There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.

[Reformed]

Actually, you are historically unaccurate. God did give us the Catholic Church because we know, historically, that it descends right back to Christ who said, “You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church.” Giving us the Churs is exactly what God did. As for oral traditions, read the early fathers. You will see it there. The structure of the Church, the sacraments, the sinlessness of Mary, etc. etc. etc. These things may not all be (but some are) explicitly spelled out in the scripture (though I believe you can find scriptural support for all of them) and yet the early christians defened and treasured these beliefs as if the Apostles themselves had taught them.

More subejctive opinions my friend. We can we use to discuss and debate as a neutral source? Maybe the Word of God?

 

[ralphinal]

More subejctive opinions my friend. We can we use to discuss and debate as a neutral source? Maybe the Word of God?

How is the Word of God neutral when both sides can present Verses defending their view? Who is going to decide which is right? If only we had something that could defend the Truth and establish what verses mean within their context.

 

[mikeledes]

The “gospel” is directly connected to the sacrificial death, burial and bodily resurrection of Christ. The Apostles could not be sent out to herald it until AFTER it occurred. Gospel means "good news, or, "glad tidings."Christ didn’t preach the salvation message He committed and commissioned to His Apostles after His death and bodily resurrection and the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. Jesus, in the historical accounts of His life, did point to Himself as the object of faith and the source of eternal life. But the gospel message of salvation through faith in Him could not be preached to the whole world until He had, once for all, “put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.”

If this is so, then why do Protestants constantly cite Jesus, particularly the Gospel of John, when teaching the “message of salvation through faith in Him,” John 3:15-16 just being one example. If Jesus did not preach the salvation message, what did He preach for 3 years? The Bible clearly indicates that Jesus and the apostles preached the Gospel, and there is only one Gospel:

Mark 8:35

**35"For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel’s will save it. **

Luke 9:6

6Departing, they began going throughout the villages, preaching the gospel and healing everywhere.

Luke 20:1

**1On one of the days while He (Jesus) was teaching the people in the temple and preaching the gospel, the chief priests and the scribes with the elders confronted Him, **

What gospel - because that’s how its described by the word of God - did Jesus and His apostles preach?

You see, Mike, the issue, this side of the cross, is not sin but belief vs. unbelief. Salvation through Christ is not a sin issue, but a belief issue. Men won’t go to Hell because they sinned (else ALL of us would end up there), but because they refused to believe what Christ has DONE! For this reason Paul responded with this to the Philippian jailer who asked what he must do to be saved: "Believe in the Lord Jesus and you shall be saved…"There are many things in Matt 5-7 than can be spiritually applied to the believer today, but only as a secondary application.

Everything discussed by Jesus in Matthew 5 applies to the spiritual and it is for believers, for they are the salt of the earth and the light of the world. And since Jesus has believers in view, Matthew 6:14-15 applies to them:

14"For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.
15"But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.

What was the issue prior to the Cross? Or were people saved in one way prior to the Cross and another way after?

Continued in next post…

 

[mikeledes]

Continued from previous post…

Jesus was not addressing those whom God “justifies,” this side of the cross, through faith in Christ alone. Because the gospel (good news) is that the believer, this side of the cross, is:"…justified as a gift by His grace (how?) through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus" (Rom. 3:24).This redemption was not accomplished until His death on the cross. And with the bodily resurrection of Christ a new age had arrived and men now enter it through faith in Him.

Paul teaches this concerning the believer’s reconciliation to God through the death of Christ:Col 1:19-23 "For it was the {Father’s} good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, {I say,} whether things on earth or things in heaven. And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, {engaged} in evil deeds, yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach-- if indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister.You see, Mike, the major doctrines of salvation hinge on the sacrificial death of Christ (the cross) and His subsequent bodily resurrection. It’s the essence of the gospel message and the believer’s faith unto salvation. What we get in the Epistles is the doctrinal revelation concerning the believer’s full redemption and reconciliation through His sacrificial death and which is appropriated, in full, at the time of belief.

