|
Post by way195 on Sept 5, 2012 13:56:53 GMT -5
Alright, I'll do that. Can't see how you could still be in doubt after the verses that I just listed. I haven't come across that much verses that would even slightly imply support opposite view.
I'll be back with the results of my seach in a week or so...
|
|
|
Post by Guadalupe on Sept 6, 2012 2:02:04 GMT -5
Please search and post us a N.T. verse about someone who lost their salvation. Surely it is not arbitrary. Why wouldn't there be a clear case? Can we consider Acts 1:25 one such example? 25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.As we understand it, this was the foundational example for the Conditional Eternal Security teaching. Judas as an apostle had believed in Jesus as Messiah. Yet he succumbed to the temptations of doubt and fear: John 13 2 And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him
|
|
|
Post by Brother Ben on Sept 6, 2012 12:25:03 GMT -5
Please search and post us a N.T. verse about someone who lost their salvation. Surely it is not arbitrary. Why wouldn't there be a clear case? Can we consider one such example? 25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.As we understand it, this was the foundational example for the Conditional Eternal Security teaching. Judas as an apostle had believed in Jesus as Messiah. Yet he succumbed to the temptations of doubt and fear: John 13 2 And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray himNo, this won't work becuse Judas was never saved. See: John 6:70, 71 Notice the verb tense, "one of you IS a devil" Devils don,t lose something they never had.
|
|
|
Post by Brother Ben on Sept 6, 2012 12:34:43 GMT -5
Alright, I'll do that. Can't see how you could still be in doubt after the verses that I just listed. I haven't come across that much verses that would even slightly imply support opposite view. I'll be back with the results of my seach in a week or so... I did see your verse, but hoping we could address my response to your first set of verse. I don't want to chase NEW rabbits when we still haven't caught the first one. (no insult intended)
|
|
|
Post by Brother John on Sept 6, 2012 22:31:57 GMT -5
Hello Brethren,
It's been a long time since I've posted on the forum, but I wanted to jump into the discussion here.
"way195," I have a couple of questions to ask you if you don't mind answering them. I'll just start with a very simple one for now, as it's late and I'm tired. Here's the question...
When did the New Testament begin?
I look forward to your response.
John
|
|
|
Post by Guadalupe on Sept 6, 2012 23:53:09 GMT -5
Can we consider one such example? 25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.As we understand it, this was the foundational example for the Conditional Eternal Security teaching. Judas as an apostle had believed in Jesus as Messiah. Yet he succumbed to the temptations of doubt and fear: John 13 2 And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray himNo, this won't work becuse Judas was never saved. See: , Notice the verb tense, "one of you IS a devil" Devils don,t lose something they never had. We have been digging into this during the rainy afternoon and it seems that there are two schools of thought among the Bible scholars regarding Judas Iscariot. One school of thought is that Judas was once a believer who also performed miracles with the other apostles and yet who subsequently fell to temptations of satan and then was possessed by satan (hence the present tense verb when Jesus asked the question in John 6.) The other school views Judas as a devil/possessed person from the very beginning when he was chosen by Jesus to be one of the Twelve. However Jesus used the present tense and not the past tense when referring to Judas' possession, thus begging the question: did Judas become a "devil" after initially professing belief in Jesus? Neither Strong's nor other Greek/Hebrew references seems to clarify it. It will probably be one of those questions to be studied for decades to come. In any case we do have the very strong and detailed teaching of 2 Peter 2: 20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.When did the New Testament begin? I look forward to your response. John John, how does your question relate to this thread on Eternal Security? I need some clarification about what you are seeking.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2012 0:11:28 GMT -5
7 September 2012 / 20 Elul 5772 / Friday at 12:11 AM
Hi Brother Ben,
In response to your request, have you ever considered Revelation Chapter 3 verses 1-6?
1 “And unto the angel of the church in Sardis write; These things saith He that hath the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars; I know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead.
2 Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die: for I have not found thy works perfect before God.
3 Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee.
4 Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with Me in white: for they are worthy.
5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the Book of Life, but I will confess his name before My Father, and before His angels.
