The Commandments should not be followed ... Part 2

[Philthy]

I’m still waiting.

And you shall forever be waiting I’m afraid. What I find truly ironic, biased - and frustrating - is the standard that MD uses to dismiss your claim while conveniently excusing himself from the same standard. You did an excellent job of demonstrating from Scripture why it is reasonable to believe Abraham was justified on more than one occasion. MD, without refuting the rationale or content of your argument dismisses it because Scripture doesnt explicitly state “Abraham’s faith was reckoned as righteousness” for each of the events. I dont want to misrepresent his position - here’s why I believe he needs to see it explicitly written in order for your case to be valid:
MD:

You still need to show me where it is recorded three times: "Then Abraham believed in the Lord; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness.

" I still find it recorded on only one occasion: Gen. 15:6
The funny thing is, as I claimed earlier, he exempts himself from this standard each and every time he claims that “salvation is by faith alone”, does he not? Where - even once - is this claim made? No where. In fact in James 2:24 we have the direct, Scriptural refutation to the claim. The argument MD makes is repeatedly of a similar form to the arguments you presented for Abraham’s justification, yet he accepts his “implied truth” while rejecting yours on the basis that it is not explicitly stated, ie “recorded in Scripture”. In fact, the rejection of the James 2:24 verse is not explicit ("recorded in Scripture) it is implied in that the justification in James 2:24 is not equivalent to salvation. He uses implicit arguments to support his position while burdening you with a requirement that he conveniently ignores in his own. That seems unfair and illogical to me. I hope he’s simply unaware of it.

 

[Philthy]

I better clear this paragraph up lest I confuse someone

Philthy:

The funny thing is, as I claimed earlier, he exempts himself from this standard each and every time he claims that “salvation is by faith alone”, does he not? Where - even once - is this claim made? No where. In fact in James 2:24 we have the direct, Scriptural refutation to the claim. The argument MD makes is repeatedly of a similar form to the arguments you presented for Abraham’s justification, yet he accepts his “implied truth” while rejecting yours on the basis that it is not explicitly stated, ie “recorded in Scripture”. In fact, the rejection of the James 2:24 verse is not explicit ("recorded in Scripture) according to the standard he holds you to. It is implied - in his opinion

• that the justification in James 2:24 is merely a demonstration of, but not equivalent to, salvation. This is no where “recorded in Scripture”, but is, in his opinion, implied.
  Again, he uses implicit arguments to support his position while burdening you with a requirement that he ignores in his own. That seems unfair and illogical to me. I hope he’s simply unaware of it.

Better?

 

[Pax]

And you shall forever be waiting I’m afraid. What I find truly ironic, biased - and frustrating - is the standard that MD uses to dismiss your claim while conveniently excusing himself from the same standard. You did an excellent job of demonstrating from Scripture why it is reasonable to believe Abraham was justified on more than one occasion. MD, without refuting the rationale or content of your argument dismisses it because Scripture doesnt explicitly state “Abraham’s faith was reckoned as righteousness” for each of the events. I dont want to misrepresent his position - here’s why I believe he needs to see it explicitly written in order for your case to be valid:

The funny thing is, as I claimed earlier, he exempts himself from this standard each and every time he claims that “salvation is by faith alone”, does he not? Where - even once - is this claim made? No where. In fact in James 2:24 we have the direct, Scriptural refutation to the claim. The argument MD makes is repeatedly of a similar form to the arguments you presented for Abraham’s justification, yet he accepts his “implied truth” while rejecting yours on the basis that it is not explicitly stated, ie “recorded in Scripture”. In fact, the rejection of the James 2:24 verse is not explicit ("recorded in Scripture) it is implied in that the justification in James 2:24 is not equivalent to salvation. He uses implicit arguments to support his position while burdening you with a requirement that he conveniently ignores in his own. That seems unfair and illogical to me. I hope he’s simply unaware of it.

Amen:thumbsup:

 

[Philthy]

Will we be perfectly happy with a salvation that is devoid of any rewards?
If claiming our salvation isnt jeopardized but that our rewards are - and that compromise turns out to be a very serious, consequential and eternal one - then what is the point of making the distinction?
Why not simply affirm the importance of our behavior (including obedience to the 10C’s)after we come to faith in Christ?

Still waiting but no longer holding my breath…:nope:

 

[Pax]

…
…
MD, without refuting the rationale or content of your argument dismisses it because Scripture doesnt explicitly state “Abraham’s faith was reckoned as righteousness” for each of the events.
…
…

I agree with your point about Moon’s contention, but I do believe that scripture is very explicit concerning Abraham and his faith being reckoned as righteousness on more than one occasion.

