|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 4, 2018 20:19:04 GMT
Post 1: to be presented after debate slows down, lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 4, 2018 20:19:26 GMT
I would suggest that most interpret Romans 3 based on Romans 4, when in fact Romans 4 is simply meant to be a corroboration of the magnitude of the Cross as taught in Chapter 3. But let's back up just a little bit in our look at Justification:
Romans 2:12-16 King James Version (KJV)
12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)
16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
The primary statement hear is "Those who do the Law are justified, rather than those who simply hear." The contrast is drawn between Jews who had received the Word of God (Romans 3:1-2) and the Gentiles who had not received the Law. The "Law" in view, again, primarily refers to the Word of God, specifically looking at the commandments GOd gave Israel. In vv.14-15 we see an internal witness given Gentiles by God that they might know His will, the Law written on their hearts.
And the fact is that here we see men are "justified" by whether they do the works of the Law or not. This stands in stark contrast to Paul's teaching that no flesh shall be justified by the works of the Law. The reason? Because no flesh can fulfill the Law. They are judged based on their response to the Law, whether the Law given them in the Word of God, or that internal witness given to those who had not received the Word of God. Paul makes it clear in Galatians 2:21, "...if righteousness come by the works of the Law Christ is dead in vain.
So we see that the justification in view is not justification on an eternal basis, for judgment remains. That contrasted with our judgment placed on Christ and the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us. Not a righteousness based on our efforts, as Abraham offering up his son, but righteousness based on what Christ did and Who He is. Now let's take a look at our next text:
Romans 3:20-26 King James Version (KJV)
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.
Do we have a contradiction with what we just read in Ch.2? Not at all, because Chapter 2 refers to the Age of Law, not the Age of Grace. The "therefore" is there for this reason: everyone has been found guilty. No man seeks after God, there is none righteous, and there is no hope for any...outside of Christ.
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
The Key word here is "now." Now the righteousness of God apart from the Law is manifested. And the Hebrew Scriptures, that which Israel had received (and Gentiles had not) testify to the veracity of this truth. What it means that it was not made manifest before is that it was not known, which is in keeping with the Mystery of the Gospel of JEsus Christ, which was Hidden Wisdom of God not revealed in past Ages or generations, either to the Saints (believers) or the sons of men (meaning all men).
22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
This righteousness is not a result of something we do, it is a result of our response to the Gospel of Christ, which effects the Faith of Christ. Again, note this was not the case under Law. Men truly looked for Messiah to come, but, just like the Disciples of Christ, they knew not the Scripture that He should rise from the dead (John 20:9).
We again see why the "therefore" of v.20 is there for:
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Everyone is guilty. That includes Abel, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David...get the picture? All means all. There are no exceptions.
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Freely Justified by His grace through...the Redemption which is in Christ Jesus. This contrasted by being justified based on what we do, which is temporal justification that even a man like Lot achieved.
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;
Appeasement through, not works which we have done, but through the faith of Christ. When we get to Galatians 3 we will see that the Faith of Christ was not manifest in the Age of Law. Paul makes the clear distinction between "before faith" and when Faith came.
Note that it is His Righteousness declared, not ours. And note it is His righteousness for the Remission of Sins that are past. Hebrews 9:15 makes the same statement, "And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament." In view is the remission of sins retroactively in regards to the Old Testament Saint. They received remission of sins on an eternal basis...postmortem.
26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
"At this time." Not before, but at this time it is His righteousness that is declared. And just to keep this short I will end this section with a fuller quote of Hebrews 9:
Hebrews 9:12-15 King James Version (KJV)
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.
13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
The Writer again contrasts the sacrifices of the Law with the Sacrifice of Christ. "By His Own blood (death) He entered once (contrasted with the repeated entries of the High Priests) into the Holy Place (clarified as the Holiest of All not made with hands, not of this creation, Heaven) having obtained Eternal Redemption for us.
The point being, those justified under Old Testament conditions and Economies were not eternally redeemed. Popular pulpit mythology teaches that eternal redemption can be imposed into the Old Testament, but Scripture makes it clear it cannot be. And we see that made clear repeatedly in Scripture.
Our next task will be to look at Abraham's justification.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 4, 2018 20:54:25 GMT
Let's start with a favorite passage of the L.O.S.T. (loss of salvation teachers) who teach works-based salvation:
James 2:20-24 King James Version (KJV)
20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
Quite possibly the favorite stomping ground of the Catholic and the Protestant.
Abraham is clearly said to be justified by works, not just by faith. Can't argue that, this is the Word of God. But what we can argue is that because both equate this to Eternal Redemption and Remission of Sins through the Work of Christ...both argue in error.