6 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.”
|
|
|
Post by Brother John on Sept 7, 2012 7:24:06 GMT -5
Guadalupe,
My question relates directly to the topic of "eternal security." I assume you are discussing here the eternal security of a born again child of God, saved by grace through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and his shed blood, regenerated and made part of the body of Christ by the Holy Spirit. In other words, you are discussing the eternal security of a New Testament Christian in this age..not an Old Testament Jew, a tribulation saint, or someone out in the milennium, or anyone else.
The topic here is that of whether or not a New Testament Christian in this age can lose his salvation. Am I correct? If so, I believe it is vital and foundational to at least know when the New Testament began. It's a very basic question.
2 Timothy 2:15 is the key verse of scripture which unlocks the proper study of and understanding of the word of God. It says...
"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."
There are right and proper divisions in scripture that must be rightly understood and made. False understanding and false teaching are a result of not making those proper divisions. The most obvious division is that of the Old Testament and the New Testament. Again, the discussion here is in regards to the New Testament saint, not the Old Testament Jew.
So again, my question to way195 is "When did the New Testament begin?"
John
|
|
|
Post by way195 on Sept 7, 2012 9:01:00 GMT -5
Thanks for referring to 2 Timothy 2:5; that is what we are trying by God's grace to do in this thread.
In answer to your question, The New Testament began with Jesus crucifiction, which ushered in the new 'dispensation' of salvation through grace rather that salvation through the deeds of the law.
|
|
|
Post by Guadalupe on Sept 7, 2012 11:02:08 GMT -5
Guadalupe, My question relates directly to the topic of "eternal security." I assume you are discussing here the eternal security of a born again child of God, saved by grace through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and his shed blood, regenerated and made part of the body of Christ by the Holy Spirit. In other words, you are discussing the eternal security of a New Testament Christian in this age..not an Old Testament Jew, a tribulation saint, or someone out in the milennium, or anyone else. The topic here is that of whether or not a New Testament Christian in this age can lose his salvation. Am I correct? If so, I believe it is vital and foundational to at least know when the New Testament began. It's a very basic question. is the key verse of scripture which unlocks the proper study of and understanding of the word of God. It says... "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."There are right and proper divisions in scripture that must be rightly understood and made. False understanding and false teaching are a result of not making those proper divisions. The most obvious division is that of the Old Testament and the New Testament. Again, the discussion here is in regards to the New Testament saint, not the Old Testament Jew. So again, my question to way195 is "When did the New Testament begin?" John Thank you for delineating your intended context for the question. That makes it more clear for the topic and my understanding. As my husband and I understand it, the New Testament = the New Covenant which began at the moment that Jesus was conceived in the womb of Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit. The Old Testament = the Old Covenant. The word "testament" in Biblical studies is defined as "covenant" or "dispensation".
|
|
|
Post by Brother John on Sept 7, 2012 12:34:11 GMT -5
Thanks for referring to 2 Timothy 2:5; that is what we are trying by God's grace to do in this thread. In answer to your question, The New Testament began with Jesus crucifiction, which ushered in the new 'dispensation' of salvation through grace rather that salvation through the deeds of the law. Wayne...Thank you for your reply. You are correct. The new testament began with the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ. Guadalupe...You said the following... "As my husband and I understand it, the New Testament = the New Covenant which began at the moment that Jesus was conceived in the womb of Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit." This is a misunderstanding which can and does lead to false interpretation and false doctrine. The new testament did not begin with the birth of Christ, but rather with his death. The new testament was instituted by Christ in Matthew 26:28, but did not go into effect until his death. Please read the following verses which make this plain... Hebrews 9:15-17 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.The reason many believe that the new testament began with the birth of Christ is because the gospels come under the heading of "New Testament" in our Bibles. So, many naturally assume that everything written from Matthew forward falls under the new testament or new covenant. However, this is not so. See here what Paul has to say about the birth of Christ... Galatians 4:4-5 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.Jesus Christ was born "under the law," and that law was not done away with until the new testament went into effect at the crucifixion and death of Christ. This means that everything you read in the gospels up until Christ's death was spoken and done under the old testament law of Moses. When Christ came the first time, he came as a Jew under the Law to old testament Jews under the law. He came as the Jewish Messiah and King to the nation of Israel. He did not come to the Gentiles, neither did he send his disciples to