What is your point? Explain what you're trying to say? Do you have
a real point? I highly doubt it.
ECT How is Paul's message different?
- Thread starter Clete
- Start date
What is your point? Explain what you're trying to say? Do you have
a real point? I highly doubt it.
I guess you have no real point?
LA, you're just kind of an oddball. You have no real
or imagined reason for being on TOL. Are you just, depressed,
lonely, have no life, no friends, angry, or just strange?
or imagined reason for being on TOL. Are you just, depressed,
lonely, have no life, no friends, angry, or just strange?
Cross Reference
New member
If you wrote this, shame on you! Here's why:
By the shed blood of Jesus Christ, God no longer holds the penalty for Adam's transgression against mankind. It is that SIN that has been eternally erased from all human accounts. It goes by the title: "Redemption". Man has been reconciled to God. Having declared that from scriptural knowledge, no other sin has been so erased as that one unless there has been repentance. In other words, Christian or not, mankind is responsible for it sins committed unless there is a relationship with God that brings forth conviction followed by confession, a contrite heart asking for forgiveness and, repentance. That is the main reason the Christian given to pursuing God to know Him per John 17:3 lest he fall into temptation and insecurities as a "sottish child" would be given to do: "For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them."2 Peter 2:21 (ESV)
". . . . God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation." 2 Corinthians 5:19 (KJV)
God holds a man responsible for when he sees the Light, and prefers darkness (see John 3:19).
Now, what part needs further explaining to you?
Last edited:
This question presupposes a contradiction.
To say I believe is to connect to Him Spiritually. (Yes, I noticed the capital 'S'.)
You cannot do one without the other, unless you're just lying to begin with.
Resting in Him,
Clete
The above post is just an outstanding example of the sort of mixed message one gets when there has been a failure to rightly divide the word of truth.
Notice how, since he has chosen the more legalistic side of the issue, which New Testament authors he takes at face value and which he modifies away from the plain meaning of the text.
He takes Paul and claims that the truths taught by Paul only apply to Adam's sin and the condition in which Adam's sin had left the world. The text doesn't say that but his doctrine has to find some way to make Paul's epistles fit with the rest of the bible, which is all legalistic from beginning to end. Then he takes the other New Testament authors and renders them as is. They mean what they seem to mean without qualification or interpretation needed.
There can be no doubt that Christ's death did indeed deal with the consequences of Adam's sin. This is taught explicitly in Romans 5 and II Corinthians 5. So, granting that point without conceding the notion that this applies to all of the identification truths found in Paul's gospel, the rest of what is said would be exactly right if the Pauline epistles didn't exist. His view of the way the gospel works is exactly the way it did work before Paul and would still work now if not for Paul's Gospel. If any of you were curious about what Christianity would have looked like had God not cut off Israel, the above post goes a long way toward answering that question.
Interestingly, there are millions of Christians who hold the opposite view. Most Baptists, for example, do not believe that one can lose their salvation. But they make the exact same error as CR has. They too have failed to rightly divide the word of truth. The difference is that they prefer (for want of a better term) the Pauline epistles and interpret the rest of the New Testament in light of his epistles rather than the other way around. You can't believe the hoops I've seen Baptist trying to jump through in order to get around II Peter 2:21!
When you realize that all of the letters included in the New Testament where not all addressed to the same group of people, such issues vanish into thin air. CR's argument doesn't touch my doctrine at all. It doesn't come within a mile of refuting it. In fact, it tacitly argues in favor of my doctrine because what he uses as proof texts do not prove my position wrong even though they say and mean exactly what it seems like they say and mean. Peter was not talking about nor writing to the uncircumcision but rather the circumcision just as it is recorded in scripture that he agreed to do (Gal. 2:9) and as such serves as a proof text for MY DOCTRINE! In other words, Mid-Acts Dispensationalism says that Paul's message is different than Peters. If it weren't different THEN I'd have a problem.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Last edited:
Yes,
That is exactly right.
That is why John said---
Joh 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.
LA
Saying it doesn't make it so, LA!
Stop being a troll!
If you don't want to make an argument please leave!
Right Divider
Body part
Don't let CONTEXT get in your way. People always try to use this verse to TRY to justify the idea that God never treats people differently EVER, but He has.
Deu 14:1-2 KJV Ye are the children of the LORD your God: ye shall not cut yourselves, nor make any baldness between your eyes for the dead. (2) For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth.
You, like many others, think that God is a liar and a taker of things that He has given.The elect true church which began at Pentecost in Acts ch 2 are the people of God.
1Pe 2:1 Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings,
1Pe 2:2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:
1Pe 2:3 If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious.
1Pe 2:4 To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,
1Pe 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.
1Pe 2:6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.
1Pe 2:7 Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,
1Pe 2:8 And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
1Pe 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
1Pe 2:10 Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.
LA
As usual you're wrong once more. You need to read/study Paul's
writings from Romans through Philemon if there's any hope of you
getting rid of your ignorance?
LA desires to live his/her life as a member of the House of Israel 2,000
years ago. It's really a shame.
years ago. It's really a shame.
Nope!
LA never tries to increase his/her knowledge of God's Grace for today. She/he
wishes to remain ignorant of the facts.
wishes to remain ignorant of the facts.
Cross Reference
New member
Then consider you have a problem. You have no insight to recognize how you wrongly divide the scripture as Paul would not think of doing when this to Timothy he wrote:
"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God[a] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." 2 Timothy 3:16-17 (NIV)
I find it interesting, Paul makes no exceptions and nothing needs be qualified to prevent misunderstanding or confusion, like you do and are.
I hold to my understanding of what I believe redemption to be about and how the scriptures confirm it to be, i.e., Jesus, by His shed blood, canceled out the debt no man of Earth could ever pay to become the Christian's advocate with God for the forgiveness of sins he repents of.
wrong
glorydaz
Well-known member
Ditch your pride and listen to Clete. You need lots of things explained further to YOU, and he's just the man to do it.