Are Jews saved?

[Nine_Two]

If you are asking for a day-by-day life story, of course nothing is recorded, but they wrote down what they wished to be remembered for the churches to come. But that is an over-arching argument which even heretics can use, and can be used to defend anything.

Which is of course why there was no accepted corpus of NT scripture until several hundred years after the fact… Now you open yourself up to how do we know what is scripture and what isn’t?

Commands and instructions are given in the gospels and epistles. To defend an idea with, “Well not EVERYTHING is written in scripture!” is simply asking for justification of eisegesis and heresy.

Indeed, and heresy did arise out of it, however heresy has also risen out of the idea that everything is written in scripture - as evidenced by the fact that those who believe in solo scriptura don’t agree on everything.

That is simply repeating the argument that a false dilemma exists - as a matter of fact, if such a false dilemma exists, it is brought about by scripture.

Which would mean scripture is imperfect, would it not?

Again, the topic of salvation is touched upon heavily throughout the New Testament. Nowhere is this third option presented or even hinted at. That is read into it.
That is assumed. Yet nowhere is it justified.

That is what a false dilemma is… presenting two options as though they were the only ones.

This third option is inserted by people who want to believe it. The truth told in the Gospel and the epistles is that Christ is the source of our salvation, and outside of Him we are but children of wrath and enemies of God.

The argument is not that Jesus ruled on that third option, it is specifically that he didn’t make mention of the outcome of existing under that third condition.

The fact is, the true dilemma comes from the theological implications of such a third option. If take Christ’s statements that He is the only source of salvation (something affirmed by the apostles) and His command to go and make disciples of all nations - yet we then introduced that none of this is necessary given certain circumstances, we negate everything they are worth. Why did Christ die if belief in the crucifixion is not necessary?

I’m going to take it on good faith that you are simply misunderstanding the argument being presented to you, and are not trying to create a strawman. No one has denied that the crucifixion was not necessary, simply that Christ does not explicitly damn those who have no knowledge the gospel. Although you bring up an interesting point, if God had determined before the beginning of the world who should have salvation, why was the crucifixtion necessary?

Why was Christ resurrected if disbelief in the resurrection - even if from supposed ignorance - still leads one to be resurrected in glory, why have the resurrection at all?

Again, I never said disbelief - you’re adding that. Disbelief implies an active rejection. My feeling toward Santa is disbelief, my feeling toward the native culture of some random South Pacific island is ignorance.

If people don’t have to be preached to so that they may see God, why be preached to at all?

Because Christ commanded that we do so, we are instructed to spread his message so that they may be saved - remember the argument is not that those who live in ignorance are automatically saved, simply that they are not necessarily damned.

I have had people respond to this argument simply with, “No, we don’t deny any of that,” but by saying a person can be saved outside of Christ and that a person can be saved even when not hearing the Word and being convicted…yes, that is precisely what you are saying, like it or not.

Once again, the argument has never been that they are saved, it is that they are at the mercy of God. They are not being “saved” outside of Christ, for Christ transcends all existence.

Inevitably, it leads to the heresy of universalism and the Emergent Church concept that the crucifixion was a nice thing for Jesus to do, not a salvific thing for Him to do.

Only if you throw the baby out with the bath water. You’re also confusing universalism with antinomianism - possibly because in the modern day they often go hand-in-hand, however that has not always been the case. Both modern day movements, by the way, have their genesis in the Puritan movement.

Again, even if there was a hint of a third option in scripture, I would agree that you at least had a fair point. But there is no such thing as this third option. The only place I have seen it is in the forum posts of those who believe it. I have not seen it in the words of Peter, the words of Paul, the words of John, nor the words of our Lord. It simply does not exist.

No, if there was a hint of a third option in scripture I wouldn’t have a point at all. Logic dictates there are three possible options, regardless of what scripture says.

There is no other standard to be held than the commands of the Incarnate Word and His apostles through the written word. Everything else is man-made tradition.

That’s a man made opinion - one which only appeared roughly 500 years ago, and which largely caught on in the interests of convenience.

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

All right, let’s not turn this into an emotional quote-by-quote chain (especially as, in chopping up my post and responding practically to every sentence, you ignore answers to your questions that are found when reviewed entire). Let’s review the focus of this discussion.

