No. I am saying that you can be a believer and commit a sin and have the Lord take you home.
Ananias and Saphira were killed. Paul in corinthians said believers died for taking the Lords Supper in an unworthy manner. John said there is a sin unto death.
Of course Jesus paid for all sin. but Grace is not a license to sin. Someone caqn have sex with a prostitute with AIDS. They can confess and be forgiven, but they will still die if they contract AIDS.
A believer can get drunk, drive and smash a car to bits. They are still saved, but still died in the car crash!
Sin has wages to be paid.
Galatians 6:7 [Full Chapter]
Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
This applies to believers as well.
Being saved means we are learning to forsake sin and grow in Godliness. Not feel free to sin because we have been forgiven. We are forgiven, but if we live in unrepentant sin- there is a physical price to pay.
Then you offered this reply:Very good. Would the "one gospel" be the "Gospel of the Kingdom" that Jesus Christ preached right out of the starting gate (Matthew 4:23), or would that be the "gospel of the grace of God" that Paul contrasts with "preaching the kingdom" in Acts 20:24-27?
Stating a thousand times that a notion is false does nothing to make your case. In fact, there is no reason to "quote >>" from the OP to then go into judgment mode, as if our opinions mean anything. Let's try this again: Do you consider the "Gospel of the Kingdom" (Matt. 4:23) preached by John the Baptist and Jesus Christ as the "gospel of God" (Mark 1:14-15) to be your "one gospel," or would that be the "gospel of the grace of God" from Acts 20:24? Please pick one or the other, or make a case for them both being the same "good news" message. Good luck.Amazing, the things people will do to try to taint the true gospel. But I think my statement about their being only one gospel should have been plain to anyone not committed to some kind of false notion of multiple gospels. [snip]
Then you wrote:Terral wrote: There is a big problem with your unsupported statements, because Jesus Christ Himself preached the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM long before dying for anyone.
What the entire Bible preaches in our opinions is meaningless to these deliberations over the "Gospel of the Kingdom" and the "Gospel of the Grace of God" with both being preached in the New Testament.The whole Bible preaches Christ. As Paul points out quite well in Romans, salvation by grace is an Old Testament doctrine. Abraham was justified by faith; he believed God and that believe was counted to him as righteousness. The believers in the Old Testament were saved in the same way as we are--by faith in Christ. They may not have known the name Jesus at those times, but they believed in God and his promises. No one, OT or NT or now, was ever saved by their own works, by their one law-keeping.
Then you wrote:Terral wrote: Ouch! That sounds serious
Ahh. Now we can see the light. You believe our Word of the Cross (Gospel of the Grace of God) is the ONLY gospel message preached in the New Testament. Paul is writing specifically about the "gospel which I preach among the Gentiles" (Gal. 2:2) that is our Gospel of the Grace of God for gathering members to the Body of Christ. You do not recognize the "Gospel of the Kingdom" that Jesus Christ preached to Israel as a good news message at all. In that case, then how were Peter, John and James saved in the Four Gospels BEFORE Christ shed one drop of blood for anyone. Good luck with that one too.Galatians 1 6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—
7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. ... let him be accursed.
Yes, it is serious. It is very serious.
No. Jesus warned the Disciples to tell no one that He was the Christ-Messiah. Matt. 16:20. Israel cannot be held accountable for rejecting the Messiah-Christ in Matthew 16, when Christ commanded them to tell no one. This kind of thing happens when ignoring the doctrinal precepts teaching the "Gospel of the Kingdom" presented in the OP of this thread.
Nolidad! You disqualified yourself as a judge in this debate the moment you hit the Reply key to toss your hat (interpretations) into the ring. I gave my side in the OP and now you are giving your side allowing these readers to judge if either of us is approved (1Cor. 11:19), or if both of us are out of our cotton-picking ignorant minds. :0)
No. Are we reading the same Bible? The gospel of the kingdom is preached by the disciples all the days of their lives, which we can see evidenced in Acts 8:
No. Christ told the Disciples that those living near the "end of the age" (Matt. 24:3) would preach the "Gospel of the Kingdom" to the whole world and then the end would come. Matt. 24:14.
No. Paul received our gospel (of the grace of God) through a "revelation of Jesus Christ" (Gal. 1:11-12) having nothing to do with the "Gospel of the Kingdom."
