ECT Obey the Gospel

[Danoh]

Because they were behaving poorly, not that they needed to know more to be saved.

I was referring to their having allowed themselves having been swayed from what else Paul had obviously taught them - about the assurance of THEIR resurrection.

I just don't see Paul going into a synagogue, stating Christ died for your sins according to the Scriptures, was buried and rose again, according to the Scriptures, and leaving it at just those two statements.

The Lord took the Twelve through much more than that as to Who He was, in Luke 24, and the Bereans are said to have studied the Scriptures - not two passages - DAILY.

The issues addressed both in Galatians and the two Thessalonian epistles are both 1 Cor. 15: 3, 4 related issues.

Yet, in addressing them in connection with that, Paul writes far much more than 1 Cor. 15: 3, 4, to them - three entire epistles, to be exact.

1 Cor.15: 3, 4 are merely a summary of all that Paul preached concerning the dbr.

What - Romans 4 and 5 - two entire chapters more - are not a part of the end of Romans 3?

What - Romans 1:18-3:20 are not a part of Romans 3:21, to the end of the chapter?

You've never found yourself having to define sin to someone, via the Scriptures (plural)?

Someone once told me they believed in Christ died for their sins.

When I pressed them on that, it turned out they were Mormon.

Well, based on more than 1 Cor. 15: 3, 4, alone, I knew right off that the Christ they were professing to believe in is NOT the Christ Paul was referring to, in 1 Cor. 15: 3, 4.

I took them through Galatians, not through 1 Cor. 15..

I assert that 1 Cor. 15: 3, 4 is merely a summary reminder of the gospel of Christ to the Corinthians because it is very obvious in the balance of both Paul's epistles to them, and in the balance of Romans through Philemon, that Paul had taken great care to define what He had meant by "Christ," and by "sins," and so on.

Even the issue of whether or not Christ had actually died, been buried, and rose again was an issue that had to be addressed.

That is the very issue every single Israeli in that video I posted revealed him or herself being completely in the dark about.

Dealing with them on that would require much more than 1 Cor. 15: 3, 4.

Among the Jews even now, because they did neither understand those two verses, nor believe in their assertion.

And among the Gentiles because all they knew were their pagan idols...

Many today know next to nothing about Christ.

And apparantly, Paul had taught the following core distinctive not mentioned by him in 1 Cor. 15: 3, 4 - the core distinctive that Christ is the Son of God.

For when he brings that up, he does so as if he expects them to know what that means.

1 Corinthians 1:9 God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.

Called unto the fellowship of His Son - where is this Ephesians doctrine mentioned in 1 Cor. 15: 3, 4 (obviously meant to impact their understanding of THEIR resurrection)?

1 Corinthians 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

There's that Son mention again, as if he expects them to know what he means by it.

And look at that, again it is evident he taught them Ephesians 1 truth - way before he wrote Ephesians, not mentioned by him in 1 Cor.15: 3, 4...

2 Corinthians 1:19 For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea.

There it is, Paul himself asserting he and his fellow laborers had each preached Christ unto them as the Son of God.

Again, where is its' mention in 1 Cor. 15: 3, 4?

It's not - because those two passages are merely a summary as a reminder of much more that he had preached unto them that the gospel of Christ consists of.

Personally, I'm surprised my fellow nitpickers of such things (and rightly so, 2 Tim. 2:15) even have an issue with having this pointed out to them.

For years now, most debates on these FORUMS have been, and continue to be, over the many distinctive those two verses in 1 Cor. 15 are actually about.

"'Died for our sins' - what sins, I'm not that bad a person..."

'That is referring to this here...

Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

And what that is about is...

About much more than its mere mention, as a reminder to the Corinthians Paul had obviously distinctly defined the meaning of too...

For he mentions Christ having died for their sins as if he expects they - "the choir" - will know exactly what he means by that....

Acts 17:11, 12.

 

[Danoh]

Agreed. When I was a Roman, I had never before been presented the "good news," as pertaining to salvation, until I heard a preacher present 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV. I heard it, believed it, trusted the dbr, and I knew I was saved.

Meaning that you already knew something about there being a Christ, and about His having died, and so on, and you already knew something about sins.

So that less had had to be broken down to you, to begin with.

You were not so new that all that had had to be elaborated on as Paul often does with people "where Christ was not named."