the Gentiles. That came later. John 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.Matthew 10:5-6 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.Everything in the gospels is Jewish in context. Everything Jesus taught and did was doctrinally aimed at the Jew. All the disciples were bearded, pork abstaining, sabbath keeping, law keeping old testament Jews. There are no new testament Christians in the gospels. There cannot be, because the new testament had not been instituted yet. In fact, the word "Christians" does not even occur until Acts 11:26. This is a crucial fact if one is to rightly divide the word of truth and be sound in doctrine. All of the false teaching regarding salvation is rooted in not rightly dividing and applying doctrine to the new testament saint that does not apply to him. You cannot go to doctrine that is aimed at the Jew and put it on the Christian, whether that doctrine comes from the gospels, the book of "HEBREWS," or James which is written to "to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad." The three main books that folks who teach false doctrine regarding salvation go to are Matthew, Acts, and Hebrews. Matthew is under the law, Acts is a transitional book which is constantly changing in doctrine and nature, and Hebrews is to...well...the Hebrews! Wayne, not only did you quote verses from the gospels out of context in order to prove that a new testament saint can lose his salvation, but you went as far as quoting old testament passages such as Ezekiel 33:13 and others. At the same time, you said this..."The New Testament began with Jesus crucifiction, which ushered in the new 'dispensation' of salvation through grace rather that salvation through the deeds of the law." Why then would you go back to the "old dispensation" of the law (whether old testament books or the gospels) in order to pull out doctrine and apply it to a new testament Christian? You're on the wrong side of the cross my brother! You're reading someone else's mail. Let's compare a few verses that might seem contradictory at first, until one rightly divides the word. Speaking of the parents of John the Baptist, we read this... Luke 1:6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.Is that where you get your righteousness, from the commandments and ordinances of the Lord (the law)? Compare that verse to the words of Paul... Romans 10:3-4 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.How about these verses from James, addressed "to the twelve tribes"... James 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
James 2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. compared to Paul's words to the new testament church in the book of Romans... Romans 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
Romans 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.Read what Christ had to say in Matthew 22... Matthew 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.[/b]
Here's Paul...
1 Corinthians 15:35-36 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come? Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
Was Paul in danger of hell fire here?
What about Christ's answer to the rich man who came with questions about eternal life?
Mark 10:17-22 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth. Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me. And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.
If I gave that same answer today, I would be teaching law keeping as the means to eternal life and I would be a heretick and accursed for teaching another gospel (Gal.1:8,9). Compare that answer to this one...
Acts 16:29-31 Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
No law and no commandments, just faith in Christ and his finished work. See the difference?
There are differences, and the differences must be understood, identified and correctly placed in order to arrive at sound doctrine. "Rightly dividing the word of truth." The belief that a new testament born again child of God can lose his salvation is a false teaching that comes from wrongly dividing the word of truth and betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of sound doctrine and of salvation itself. It is a result of applying to the new testament saint doctrines that deal with Jews under the law before the church age, or saints during the tribulation after the church age.
Here are portions of posts I just remembered that I made a while ago in a thread regarding the sabbath. The whole thread can be found here... coveredbaptists.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=fundamental&action=display&thread=3241&page=1 Some of the points I've already made above are repeated here, but I hope the information is helpful.
"In order to have a correct scriptural understanding of the sabbath and how it pertains to us as New Testament saints, it is absolutely essential to have the proper foundation in regards to Biblical interpretation. Invariably, incorrect ideas about the sabbath and other similar issues arise out of some misunderstandings concerning basic and fundamental scriptural truths. The first of those truths is found in 2 Timothy 2:15:
"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."
So then, there are right and proper division in the scriptures. The most obvious being that of the Old Testament and the new, or the old covenant and new. We know that the Old Testament is just as much scripture as is the new. Not only that, but it is written for our learning and admonition (Romans 15:4;1 Cor. 10:11). After all, the Old Testament scriptures are all about one subject, the Lord Jesus Christ (John 5:39; Luke 24:44). That being said, the Old Testament (old covenant/Law of Moses), DOCTRINALLY, is not applicable to the New Testament believer.
