What is the Historical Gospel of Jesus Christ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Yeshua HaDerekh

Men dream of truth, find it then cant live with it
May 9, 2013
11,444
3,769
Eretz
✟317,123.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Do you know why the Eastern Orthodox Churches never call Ecumenical councils anymore. It’s because even they know that only the Pope has the authority to convene a council. They disagree about papal infallibility, but they are fully aware that there is a pope and which man currently holds that position.

That is silly and not true whatsoever...
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Tigger45
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,498
136
✟16,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
There are two types of laws related to your question. There are the Levitical Laws which, the Catholic Church acknowledges, no longer need to be followed. This is clearly seen in the Council of Jerusalem described in the NT. To teach that the Levitical laws must be obeyed by Christians is called Judaizing.

First, I appreciate the effort you have put into this, and I am happy to have a post that addresses part of what the post you quoted deals with.

However, trying to distinguish between the Levitical Laws and the Moral Law, which has merit, is still misleading and in conflict with the teachings of Scripture.

As an example, I would point out that vicarious animal sacrifice predates the formalized Covenant of Law.

Do you, or a Priest in your stead—offer up sacrifice for remission of sins?

Do you keep the Sabbath Holy?

Do you think your children must be circumcized?

Do you tithe, and if so, on what Scripture do you base your tithing on? What percentage is your tithe? Do you demand that other men tithe, offer up sacrifice, keep the Sabbath holy, and be circumcized?

Being under Law, as I have stated repeatedly in this thread, is bandied about as though it is a viable option for born-again believers. Nowhere in the New Testament do we see that we are under Law. If you have Scripture that teaches we are under Law then please present it.

But first, I will ask that you answer my questions (above).

I will begin with one passage that has already been presented and ignored by my antagonists:


Acts 15:23-24
King James Version

23 And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia.

24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:



Based on what I have read so far in a couple of your posts, this would be a decree of the "Catholic Church," no? Does it not plainly state that no one was authorized to tell men they must be circumcized or—keep the Law?

So in regards to "We keep the Moral Law but not the Levitical," the first point to discuss is where in Scripture do we see a negation of the many passages that make it clear that we are not under Law. Neither moral (because we cannot save ourselves by "good behavior") or Levitical (because the service of the Levitical Priesthood nor anyone acting in the role of Priest prior to the formalized Covenant of Law) can save us.

And to clarify at the outset, I do not consider myself a Protestant. I am just a Christian who happens to read his Bible. There are things I would agree with concerning Protestant Doctrine, but then, I am a Trinitarian and am not Catholic either.


Continued...
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,498
136
✟16,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The other type of law is found in the moral law of the Ten Commandments, eleven if you count Jesus' new commandment, he that he revealed on the night before his crucifixion

So you keep the Sabbath holy and teach other men they must do so?

I am going to break these responses up in hopes of keeping the points of the statement in focus easier to answer.


Continued...
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,498
136
✟16,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
(BTW, does it make sense that Jesus would issue a new commandment that would only in effect for a few hours only?)

First, I would point out that the "new commandments" of the Lord in the New Testament would knock your list back to ten, unless you want to argue that men must keep the Sabbath.

Secondly, it is not a "new commandment" being added to the Ten Commandments:


Matthew 22:39-40
King James Version

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.



Nothing new about God's desire for man to love his neighbor, is there?

However, there is something that will be new not long after the Lord issues His new commandment: the Church. They would not have love one for another as neighbors, but as brothers and sisters in Christ.

So one of the problems we see with the Judaizer is that he is not considering the difference between people under Law and the Church, which is not under Law.

Before I add another verse for us to discuss in this context, let's look at a couple of people who did keep the Law:


Luke 1:5-6
King James Version

5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.

6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.



They were justified by works, right?

Now, answer this one question: did they still need Jesus Christ to die in their stead?

Sorry, but answer two questions: did their justification by works save them on an eternal basis?


Continued...
 
Upvote 0

Daniel Peres

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2022
586
150
57
Miami
✟26,872.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Widowed
That is silly and not true whatsoever...
I am sure you know the difference between a fact and an opinion. We I have given you facts. But don’t believe research it for yourself. It’s a simple fact that only the Bishop of Rome has the authority to convene an ecumenical council of Bishops. If this were not true then the Council of Nivea would have been called by Hosius, the Bishop of Cordoba, Spain, and the first high level church leader personally know by Emperor Constantine. When Constantine approached Hosius with his concerns that the Arian controversy might bring disunity to the Catholic Church, Hosius informed him that the problem could be resolved by an ecumenical council but only the Bishop of Rome had the authority to convene a council. That’s why Constantine contacted the Bishop of Rome.