So his apostles were not justified when He said to them that if they forgive, God will forgive their sins and if they don’t forgive, God will not forgive their sins? They were only justified on the “other side of the Cross.” So there were no justified or regenerated people while Jesus preached for three years?

But before you even go there, no, the last part of that passage (Col. 1:23) is not a condition of a believer’s Divine reconciliation but a manifestation of it.

And yet we have examples of true Christians falling away:

Hebrews 6:4-6

**4For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit,
5and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,
6and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame. **

No it’s not, Mike. James is not talking Divine, judicial forgiveness based on the redemptive work of Christ on the cross. Otherwise any and all sickness would be considered sinful; and no one sick could be saved; and anyone dying of a sickness would not, could not, enter heaven, having died in a sinful state (I am now addressing Catholic logic).I think, “having forgiven us ALL our transgressions…having cancelled out the certificate of debt” and “having put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself” testifies against you, Mike

.

And where do James or I say that all sickness is sinful? You said that that passage seems to link sickness with sin. I said that is not the case. The point still stands and what James says testifies against you:

James 5:15

15and the prayer offered in faith will restore the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up, and if he has committed sins, they will be FORGIVEN him.

No matter how you slice it or dice it, James talks about forgiveness (a judicial act) of sins.

Of course, when you replace the gospel with those passages. I could quote hundreds of verses (like Pax) that would seem contradictory based on your method of interpretation (hermeneutic). In fact, by your method of interpretation the whole Bible presents itself as one great big contradiction. As for not being “the historic Christian understanding,” one only need appeal to the Epistles written to the churches (especially Pauline). That’s about as early in Christian history as you can get. But one must first believe what Christ has DONE in order to see what God has gifted by grace alone

I don’t replace the gospel with “those passages.” I accept the whole Gospel as preached by Jesus and the apostles. It is *your *method that makes the Bible a big contradiction.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[Reformed]

How is the Word of God neutral when both sides can present Verses defending their view? Who is going to decide which is right? If only we had something that could defend the Truth and establish what verses mean within their context.

Well, we are all dependent upon God the Holy Spirit to illuminate truth to us wretched sinners through the Scriptures. So, technically, how do we know that God the Holy Spirit has illuninated truth to our minds and hearts to the redemned of God? The problem (IMO) with the strawman’s agrument that Protestants have 1 billion denominations is the same problem the Roman Catholic Chuch has. The Roman Catholic Church like the Orthodox Church are also part of that 1 billion denominational issue. However, Roman Catholics haven’t figured out that the Roman Church only knows in part. If you believe God works through the Catholic Magestium to determine truth exclusively, then I would say your faith is on a sandy foundation (IMO).

 

[mikeledes]

Well, we are all dependent upon God the Holy Spirit to illuminate truth to us wretched sinners through the Scriptures. So, technically, how do we know that God the Holy Spirit has illuninated truth to our minds and hearts to the redemned of God? The problem (IMO) with the strawman’s agrument that Protestants have 1 billion denominations is the same problem the Roman Catholic Chuch has. The Roman Catholic Church like the Orthodox Church are also part of that 1 billion denominational issue. However, Roman Catholics haven’t figured out that the Roman Church only knows in part. If you believe God works through the Catholic Magestium to determine truth exclusively, then I would say your faith is on a sandy foundation (IMO).

Why do you think there are Lutheran, Arminians, and Calvinist? Why do you see TULIP so clearly in Scripture while the Arminian clearly sees the opposite?

God Bless,
Michael

 

[ralphinal]

Well, we are all dependent upon God the Holy Spirit to illuminate truth to us wretched sinners through the Scriptures. So, technically, how do we know that God the Holy Spirit has illuninated truth to our minds and hearts to the redemned of God? The problem (IMO) with the strawman’s agrument that Protestants have 1 billion denominations is the same problem the Roman Catholic Chuch has. The Roman Catholic Church like the Orthodox Church are also part of that 1 billion denominational issue. However, Roman Catholics haven’t figured out that the Roman Church only knows in part. If you believe God works through the Catholic Magestium to determine truth exclusively, then I would say your faith is on a sandy foundation (IMO).

