Commandments should not be followed ...

[Pax]

It’s easy to read one’s own theology into a parable.

Both the believer and his inheritance, according to Apostolic teaching, are revealed to be very different from that of the PS and his inheritance.1 Pet 1:3-5 "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to {obtain} an inheritance {which is} imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time."The believer, now in Christ, can’t squander an inheritance that’s imperishable and reserved in heaven, and who is himself protected by the power of God.

The story of the prodigal son more suitably reflects national Israel (to whom He’s speaking), in which it did squander its inheritance by rejecting its Messiah and wallowed in the mire amongst the Gentiles. But at the end of the age Israel returns to the land and a remnant believes; they (the believing remnant) are ushered into the earthly, Millennial Kingdom at Messiah’s second advent.

This is all graphically foretold by Israel’s prophets.James is writing to a mixed crowd and no doubt there were some not converted (i.e., of true belief) amongst them. “Among you” does not of necessity imply a true believer.

The person James is referring to was under the sound of the gospel, being among them, but then strays from (Gr., “apo”) the truth (not “ek,” meaning “out of” the truth, which would then refer to a believer). The Christian worker is the means of the “sinner’s” salvation (Note: a true believer is called a “saint,” never a “sinner”).

This passage has nothing to do with losing salvation and gaining it back again. Nor does the parable of the prodigal son.

This is the most absurd twisting of scripture that I have read in a very long time.

I stand by my explanation and the perspicuity of scripture in the passages under scrutiny.

 

[Teflon93]

I agree with what you are saying, but it presents a real difficulty for non-Catholics that do not accept the Eucharist any more than Judas did. Scripture says that Judas believed in Jesus, and when Jesus is proclaimed to be the son of God, Judas never goes into denial. Like non-Catholics today, he only denied the Eucharistic promise in John 6, but continued to walk with Jesus until the betrayal.

Absolutely. I cannot claim to know with any certainty that those who reject the Eucharist and other sacraments by remaining outside the Church Christ founded will not be saved somehow; the question is whether they have retained enough of the Truth of the Church to persevere to the end.

Obviously, their belief that they’ve already been saved and nothing they do will change that fact is an enormous obstacle to staying on the narrow path.

As noted earlier, I hope Moondweller and Sandusky both will make it in the end, as I hope we do.

 

[sandusky]

Teflon93:

It’s simple English, Sandusky—no need to twist anything. Christ’s reference to the lost sheep of Israel contradict your claim—as is typical of you, you simply ignore Scripture which doesn’t confirm your false, manmade tradition.

It is about the English which states, they hear His voice, He knows them, they follow Him, they will never perish, because He and Father are one in purpose with regard to the final disposition of the sheep. I’d suggest you do a re-reading of John 6, but your Tradition tells you that section is about the mass.

Teflon93:

Who says it’s difficult to comprehend? I believe Christ. You rely upon misinterpreting Paul even when your misinterpretation is at odds with what Christ says.

Paul received the gospel directly from Christ so there is no disagreement between the two (Gal 1:11-12).

Teflon93:

That’s not the definition of “religious folk”—devils know who Christ is as well.

Luke 6:46 reveals the distinction clearly.

That’s right Teflon, and those in Mt 7 are “religious folk,” as the identification states—they think that what they are doing is right, but it’s not.

Teflon93:

According to Christ in Matthew 25, all will have done good works with the grace granted them or be cast into the outer darkness. Take heed, Sandusky—this includes loving your brothers.

Incorrect, Teflon, you need to re-read the passage; it does not say that all have done good works.

Teflon93:

Provided they persevere until the end, as we have seen. The sheep must return to the fold. You need to think on this.

You need to re-read right from Genesis on through. The Jews rejected Him, as prophesied, and according to God’s predetermination in Is 6 (you can run that down through the scripture with the final mention in Jn 12). That’s why the Lord refers to the church age as the ”times of the Gentiles” (Lk 21:24; cf Jn 10:16; Rom 11:12, 25). That’s why Israel is today, a secular nation in the land, but not members of the Body of Christ—the times of the Gentiles await fulfillment.

Teflon93:

No, I’ll believe Scripture, which is quite clear on the point.

From the Scripture which you’ve turned your back upon so pridefully:

John 6:

John 6 is not about the mass; however, as I said, you’ll believe what you want, and what you want is to believe that in the bread and wine you truly consume the flesh and blood of Christ, and that in doing so you’ve laid hold of the final foothold into the kingdom. But that’s not what John 6 is saying.

Teflon93:

So take care in how you inveigh against the tree to which Christianity was grafted, even as you yourself have left the grafted branch for a twig through the rude pruning or your theology of subtraction.

Again, you need to read the whole of scripture; I’m not inveighing against the Jews, but merely relating what God has revealed about them according to His plan. The very last question that the Jewish disciples asked the Lord before His ascension in Acts is telling—read it; perhaps it will spur you to further study on the subject, I don’t know.

Teflon93:

Of course, you simply tried to imply that St Paul was speaking prophetically of the Mass and the altar upon which it is performed. There is simply nothing you will not twist in the Scripture you claim to love, is there?

I don’t know what you’re talking about; however, I believe that the early church believed that it replaced national Israel, and inherited Israel’s promised blessings. I also think that affected the church’s theology, and defined her liturgy. Here’s a treatment of that subject:Israel and the Church.