So here's a simple question? What is the basis of his justification? Not specific faith in Christ. He couldn't possibly have specific faith in Christ because the Faith of Christ...hadn't come yet. The Gospel of Jesus Christ was still the Hidden Wisdom of God kept secret since the foundation of the world.
It's pretty clear, isn't it? He was justified, declared righteous, based on his faith in the Promise of God, which was "in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed." The "works" James speaks of is Abraham's willingness to sacrifice his son, which established his belief and faith in God's promise. And what many Catholics do, perhaps inadvertently, is to go to an extreme and exclude faith and belief, having an exaggerated emphasis on works. Just like many Protestants go to the opposite extreme and engage in antinomian nullification of works.
The balance lies here: in view is temporal justification, not Eternal Salvation. Not only does James make this clear in the first part of this chapter. Can anyone seriously consider that Eternal Salvation can be accomplished by giving the cold clothing and the hungry food? There are Atheist Organizations and charities that do that very thing, shall we have hope they will be eternally saved through this while rejecting Jesus Christ? That's absurd, right?
So let's look at Romans 4, and I will try to be brief (as I said this is a shot across the bow to stir up discussion):
Romans 4 King James Version (KJV)
1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?
2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
Again we see Abraham justified. And the point is...he wasn't justified by works. In James we have a temporal context in which men are justified in the sight of other men, and here we have justification in the sight of God. If this justification were of works then it is a debt owed to Abraham, rather than it being something reckoned to his account.
The question I would ask at this point is this: did Abraham die still in need of Redemption? We know He did. He died in faith without...
1. Remission of Sins;
2. Reconciliation;
3. Eternal Indwelling;
4. The Baptism with the Holy Ghost;
5 Regeneration, which is a result of the eternal indwelling of God, which is synonymous with being "immersed into God;"
6. Eternal Salvation;
7. Eternal Redemption;
8. Being made perfect, or...complete in Christ;
9. Eternal Life (through eternal union with God);
10. Entrance into the Holiest of All, Heaven.
But he was justified, right? And because for hundreds of years men have repeatedly taught their students that the justification in view is equable to Eternal Redemption (though perhaps inadvertently) the assumption is made. Most think the Disciples of Christ were Christians prior to Pentecost. Just basic errors devoid of basic truths of the Word of God, all of which were taught in the First Century by Christ and the Apostles.
9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.
10 How was it then 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 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:
Do we equate the faith of Abraham and circumcision under that Covenant...with being baptized into Christ and relationship with God through the New Covenant? We would be foolish to do so. If that had been all that was required then there would have been no need for even the establishment of the Covenant of Law. But because of transgressions the Law was given...until the Seed should appear. And He did, at the fullness of time, to redeem them that were under Law. Now here Abraham is called the father of all them that believe. What does that mean? Same thing Paul meant when he said he had "begotten" children of faith in Christ. He taught them. Abraham was an example of what it meant to have faith in God. The Writer of Hebrews makes it clear that general faith in God, the "foundation of faith in God," is no longer acceptable. We must progress to that which is perfect (complete) in regards to the Doctrine of Christ.
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,
17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.
18 Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be.
19 And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sarah's womb:
20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God;
21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.
22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
Note that everything listed is...what Abraham did. And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness. Let me remind you that again, we must interpret this based on Romans 3, which draws a distinction between what was and what is:
Romans 3:24-26 King James Version (KJV)
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.
We are justified on an eternal basis based on the Work of Christ, not based simply on faith in the promises of GOd which have not yet been made manifest. Abraham believed God when He said: "...he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir."
And I will stop there because this is getting long, so we will come back to Abraham and his faith in God in the next post.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 4, 2018 21:28:30 GMT
Again we look at the reason Abraham was justified, and the contention is that this is a temporal justification based on what Abraham did, rather than what Christ would do far in the future of Abraham's day. Often the objection arises, "But what about..."
John 8:56 King James Version (KJV)
56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
...doesn't this show Abraham had a knowledge of Christ?"
Well, yes and no. He had the knowledge, the revelation God gave him which inspired faith in God, and that "...all families of the earth would be blessed through him." We see that here:
Galatians 3:6-8 King James Version (KJV)
6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.
7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.
8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
Again we see the justification of Abraham, and told why he was justified: he believed God. But was he believing in Jesus Christ? No, he was believing in the First Principles of the Word of God (the ABCs of the Doctrine of Christ (Hebrews 5:10-6:3)). Here the "Gospel" is simply "In thee shall all nations of the earth be blessed." Now, you and I can understand why this is the Gospel and why it is relevant to Jesus Christ, but...they could not.