The actual problem, and this is fact, is that we can have a theological discussion with the phrase "In my opinion.’ Why did Jesus pray taht we be one if he did not mean One in Faith? One People lifting up our prayers to God? One is not two. One is not three. One is not one trillion. Any number other than one is anti-Christ. So, how can we be one? Many people read different things out of scripture. How can you be sure that you are the one following the Holy Spirit? Give me one indication that you are right and no one else is. And there cannot be multiple correct answers, otherwise there is no such thing as One.

 

[Reformed]

The actual problem, and this is fact, is that we can have a theological discussion with the phrase "In my opinion.’ Why did Jesus pray taht we be one if he did not mean One in Faith? One People lifting up our prayers to God? One is not two. One is not three. One is not one trillion. Any number other than one is anti-Christ. So, how can we be one? Many people read different things out of scripture. How can you be sure that you are the one following the Holy Spirit? Give me one indication that you are right and no one else is. And there cannot be multiple correct answers, otherwise there is no such thing as One.

We walk by faith and not by sight. Again, we all know in part. We agree on many essentials such as the dual nature of Jesus Christ being fully God and fully man (hypo-static union). We believe in our Great Triune God. We believe that the Holy Scriptures is the Word of God. We cannot prove this, because we receive it by faith. Where we disagree is authorative revelation and the gospel of God’s grace. Do you seem to agree, or disagree and why?

 

[mikeledes]

We walk by faith and not by sight. Again, we all know in part. We agree on many essentials such as the dual nature of Jesus Christ being fully God and fully man (hypo-static union). We believe in our Great Triune God. We believe that the Holy Scriptures is the Word of God. We cannot prove this, because we receive it by faith. Where we disagree is authorative revelation and the gospel of God’s grace. Do you seem to agree, or disagree and why?

Do you believe you know in part the “fundamentals” of Christianity? Do you believe you know the gospel of God’s grace in part? Why do you think there are Calvinists, Lutherans, and Arminians?

God Bless,
Michael

 

[ralphinal]

We walk by faith and not by sight. Again, we all know in part. We agree on many essentials such as the dual nature of Jesus Christ being fully God and fully man (hypo-static union). We believe in our Great Triune God. We believe that the Holy Scriptures is the Word of God. We cannot prove this, because we receive it by faith. Where we disagree is authorative revelation and the gospel of God’s grace. Do you seem to agree, or disagree and why?

Here is the problem. Explain why Jesus’s prayer that we be one as he and the Father are one is answered in being divided over the Real Presence or infant baptism? There are no minor issues. If there were, we could all be one.

 

[East_and_West]

More subejctive opinions my friend. We can we use to discuss and debate as a neutral source? Maybe the Word of God?

Not subjective at all. Read the evidence of the early Fathers. You will find I am quite accurate. By the way, I notice you like to call things “subjective” when you don’t like the facts. Sorry buddy, but calling something subjective is does not make it so.

 

[Reformed]

Do you believe you know in part the “fundamentals” of Christianity? Do you believe you know the gospel of God’s grace in part? Why do you think there are Calvinists, Lutherans, and Arminians?

God Bless,
Michael

You lost me. Would you please try again. The Calvinists, bibilcal Lutherans and biblical Arminians agree in the essentials of the Christian Faith.

 

[Reformed]

Here is the problem. Explain why Jesus’s prayer that we be one as he and the Father are one is answered in being divided over the Real Presence or infant baptism? There are no minor issues. If there were, we could all be one.

Oh, I’m not sure we are saved by having perfect knowledge on an Infinite God, us being finite. God is a very very very big God.

 

[Reformed]

Not subjective at all. Read the evidence of the early Fathers. You will find I am quite accurate. By the way, I notice you like to call things “subjective” when you don’t like the facts. Sorry buddy, but calling something subjective is does not make it so.

Are you trying to say that the Early Church Fathers were in agreement? If they did not agree on all issues, that these are not facts. So, what’s a fact? Can you prove that God exist as a fact?

 

[PerryJ]

It all depends who’s history books you are reading from. Does your history come from a Roman Catholic persepective, Orthodox perspective, LDS Christian perspective, or a Protestant perspective? Three of the four groups above have a high view of the Scriptures. The Protestants have the highest view of Holy Scripture. So, what does God reveal through the Scriptures? BTW… here is a Protestant perspective in regards to history being on the Protestant side.