Again, the Jewish disciples last question prior to the Lord’s ascension says a lot, and His answers says even more with respect to Israel and God’s dealing with the Jews at the fulfillment of the “times of the Gentiles” (Lk 21:24, et. al.).

 

[sandusky]

What’s to labor over?John 13:34 "A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another."Now, go to the beginning of the chapter, Tef., and take note as to whom He was speaking: “Having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them (lit.) to the uttermost.”

Speaking only to those who “were His own” He gave a new commandment. What? That they love their neighbor as themselves? Why would that be new? Didn’t the Law already require it? Even the Jewish lawyer understood that requirement of the Law (although Jesus demonstrated to him his utter failure to keep it through the story of the “Good Samaritan”).

It was “new” because there was shortly to come about a whole new classification of people on this earth designated His own who, by grace through faith in Him alone, would be purchased (redeemed) out of this world by His substitutionary death and sacrificial blood. Men eternally related to Him through a new and better covenant with better promises.

This “new” commandment of His wasn’t to those under the Law with regards to loving one’s “neighbor,” but to the redeemed, and their loving “one another,” just as He loved them “to the uttermost.”

He gave that new commandment to those few in the upper room who were deemed “His own,” but ultimately pertained also to those who would believe in Him through their word (Jn. 17:20).

I find no obstacles with this new commandment.Not at all, I abide in it (and I have no doubt about Sandusky). But this new commandment pertains only to those who are of the promise, not law; grace, not works; children of the free woman, not the bondwoman (Hagar, Mt. Sinai); children of the new covenant; residents of the Jerusalem above which is free.

Those who want to impose the Law have their commandment: To love God with all their heart, soul, strength and mind, and to love their neighbor as themselves. All to which, according to Law, must be perfectly executed throughout their lives, because those who practice them must live by them. Since, says Paul, “the law is not of faith” (Gal. 3:12).

But is “loving” your neighbor personally attacking his intellect, his character, falsely accusing and publicly denigrating him?In such a manner? What makes it even worse is that you call us your “brothers.”

The thread will close shortly so we’re seeing the final Catholic push.

Good posts all, moondweller.

 

[Pax]

Sandusky…shall we extend high fives all around?

 

[Pax]

md,

Before you get overly elated because of Sandusky’s kudos, please answer the following two posts. I hope you can fit it in because the thread will soon close.

Please examine the following verses.

Romans 7:4-6
Likewise, my brethren, you have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead in order that we may bear fruit for God. While we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive,** so that we serve not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit**.

Eph 2:8-10
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God–not because of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

Romans 6:16-18
Do you not know that if you yield yourselves to any one as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.

As members of the New Covenant family of God we:

1. serve in the new life of the Spirit.
2. we are God’s workmanship.
3. we are created in Christ Jesus for good works that the Father prepared in advance of our justification so that we should walk in them.
4. we are no longer slaves to sin which leads to death and condemnation.
5. we have become obedient from the heart which leads to righteousness.
6. we are freed from sin.
7. we have become slaves to righteousness.

Now please explain to me how it is that living in the life of the Spirit as described above in scripture is legalistic.

Please explain to me how this is not living by grace and faith, but is instead subjecting ourselves to the Old Law which Paul says cannot justify us.

Please explain to me how all of this pits grace against works in salvation.

Please explain to me how this pits faith against works in salvation.

Please explain to me how faith alone conforms to these scriptures.

True, true…true.

God’s grace makes us members of His family. We are adopted sons and daughters of God. Jesus Christ is our brother. The Father’s purpose for those he predestines is to conform them to the image of His son.[Rom 8]

The apostle Peter tells us the following:

2 Peter 1:3-4
His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence, by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, that through these you may escape from the corruption that is in the world because of passion, and become partakers of the divine nature.

If we choose to leave the household consider what it is we are choosing. We are placing something ahead of our Creator. We are choosing corruption ahead of being partakers of the divine nature. When we do this we fall into a form of idolatry. That is why Paul says in Eph 5:5: “Be sure of this, that no fornicator or impure man, or one who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.”

While salvation is the free gift of God, the wages of sin is death.[Romans 6:23] The former is what God does, while the latter is what we do.

Salvation can, indeed, be lost and it will be our own doing. Salvation is God’s doing, but he allows us to have what it is we freely want and choose. That is why salvation is referred to as a gift rather than something that is imposed upon us.

 

[moondweller]

This is the most absurd twisting of scripture that I have read in a very long time.

That’s because you don’t understand the power of the cross. The gospel (good news) message, this side of the cross, Pax, is not “Careful, God is out to get you.” But, rather, if you put your faith, not in a church, not in a creed, but in the Person and work of Christ alone, “He’s got you, paid for in full.” And you are called “His own.”

This side of the cross it’s a message of REDEMPTION, not condemnation. Wrong covenant!!! :yup:

 

[Church_Militant]

That’s because you don’t understand the power of the cross. The gospel (good news) message, this side of the cross, Pax, is not "Careful, God is out to get you

." But, rather, if you put your faith, not in a church, not in a creed, but in the Person and work of Christ alone, “He’s got you, paid for in full.” And you are called “His own.”

This side of the cross it’s a message of REDEMPTION, not condemnation. Wrong covenant!!! :yup:I’m sorry but your “gospel” is different than that which the New Testament presents. Who REALLY Preaches “A Different Gospel”?

 

[Michael_Francis]

Over 1,000 post limit and closed.
MF