Scripture clearly identifies the "Gospel of the Kingdom" that John the Baptist, Jesus Christ and the Twelve all preached to Israel only, until that good news finally included Gentiles like Cornelius. Paul comes along and also is "preaching the kingdom" (Acts 20:24-27) to the Jew first, and then the "gospel of the grace of God" to the Gentiles and Jews among them. The seeming confusion in your statements to me are caused by mixing the doctrinal precepts teaching the Gospel of the Kingdom "and" the Gospel of the Grace of God together that forces people into the position of not knowing the difference. Now, some of these readers can see the reasoning behind starting this topic for exploring the differences between the Two Gospels of the New Testament.
Some of these relates to the success of the Gospel in the intra-Advent period, others refer to the NHNE. There is no future millennium mention here in these texts. It is never going to happen!!!
It symbolically depicts the peace that Christ has introduced through the new covenant and which will be literally realized in the new heavens and new earth. The one thing it does not speak of is some supposed sin-cursed, goat-infested, death-blighted future millennial kingdom.
Premils are quick to connect Isaiah 11:6-9 and Isaiah 65:17-25, but in doing so this begs an important question: what or when is Isaiah 65 referring to? Thankfully we don’t need to speculate. The text speaks for itself. Isaiah 65:17 sates: “For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.” Contrary to what Premil insists there is no mention or description of some future millennial period.
When one starts to compare all the Premil proof-texts we start to see some glaring contradictions. In one breath it promotes an age of perfect peace and tranquilly for the animal kingdom where they will not be tearing each other apart (Isaiah 11:6-9 and Isaiah 65:25), yet in the text it promotes the mass slaughter of countless innocent lambs and goats in the physical temple in Jerusalem for the whole duration of this age (Ezekiel 40-47 and Zechariah 14:18-19). This is confused contradictory picture, and a bloody mess.
What Premils forget is that Isaiah 11 is expounded within the writings given to us in the New Testament. They provide a clear unambiguous interpretation of such Old Testament prophecies and demonstrate its true fulfillment. The New Testament clearly confirms the current fulfillment of Isaiah 11. Whilst I see references to the eternal state, it is not the bipolar Premil age you speak of but the "new heavens and new earth" (as per Isaiah 65). This passage actually rebuts the location of Isaiah 11 in this so-called millennial age. Here again by your linkage you actually remove another Premil proof text.
Physical death at the hand of God is not loss of salvation. Once again ananias and Saphira experienced church discipline from Matthew 18!
All consequences of sin is Gods judgment- whether natural or supernatural. But for a believer it is not a soteriological judgment.
Wrong!
Jesus and the discples and John the Baptist had al proclaimed that Jesus was Messiah! Israel rejected it in Matthew 12 so the offer of the kingdom to Israel in that generation was withdrawn.
Starting in Matthew 13, you will notice that the disciples no more went out preaching. Miracles were only done on an individual basis on faith.
So you have the gospel being preached during the 400 silent years now! Any biblical proof or are you just going to pontificate.
There are no sacrifices of animals in the millenial kingdom, sorry, but that is another of your misreadings. Well it is time to end this nonsense- you will not see, and then you just misquote scripture and torture the language to have an amill position or whatever mess you believe.
Maybe you should read what follows when Jesus restores the earth after the devestation of the tribulation period.
17 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.
18 But be ye glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create: for, behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing, and her people a joy.
19 And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in my people: and the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying.
20 There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed.
21 And they shall build houses, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and eat the fruit of them.
22 They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands.
23 They shall not labour in vain, nor bring forth for trouble; for they are the seed of the blessed of the Lord, and their offspring with them.
24 And it shall come to pass, that before they call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will hear.
25 The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent's meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the Lord.
When the rapture happens, and we return with Jesus to earth and He establishes th epromised kingdom exactly as He said He would, I am glad you won't blush with shame at how wrong you are!.
See I believe God when He says He will do something and there is no conditional clause when He says He will do something! God says He will do this and He will as written, not as your teachers have rewritten the Word!
That is not eternity but a restores earth that is paradise, and it will last for 1,000 years, just as God promised!
There are no sacrifices of animals in the millenial kingdom, sorry, but that is another of your misreadings. Well it is time to end this nonsense- you will not see, and then you just misquote scripture and torture the language to have an amill position or whatever mess you believe.
Paul said in romans 4, quoting David that God does not imputed sin to our account under grace, and calls us blessed. His adultery sin was imputed to him by God when his son died.
now you are claiming that under the grace dispensation that you believe in, God can still impute sin to our account?