The Old Testament only makes the statement once, but in the New Testament that statement is made more than once in regards to Abraham. Naturally, I agree with the author’s of the NT as opposed to Moon’s view.

In the NT James makes the statement “reckoned as righteousness” in recognizing Abraham’s faith and willingness to sacrifice Isaac upon the altar per James 2:23. I demonstrated in my earlier posts how that verse cannot be interpreted in any other way.

Paul also states in Galatians 3:5-9 that “Abraham believed God and, that it was reckoned to him as righteousness” in reference to Genesis 12:1-4. My prior posts demonstrate why this statement can only refer to the instance when Abraham left Haran to go to the land that the Lord would show him.

These two instances are referred to in the NT with the statement that “Abraham believed God, and that it was reckoned to him as righteousness.”

References in the NT that are of the same nature as something in the OT are rather common. Likewise, NT scriptures make reference to things in the OT that are not explicitly stated in the OT.

Moon’s position on Abraham would require that all other statements by the NT authors about OT events would have to be explicitly stated in the OT or they would be invalidated. This is illogical and defies what we actually find in the scriptures.

Here are some examples:

Hebrews11:7 says:
“By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, took heed and constructed an ark for the saving of his household; by this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness which comes by faith.”

The OT says nothing of Noah having condemned the world by building the Ark or anything about Noah becoming an heir of righteousness which comes by faith.

Likewise, Hebrews 11:4 says that:
“By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he received approval as righteous,”

Nowhere in Genesis 4 does it say that Abel received “approval as righteous.”

Obviously, a reference in the NT that gives meaning and significance to something in the OT does not have to be explicitly stated in the OT in order to be true. This is exactly what is going on in the examples above, and it is exactly what is going on with the statements in the NT concerning Abraham and his righteousness in the OT. Abraham was clearly justified on three different occasions and we have the witness of Paul and James to prove it.

 

[moondweller]

Mikeledes:

If faith is trust in the work of Christ for salvation, what was the content of Abraham’s faith, being that he was not aware of Christ and His Cross?

Been through this with you already.Gen 15:6 “Then he believed in the LORD; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness.”

Acts 16:31 They said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved,…"Salvation was and always is through faith. This side of the cross it’s “Believe in the Lord Jesus…” Why is it you find this so difficult? Is it because you cannot fathom God saving/justifying apart from any works but through faith alone?

 

[moondweller]

ryanoneil:

In John 3:16 doesn’t the word BELIEVES (“pisteuo” in Greek) includes obedience?

Pisteuo: "to believe, also to be persuaded of, and hence, to place confindence in, to trust, signifies, in this sense the word, reliance upon, not mere credence.

Doesn’t 1 Peter 2:7-8 which also uses “pisteuo” (to obey) and “apitheo” (to disobey) prove it?

Even the translation you’re using translates “pisteuo” as “believe.” The translation of “apistousin” is what is in question. Here’s how the NASB translates it:1 Pet 2:7 This precious value, then, is for you who believe (pisteuousin); but for those who disbelieve (apeithousin)…,"The latter means to wilfully disbelieve. To wilfully disbelieve is a state of disobedience.

The proposition of the gospel message is to believe in the Lord Jesus. 1 Pet. 2:7 is to be understood in the context of Christ’s own words:John 3:18 "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

 

[moondweller]

Philthy:

Well, that would be hope. My faith remains in Christ my redeemer, but I hope and pray that by the grace of God I will persevere to the end and am brought to the glory of eternal life where Christ will say, “Well done good and faithful servant…why dont you and MD shake hands and get aquainted.”

You SAY your faith remains in Christ your redeemer but then you deny that He’s even redeemed when you say that you “hope” and “pray” that you’ll finally gain approval by persevering to the end (of what, your life?) and by your perseverance be brought “to the glory of eternal life.” This is works (merit) on your part; salvation and eternal life being based on personal merit.

Contrary to Divine revelation, you deny that they’re both gifted by God (Eph. 2:8; Rom. 6:23). You also deny Christ’s own words where He states that whoever believes in Him HAS eternal life (Jn. 3:15-18; 5:24).John 3:12 “If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?”…says Jesus.

Obviously the unbeliever has no assurance that he “HAS” eternal life, therefore, he only “hopes” and “prays” in the end it will be rewarded him.

I dont veer off. I deal with practical realities. God saves - we dont save ourselves.

Not according to what you clearly state above. You save yourself through your perseverance.

We can jeopardize our salvation, however, through out conduct.