I can appreciate anyone who has the opinion that my analysis on any given issue is wrong. You are perfectly within your right to have your own opinion, as am I. However, when it comes to facts, I don’t give false facts. I never just repeat things that I read somewhere. I always confirm the accuracy of the information by going to the relevant historical documents. In other words, you may disagree with my opinions, and that’s ok. However, you cannot disagree with the facts.
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,498
136
✟16,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Anyway, Jesus teaches over and over again that the commandments must be followed, in fact he was clear that those who loved him followed his commandments.

Do you understand, Daniel, that Jesus Christ was made under Law and therefore ministered to Israel under Law and within the revelation that had been provided to men at that time?

Do you understand why this is a significant point?


Galatians 4:4-6
King James Version

4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,

5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.



Do you understand that there were no "sons of God" in New Covenant relationship with God prior to Pentecost?

The Son of God came for the express purpose of bestowing Eternal Life to those who would believe. Not to those who were justified in a temporal context as Abraham was. As Zacharias and Elisabeth were.

He redeemed us from the Law that we might become the sons of God. That we might receive the adoption.


6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.


We have received the adoption of sons, and this is not something that happened during His earthly ministry, which, by the way—was to Israel only:


Matthew 15:24
But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.



So the question now is this: do you understand that Jesus Christ ministered under the Law, thus He ministered to men concerning their condition under Law?

Question two: do you understand that in Christ we have been delivered from the Law and its penalty?


Continued...
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,498
136
✟16,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Of course, maybe your one of those Protestants that actually believe Christians don't need to love Jesus.

I am not a Protestant. The Doctrine I teach dates back to the First Century teaching of Christ and the Apostles (and has as testimony the Hebrew Scriptures) and has nothing to do with the unholy division in the Body today.

Whether my doctrine does indeed date back to then is open to anyone to challenge.

As to whether Christians "have to love Christ" or not, I would remind you that our ability to love is a consequence of 1) God first loved us (1 John 4:10), and 2) our continued progression of sanctification (which we partake in after we have received life from Him).


I have met some who actually believe that while simultaneously say Christians must have a personal relationship with Jesus. How can a there be a relationship when one party shows love but the other does not.

Scripture doesn't teach that people that are ignorant of advanced understanding of Scripturecan't be saved.

Let me ask you this: do you feel that your love for God and Christ is better now than when you were saved? When you were younger?


Continued...
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,498
136
✟16,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Additionally, Paul also explains how the moral law must be obeyed.

No, actually Paul makes it clear that those who are unrighteous are not to be considered saved, or people who who have been saved.


For example, in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 Paul clearly states, "Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God?

You need to present all Paul states:


1 Corinthians 6:6-11
King James Version

6 But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.

7 Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?

8 Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.

9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.



His point is that they are acting like unbelievers, not that they will be lost.

He is saying "You are acting like unbelievers!" Nothing more. You are imposing into the text something that isn't there.

He can't be saying "You are going to lose your salvation!" and at the same time telling them they will judge the world and angels (fallen):


1 Corinthians 6
King James Version

1 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?

2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?

3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

4 If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.

5 I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?



He is amazed they are taking it to secular judges:


6 But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.



So this fails as a proof-text for loss of salvation. It is an admonition to believers for not being able to work things out amongst themselves.

In other words, "fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God...

...why would you go to them to settle disputes among yourselves?"


Continued...
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,498
136
✟16,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God." Don't you see that the Christians that violate the moral law of the Ten Commandments will not be saved despite their faith in Jesus.

No, I don't see that, lol, because it isn't in the text.

Question: Jesus Christ will forsake and leave those who belong to Him because they aren't temporally perfect and without sin?

First—that is the purpose of the Shepherd. To keep the flock safe. To keep them from hurting themselves. To keep them alive.

Secondly, we are not the ones that bring our faith to completion, Jesus Christ is:


Hebrews 12:2
Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.



Question: just how much faith do you have in Jesus Christ?

Are you trusting Christ for your eternal destiny or do you think your eternal destiny is a cooperative effort between you and Him, and if you get out of step the Shepherd will simply let you fall off the cliff?


Continued...
 
Upvote 0

Daniel Peres

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2022
586
150
57
Miami
✟26,872.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Widowed
First, I would point out that the "new commandments" of the Lord in the New Testament would knock your list back to ten, unless you want to argue that men must keep the Sabbath.

Secondly, it is not a "new commandment" being added to the Ten Commandments:


Matthew 22:39-40
King James Version

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.