The covenant was made with a specific people, Israel. The Law was given to them and they were under it. You and I are not under the Law of Moses. We are not Israel, and we are under a new covenant or the law of the Spirit (2 Cor. 3:6; Rom.8:2). So, there is a big difference. There is a division that must be made and understood. The misunderstanding or the twisting of this truth has brought forth much heresy and false teaching. Here's another division found in 1 Cor. 10:32:
"Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:"
Scripture speaks of three distinct groups of people. The Jew, or Israel. The Gentile, or non-Jew. The church of God, or saved Jews and Gentiles as one in the body of Christ. That's a fundamental difference that must be understood.
So, whenever reading any book, passage or verse of scripture, you have to ask yourself who is it speaking to directly and doctrinally. Also, in what time period does it apply? Before the law? Under the law? After the law? Church Age? Tribulation? Millennium? etc. These are all divisions. The whole of the Bible is scripture given by inspiration and is profitable, but the whole of the Bible is not doctrinally applicable to us. It's one Book, but every part of that Book has it's place.
Likewise, there are other divisions in scripture that must be properly made. Think of the Bible as a puzzle, with all the pieces having their proper place. Place one piece in the wrong spot and the whole thing doesn't make sense. Also, keep this in mind. Every verse of scripture has at least three applications to it. First, doctrinal. Again, to whom does a particular passage or verse doctrinally apply? Jew, Gentile or Church? Second, historical or prophetical. Where does this verse fit in the history of God's dealing with men and in what time period does it apply? Is it Church Age, Tribulation, etc.? Third, devotional or spiritual. In other words, what spiritual lessons can I learn from this passage regardless of it's doctrinal application?
This fundamental approach to scripture is the key to proper interpretation of scripture....rightly dividing the word of truth. It clears up many of the false ideas and teaching that people hold to. That's why we are told not just to study the scriptures, but how to study them, by rightly dividing them. Things that are different are not the same! So to understand the sabbath, you must have an understanding of the differences between the covenants or testaments, between the different time periods and between Israel and the church."
"We also looked at the fact that Israel, or the Jew, is a distinct and different entity than the Gentile and the church. The Old Testament is a record of God’s history, dealings and covenants with His people Israel. So, where do we as the New Testament church go to find God’s instructions to us? Well, to the New Testament of course.
Remember, all scripture is given by inspiration and is profitable, but not all scripture is directly and doctrinally aimed at the church. God deals differently with different peoples in different times and for different purposes. Israel was God’s chosen people to establish a physical kingdom here on earth. A kingdom which is yet to be realized. Therefore, the Jew’s religion is a physical one with a physical building and rituals and with God physically manifesting Himself to them with outward signs and wonders that can be seen. Along with that, the Jew was given a physical day of rest for his body!
What about the church? She is the spiritual people of God, manifesting the spiritual Kingdom of God. Therefore, we don’t have a temple of stone in which to worship. We are the temple of God in which He abides. We offer no fleshly sacrifices, but those of praise and thanksgiving. We are given no physical manifestation of signs and wonders because we walk by faith and not by sight. Ours is the Kingdom of God which is within, not the outward theocratic kingdom of the Jew. So then, our sabbath is not a Sabbath for the body which was just a shadow. Our sabbath is the realization of that shadow. It is a spiritual rest in Jesus Christ and His finished work.
So, if I as a New Testament believer want doctrinal truth for me regarding the sabbath or anything else, I am going to go to that portion of the word of God which is written to me. I am part of the New Testament church and it is to the epistles and letters to the church to which I must ultimately look for my instructions. What about the Gospels? Now here is where many sincere and well meaning saints lose their bearings, including those who teach sabbath keeping for Christians. After all, didn’t the Lord Jesus and his disciples keep the sabbath and can you not find record of this in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John? Yes. Well, doesn’t this prove that the sabbath is a New Testament commandment for the church. No.
Let's start by making one point very, very clear. It is an extremely vital point which cannot be missed, or our entire understanding of the New Testament Christian faith will be effected. The New Testament did not start with Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Although those books are in the New Testament section of our Bibles, everything that took place in those books up until Christ's death and resurrection took place under the Old Testament. When you read the Gospels, you are reading of events taking place and teachings being given under the Old Testament Jewish setup. When did the New Testament actually begin? What saith the scriptures?
