression. 16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,
​

Because the law - Considered apart from that grace, which though it was in fact mingled with it, yet is no part of the legal dispensation, is so difficult, and we so weak and sinful, that, instead of bringing us a blessing, it only works wrath; it becomes to us an occasion of wrath, and exposes us to punishment as transgressors. Where there is no law in force, there can be no transgression of it.

Therefore it - The blessing. Is of faith, that it might be of grace - That it might appear to flow from the free love of God, and that the promise might be firm, sure, and effectual, to all the spiritual seed of Abraham; not only Jews, but gentiles also, if they follow his faith not merely attempt to copy his obedience.

The promises came because Abraham was faithful. And again, what made Abraham faithful. Obedience! Right, I certainly haven't asserted anything different.

FALSE! Promises came due to FAITH of Abraham: He believed, and was reckoned...

You are mixing up terms, again.

Most important you are inconsistent in your theology. You say one thing correctly, and back it up with Scripture. Then you say the polar opposite by taking things out of their context. RND, God is consistent, not inconsistent. He will not justify by faith on one hand not then turn around and require works to either maintain or assure salvation.

See my point?

 

[RND]

Again, you confuse the TOKEN/SIGN of the covenant with the Covenant itself, nor do the Scriptures you provide support that proposition

In neither verses is there a reference to the covenant made between God and Abraham

That position assumes that mankind is capable of living a life that in total obedience to the law. We both know that is impossible.
Here are examples of the "one sided covenant":

Jeremiah 31:33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith Jehovah: I will put my law in their inward parts, and in their heart will I write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people American Standard Version.

Genesis 17: 8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land of thy sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God American Standard Version.

Jeremiah 24: 7 And I will give them a heart to know me, that I am Jehovah: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God; for they shall return unto me with their whole heart American Standard Version.


Zechariah 8:8and I will bring them, and they shall dwell in the midst of Jerusalem; and they shall be my people, and I will be their God, in truth and in righteousness. American Standard Version.​

Can you not see the unconditional in these (and there are others) Scriptures?


I brought this up RND because you had this backwards in your previous posts.

Sorry, but it is an either/or question. That is given by the context that Abraham was justified by FAITH ALONE, and not by circumcision. The just shall live by faith.

Why?

A promise of God IS a COVENANT, by definition. The promise, that he should be the heir of the world - Is the same as that he should be "the father of all nations," namely, of those in all nations who receive the blessing. The whole world was promised to him and them conjointly. Christ is the heir of the world, and of all things; and so are all Abraham's seed, all that believe in him with the faith of Abraham

You forgot the subsequent verses, and that is why CONTEXT is so important

Romans 4:15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression. 16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,
​

Because the law - Considered apart from that grace, which though it was in fact mingled with it, yet is no part of the legal dispensation, is so difficult, and we so weak and sinful, that, instead of bringing us a blessing, it only works wrath; it becomes to us an occasion of wrath, and exposes us to punishment as transgressors. Where there is no law in force, there can be no transgression of it.

Therefore it - The blessing. Is of faith, that it might be of grace - That it might appear to flow from the free love of God, and that the promise might be firm, sure, and effectual, to all the spiritual seed of Abraham; not only Jews, but gentiles also, if they follow his faith not merely attempt to copy his obedience.


FALSE! Promises came due to FAITH of Abraham: He believed, and was reckoned...

You are mixing up terms, again.

Most important you are inconsistent in your theology. You say one thing correctly, and back it up with Scripture. Then you say the polar opposite by taking things out of their context. RND, God is consistent, not inconsistent. He will not justify by faith on one hand not then turn around and require works to either maintain or assure salvation.

See my point?

John, you are so blinded by what you want to believe you can't understand what is being said.

I said: "The promises came because Abraham was faithful"

You said: "FALSE! Promises came due to FAITH of Abraham: He believed, and was reckoned..."

Seriously John, take the blinders off. If promises came due to the faith of Abraham, then "Abraham was faithful." Good night man!

 

[JohnT]

RND

If you are going to copy any remarks, please make sure that you use the "preview post" option. What happened was that your first post where I said "false" was omitted. I do not attribute that to malice, OK? However, it caused me to wonder "Did I really write that?"

your original post
The promises came because Abraham was faithful. And again, what made Abraham faithful. Obedience! Right, I certainly haven't asserted anything different.

My response

FALSE! Promises came due to FAITH of Abraham: He believed, and was reckoned...