Then you were never truly saved to begin with. Only potentially, and the reality of it will be based on your conduct. Salvation then being not gifted by God (through faith in Christ) but rewarded by Him based on your conduct.

“Would we be eternally happy with a salvation devoid of reward?”

There would be no salvation if it was rewarded rather than gifted by grace alone. The believer, saved by grace" will be, for all eternity, a personal demonstration to all powers and principalities (the angelic host) of God’s infinite attribute of GRACE. Will men be “happy” with a salvation devoid of rewards, ABSOLUTELY!! In fact, nothing will give him greater joy because grace glorifies the Lord Jesus Christ, and when Christ is glorified those whom are His (redeemed by His blood) are satisfied.

However, though salvation itself is all of grace, the saved will still enjoy rewards for their labor (1 Cor. 3:10-15).

If you answer yes, then why did Christ and all the NT writers make such a big deal of our conduct as Christians?

Because the true believer is to glorify Christ, who redeemed them, by their conduct. Conduct is not FOR salvation but glorification, and that of the Redeemer’s.1 Cor 6:20 “For you have been bought with a price (i.e., redeemed): therefore glorify God in your body.”

1 Pet 2:12 “Keep your behavior excellent among the Gentiles, so that in the thing in which they slander you as evildoers, they may because of your good deeds, as they observe {them,} glorify God in the day of visitation.”

Im still waiting for a practical answer that I can use throughout my life. Until then I have to believe that our conduct has a very serious effect on our individual salvation (or that of others).

You have your practical application. You just refuse to accept the motivation. You want a wage for your conduct.

Perhaps. Then again, perhaps you have a problem and have read more into the dialogue than is actually presented based upon your problem. For example, you claim that the “live” in Christ’s answer didnt correspond to the “eternal life” that the lawyer inquired about. You made reference to Deut to justify this claim. Yet the “live” in Deuteronomy is not “eternal life” that the lawyer asked of, is it? You make Christ out to be less than forthcoming as some are prone to be on this very thread.

No I don’t. The whole dialogue between Jesus and the lawyer was in the context of the Law. He was an expert in the Mosaic Law and his question was not sincere but desired to put Jesus to the test (according to the Law). Jesus answered Him according to the Law and then proceeded to show him (after he tried to justify himself) that not even he, an “expert” on the Law, lived up to the standard required by it.

Rather than continuing to try to justify your interpretation, you should learn from the lawyer. If you want eternal life you must believe in the Source of it. Eternal life is based on the principle of grace, not law.

So to sum it up, trusting is believing, believing is having faith; repenting is turning from unbelief to belief, which is from faithlessness to having faith (not faithfulness!). Faith is faith, repenting is faith, trust is faith and belief is faith. It’s prettty much all faith, Correct? Is forgiving others their trespasses faith? Is persevering to the end also faith? Is believing and being baptized faith? Was offering Isaac faith? Is obedience to God’s will faith? Is obeying the 10 commandments faith? Sorry, had to throw that one in there…

None of it is faith in Christ if (as you teach) it is FOR salvation and the ultimate “reward” of eternal life. God justified Abraham years before he offered up Isaac - and that based on belief in Him alone. No matter how much Pax and you try to manipulate the Scriptures to fit your theology, Scripture records only ONE occasion where God justified (hence, once for all) Abraham. And that based on faith alone.Rom 3:30 “since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one.”

Rom 4:4-5 “Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness,”

Gal 3:8 “The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, {saying,} “All the nations will be blessed in you.”” (In Abraham, the believer).

 

[moondweller]

Pax:

Does a Christian live by the law of the Spirit or not?

Yes. But he is not saved by that law, nor “the law of Christ,” nor “the law of liberty.”

One is neither saved nor justified by (the principle of) law - period.

 

[moondweller]

I agree with your point about Moon’s contention, but I do believe that scripture is very explicit concerning Abraham and his faith being reckoned as righteousness on more than one occasion.

The Old Testament only makes the statement once, but in the New Testament that statement is made more than once in regards to Abraham. Naturally, I agree with the author’s of the NT as opposed to Moon’s view.

In the NT James makes the statement “reckoned as righteousness” in recognizing Abraham’s faith and willingness to sacrifice Isaac upon the altar per James 2:23. I demonstrated in my earlier posts how that verse cannot be interpreted in any other way.

Paul also states in Galatians 3:5-9 that “Abraham believed God and, that it was reckoned to him as righteousness” in reference to Genesis 12:1-4. My prior posts demonstrate why this statement can only refer to the instance when Abraham left Haran to go to the land that the Lord would show him.