"And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator]iveth." Hebrews 9:15-17
Here is an extremely important and foundational fact...the New Testament did not start until after Christ died. When Jesus came He came as the Jewish Messiah to the Jewish people.
“But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Matthew 15:24
He lived and taught as a Jew under the Old Testament Jewish Mosaic law.
"But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law," Galatians 4:4
So when you read about Jesus and His disciples keeping the sabbath in the Gospels, you are NOT reading about Christians and their New Testament faith. You are reading about Jews under the Old Testament, under the law, under Moses. These same men were bearded, abstained from pork and unclean meats, went to the temple, kept the feasts, offered the sacrifices required and were old covenant Jews in every point. There is a BIG difference! Again, things that are different are not the same.
Does this mean that we disregard the Gospels completely? Not at all. They are scripture and man shall live by every word of God. Again, however, you have to put all the pieces of the puzzle in their proper place or you will not get the correct picture. The Gospels, particularly Matthew, are transitional books taking the reader from the Old Testament and into the New. There are doctrinal truths found in those books that match those written and aimed at the church. We can certainly apply those to us. There is also spiritual and prophetic truth in the Gospels for us to read, study, understand and apply. And of course, it’s in the Gospels where we learn of our Lord’s earthly life and ministry. So there is much in Matthew to John for the New Testament believer to learn from. Doctrinally however, you are on Old Testament turf. You’re on the wrong side of the cross when it comes to doctrinal truth for the New Testament saint."
"What does dividing mean in 2 Tim.2:15? Let's put aside man made opinions of what anyone thinks it means and allow scripture to interpret itself and let the Holy Spirit teach us what He means. We do this by comparing spiritual things with spiritual things and scripture with scripture. If you are reading this, take out your concordance right now and run the references on all the verses with the word "dividing" in them. There are only four in the Old Testament and three in the New.(Josh.19:49,51; Isa.63:12; Dan.7:25; 1 Cor. 12:11; 2 Tim.2:15; Heb. 4:12) After you've done that, run all the references with the words "divide," "divided," and "divideth." What you will find is that in every verse, in every book, in both testaments, God meant what he said and said what he meant. Every time the word dividing appears in scripture it means dividing.
We don't need any help from the Hebrew or Greek to understand that. All we need is to believe what God said in the perfect Book which he has given us in our own language and allow the Author of that Book to tell us himself what he means by interpreting scripture with scripture (2 Pet.1:20).
So, what does dividing mean in 2 Tim.2:15 when it says, "rightly dividing the word of truth?" One thing we know for certain is that it does not mean to expound, teach or explain the scriptures. It means exactly what it says...dividing. There are right and proper divisions in scripture and it is our job as workmen to study those divisions out and understand them. A great majority of heresies out there have their source in two errors. The first is the one already mentioned, that is, not believing what God said and correcting the scriptures to accommodate a particular doctrine. The second is a failure to rightly divide the scriptures."
"The Bible has one true Author and comes together as one Book. The central theme, or message, of the Bible is a King and his Kingdom. However, the Bible is actually composed of 66 different books and letters written by 40 different authors over a period of 1,500 years. These 66 books and letters are written at different times, to different people and for different reasons. The five books of Moses were not written to the same folks as the letters of Paul were. The epistles addressed to the churches are not addressed to the same group of people as the book of HEBREWS is. This:
"Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:" Eph.1:1
is not the same as this....
"James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting." James 1:1
Things that are different are not the same. There are differences and those differences must be understood."
|
|
|
Post by Guadalupe on Sept 7, 2012 20:16:49 GMT -5
John, we believe based on our Biblical commentaries that the crucifixion and resurrection would not have had any purpose nor meaning had not God become man in the person of Jesus Christ.