You have obedience (works) preceding grace Romans 4:16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace...
Why is so difficult to see that?

I (RND) said: "The promises came because Abraham was faithful"

You (John T) said: "FALSE! Promises came due to FAITH of Abraham: He believed, and was reckoned..."

Seriously John, take the blinders off. If promises came due to the faith of Abraham, then "Abraham was faithful." Good night man!

Again, you mix terms. Faith is not the same as faithful.

Formally, faith is a noun and is series of religious beliefs; an intellectual activity. Faithful is an adjective, and describes a noun, in this case Abraham, and means strict or thorough in the performance of duty.

Therefore, it is important for you to understand that there is ZERO examples of Abraham performing a duty in these verses:

Romans 4:9 Is this blessing then pronounced upon the circumcision, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say, To Abraham his faith was reckoned for righteousness.
10 How then was it reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision:

​

That is why the examples of the "one sided covenant" that I posted earlier is so important. It is God who moves first. "I will be their God and they will be my people" is repeated many times in Scripture. If that were not so, it would not be in Scripture once.

That is what unmerited grace is all about. Total depravity tells us that there is nothing that we can do in and of ourselves to make ourselves pleasing to a just and holy God.

Unmerited grace means that God moves first, and we respond with awe saying, "Why Lord did you grant me this faith so I could be able to be justified and sinless?

It appears that you have God saying, "Oh what a wonderful work this person does! I an obligated to save him." That sounds like semi pelagianism to me; correct me if I am wrong.

 

[RND]

RND

If you are going to copy any remarks, please make sure that you use the "preview post" option. What happened was that your first post where I said "false" was omitted. I do not attribute that to malice, OK? However, it caused me to wonder "Did I really write that?"

You have obedience (works) preceding grace Romans 4:16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace...
Why is so difficult to see that?

John, don't make ridiculous statements and we'll be fine.

Let's try as best we can to look at this in a rational way shall we?

Gen 12:1-3 Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

When God spoke this to Abram, Abram had two choices. Obey or defer.

"No thanks God, I'm not really interested in becoming the patriarch of a huge nation, but thanks none-the-less."

Yet Abram chose to obey. In this little test God found someone who would be faithful to Him. As a result of Abram being obedient he received the promise. Had Abram NOT been obedient he would not have received the promise.

The promise came by way of faithfulness which is exactly what is said in Roman 4.

For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith.

The promise cam through Abrams righteousness of faith. It can't be any easier to follow John. If Abraham didn't accept the promise he wouldn't have been faithfull.

Again, you mix terms. Faith is not the same as faithful.

Formally, faith is a noun and is series of religious beliefs; an intellectual activity. Faithful is an adjective, and describes a noun, in this case Abraham, and means strict or thorough in the performance of duty.

John, one can't be faithful unless they have faith!. Geez!

John,
Therefore, it is important for you to understand that there is ZERO examples of Abraham performing a duty in these verses:

Romans 4:9 Is this blessing then pronounced upon the circumcision, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say, To Abraham his faith was reckoned for righteousness.
10 How then was it reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision:

​

That is why the examples of the "one sided covenant" that I posted earlier is so important. It is God who moves first. "I will be their God and they will be my people" is repeated many times in Scripture. If that were not so, it would not be in Scripture once.

John, there can't be a "one-sided covenant" ever! A covenant is an agreement between two parties, not one. If it is an agreement of just one then it is not a covenant.

Your "one-sided" covenant take is completely wrong and goes against every premise of a covenant in the Bible.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This cov·e·nant

Audio Help /ˈkʌv

ə

nənt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kuhv-uh-nuh

nt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun

1.an agreement, usually formal, between two or more persons to do or not do something specified.

This from a non-Adventist's source:

A Comparison of Historic Covenant and
Historic Dispensational Theology

The sign of circumcision that God required was Abraham's signature of acceptance regarding God's proposal. There were no covenants given to Abraham prior to Genesis 17 and that's what Romans 4 is pointing out. If they were covenants they would have been by the law. But clearly Paul's tells us that these were "promises" and not of the law.

For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

Get your facts straight John.

That is what unmerited grace is all about. Total depravity tells us that there is nothing that we can do in and of ourselves to make ourselves pleasing to a just and holy God.

Right. We are free to either accept grace or reject it. Abraham accepted it, by faith!

Unmerited grace means that God moves first, and we respond with awe saying, "Why Lord did you grant me this faith so I could be able to be justified and sinless?

Right! We are free to either accept grace or reject it. Abraham accepted it, by faith!