These two instances are referred to in the NT with the statement that “Abraham believed God, and that it was reckoned to him as righteousness.”

References in the NT that are of the same nature as something in the OT are rather common. Likewise, NT scriptures make reference to things in the OT that are not explicitly stated in the OT.

Moon’s position on Abraham would require that all other statements by the NT authors about OT events would have to be explicitly stated in the OT or they would be invalidated. This is illogical and defies what we actually find in the scriptures.

Here are some examples:

Hebrews11:7 says:
“By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, took heed and constructed an ark for the saving of his household; by this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness which comes by faith.”

The OT says nothing of Noah having condemned the world by building the Ark or anything about Noah becoming an heir of righteousness which comes by faith.

Likewise, Hebrews 11:4 says that:
“By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he received approval as righteous,”

Nowhere in Genesis 4 does it say that Abel received “approval as righteous.”

Obviously, a reference in the NT that gives meaning and significance to something in the OT does not have to be explicitly stated in the OT in order to be true. This is exactly what is going on in the examples above, and it is exactly what is going on with the statements in the NT concerning Abraham and his righteousness in the OT. Abraham was clearly justified on three different occasions and we have the witness of Paul and James to prove it.

NONE of this proves that Abraham himself was justified by God on more than one occasion. Any more than Abel or Noah was justified by God on many occasions. For you to prove your point you must give me other quotes where it is recorded and stated that, prior to and after Gen. 15:6, God justified Abraham. Both Paul and James cite only ONE.

I am not stating my position on “interpretation,” but Divine revelation. Both of you are trying to justify your position based on your own interpretation rather than simple Revelation (that which God has revealed).

 

[Pax]

NONE of this proves that Abraham himself was justified by God on more than one occasion. Any more than Abel or Noah was justified by God on many occasions. For you to prove your point you must give me other quotes where it is recorded and stated that, prior to and after Gen. 15:6, God justified Abraham. Both Paul and James cite only ONE.

I am not stating my position on “interpretation,” but Divine revelation. Both of you are trying to justify your position based on your own interpretation rather than simple Revelation (that which God has revealed).

You do not set up the rules of logic. Likewise, you do not set up the rules for biblical exegesis. I have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Abraham was justified on more than one occasion by way of the NT scriptures.

You are either too lazy to examine what has been given to you, or you are simply in denial of the facts because it destroys your doctrinal position.

Try using simple logic. Hebrews 11:4 says that “By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he received approval as righteous,”

Hebrews 11:7 says that “By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, took heed and constructed an ark for the saving of his household; by this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness which comes by faith.”

Abel and Noah were righteous by faith were they not? Or are you calling the inspired author of Hebrews either mistaken or a liar? If not, then the fact that the OT does not contain a statement that either of these two were righteous/justified, means that the same thing applies to Abraham when similar statements are made about him in the NT that are not stated in the OT.

What is your real problem?

 

[Pax]

Yes. But he is not saved by that law, nor “the law of Christ,” nor “the law of liberty.”

One is neither saved nor justified by (the principle of) law - period.

You have just utterly destroyed your doctrine of salvation by “faith alone.”

Faith is part of the OT law and Jesus us tells us so in Matthew 23:23 when he says:

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law, justice and mercy and faith; these you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.”

Your doctrines and statements are self contradictory.

 

[mikeledes]

.“Fruit bearing” is for discipleship, not salvation. The saved believer (the branch) is to abide in Christ, the Vine (his Source of power), in order to bear much fruit. The believer is now, positionally “in Christ” and seated with Him in the heavenly (Col. 3:1-3; Eph. 2:6), but he is to volitionally “abide” in Christ during his walk on earth, in order to “bear fruit.”

This makes no sense when one takes into consideration what the Greek word “meno” actually means. “Meno” means to continue, stay, or remain in a state, condition, or location. Here are a couple of examples of the use of “meno” in the Bible:

Acts 21:7

7When we had finished the voyage from Tyre, we arrived at Ptolemais, and after greeting the brethren, we stayed with them for a day.

Matthew 10:11

**"And whatever city or village you enter, inquire who is worthy in it, and stay at his house until you leave that city. **

1 Timothy 2:15

**But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint. **

1 Corinthians 7:40

But in my opinion she is happier if she remains as she is; and I think thatI also have the Spirit of God.