The History of Christian Doctrines, by Louis Berkhof

ISBN 0-8010-0636-8

Concerning the early Church Father’s or Luther one can read their writings.

 

[Reformed]

Concerning the early Church Father’s or Luther one can read their writings.

Sure, by what they write is not in par with the Holy Scriptures, right? Does the Catholic Church teach that the writings of the Church Fathers are equal to Scripture as being God-breathed? I do not believe what Luther or Calvin wrote to be equal to the Holy Scriptures.

 

[PerryJ]

Sure, by what they write is not in par with the Holy Scriptures, right? Does the Catholic Church teach that the writings of the Church Fathers are equal to Scripture as being God-breathed? I do not believe what Luther or Calvin wrote to be equal to the Holy Scriptures.

First you post a book we should accept. Then you refute history books and then refute the direct sources. ???

 

[East_and_West]

Are you trying to say that the Early Church Fathers were in agreement? If they did not agree on all issues, that these are not facts. So, what’s a fact? Can you prove that God exist as a fact?

Well, yes, I can prove that God exists but that is a separate issue. And, for the most part, yes the Church fathers were in broad agreement. But guess what, when a Church Father held an opinion that the Church eventually deemed to be an incorrect view he would change his opinion. Jerome is a great example of this. This is the attitude of a Catholic, not a protestant. When a protestant does not agree with his church, he just starts a new one. That one being more “correct” than the last, until they realize that there is no unity of truth in protestantism.

 

[East_and_West]

Sure, by what they write is not in par with the Holy Scriptures, right? Does the Catholic Church teach that the writings of the Church Fathers are equal to Scripture as being God-breathed? I do not believe what Luther or Calvin wrote to be equal to the Holy Scriptures.

No. But they are good historical evidence for wht the Apostles taught. Btw, how do you know what books go in the bible?

 

[headin_home]

I believe this is the heart of our division: There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. I personally don’t see much faith and confidence in most Roman Catholics in regards to this one simple truth. This needs to be received to grow in affections for our amazing Triune God. I particpate on this forum so all of us will grow together in our love for God through the truth of His Holy Word. Our religious affections is the key in our Christian battle within ourselves. We remove religous idols of our hearts through the sanctifying truths of God’s Holy Word (John 17:17). Embrace the truth of no condmenation for those who are in Christ Jesus. The real soul searching question should be “have you really been united to Christ”? That is a question all professing Christians should ask themselves, regardless of your church affiliations. To examine yourself to see if you are truly in the faith is taught in the Bible.

Here is the verse in context:

There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. 8 Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

• Rom 8

Romans 8:1
"There is now therefore no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus…???

The favorite half verse qoute of the “once saved,always saved” theology.

PLEASE PUT THE COMMA BACK IN AND AT LEAST ADD THE REST OF THE FIRST VERSE!!!

Here’s what it really says:

1 There is now therefore no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus, who walk not according to the flesh.

2 For the law of the spirit of life, in Christ Jesus, hath delivered me from the law of sin and of death. 3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh; God sending his own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh and of sin, hath condemned sin in the flesh; 4 That the justification of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh, but according to the spirit. 5 For they that are according to the flesh, mind the things that are of the flesh; but they that are according to the spirit, mind the things that are of the spirit.

BTW—If believing something requires an act(work)
then everyone has to, “GOD forbid” ,work
their way to heaven.
The grace of GOD freely given through
the shed blood of JESUS must be
accepted by a conscious decision
which requires an action (work).

A FELLOW CHARISMATIC TRIED TO USE THIS HALF VERSE TO TELL ME THAT A CHRISTIAN SHOULD NEVER BE ASHAMED.
THEIR FAMOUS TV EVANGELIST ALSO SAID IN HIS NY BEST SELLING BOOK THAT IF A PERSON IS ANGRY WITH GOD,THEY SHOULD FORGIVE GOD.

Thats when I decided to get on the path that was set for me by the REAL church that JESUS established.