It appears that you have God saying, "Oh what a wonderful work this person does! I an obligated to save him." That sounds like semi pelagianism to me; correct me if I am wrong.

Nope. John, I have been extremely consistent in my position here. God offered a promise to Abram. By faith Abram accepted.

 

[JohnT]

You will find this interesting

The covenants referred to above were between two equal parties; this means that the covenant relationship was bilateral. The bond was sealed by both parties vowing, often by oath, that each, having equal privileges and responsibilities, would carry out their assigned roles. Because a covenant confirmed between two human parties was bilateral, some scholars have concluded that the covenant Yahweh established with human beings is also bilateral. This is not the case. God initiated, determined the elements, and confirmed his covenant with humanity. It is unilateral. Persons are recipients, not contributors; they are not expected to offer elements to the bond; they are called to accept it as offered, to keep it as demanded, and to receive the results that God, by oath, assures will not be withheld. Elwell, W. A., & Elwell, W. A. (1997, c1996). Evangelical dictionary of biblical theology Baker Book House.

​

That is why I cited four different references to the "I will be their God..." in the OT. It is God who moves first, and by definition, that is unilateral.

But, RND you continue to mix terms. Genesis 12 is an important covenant of blessing, but notice

1. THE PROMISE CAME FIRST
2. It was NOT conditional
3. A great nation shall come from him.
4. God blesses those who belss Abraham's nation, and curses those who curse that nation
5. In Abraham's nation, all the nations of the earth shall be blessed.

You can see that below:

Gen 12:1-3 Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
​

That is why Paul is able to write these words:

Romans 4:9 Is this blessing then pronounced upon the circumcision, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say, To Abraham his faith was reckoned for righteousness.
10 How then was it reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision:
​

You should know that it is possible to faithfully carry out orders of another even if you do not have faith in them, such as may be the case in the military. But God here ordered Abram to move, and gave him that promise without the contingency of obedience attached to it. It was an unconditional blessing, an unconditional promise, and an unconditional covenant. What could be clearer?

Here is another explanation of the covenant, with Scriptural references:

Man, by his fall, having made himself incapable of life by that covenant, the Lord was pleased to make a second,a commonly called the covenant of grace; wherein He freely offereth unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ; requiring of them faith in Him, that they may be saved,b and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto eternal life His Holy Spirit, to make them willing, and able to believe.c
a. Gal. 3:21; Rom. 8:3; 3:20–21; Gen. 3:15; Isa. 42:6.
b. Mark 16:15, 16; John 3:16; Rom. 10:6, 9; Gal. 3:11.
c. Ezek. 36:26–27; John 6:44–45.​

Smith, M. H. (1996, c1990). Westminster Confession of Faith. Index created by Christian Classics Foundation.; Published in electronic form by Christian Classics Foundation, 1996. (electronic ed.) (2). Greenville SC: Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary Press.


​

Here is another example of what I am talking about.

Verse 10.—How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.​

How was it? or in what circumstances was righteousness counted to him?—This question, with the affirmation which follows, determines that Abraham’s justification by faith was previous to circumcision, and therefore circumcision could not be its cause. If righteousness was imputed to him before he was circumcised, then circumcision is not necessary to justification. It may come on Gentiles as well as on Jews. This is founded on the history of Abraham, recorded in the Old Testament, who was in a state of justification before Ishmael’s birth, many years antecedent to the appointment of circumcision.​

Verse 11.—And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also. 24​

If, then, Abraham was justified in uncircumcision, for what purpose, it might be asked, was he circumcised? It is replied, that he received circumcision, which was appointed as a figure or sign of his paternity, literally with respect to a numerous seed, and spiritually of all believers. It intimated that He in whom all the families of the earth should be blessed, was to spring from Abraham. This blessedness is described by David as consisting, in the imputation of righteousness without works.

But this was not all: circumcision was not only a sign, but a seal of that righteousness which was imputed to Abraham through faith while he was uncircumcised. This does not mean, as is generally understood, that it was a seal of Abraham’s faith. This is not said.

It is said that it was a seal of the “righteousness” of the faith which he had; that is, a seal of that righteousness itself, namely, the righteousness of God, which he had received by his faith. It was a seal, assurance, or pledge that the righteousness, by the imputation of which, through his faith, he was justified, although not then in existence, should in its appointed period be brought in. Circumcision, then, being such a seal or pledge, and as the appointment of Abraham as the father of Christ, by whom this righteousness was to be introduced, included his being the father of the line from which Christ was to spring, it was to be affixed to his posterity.​

.