So when Jesus says “abide in me”, what does He mean? Abide or continue in what state, condition, or location? You have said that the believer is positionally “in Christ.” So the spiritual state or location of the believer is “in Christ.” And yet it is precisely this “position” or “spiritual location” in which Christ Himself says the believer must remain/ continue. Christ says “abide IN ME”, which means remain in Christ, remain in that spiritual location in which you have been placed by God. So logically, if we do not remain in Christ, we are no longer “in Christ.” How can someone not remain in Christ and still be in Christ at the same time. That’s like saying you did not remain in a house and are still in that house at the same time.

The Vine is not only ths source of power, it is the source of life. A branch that is cut off from the Vine does not bear fruit, but also does not remain alive. It dries up/ dies. John 15:6 says:

**6"If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned. **

From what are these branches being “thrown away” or “taken away?” What does “dries up” mean? Who is the “they” that does the “gathering” and what does this “gathering” refer to? I know you bring up 1 Corinthians 3:14-15. However, in that verse there is no reference to a gathering or to a casting into the fire as mentioned in John 15:6, all of which are key hallmarks of the Biblical language of reprobation/ eternal damnation:

Matthew 3:10, 12

**10"The axe is already laid at the root of the trees; therefore every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
12"His winnowing fork is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clear His threshing floor; and He will gather His wheat into the barn, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire." **

Matthew 13:39-40

**39and the enemy who sowed them is the devil, and the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are angels.
40"So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end of the age. **

Matthew 13:49-50

49"So it will be at the end of the age; the angels will come forth and take out the wicked from among the righteous,
50and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

In fact, the Greek word for “casting” - also translated “thrown” - is consistently used in the Bible when discussing divine punishment, especially reprobation/ eternal damnation.

Matthew 18:8

**8"If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire. **

Matthew 22:13

13"Then the king said to the servants, 'Bind him hand and foot, and throw him into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'

Matthew 25:30

**30"Throw out the worthless slave into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. **

Revelation 20:15

**15And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. **

It is clear that when Jesus says that those who do not abide in Him are cast into the fire and burned, it is a reference to eternal damnation.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

.“Fruit bearing” is for discipleship, not salvation. The saved believer (the branch) is to abide in Christ, the Vine (his Source of power), in order to bear much fruit. The believer is now, positionally “in Christ” and seated with Him in the heavenly (Col. 3:1-3; Eph. 2:6), but he is to volitionally “abide” in Christ during his walk on earth, in order to “bear fruit.”

What I also would like to know how you reconcile the existence of fruitless branches in Christ that remain saved with the following passage:

James 2:14, 20, 24

**14What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him? **
20But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?
24You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

If genuine faith saves and exists without works - since a fruitless branch must have genuine saving faith in order to in the True Vine - then how do you reconcile that with James, particularly when he indicates that a fruitless faith cannot save?

God Bless,
Michael

 

[Always_For_Him]

It really sounds to me based on this conversation that Protestants don’t believe they can go to hell. How can you go to hell if you are already saved by Jesus dying on the cross? If you can’t do anything to be separated from Christ because you believe, have faith and he died on the cross for our sins, then how can you go to hell? Is that what non-Catholics believe?

 

[moondweller]

You do not set up the rules of logic.

I’m not presenting “logic.” I’m just stating my position based on what is REVEALED in God’s written Word.

Likewise, you do not set up the rules for biblical exegesis.

Well, I think we have to begin with what the Scriptures actually say, or do not say.

I have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Abraham was justified on more than one occasion by way of the NT scriptures.

You’ve only tenaciously asserted it.

Nowhere is it recorded that God justified Abraham other than Gen. 15:6. All of Paul’s theology is based on it.

 

[Pax]

I’m not presenting “logic.” I’m just stating my position based on what is REVEALED in God’s written Word.Well, I think we have to begin with what the Scriptures actually say, or do not say.You’ve only tenaciously asserted it.

Nowhere is it recorded that God justified Abraham other than Gen. 15:6. All of Paul’s theology is based on it.

Oh really…then logically refute the scriptures that I presented and the exegetical methodology used. You are the one making the assertions.

 

[Pax]

Nowhere is it recorded that God justified Abraham other than Gen. 15:6. All of Paul’s theology is based on it.

Where in scripture does it state that all of Paul’s theology is based on your errant view?

 

[Pax]

I’m not presenting “logic.” I’m just stating my position based on what is REVEALED in God’s written Word.

You are not thinking logically and you are thus misrepresenting God’s written word.

 

[Pax]

Well, I think we have to begin with what the Scriptures actually say, or do not say.You’ve only tenaciously asserted it.

That is exactly what I did. The difference between what you’ve done and what I did, was that I quoted “all” of the pertinent scriptures while you have ignored them.