You argue, again, that there is a false dilemma in saying there is two points. However, in order for there to be a false dilemma, we would have to accept a third option exists. As it stands, however, no such third option exists. You have not presented any evidence for that except your own personal opinion. You say that I am “presenting two options as though they were the only ones,” but I am not doing that - again, I am only quoting what scripture says. Scripture provides two options, because one leads to eternal life and has only one source, whereas one leads to damnation and death. To say there is a false dilemma here would be like if you applied for a job at a restaurant and the manager said, “OK, we only have openings for waiters and hosts,” and you replied, “That’s a false dilemma!” Or, to put it more plainly, imagine how “The Matrix” if, when Morpheus offered Neo either the red pill or blue pill, Neo had blurted out, “You’re giving me a false dilemma!” In both cases it would be nonsensical, just as it is when scripture provides two states of being and we are supposed to believe - from personal opinion alone - that there is some third option and to believe anything else is to present a false dilemma.

I say again and again: there is no such divine loophole or third option in scripture. I’ll ask again, if you can show me even a hint of it, I will accept such an argument to be brought forward, but to repeat the mantra of, “You’re making a false dilemma!” is to ignore the text of scripture, which time and time again highlights that in Christ alone is life, and outside of Christ is death.

In regards to the meaning of the Great Commission and the Crucifixion/Resurrection, I recognize that no one is directly arguing that, but when we review the circumstances that is exactly where this theology leads to. It leads to a theology where Peter’s words that there is no other name under which we can be saved are false - for a Muslim, if he just doesn’t know any better, can be saved under the name of Mohammad, and a Buddhist, if he doesn’t know any better, can be saved under the name of Buddha. It makes Christ’s words that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and no one comes to the Father except through Him likewise false, because apparently there are many ways and truths and eternal life can be found under someone other than Him. If this is the case, what is the purpose of it all? This is exactly the kind of theology that leads one to universalism and the kind of open-ended theology so prevalent in Emergent Churches. That is the danger here, and that is why I mean by saying that it is contradictory to on one hand say, “I believe people can be saved by Christ,” and then on the other hand admit, “But some people can be saved without Christ.” That is, as I said earlier in this thread, inconsistent theology.

 

[Nine_Two]

Well, after a number of posts we have moved nowhere, which means it is time to give up the ghost on this argument.

I am a bit shocked that you openly admit to creating a strawman.

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

I did not admit to creating a strawman, only that what a person claims does not hide what they are doing. It is like Emergent Church leaders who say, “Oh no! We’re not preaching that! Let us explain!” and then go on to explain the exact heresy they claimed they weren’t preaching to begin with.

 

[look3467]

When Jesus made this statement: Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

That statement is interpreted as meaning either heaven or hell, Jesus or no Jesus, one or the other, no in betweens and no third option.

But that statement was addressed to the High priests, representing the Jewish nation and the laws of Moses, the chosen by God to convey to the world His character.

Thus being so, the Jewish nation had a direct link to God, as in first place, while the rest of the world had nothing.

The chosen begun with the selection of Abraham, while all souls prior to Abraham were without any knowledge of who or what God was.

The Jewish nation, Israel, had to be spiritually severed (Cut off) from first place to bevcome second, while Jesus and His kingdom believers became first.

In order for God to then include the rest of the Gentile world, and all the souls prior to Abraham, along with Abraham and all his offspring, up to Jesus’ resurrection, meaning all in all, God had to blind the Jews into not seeing the true nature of who Jesus was into His salvation plan.

If then, Israel being the apple of God’s eye follows blindly the law give to them by God, and reject Jesus, can only be said or understood as Israel being innocent of any wrong doing.

Why Jesus would say “Father forgive them for they know not what they do”, for they were purposely blinded by the law to have accomplished God’s work of salvation.

The supposed two choices, heaven or hell, believe in Jesus or not, does not stand, for God in Jesus did not come to save the believers, but the unbelievers.

Supporting verses: Cutting off : Isa 9:14 Therefore the LORD will cut off from Israel head and tail, branch and rush, in one day. (Key words in red)

Blinded: Joh 12:40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. (Father forgive them?)

“Save that which was lost” Luk 19:10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.