Haldane, R. (1996). An exposition of Romans



​

Honestly RND, I can not figure out why you say that I have blinders on.

 

[RND]

RND

Scripture disagrees with your assumption that circumcision is the covenant. It is a SIGN or TOKEN id the covenant; it is not the covenant itself. What is so hard to understand in the verse I cited in bold RED?

11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.

When two people enter into a contract, a covenant, generally there is something that proves the existence of that contract. In the case of the here and now it is generally two signatures on a document that spells out the requirements for both parties.

Now, do you think that God needs a contract to remind Him of the contracts He enters into?

Did Abraham need a sign, or a token of the contract he entered into? Think about it.

Do you know why the story's in Gen. 12 and 13 are promises and not covenants? Because God didn't say they were covenants!

John, God made promises to Abraham before Abraham was circumcised. Abraham obeyed those promises. He was counted righteous because he obeyed God's word.

Let me see if I can illustrate this one more time so you'll hopefully get this once and for all.

RND: "John, if you mow my lawn for me I buy you a sixer of your favorite beverage."

John: "OK, Dave. I'll do it."

Your trust in me and my word (your faithin me) causes you to mow my lawn prior to getting the reward I promised. I did not promise to help you or enter into contract with you.

Let's look at it contractually.

RND: "John, let's go into business together to mow lawns, and we'll split the profits 50-50. But before we do let's both sign this contract."

John: "OK, Dave. I'll do it."

What's the difference? Read Gen 17 to find out.

For goodness sake, how can you twist Romans 4:9-10 as you seem to do?

Romans 4:9 Is this blessing then pronounced upon the circumcision, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say, To Abraham his faith was reckoned for righteousness.
10 How then was it reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision:
​

It simply says that his faith was accounted to him as being righteous while he was uncircumcised.

Precisely John, that's what I've been trying to get across to you for several pages now.

Abraham's righteousness did not come by way of contract or covenant which Paul refers to as "law" it came by faith.

Look what it says here:

Genesis 15:6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.
​

I can not see how it can be any clearer, RND. Circumcision came AFTER Abraham was declared righteous by God because of his faith, ALONE.

John, please....re-read the post for goodness sake. I have been quite consistent in my responses to this thread regarding this point.

When Abraham was circumcised that was by covenant, i.e. "law." Yet, God promised him several times before He asked Abraham to join into the covenant with Him.

Again John, please re-read the post.

On another note, indeed, works are important, but they are ancillary to salvation, not a condition or proof of salvation.

True.

Many heathen do good works as part of a civic or fraternal organization, but none of them are concerned with the salvation of humanity.

You have no idea what rests in the heart of another, only God does. What say we let God be the judge of the motives of others.

On my monitor, it looks as if you take the position that only if one does good works PLUS having Jesus as his/her savior can any be assured of salvation.

Please clarify.

Good works come with having Jesus. Even someone that is doing good works without knowing the Lord is still doing works that bring glory to the Son and the Father. Or would you suggest that an atheist working once a week in a downtown soup kitchen isn't glorifying God and the Son? The thing that's so funny about that scenario is that the atheist has no idea that they are glorifying God in what they do and would deny it if you told them! And yet, God and the Son are still being glorified!

God speaks to many people in many different ways. All those way point to Christ.

Take the Anazasi Indians of the southwestern portion of the country before there was a United Sates. They lived very spiritual lives in harmony with nature, they were farmers and non-aggressive with their neighbors and more important, from all indications, great at rearing a family unit. Historically they lived at the same time Jesus walked the Earth.

Can we trust that God spoke to them about Jesus Christ through nature? I can.

 

[JohnT]

When two people enter into a contract, a covenant, generally there is something that proves the existence of that contract. In the case of the here and now it is generally two signatures on a document that spells out the requirements for both parties.

An analogy that falls short, for it applies to people, not man and God.

Hebrews 6:
13For when God made promise to Abraham, since he could swear by none greater, he sware by himself,
14 saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee.
15 And thus, having patiently endured, he obtained the promise. 16 For men swear by the greater: and in every dispute of theirs the oath is final for confirmation.
17 Wherein God, being minded to show more abundantly unto the heirs of the promise the immutability of his counsel, interposed with an oath;
18 that by two immutable things, (His oath and His oath= two witnesses) in which it is impossible for God to lie, we may have a strong encouragement, who have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before us: American Standard Version. 1995



​

Now, do you think that God needs a contract to remind Him of the contracts He enters into?