Nothing new about God's desire for man to love his neighbor, is there?

However, there is something that will be new not long after the Lord issues His new commandment: the Church. They would not have love one for another as neighbors, but as brothers and sisters in Christ.

So one of the problems we see with the Judaizer is that he is not considering the difference between people under Law and the Church, which is not under Law.

Before I add another verse for us to discuss in this context, let's look at a couple of people who did keep the Law:


Luke 1:5-6
King James Version

5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.

6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.



They were justified by works, right?

Now, answer this one question: did they still need Jesus Christ to die in their stead?

Sorry, but answer two questions: did their justification by works save them on an eternal basis?


Continued...

Scripture as well as tradition is clear that we don’t have to keep the Sabbath. But we are to keep the Lord’s Day. I am often amused when Jews and Seventh Day Adventists claim Christians moved the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. This mistaken belief is due to the fact that in English Saturday gets its name from Saturn and Sunday gets its name from the Sun. But those of us speak who speak a Romance language, such as my second language, Spanish know that in Romance languages Saturday is still called Sabbath (Sábado in Spanish) and Sunday is called Domingo which means day of our Lord.

(BTW, to lighten up our conversation, I’ll tell you something funny that use to exist in the Spanish speaking world of entertainment. For along time, the most popular show in Spanish language television was a variety show called “Sábado Gigante” (translates as Giant Sabbath). The host of this show was a Venezuelan Jew. I always thought it was a little humerous that a Jew was a host of a television show where he was required to work on the Sabbath, and did so for decades.) Hopefully that gave you a good laugh.

Niw back to our discussion. As for Jesus not adding a new commandment to the Ten Commandments, I ask, “Then why did Jesus say he gave his apostles a “New” commandment? Do you really expect me did ignore the word “New” spoken by Jesus himself? I can’t ignore the word.

As for me believing that someone can be saved by works, I don’t believe that at all. What I do believe is that , in addition to faith, we are saved by obeying the first great commandment, ““You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.” It’s true that loving God entails the performance of loving works (not legal works of the Levitical law). However, one is not saved by the actual loving works themselves, but rather by a person’s love for God.

Would you disagree with that view? Does that sound like I believe in works-based salvation? I wouldn’t be surprised if you believe that the belief in the need to love God to be saved is a form of works-based salvation, I have engaged with some Protestants on this forum of that opinion. Are you one of them!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,498
136
✟16,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I say despite their faith in Jesus, because Paul was referring to immoral Christians, and not Pagans.

I don't see anything immoral about Christians going to secular judges. The irony is that we will judge the world and fallen angels yet they go to unbelievers to sort out their affairs.

I can only suggest you reread the passage, then read the passages that make it clear that we have, in Christ—been made complete in regards to remission of sins:


Hebrews 10:1
King James Version

1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.


Hebrews 10:14
King James Version

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.


While in a temporal context we still sin and are in need of confession and remission of sins, in the Eternal Context we have been forgiven forever. Is that not what the Writer of Hebrews states above?

And He doesn't say "The Moral Law was a shadow of the good things to come," he says quite clearly he is speaking about The Law.

This is why the Priesthood and The Law was changed. Because the New Covenant is not based on an If/Then condition. It is based on an I will condition:


Ezekiel 36:24-27
King James Version

24 For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.

25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.



When we walk in His statutes, and keep His judgments—we do so by His power. The power of God working in our lives.

Not by good works which we have done.

So the first step to "keeping the Law" is that one must be eternally indwelt by God.

But it still remains: we are not under Law. We are in relationship with God through Christ under the New Covenant:


Hebrews 8:8-13
King James Version

8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.

12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.



Nothing about moral or Levitical law here. Just a matter of what God is going to do in the lives of men and women.

While the context is specific to the formalized Covenant of Law (the "First Covenant," which was not the first in a meaning of sequence), being under Law extends to the "Law" of God prior to the Covenant of Law.

We see that example here in regards to vicarious animal sacrifice (which also predates the Covenant of Law):


Hebrews 12:18 & 22-24
King James Version

18 For ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest,



22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,

23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.



All covenants of the Old Testament prophesied of the New Covenant, and were but shadow, and parable.

Paul makes a clear point here:


Galatians 3:10
For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.



If one wants to be under Law, even if they try to give it a sugary coating by calling it "Moral Law," then they are still under the curse.

Because...


James 2:10
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.



So my question at this point would be, just how well are you doing in keeping the Moral Law, my friend?

Are you keeping it perfectly? Have you failed to keep it even once? If so then you are lost, because you are guilty of all the Law.