Rom 11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

The condition set for either heaven or hell was as I saw on a documentary, was due to the revelation to one of the scholars of the church, can’t remember who he was, but he struggled with it for 3 days without sleep.

His conclusion was that universal salvation was indeed real, but that he knew the people would misinterpret it to mean they could do anything they want and still go to heaven.

So he wrote the conditions based on that conclusion of either you repent or your going to hell.

At first I didn’t understand the struggle until I came to the same knowledge of universal salvation.

So, you do have a reasonable doubt as to a third choice, when there is no choice of any kind, for God in Jesus came to save that which was lost.

What was lost was the creation due to the process of the individual soul have a choice.
One verse in the book of Romans gives a clue:

Rom 8:20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

The creature was made subject to, was in the creation process, while also, in another creation process, Jesus, was a new creation made in hope.

Thus, life did not begin with Adam, but with Jesus, for in Adam all die.

Oh, by the way, the Jews, they like you and I, will all be saved.

blessings, AJ

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

Hello look3467 (aka AJ) - just so you don’t think I’m “hitting the ignore button” ( ) I was just curious: what was your basic premise in that post, ie., your summarized point? I apologize, I had a bit of trouble following.

 

[look3467]

Byzantine_Wolf

The discussion went on the issue of a possible third option, where maybe the first two were not justified.

So I chimed in to present my view of a no option.

The point was that in the process of the creative work of God humanity didn’t have a choice in being born, and being subjected to vanity.

That process required that mankind be “lost”.

God with held the tree of life until a certain point in human history to which He then introduced it (meaning Jesus) and the fruits of that tree we were then able to reach for and eat, as verse in Genesis states: Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

That same verse in Genesis is justified by Rom 8:20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

We have both the physical creation and the spiritual creation further justified by Joh 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water (Physical)and of the Spirit,(Rebirth spiritually) he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

The question then of an option of either one is saved or not has no bearing on the above verses since it is not a work of mankind that salvation comes, but it is of God who gives it.

The question then of the Jews being saved or not also falls within those same verses as you and I do.

The Jews were chosen as instruments to play His music to the world and also to play the harlot, meaning to reach out to other lovers, meaning the gentile world via the rejection by His own by the Jews.

So, if the Jews were and are an instrument playing the music of God, then unto this day they still are, thus are as angels, not knowing what they do as Jesus prayed.

2Co 3:15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.

Justification of all those verses and the salvation by God in behalf of mankind is:Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Not one, not some, but all have sinned. Thus all was lost, and all needed redemption.

Rom 5:19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

A work of God, and not of man.

Blessings, AJ

 

[BryanM27]

Just presenting a view point because I’ve been away for awhile and I miss Wolf’s doctrinal replies to my posts…

Here is an interesting problem:

So lets take churchgoer A (Dave). Dave goes to mass every Sunday, gives 10% of his money to the church, makes confession once per year, basically follows all the little “requirements” of being Catholic. However he does not volunteer at a shelter or food bank or school or anything. He’s trapped in his own little world.

“Churchgoer” B (Ryan). Ryan does not believe in ANY higher power, although he has access to the internet and bibles, etc. However, he has dedicated his life to serving those who need help. He provides food for the homeless and tries to help them find work. He counsels youths on various delicate topics from drug resistance to abstinance and even depression resulting from various sources. He spends three hours per week at a shelter for victims of spousal/parental abuse. He uses what money he makes as a highly-paid doctor to fund these various missions, and keeps only enough for himself to supply basic needs for his family (with maybe a few small comforts like heat and A/C). He DOES NOT drive an expensive car or own an iPhone.

Which one is saved?

 

[look3467]

Which one is saved?>>>BryanM27

In my view, both A, and B.! Jesus paid the price for the salvation of mankind, for mankind was lost of no fault of it’s own, so God had to provide the salvation.

Now, having said that, the one who can identify with the saving grace of God in Jesus is the one that will “know” that he or she is saved. As for the others that can not identify, though saved, they just don’t know it, can not enjoy the benefits of the kingdom.

As for the Jews, the same condition applies.

You see, we can not save ourselves except God does it, so the conditions for salvation were already met in Jesus for all mankind and not just a chosen few.

The whole thing about God is the discovery.

