Articles on "Separated Brethren"

[Abu]

The crucifixion, death and resurrection of Jesus has REDEEMED us from our fallen state in which heaven had been closed, but our SALVATION depends upon our cooperation with His saving Grace.

 

[dronald]

The crucifixion, death and resurrection of Jesus has REDEEMED us from our fallen state in which heaven had been closed, but our SALVATION depends upon our cooperation with His saving Grace.

So then would it be correct to say that by grace we have been saved through faith and some of it by works of our own; but still no one may boast.

Or something of that sort?

 

[Abu]

dronald #301
So then would it be correct to say that by grace we have been saved through faith and some of it by works of our own; but still no one may boast.

Yes, as “Faith without works is dead” (Jam 2:14-26), and we may not boast.

 

[dronald]

Yes, as “Faith without works is dead” (Jam 2:14-26), and we may not boast.

I see.

So when Paul says “Not a result of works” was he being serious?

Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,

9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

I too have James in my Bible, but it has to be read in light of this as well.

Most Christians admit that the works are a result of our faith and that our works prove our own faith.

Notice how I said “some of it by works” and you agreed? Then Paul says “not of our own doing.” How do you reconcile this?

 

[Abu]

Trying to deny that faith requires works is futile. Read and learn, further.

1. Jesus expressly linked greater rewards with greater merit in His parable of the talents: “Well done good and faithful servant, you have been faithful over a little, I will set you over much; enter into the joy of your master.” (Mt 25:21).
2. St Paul: “God will render to each man according to his works.” (Rom 2:6).
3. “Knowing you shall receive the reward of inheritance, serve the Lord Jesus Christ.” (Col #:24).

 

[dronald]

Trying to deny that faith requires works is futile. Read and learn, further.

1. Jesus expressly linked greater rewards with greater merit in His parable of the talents: “Well done good and faithful servant, you have been faithful over a little, I will set you over much; enter into the joy of your master.” (Mt 25:21).
2. St Paul: “God will render to each man according to his works.” (Rom 2:6).
3. “Knowing you shall receive the reward of inheritance, serve the Lord Jesus Christ.” (Col #:24).

True.

But why haven’t you read what I posted?

 

[benhur]

You claimed that Jesus and His** finished work on the cross** saves you… and you asked, “Are you denying that Christ’s finished work on the Cross cannot save one?”

From Rom. 4:25 it is clear that our redemption is not complete without Jesus being “raised for our justification” – so since Jesus didn’t rise from the dead until Easter Sunday, whatever work it was that He finished on the Cross on Good Friday, can’t possibly have been the completion of our redemption – Easter Sunday was still two days in the future at the time!

So I ask you yet again… In John 19:30, what did Jesus mean when he cried, ‘It is finished’? What does the 'it’ refer to (since it can’t possibly be the completion of our redemption)?

One thing is work, another is the paycheck. One thing is work,another is approval, validation. Surely it is finished meant something.

 

[benhur]

Trying to deny that faith requires works is futile. Read and learn, further.

1. Jesus expressly linked greater rewards with greater merit in His parable of the talents: “Well done good and faithful servant, you have been faithful over a little, I will set you over much; enter into the joy of your master.” (Mt 25:21).
2. St Paul: “God will render to each man according to his works.” (Rom 2:6).
3. “Knowing you shall receive the reward of inheritance, serve the Lord Jesus Christ.” (Col #:24).

You can not work unless you are alive first. Rewards are not “salvation” but what we do with this new life,salvation. None of these verses says you will go to hell…You may do the work to prove you are alive ,but the work itself does not make you alive.

 

[benhur]

The crucifixion, death and resurrection of Jesus has REDEEMED us from our fallen state in which heaven had been closed, but our SALVATION depends upon our cooperation with His saving Grace.

And Paul emphatically states even that cooperation, to will, is from the Father. Of course we are not being forced against our own will, but we become convinced to kill it and make His will our own. And yes, there will be evidences of the change, and the biggest is confessing Jesus as Lord,“for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks”,revealing,proclaiming that we know Him as such (Lord and Saviour),showing the seal of the Holy Spirit.

Blessings

 

[PRmerger]

True.

But why haven’t you read what I posted?

dronald, can you please address how you believe you are cleansed by the blood of the Lamb if this event occurred 2000 years ago?

 

[dronald]

dronald, can you please address how you believe you are cleansed by the blood of the Lamb if this event occurred 2000 years ago?

Well He did it for all who would believe in Him; and continue to walk in Him. There wasn’t really a cut off date.

 

[PRmerger]

Well He did it for all who would believe in Him; and continue to walk in Him. There wasn’t really a cut off date.

Let’s scrutinize this, ronald.

It occurred 2000 years ago, but the Sacrifice is still effectual today?

How does that work?

 

[Erich]

Surely it is finished meant something.

Right… but I don’t think it means what you think it means.

In Matthew 26:29 Jesus said, “I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in My Father’s kingdom.”