Regardless of whether it is Moral Law or Levitical Law.


Continued...
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,498
136
✟16,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You have clearly accepted Jesus as your Lord and Savior. Do you honestly believe you will be saved if you engage in the sins listed by Paul in the above verse?

Of course I do, lol, because I was not saved because of what I did. I was eternally redeemed because of what Christ did:


Hebrews 9:12
King James Version

12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.



But let me say this: if I were to be living in an unbroken pattern of sin as Paul describes of the unbelievers in your proof-text—would that indicate that I had been saved?

So I will ask again, and if you have already answered this in a response you can ignore it, but have you kept the Law perfectly since you were saved?

Have you been as sinless as Jesus Christ the Son of the Living God?

Could you die in the stead of another sinner like He can?


Continued...
 
Upvote 0

Daniel Peres

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2022
586
150
57
Miami
✟26,872.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Widowed
No, I don't see that, lol, because it isn't in the text.

Question: Jesus Christ will forsake and leave those who belong to Him because they aren't temporally perfect and without sin?
...
If I understand you correctly, you are saying that you don’t see that all of the sins listed by Paul are sins of immorality. All I can say is your inability to see it is fascinating.

As for your question as to whether I believe Jesus forsakes Christians who “aren't temporally perfect and without sin”…Forgive me if I made you come to this conclusion about my beliefs about the consequence of sin.

Let me clarify this for you. Jesus does not expect us to be perfect since we are not capable of being perfect and without sin. However, there have always been Christians who believe Jesus’ mercy gives them a license to sin. That was true in ancient Christianity and is even more true now. Haven’t you noticed how many Christians, both Protestant and Catholic, that believe it’s ok to engage in homosexual acts. They believe they are entitled to engage in this sin because it’s God’s fault for making them that way. They don’t even try to avoid the sin. They now even demand that their churches officially teach their sin is not a sin at all. Do you really expect me to believe Jesus forgives these types of sinners.

Contrast that to a Christian who acknowledges that he has a sinful nature and tries his best to avoid the sin of homosexual activity, despite occasionally failing. He prays daily for God to help him avoid the sin. I certainly believe Jesus forgives that type of Christian sinner. But God gave us free will, and Jesus will not force his salvation on unrepentant sinners that don’t wish to be saved, and would rather go to eternal damnation. We all have a choice to make. One either chooses God or he chooses Satan. That’s what I believe. Do you disagree? Do you believe Jesus forces salvation on those unrepentant sinners that do not wish to be saved?
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,498
136
✟16,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
So, when Catholics read the Epistle of James, we don't see James talking about Faith and works of the Levitical Law because James specifically describes works that bring comfort to a suffering Christian, and those works have nothing to do with the Levitical Laws.

What Catholics and Protestants usually do is to equate Justification with Eternal Redemption.

The context of both James 2 as well as Romans 4 is temporal.

Do you really think Abraham was justified in an eternal context because he believed God would give him a son of his own loins from a woman beyond the age of bearing children?

If so, then we can say there are two means of Eternal Redemption: Jesus Christ and His death, burial, and Resurrection...

...and belief about other things. For Zacharias and Elisabeth it would be obedience to the Law.

For the sinner of Luke 18:10-14 it would simply be as simple as acknowledging that we are sinners and unworthy to lift our heads to Heaven.

Does Scripture teach that?

No, we simply back up to Romans 3 in order to see how men are justified in an eternal context:


Romans 3:23-26
King James Version

23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.



If you notice, the declaration that "...all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" is made long after Abraham died.

Abraham is justified in a temporal context in James 2 and Romans 4, and Catholics and Protestants don't seem to have figured that out yet.

Romans 4 makes it clear that Abraham was justified by faith alone, because he believed God. Simple as that.

But equally simple is the fact Abraham still died in need of the Prophesied Messiah and the Eternal Redemption He would obtain through the Offering of Himself.

And when men come to understand that we will be well on our way to ending the unholy division in the Body of Christ.


Continued...
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,498
136
✟16,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The good works described by James have to do with the "Love thy Neighbor" commandment.

Sure. But it is speaking in a teporal context. James isn't stating how people are saved or how they remain saved.

He is speaking of whether people are saved or not, lol.

Read Romans 4 again, read James 1-2 again: where do we see anyone eternally redeemed?

Explain to me how it is that Abraham was eternally redeemed by his works. If you offer up the mythology that Eternal Redemption was imputed to men in the Old Testament I can show you quite a bit of incontrovertible statements in Scripture that show this is a false teaching.