Those who seek will find Him, and those who are blinded by the rudiments of mankind’s religious practices and beliefs are not liberated. Free to worship God in spirit.

Blessings, AJ

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

Which one is saved?

Which one has repented and believes in Christ as his Lord and God? It is not by external works that we are saved. A man can seem charitable on the outside and be spiritually dead on the inside. The Pharisees believed in external works yet did not have a heart towards God, hence why our Lord called them whitewashed tombs (Matt 23:27).

In any case, if Dave is going to church because he does love God and believes in Christ, then yes he is saved and those works are the fruits of his faith. If, as you say, “Ryan does not believe in ANY higher power,” then he is an atheist, then he is most definitely not saved (for all the reasons and scriptural citations I have presented throughout this forum). If no one likes the idea of Ryan going to hell, then I will propose to do exactly as the apostles did when they encountered those who did not believe: preach him the gospel.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

, purgatory is not a real place. It is made up. Sorry.

YOu should not comment on what you do not know or understand.

 

[BryanM27]

Which one has repented and believes in Christ as his Lord and God? It is not by external works that we are saved. A man can seem charitable on the outside and be spiritually dead on the inside. The Pharisees believed in external works yet did not have a heart towards God, hence why our Lord called them whitewashed tombs (Matt 23:27).

In any case, if Dave is going to church because he does love God and believes in Christ, then yes he is saved and those works are the fruits of his faith. If, as you say, “Ryan does not believe in ANY higher power,” then he is an atheist, then he is most definitely not saved (for all the reasons and scriptural citations I have presented throughout this forum). If no one likes the idea of Ryan going to hell, then I will propose to do exactly as the apostles did when they encountered those who did not believe: preach him the gospel.

FINALLY! I’ve been waiting for you Wolf!

And were it not for the fact that God ultimately chooses who is saved, I would probably agree with you. My only issue being that it is my understanding (not necessarily correct) that the Pharisees were “spiritually dead inside” was because they focused on the outward symbols of “faith.” They ignored those whom society called “unclean.” They focused on the fulfillment of the Law, rather than on its meaning. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong. That’s just the way I see it when I read the Gospels.

But now I ask in relation to Matthew 7:21-23 and 25:31-46.

Dave is a believer, but so were the Pharisees. Dave is like them. He focuses on the fulfillment of the “law” of his religion. He does not help those in need.

Ryan, meanwhile, is working with those who need help. He has dedicated his life to this purpose for nothing other than the joy it brings him (did I mention he didn’t even buy an iPhone?).

Who is saved? If Ryan believed in a higher power, but not Jesus (lets say he was Buddhist), is he saved then? What if he is a Muslim or a Jew?

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

And were it not for the fact that God ultimately chooses who is saved, I would probably agree with you. My only issue being that it is my understanding (not necessarily correct) that the Pharisees were “spiritually dead inside” was because they focused on the outward symbols of “faith.” They ignored those whom society called “unclean.” They focused on the fulfillment of the Law, rather than on its meaning. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong. That’s just the way I see it when I read the Gospels.

That’s what I said - outward symbols of faith. They believed to be a good believer you had to follow certain actions and be a certain type of believer (like Medieval monastics). While this started out with noble intentions (again, like the monastics), it ultimately led to forgetting about the spirit of the Law.

But now I ask in relation to Matthew 7:21-23 and 25:31-46.

Ah yes, the parable of the sheep and the goats…I actually wrote a blog post on this recently (as in earlier today), explaining in detail that what Christ is talking about is not any Joe Shmo off the street who gives money to a homeless person or goes into a prison to say hi, but rather believers in a state of persecution who are serving others within the church.

Dave is a believer, but so were the Pharisees. Dave is like them. He focuses on the fulfillment of the “law” of his religion. He does not help those in need.

If he is not saved on the inside, then he is a false believer. The tree must be made good first before the fruits are (Matt 7:17-18).

Ryan, meanwhile, is working with those who need help. He has dedicated his life to this purpose for nothing other than the joy it brings him (did I mention he didn’t even buy an iPhone?).

Who is saved? If Ryan believed in a higher power, but not Jesus (lets say he was Buddhist), is he saved then? What if he is a Muslim or a Jew?