And I would also point out that the Justification of the heathen is a future event. Does that mean no Gentiles were justified prior to the Cross? No, because even the Jew was in need of Redemption and being Reconciled to God. Both would be made one man in Christ when both began to be baptized into Christ.
Paul has to clarify about the promise made unto Abraham:
13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
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.
The Seed is the basis for the blessing that...wasn't taking place in Old Testament Economies. It is a reference to Jesus Christ, which again we can understand in it's proper context because unto us the Mystery of the Gospel has been revealed. Note that we see we receive the Promise of the Spirit (Acts 1:4-5) through faith (in Christ). Abraham did not receive that promise (Hebrews 11:13, 39-40).
Let's keep going:
Hebrews 11:17-19 King James Version (KJV)
17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,
18 Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called:
19 Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.
Again we see the same event given by James, the offering up of Isaac. Abraham's faith was strong enough that he knew God would have to raise Isaac from the dead if he slew him. And that is what the Writer states, "he received him from the dead in figure."
So again, after looking at these few passages, can we say that Abraham was a recipient of that which Scripture makes clear he was not? When we look at the Promise of the Spirit and the correlation of the Eternal Indwelling of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (John 14:15-23), we know without controversy Abraham indeed died in faith...not having received the Promises, and not having been made perfect/complete in Christ. The imposition of Eternal Redemption into the Old Testament is base in large part on the Catholic/Protestant error of equating the justification of the Old Testament Saint with Eternal Redemption. If that were the case, then we have two means by which men might be saved. Christ, and their own efforts. So is it any great wonder that Catholic Doctrine teaches works-based salvation? And before any Protestants smirk, know you not that you too teach the same? One man who claimed "not to be Catholic" (whatever that is supposed to mean) implied Salvation in Christ covers the sin of one who has "gained entrance to the Church through water baptism" up unto his conversion. When the fact of the matter is...
Hebrews 10:14 King James Version (KJV)
14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
This is, in my view, the most irrefutable statement of Eternal Security in all of Scripture. If there is anyone that would like to show me how the Sacrifice of Christ does not, in complete contradiction to Scripture, make one complete in regards to Remission of sins, please do so.
Okay, again, this is just a shot across the bow, so I now open it up to any objections that might be presented.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 4, 2018 21:51:14 GMT
take a look...
Acts 9: 17And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. 18And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.
Acts 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.
Paul had to be water baptized in order to receive the Spirit and be cleansed of his sins.
Response: Where do you see Paul received the Spirit? What I see is that Ananias came that Paul might be healed and be filled with the Holy Ghost. An entirely different issue than receiving the Spirit of God. Men have been filled with the Spirit continuously in the Old Testament, but it is not until Pentecost that they receive the Promised Spirit, promised by the Father and taught of by Christ (Acts 1:4-5). This is a basic blunder.
What you are doing is creating a dichotomy concerning baptism. Cornelius and his house received the Spirit apart from water baptism, as did every disciple in the upper room on the Day of Pentecost, yet your interpretation of this statement (or rather the interpretation of the Catholic Church) creates that Christians can, or do not have to...receive the Holy Ghost when Baptized. So where is your Scripture to support that dichotomy? There is no controversy in regards to the disciples and Cornelius, the text makes it clear there is no baptism in water that men might receive the Holy Spirit, and in this one proof-text you have thus far given to support your (Catholic) doctrine...you ignore the difference between the filling and the eternal indwelling that began at Pentecost.
In regards to Acts 22:16, the "washing away of sins" undoubtedly refers to Paul "making amends," so to speak, for his villainy. The washing away of sins is always attributed to God, not the believer:
Ezekiel 36:24-27 King James Version (KJV)
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.
Here we see the promise of the New Birth, and cleansing is through pure water. Note that it is God washing with pure water, not men. Let's find out what that cleansing agent is:
John 15 King James Version (KJV)
3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.
Ephesians 5:25-27 King James Version (KJV)
25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
Titus 3:4-5 King James Version (KJV)
4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
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;
Absolutely absurd to think that water baptism washes away sins. Only the Blood of Christ cleanses us of sin, making us free from the stain. That too is a basic blunder on your part, and as I said, you lessen the magnitude of the Cross with your doctrine. That is not a First Century Doctrine, my friend.
This alone shows that your understanding of baptism (and justification) are not in line with what we actually see in Scripture.
Response: You are correct here, but, the fact is that no Bible Student "sees" what you "see" in Scripture, lol. And the problem is, you have not developed an understanding of your own, you have been indoctrinated into the "faith" you have, and the irony is that you (guys) are proud of not standing on Scripture alone. Is it any wonder that you hold to salvation through water baptism based on a few verses you have improperly interpreted?
|
|