There is a connect in the minds of Catholics and Protestants that equates Temporal Justification with Eternal Redemption. They aren't arguing "We are justified by faith alone" or "we are justified by faith and works," they are arguing "We are Eternally Redeemed by faith" or "we are Eternally Redeemed by faith and works."

Because neither passage (Romans 4 or James 2) has a context of Eternal Redemption.

Sorry, but you guys have been killing each other (both physically and morally) for millennia and you're both wrong.


Continued...
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,498
136
✟16,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
This is completely different to the "works of the law" Paul rightfully explained were of no value for salvation.

Paul rightfully explained that no works we do have value for salvation.

This...


Ephesians 2:8-10
King James Version

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.



...has a context of Eternal Redemption.

So does this:


Colossians 1:12-14
King James Version

12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:

13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:



Go back to Hebrews 10 and see that it is His death in our stead by which we are forgiven, and His Life by which we live. We are made alive in Christ when He baptizes us into Himself.

Did you baptize yourself into Christ? Did another man?

Nope.

Christ is the Baptizer.

Who pays the penalty for your sin, Daniel? You and Christ?

Nope.

He is the Lamb of God, and there is only One Sacrifice by which you can be eternally redeemed.

So back to being under the Law:


Galatians 2:11-16
King James Version

11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.

12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.

13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.

14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,

16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.



Is Paul speaking of Levitical Law?

Did the Jews keep the Law?

Are men justified by the works of the Law?

Exactly what part of "...for by the works of the Law shall no man be justified" is not understood?


Romans 3:19-20
King James Version

19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.



Where do we see a division or distinction between moral law and Levitical law here?

Paul makes it pretty clear, no?


God bless.
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,498
136
✟16,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Scripture as well as tradition is clear that we don’t have to keep the Sabbath.

Did you not include it?

The other type of law is found in the moral law of the Ten Commandments, eleven if you count Jesus' new commandment,


You charge Protestants thus:

Protestants will make clever arguments to avoid the plain meaning.

Can I suggest you are as guilty as they?

I am sorry, but like the Judaizer, you are trying to bring men under the yoke of the Law again.

By a not-so-clever argument of distinction between Levitical laws and Moral law you have had your first error publicly exposed.

So when in Biblical History have men been able to pick and choose which parts of the Law they will follow?


God bless.
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,498
136
✟16,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
But we are to keep the Lord’s Day. I am often amused when Jews and Seventh Day Adventists claim Christians moved the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. This mistaken belief is due to the fact that in English Saturday gets its name from Saturn and Sunday gets its name from the Sun. But those of us speak who speak a Romance language, such as my second language, Spanish know that in Romance languages Saturday is still called Sabbath (Sábado in Spanish) and Sunday is called Domingo which means day of our Lord.

So you have taken it upon yourself to change the Sabbath?

To make the Sabbath obsolete?

Is there no moral issue with keeping the Sabbath? I think servants and beasts of burden might disagree.

As far as a romance language, there is only one: the Word of God.

Spain does not love the world. Why do you think Paul wanted to go there?


Continued...
 
Upvote 0

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,498
136
✟16,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
(BTW, to lighten up our conversation, I’ll tell you something funny that use to exist in the Spanish speaking world of entertainment. For along time, the most popular show in Spanish language television was a variety show called “Sábado Gigante” (translates as Giant Sabbath). The host of this show was a Venezuelan Jew. I always thought it was a little humerous that a Jew was a host of a television show where he was required to work on the Sabbath, and did so for decades.) Hopefully that gave you a good laugh.

Yes, that is humorous.

It calls to mind people voting for a Muslim sympathizer who reinforced a religious movement that would kill just about everyone that voted for him.

That was irony, not humor, though.


Continued...
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

P1LGR1M

Stranger
Jun 20, 2012
2,498
136
✟16,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Niw back to our discussion. As for Jesus not adding a new commandment to the Ten Commandments, I ask, “Then why did Jesus say he gave his apostles a “New” commandment? Do you really expect me did ignore the word “New” spoken by Jesus himself? I can’t ignore the word.

Who said Jesus didn't add a new commandment?

He gave quite a bit of new teaching during His ministry. Namely the Gospel. Though the Gospel would remain Mystery until Pentecost, we still see Him teaching new commandments.

THat does not make men "under Law" in any way, shape, or form.

By the way, I got into this particular discussion concerning the statement "We are under Law as children."

The same member that also said...


Hammster said:

The believer and unbeliever alike are still under the Ten Commandments.



This is exactly what you said in your first post, but you are now changing that to drop keeping the Sabbath.

Why?


Continued...
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.