In Matthew 26:39, we read, “And going a little farther, he fell on his face and prayed, ‘My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.’” Jesus prays the same thing two more times, so an obvious question arises: what cup was Jesus talking about? Note also how Jesus’ resolution not to drink “this fruit of the vine” seems to reappear in the scene at Golgotha right before he is crucified: “And they offered him wine mingled with myrrh; but he did not take it” (Mark 15:23).

In John 19:28-30 we read, “After this Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfill the Scripture), ‘I thirst.’ A jar full of sour wine was standing there; so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus’ lips. When He had received the drink, Jesus said, ‘It is finished.’ With that, He bowed His head and gave up His spirit.”
Scott Hahn:

Jesus was thirsty long before this closing moment of his life. His words, therefore, must reflect more than a desire for a last drink of fluid. He seems to have been in full possession of himself as he realized that “all was now finished.” Whatever it is that “was now finished” seems to be directly connected to his utterance, which he spoke “to fulfill the Scripture.” More things fall into place upon reading what followed his expression of thirst: “A bowl of sour wine stood there; so they put a sponge full of the vinegar on hyssop and held it to his mouth” (19:29). Only John noticed that hyssop was used, the branch prescribed in the Passover law for sprinkling the blood of the lamb (Ex.12:22).

This verse reveals something significant. Jesus had left unfinished the Passover liturgy in the upper room by not drinking the fourth cup. He stated his intention not to drink wine again until he came into the glory of his Kingdom. As we have seen, he refused some on one occasion, right before being nailed to the cross (Mark 15:23). Then, at the very end, Jesus was offered “sour wine” (John 19:30; Matt.27:48; Mark 15:36; Luke 23:36). But only John tells us how he responded: “When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, ‘It is finished’; and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit” (19:30).

AT LAST I had an answer to my question. It was the Passover that was now finished. More precisely, it was Jesus’ transformation of the Passover sacrifice of the Old Covenant into the Eucharistic sacrifice of the New Covenant. I learned Scripture teaches that the Passover sacrifice of the New Covenant began in the upper room with the institution of the Eucharist, not merely with Jesus being crucified on Calvary, as I was taught and had been teaching. In Jesus’ mind, his Eucharistic sacrifice as the Passover lamb of the New Covenant was not finished until Calvary. In sum, Calvary begins with the Eucharist and the Eucharist ends with Calvary. It is all of one piece.

It did not occur to me at the time that this is the teaching of the Catholic Church on Christ’s sacrifice in the Eucharist.

 

[Riser]

I have been gone and extremely busy, so I have not been here.

It looks like I am not needed here now, as I see posts flying back and forth while people squabble over the authority of the church.

I don’t think that is profitable at all, but you all go right on ahead.

I have an authority over me, and that authority is the One who can save me.

I still believe in the Comforter who was given to us to enable us to follow Christ and to understand the things that He would have us to know. I have brethren to assist me, Godly men to help me, and a body of believers to worship with me.

The gospel message is the same, but those who think that only the RCC can provide someone eternal life will not accept that.

 

[Peter_J]

I have been gone and extremely busy, so I have not been here.

It looks like I am not needed here now, as I see posts flying back and forth while people squabble over the authority of the church.

Well … That could be the case, for all I know. I make no claim to having read every single post. (And, in the event that you’re thinking it strange that I’ve not read every single post, you might ask yourself whether you watch every single show that’s broadcast on channel 9. )

 

[benhur]

Right… but I don’t think it means what you think it means.

In Matthew 26:29 Jesus said, “I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in My Father’s kingdom.”

In Matthew 26:39, we read, “And going a little farther, he fell on his face and prayed, ‘My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.’” Jesus prays the same thing two more times, so an obvious question arises: what cup was Jesus talking about? Note also how Jesus’ resolution not to drink “this fruit of the vine” seems to reappear in the scene at Golgotha right before he is crucified: “And they offered him wine mingled with myrrh; but he did not take it” (Mark 15:23).

In John 19:28-30 we read, “After this Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfill the Scripture), ‘I thirst.’ A jar full of sour wine was standing there; so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus’ lips. When He had received the drink, Jesus said, ‘It is finished.’ With that, He bowed His head and gave up His spirit.”

Thank you but does not make sense. I think I understood Hahn to say the vinegar/wine just before death was the fourth cup completing Passover. It just seems to contradict what Jesus spoke, of not having drinking wine until or in His kingdom, with us. That kingdom had not come so why would He drink ?

The drinking also could not be fourth cup for our passover could not be complete until the testator dies and Christ had not died yet. It is technical though He died shortly thereafter .

We also do not know if Jesus had any cups of wine but for sure the bread at the Passover /last supper.

I do like that Christ fulfilled the psalmist prophecy 69:21 and His blood mixed with the hysop and vinegar on the cross as did the first lamb’s blood for Moses and the Israelites.

The sacrifice was finished but not sure that translates to full fulfillment of the Passover seder and its 3/4cups,for even Christ says that will happen when He drinks that last cup with us in heaven. The eucharist does not end with Calvary, but upon His return and our reunification with Him, hence we remeber til his second coming. However, the sacrifice, the suffering and punishment for sin is “finito”.