See above

Did Abraham need a sign, or a token of the contract he entered into? Think about it.

We all need signs, Abraham was no exception, but you neglect the most important part: THE PROMISE CAME FIRST, AFTERWORDS THE SIGN

Do you know why the story's in Gen. 12 and 13 are promises and not covenants? Because God didn't say they were covenants!

You quibble at words, and distort both in the process. A promise from God is as good as his word, thus it is a covenant, albeit a one sided covenant: God made the obligation. He moved first, and He is obliged ontologically to keep his covenant.

John, God made promises to Abraham before Abraham was circumcised. Abraham obeyed those promises. He was counted righteous because he obeyed God's word.

Here is another mix up, RND.

1. God made the promise
2. God ALONE can keep the promise; Abram can not make a mighty nation himself, especially being childless through his wife
3. How can any of us obey what God promised that he would do?

Let me see if I can illustrate this one more time so you'll hopefully get this once and for all.

RND: "John, if you mow my lawn for me I buy you a sixer of your favorite beverage."

John: "OK, Dave. I'll do it."

Your trust in me and my word (your faithin me) causes you to mow my lawn prior to getting the reward I promised. I did not promise to help you or enter into contract with you.

Let's look at it contractually.

RND: "John, let's go into business together to mow lawns, and we'll split the profits 50-50. But before we do let's both sign this contract."

John: "OK, Dave. I'll do it."

What's the difference? Read Gen 17 to find out.

Precisely John, that's what I've been trying to get across to you for several pages now.

Abraham's righteousness did not come by way of contract or covenant which Paul refers to as "law" it came by faith.

John, please....re-read the post for goodness sake. I have been quite consistent in my responses to this thread regarding this point.

When Abraham was circumcised that was by covenant, i.e. "law." Yet, God promised him several times before He asked Abraham to join into the covenant with Him.

Another contradiction here! You make an analogy about me having to "sign a contract" then you state Abraham's righteousness did not come by way of contract or covenant which Paul refers to as "law" it came by faith

Which is it? Is it obedience, meaning works and that Abraham EARNED his covenant? Or is it by unmerited grace, determined in eternity by the foreknowledge of God? They are mutually exclusive, and can not be half and half proposition.

You have no idea what rests in the heart of another, only God does. What say we let God be the judge of the motives of others.

NO ONE knows that, but the following statement is illogical.

Good works come with having Jesus. Even someone that is doing good works without knowing the Lord is still doing works that bring glory to the Son and the Father. Or would you suggest that an atheist working once a week in a downtown soup kitchen isn't glorifying God and the Son? The thing that's so funny about that scenario is that the atheist has no idea that they are glorifying God in what they do and would deny it if you told them! And yet, God and the Son are still being glorified!

1. ANYONE can do good works, even Satan, if it suits his purpose.
2. Bringing in the atheist argument is bogus, for by definition, the atheist is NOT a believer
3. The conclusion of the argument is that good works can get you into heaven; I am CERTAIN this was not your purpose.

God speaks to many people in many different ways. All those way point to Christ.

If we are talking about "effectual calling", then yes

Take the Anazasi Indians of the southwestern portion of the country before there was a United Sates. They lived very spiritual lives in harmony with nature, they were farmers and non-aggressive with their neighbors and more important, from all indications, great at rearing a family unit. Historically they lived at the same time Jesus walked the Earth.

Again you make the argument that good works, in this case peaceful INdians can get into heaven, That runs counter to what Jesus said. "I am the way the truth and the light. No one comes to the Father EXCEPT BY ME"

Can we trust that God spoke to them about Jesus Christ through nature? I can.[/quote]

Romans 2 says that no one is without excuse of any sort. However, if they were saved, they would seek Jesus apart from "living in harmony with nature, and being spiritual".

That is why your examples fail: They contradict Scripture. But hey, they sound nice and are politically correct.

 

[RND]

An analogy that falls short, for it applies to people, not man and God.

I think that's why they're are called analogies.

Hebrews 6:
13For when God made promise to Abraham, since he could swear by none greater, he sware by himself,
14 saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee.
15 And thus, having patiently endured, he obtained the promise. 16 For men swear by the greater: and in every dispute of theirs the oath is final for confirmation.
17 Wherein God, being minded to show more abundantly unto the heirs of the promise the immutability of his counsel, interposed with an oath;
18 that by two immutable things, (His oath and His oath= two witnesses) in which it is impossible for God to lie, we may have a strong encouragement, who have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before us: American Standard Version. 1995



​

See above

Exactly.