No one is talking about salvation here
You should honestly read your proof-texts before coming out with statements like this. You promote the full restoration of the old covenant sacrifices:
· The “meat offering” – Ezekiel 42:13, 44:29, 45:15, 17, 24, 25, 46:5, 7, 11, 14, 15, 20.
· The “sin offering” – Ezekiel 40:39, 42:13, 19, 21, 22, 25, 44:27, 29, 45:17, 19, 22, 23, 25, 46:20.
· The “trespass offering” – Ezekiel 40:39, 42:13, 44:29, 46:20.
· The “burnt offerings” – Ezekiel 40:38, 39, 42, 43:18, 24, 27, 44:11, 45:15, 17, 23, 25, 46:2, 4, 12, 13, 15.
· The “peace offerings” – Ezekiel 43:27, 45:15, 17, 46:2, 12.
· The “drink offerings” – Ezekiel 45:17.
What does the cross lack that necessitates the reintroduction of multiple "sin offerings" and "trespass offerings"? Is Christ’s sinless life, atoning death and glorious resurrection not enough for you? Was it not perfect enough, not satisfactory enough, and not final enough?
You misunderstand what imputation is. It is a soteriological thing.
God forgave David of his adultery and removed the sin. But God still allows believers to reap the consequences of their sin if He decides to do so!
7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
Paul is writing to believers here not unbelievers! We also shall reap the consequernces of our sin if we sow to the flesh.
Well as these verses refer to the temple rebuilt by Nehemiah and zerubabbel and not the millenial temple built before the tribulation or during the first 3 1/2 years of the 70th week of Daniel you rcomplaint is moot.
When Jesus returns to establish the 1,000 year kingdom when Satan is abyssed, there is no animal sacrifice! there is praise and Joy but no more sin offering! that system as far as its efficacy has been done away forever! Israel will restat the sacrifice again prior to them having to flee to Petra in the middle of the 70th week, but God does not honor those sacrifices anymore.
As I stated, David saw and call us blessed because, unlike him, he saw that God will not impute sin into our account.
He cannot be talking about himself in romans 4 quote because his sin was imputed to him by God, his son died.
I agree with you that David did not lose his salvation because he begged for forgiveness (Psalms 51)
We cannot even lose ours even if we don’t because we are under a far better covenant than him, that is why he calls us blessed.
Paul point about sowing and reaping in 2 cor was about finances
there are always consequences to sin, as I have explained in the prostitution and drunk driving examples, but not from God because Jesus took that punishment
You do not know what imputation meas theologically then.
If sin is imputed to ones account- then they are lost! For they have to pay for it.
If one experiences the consequences of their sin as a believer- they are being disciplined by God as a loving Father.
So you are saying Ananias and sapphira has their lives taken away by God as a form of discipline from a loving father?
that is the grace dispensation to you? When Jesus said it is finished at the cross, what exactly was finished?
I thought you believed Ezekiel's temple is the millennium temple?
Heb. 12:
5 And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him:
6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.
9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?
Yes. Remember the first and highest attribute of God is His absolute holiness! He will not let us His children just run across the globe willy nilly. If we choose to sin grievously He will choose if He takes us home early . He will only allow us to cause His name to be blasphemed so much.
What was finished- the payment for sin judicially. It does not mean that God looks the other way when His children choose to live in rebellion. That is foolishness.
titus 2:
11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
Why? It is the second temple which Herod the great expanded on .
The millenial temple will be the third temple built.
Ezekiel was a prophet of the Babylonian Exile and prophesied the rebuilt temple under zerubabbel.
The millenial temple will be one that is rebuilt either before the rapture or during the 1st half of the 70th week we call the tribulation. there must be a third temple because the man of sin sits on the mercy seat declaring himself God and in the middle of the 70th week the antichrist causes the sacrificial system again to cease (not that God accepts those sacrifices- it is just God reporting on what will happen once Israel rebuilds the temple)
The Holy Spirit and the shecinah glory of God will not enter the trib temple. Nor will Israel offer sin offerings- for they will know that Jesus is th eonly sin offering for the New covenant will be in effect that was prophesied in Jeremiah!
There is a third temple and this is it and nothing is going to tear it down or make it obsolete.Please give me all your Scripture to support the rebuilding of a third temple?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?