Therefore we believe that the Incarnation, the moment that the second person of the Trinity assumed flesh at conception is the beginning of the New Covenant, ergo the New Testament.
|
|
|
Post by Brother John on Sept 7, 2012 21:11:15 GMT -5
John, we believe based on our Biblical commentaries that the crucifixion and resurrection would not have had any purpose nor meaning had not God become man in the person of Jesus Christ. Therefore we believe that the Incarnation, the moment that the second person of the Trinity assumed flesh at conception is the beginning of the New Covenant, ergo the New Testament. Guadalupe, With all due respect, if your "Biblical commentaries" contradict the Bible, then they aren't very "biblical" at all. If the scriptures say one thing and commentaries say another, it's time to discard the commentaries and words of men in favor of believing the word of God. Otherwise, you are guilty of "Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition..." (Mark 7:13) Scripture is perfectly clear on when the new testament began, and it leaves no room for private interpretations such as the one you've given. Once again... Hebrews 9:15-17 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.One more... Colossians 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;When was the law, the "handwriting of ordinances," taken out of the way? When was the old testament "done away" (2 Cor. 3:11) to make room for the new testament to take its place? When it was nailed to the cross, and not a second before. The old testament ended and the new testament began with the death of Christ, and not his birth. No amount of human sophistry and finagling of the scriptures will change that fact. The only choice we have to make is whether or not we are going to believe what God said as he said it. "Thus saith the Lord" or "Thus saith the commentaries?" John
|
|
|
Post by Guadalupe on Sept 7, 2012 22:16:53 GMT -5
Respectfully, neither Spurgeon's nor other credible commentaries based on the same scholarship contradict the Bible. As Bro. Ben states, we must hammer out the Truth on the anvil of the Bible. With that in mind, we hold by our convictions that at the conception of Jesus, fully human and fully divine, was the beginning of the New Testament as Jesus is the New Covenant fulfillment. There can be no sacrifice without the life preceding it.
We have shared our understanding on this matter and respect the fact that others may disagree. We came to our understanding with much study and prayer. We choose not to debate as debates are unworthy of Christians commanded to love one another, especially as we none of us have the fullness of Truth until we see Jesus face to face for in 1 John 2 3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
In closing, here are verses for consideration, prayer, and more prayer. John 1 King James Version (KJV) 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.
16 And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.
17 For the law was given by Moses (note: Old Testament), but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ (New Testament).
18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
|
|
|
Post by Brother John on Sept 7, 2012 22:58:46 GMT -5
Respectfully, Spurgeon nor other commentaries contradict the Bible. As Bro. Ben states, we must hammer out the Truth on the anvil of the Bible. With that in mind, we hold by our convictions that at the conception of Jesus, fully human and fully divine, was the beginning of the New Testament as Jesus is the New Covenant fulfillment. There can be no sacrifice without the life preceding it. We have shared our understanding on this matter and respect the fact that others may disagree. We came to our understanding with much study and prayer. We choose not to debate as debates are unworthy of Christians commanded to love one another, especially as we none of us have the fullness of Truth until we see Jesus face to face for in 1 John 2 3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.Guadalupe, I have no intention to "debate" with you either. This is for several reasons. One, you are a woman. I would no more debate doctrinal issues with you online than I would in person. The scriptures are clear in regards to the place of women in these matters (1 Tim. 2:11,12; 1 Cor. 14:34). Those passages are just as applicable to a woman's place and behaviour online as well as in church or anywhere else. Two, since you keep mentioning "we," I assume you are married. If so, it is not my place to try to teach you anything. God has given you a husband to teach you (1 Cor.13:45). If your husband is wrong and teaching you wrong, that is between him and God. Three... Titus 3:10-11 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.Your responses have clearly shown that you have no regard for what God said as he said it. You've elevated your own ideas and opinions above that of the scripture. You have made the word of God of none effect by your tradition and you refuse to believe the Book and submit to it. There is nothing left to say. I only respond publicly now lest others should get confused regarding the truth of scripture because of your statements. Apparently you believe commentaries are infallible, never contradicting the scripture. Your appealing to love as an excuse to ignore and deny the plain truth of scripture is not love at all. It is a humanistic and false love, for true love "rejoiceth in the truth." 1 John 3:18 My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.None of us has the fullness of truth? Really? John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.2 Peter 1:3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:2 Timothy 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.An old preacher of mine once said... "The root of the trouble about these people who think a Christian can lose his salvation goes a great deal deeper than just being confused on doctrine. At the bottom and base of this thing is a self-righteous person who wants his works to be part of his salvation. A man who also has complete disregard for what God said as He said it, when what God said crosses his opinion."Amen and amen! Enough said.
|
|