We all need signs, Abraham was no exception, but you neglect the most important part: THE PROMISE CAME FIRST, AFTERWORDS THE SIGN

No John I'm not neglecting anything. I' have consistently said that the promise came before the sign. Mrs. White said the exact same thing! Glad you've finally come around to agree with her!

At this time the rite of circumcision was given to Abraham as "a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised." Romans 4:11. It was to be observed by the patriarch and his descendants as a token that they were devoted to the service of God and thus separated from idolaters, and that God accepted them as His peculiar treasure. By this rite they were pledged to fulfill, on their part, the conditions of the covenant made with Abraham. They were not to contract marriages with the heathen; for by so doing they would lose their reverence for God and His holy law; they would be tempted to engage in the sinful practices of other nations, and would be seduced into idolatry. {PP 138.1}

You quibble at words, and distort both in the process. A promise from God is as good as his word, thus it is a covenant, albeit a one sided covenant: God made the obligation. He moved first, and He is obliged ontologically to keep his covenant.

Nope. John, Pual tells us that the promises aren't part of the law because if they were they would cease to be promises.



Pay attention:

For the promise that he would be the heir of the world was not to Abraham or to his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise made of no effect,

For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith. For if those who are of the Law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise is nullified;

The promise to Abraham and his descendants, that they should inherit the world, did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith. If it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, faith is null and the promise is void.

For not through the law was the promise to Abraham or to his seed that he should be heir of the world, but through the righteousness of faith. For if they that are of the law are heirs, faith is made void, and the promise is made of none effect:

Here is another mix up, RND.

1. God made the promise
2. God ALONE can keep the promise; Abram can not make a mighty nation himself, especially being childless through his wife
3. How can any of us obey what God promised that he would do?

No mix up on my part. A promise by God indicates an offering to do something without strings attached. A covenant indicates to me that there is a work to do in order for the covenant to be binding.

Another contradiction here! You make an analogy about me having to "sign a contract" then you state Abraham's righteousness did not come by way of contract or covenant which Paul refers to as "law" it came by faith

Which is it? Is it obedience, meaning works and that Abraham EARNED his covenant?

Yes.

Or is it by unmerited grace, determined in eternity by the foreknowledge of God? They are mutually exclusive, and can not be half and half proposition.

Yes and right.

John Abraham received "unmerited grace" as you put it because of his faith which he exhibited to God before the covenant.

NO ONE knows that, but the following statement is illogical.

I know that and so do lots of Christians. We have no idea what is inside the heart of another human.

1. ANYONE can do good works, even Satan, if it suits his purpose.
2. Bringing in the atheist argument is bogus, for by definition, the atheist is NOT a believer
3. The conclusion of the argument is that good works can get you into heaven; I am CERTAIN this was not your purpose.

Satan doesn't do good works, if he does you'd have to show me some scriptures that prove that point.

Just because an atheist John isn't a believer doesn't preclude them from doing good works. Do you deny that an atheist's good works glorify our Father in Heaven?

The conclusion of the argument is that we will be very surprised by the people we meet in Heaven.

If we are talking about "effectual calling", then yes

Is there another kind?

Again you make the argument that good works, in this case peaceful INdians can get into heaven, That runs counter to what Jesus said. "I am the way the truth and the light. No one comes to the Father EXCEPT BY ME"

By = through. "...except through me..." It is through Jesus that men are called to God. How do you know that Jesus, through nature, didn't call the Anazasi Indians to be righteous in His name?

Answer: You don't.

Romans 2 says that no one is without excuse of any sort. However, if they were saved, they would seek Jesus apart from "living in harmony with nature, and being spiritual".

How do you know they didn't? Were you there? Before they cross they looked "forward" to Christ. We look backwards. What happens to those that were living in a parallel time dimension? Did God just created them to be lost anyway?

Romans 2:14-15 When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them

That is why your examples fail: They contradict Scripture. But hey, they sound nice and are politically correct.

Maybe. I just prefer to let God take care of the details. I would rather point to the goodness of God to save from the uttermost.

But that is an interesting paradox you bring up. Did God make the Anasazi Indians and place them in the same time domain as Jesus, deny them the truth of Jesus just so he could burn them in hell forever because they didn't know Jesus?

Wow, I'm not too sure I want to know that god. Makes people and purposely hides Jesus from them just so He can burn them? Ouch.