To say eucharisting began at Last Supper is a bit bit broad for it also began at the garden with the first promise of propitiation, reconciliation and down thru the ages, right to Calvary.

We do not need to ask for "acceptance " of a re-presented sacrifice, and we give thanks (eucharist) because we know it was acceptable as testified by His glorious resurrection.

watchmanforjesus.blogspot.com/2010/11/when-did-jesus-drink-fourth-and-final.html a respectful rebuttal to Hahn’s comments I think

Blessings

 

[benhur]

Let’s scrutinize this, ronald.

It occurred 2000 years ago, but the Sacrifice is still effectual today?

How does that work?

Well, it is said a future “sacrifice” enabled the immaculate and perpetual purity of Mary. (Christ’s future graces were pre-applied) Others say the future Calvary was effectual for OT saints, the first ones being Adam and Eve, carriers of the Promise.

So we look backward for and to effectualness of Calvary surely as they looked forward to it, by faith, that gift of God.

The testaments always give us foreshadows, even rites,ceremonies, symbols of Calvary. We now have the eucharist as that remembrance, until His coming. There’s was a future tense whilst ours is a past tense sacrifice.That is why I have difficulty with re- presenting again in the present tense.

They presently gave thanks for a future Calvary and we presently give thanks for a past Calvary.

 

[Abu]

benhur #316
We now have the eucharist as that remembrance, until His coming. There’s was a future tense whilst ours is a past tense sacrifice.That is why I have difficulty with re- presenting again in the present tense.

Listen to the Christ, and follow Him in His Church.

Accept the clarity and directness of Christ – “This IS My Body” at the Last Supper after carefully teaching in Jn 6:51: “I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh," establishes the reality.

Jn 6:55: “For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.” And many walked no more with Him. (Jn 6:66). Did he say “you misunderstood Me”? No, He let them go – take note.

Then, to make absolutely certain there was no mistaking what He was saying, Jesus said to the Twelve, “What about you, do you want to go away too?” To which Simon Peter replied, “Lord, who shall we go to? You have the message of eternal life, and we believe” (John 6:59-68).

With Christ’s teaching on His Body to eat and His Blood to drink, He made sure that this was not misunderstood by:

1. Reemphasizing His teaching and refusing to change it even when many left Him
2. By questioning, ensuring that His Apostles, with Peter the Supreme Vicar of His Church, understood and assented to His teaching – so clear as to His meaning – that the doubters left Him.

That is what Christ’s Catholic Church possesses for the growth of holiness.

 

[benhur]

Listen to the Christ, and follow Him in His Church.

Accept the clarity and directness of Christ – “This IS My Body” at the Last Supper after carefully teaching in Jn 6:51: “I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh," establishes the reality.

Jn 6:55: “For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.” And many walked no more with Him. (Jn 6:66). Did he say “you misunderstood Me”? No, He let them go – take note.

Then, to make absolutely certain there was no mistaking what He was saying, Jesus said to the Twelve, “What about you, do you want to go away too?” To which Simon Peter replied, “Lord, who shall we go to? You have the message of eternal life, and we believe” (John 6:59-68).

With Christ’s teaching on His Body to eat and His Blood to drink, He made sure that this was not misunderstood by:

1. Reemphasizing His teaching and refusing to change it even when many left Him
2. By questioning, ensuring that His Apostles, with Peter the Supreme Vicar of His Church, understood and assented to His teaching – so clear as to His meaning – that the doubters left Him.

That is what Christ’s Catholic Church possesses for the growth of holiness.

Abu my posting friend, I do follow the church on this.I do eat Christ, and as Augustine said without teeth and belly . To eat is to bring in and you can not get God more in you than His baptism in the Holy host and His indwelling. By faith we eat …His words…that bring new life.

As for Peter, he did not say you have the flesh to eat for eternal life, but “Words” of eternal life. The other disciples left because they did not “eat” His words. It says they did not believe His words “from the beginning”, way before the bread of life discourse. Jesus purposely chased them away with His hyperbole of flesh eating, signifying His death.They followed a kingly Messiah (and He is but not yet) and not the Lamb of God. They took his words to eat literally and not at all spiritually.

Those that left were more literal in their understanding of eating than those that stayed. It may be you that has more in common with the doubters and created something to your own imagining via literal flesh eating, though I am thankful that you do “eat” His words.

Blessings

 

[Erich]

As for Peter, he did not say you have the flesh to eat for eternal life, but “Words” of eternal life.

And what were the words Jesus spoke that are spirit and life (John 6:63)? Why, the very words recorded in the previous verses:

“I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world. … Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.”

By faith we eat …His words…that bring new life. …It may be you that has more in common with the doubters and created something to your own imagining via literal flesh eating, though I am thankful that you do “eat” His words.

I’m pretty sure Jesus didn’t put “air quotes” around the verb eats as you are doing. In fact, the Evangelist tells us the word Jesus used was trogo which literally means “to gnaw, crunch, chew.” If I remember correctly, *trogo *is only used 6 times in the entire New Testament (5 times by John and 1 time by Matthew), 4 of them right here. It seems to me that it takes more imagining to not see that Jesus had something very literal in mind!