No, Ryan is not saved, whether he be a “good” Buddhist, Muslim or Jew. Without the true God, our “righteous deeds are like a filthy garment” (Isa 64:6). Let’s also see about what scripture says regarding being saved under another name:

“He [Christ] is the STONE WHICH WAS REJECTED by you, THE BUILDERS, but WHICH BECAME THE CHIEF CORNER stone. And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.” [Acts 4:11-12; NASB; emphasis mine]

Therefore, to answer your initial question: neither men are saved.

 

[BryanM27]

That’s what I said - outward symbols of faith. They believed to be a good believer you had to follow certain actions and be a certain type of believer (like Medieval monastics). While this started out with noble intentions (again, like the monastics), it ultimately led to forgetting about the spirit of the Law.

Ah yes, the parable of the sheep and the goats…I actually wrote a blog post on this recently (as in earlier today), explaining in detail that what Christ is talking about is not any Joe Shmo off the street who gives money to a homeless person or goes into a prison to say hi, but rather believers in a state of persecution who are serving others within the church.

If he is not saved on the inside, then he is a false believer. The tree must be made good first before the fruits are (Matt 7:17-18).

No, Ryan is not saved, whether he be a “good” Buddhist, Muslim or Jew. Without the true God, our “righteous deeds are like a filthy garment” (Isa 64:6). Let’s also see about what scripture says regarding being saved under another name:

“He [Christ] is the STONE WHICH WAS REJECTED by you, THE BUILDERS, but WHICH BECAME THE CHIEF CORNER stone. And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.” [Acts 4:11-12; NASB; emphasis mine]

Therefore, to answer your initial question: neither men are saved.

As always, pleasure discussing this with you.

 

[look3467]

There are two things that are evident in the life of the flesh.

1. The work God does and
2. The work mankind does.

Number one above gives us our origin, who the creator is, why we are in a fallen state and why God needs to remedy what became fallen, or separated/death.

In the the beginning God withheld the tree of life as a means to give us the reason why we were separated and in need of help.

Had Adam then had the tree of life, Adam would have reached out to it and gained eternal life without the trials and tribulation experience of an earthly fleshly life.

Love is born in the midst of the trial of human behavior of which Jesus is the ultimate demonstration of human victory over what is the reason for the fall in the first place and that is self.

Self, being the human ego as an entity, separate from God, dead and in need of reviving, need be born again, with the self given up in place of God’s spirit in us.

The human ego can not be reborn again without God’s work in Jesus.

The Jews are the ones by which God chose to do His work through, of all the people of the world by giving them, as the Father God figure, His laws.

Thus, the Jews had the only exclusive connection to God via the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob, where as for the rest of the world had none.

The strict adherence to the law was a key factor in bringing Jesus to trial, by and in which Jesus was able to fulfill the law to the letter in our behalf, so that we, as the rest of the world could come to the saving knowledge and grace of God in Jesus.

Thus, the Jews were as angels, in that they were a stubborn lot to the strictness of the law, as given to them exclusively by the Father of whom they knew only and none other.

God… in order to reach and save the rest of the world had to have them reject Jesus as the Messiah; offer up Jesus as the one and only sacrificial lamb of God for all time by Jesus making the following statement: Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Because the Jews failed to follow Jesus as the Messiah, they themselves fulfilled their work as a part of the works of God in the salvation of the world.

Now comes number two: “The work mankind does”.

Because Jesus enabled mankind, given the gift of life as a work by and of God, the only thing left for mankind is to acknowledge or reject the receiving of the gift of life.

Here in lies the dilemma, the acknowledging.

If we do not share this precious gospel good news to our brothers and sisters, they will not have the privilege of living a victorious life in Jesus as you and I are.

Their souls are already purchased by the blood of Christ.

So, what remains is our works, of which we, shall all be judged on, on a daily basis and subjected to blessings, or cursing, all payable in the flesh.

For after our death, their no longer remains any work, so sin ceases at that point.

In summary, the Jews are as, along with all of us, covered by the blood of Christ’s sacrifice as a work of God and abosulety nothing to do with our own personal behavior.

Now, after acknowledging of the saving grace of God, should we continue to sin willingly, the consequences of a vexed spirit is greater than the ones who don’t.

But willingly, should we choose to live right, our blessings are limitless.

Blessings, AJ