In your case, someone came along, and merely rightly divided you on what little you already knew.

"You should drop it."

:chuckle:

Rom. 5:6-8.

 

[Danoh]

So what is your complaint about my simple albeit brief post? If I'm wrong, please point it out. If I'm not, then why is brevity not the best answer in this particular case?

Wasn't complaining. That is you reading that, into my words.

Was merely relating my understanding of those things, which perhaps differs from your own.

My understanding being, in summary, that the Believer's participation in the sanctification aspect is not a passive role, is indeed, a very conscious and active role.

Titus 2:9 Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again; 2:10 Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things. 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, 2:12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; 2:14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

Rom. 5:6-8.

 

[Danoh]

I'm noting what was said at 5:57,

Q: "Why don't Jews believe that Jesus is the Messiah?"

A: "If the redemption had arrived, there would be no need to work and do the commandments..."

So is the reasoning behind that being "Jesus was not the Messiah, therefore we need to obey our commandments?" or is it "We need to obey our commandments, therefore no one can be the Messiah?" A little further it seems that there is a different idea as to what "redemption" entails.

If you'll read the first part of Acts 17, you'll find that although Paul had greatly elaborated on Christ based on the Scriptures (plural) to the Jews, but the tradition that Christ had not been Who He had claimed having been, and Who His followers had claimed He had been, was already a tradition, all those years later, by the time of Acts 17.

So that it is apparent there that although Paul had taken them through many passages of Scripture confirming Who Christ had been, etc., their tradition won out, where most of them were concerned.

While later in the chapter, some other people are depicted as having invested days searching the Scriptures (plural) as to all that Paul had opened and alleged from them (the Scriptures) about Christ.

Finally, they believed.

Well, that kind of time is what is often required when dealing with Jews.

Not that non-Jews have much of a clue about their eternal predicament and God's provision in Christ.

This here...

Acts 17:1 Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews: 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, 17:3 Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ. 17:4 And some of them believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few. 17:5 But the Jews which believed not, moved with envy, took unto them certain lewd fellows of the baser sort, and gathered a company, and set all the city on an uproar, and assaulted the house of Jason, and sought to bring them out to the people.

17:10 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. 17:12 Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

It often takes much more than a few words, let alone a sit down or two, to educate the lost, on their condition.

This is due their existing, pervasive, long since set in stone, present paradigm.

So much so that even a person wanting to understand or see a thing for what it is can have ended up unable to, for a time, unless they are willing to put their skepticism aside, at least for a time, as those Bereans are said to have been willing to do.

Acts 17: 11, 12.

 

[musterion]

Did [MENTION=16688]Danoh[/MENTION] ever take care of this?

What exactly, Danoh, is incomplete about believing that content and unable to save without it?

What else, ON TOP OF the DBR for the sins of all, MUST the lost know and believe, else they won't be saved?

Bullet point it for everyone, please.

(now watch what happens)

 

[Truster]

Translation: Copy'npaste from "Dr. Phil," "Oprah." Thanks for the compliment, coming from a perverter of the gospel of Christ, and thanks for the cliche psycho babble. That is your best GOOG searched response?


And I see that you are another self righteous rejector of the gospel of Christ, not perceiving the standard, which the LORD God requires, to be in His presence, which is the righteousness of God, as defined by the Lord Jesus Christ, as you are a dirty rat, but think, "Well, I am a rat, but I am not as dirty as my fellow rats, as I display more 'fruits' than they do, and am 'cleaner' than my fellow rats, so I must be saved."

Get saved, rat.

I posted a scripture and I didn't expect you to recognise it. Your lack of recognition does not in any way void the scripture.

I've never seen or heard Dr Phil or Oprah and I have no wish to acquaint myself with them.

Bless you.

 

[john w]

Meaning that you already knew something about there being a Christ, and about His having died, and so on, and you already knew something about sins.

So that less had had to be broken down to you, to begin with.

Misdirection, as you argued, to be saved, there is more to it than 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV, and you would say to a Roman Catholic, such as I was, "Well, you cannot be saved by 1 Cor. 15:1-4,".....or you are playing games, Danoh. Knock it off. I was saved by trusting in the dbr, as given in 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV, for it is the power of God unto salvation, unto me, when I believed. That was it, as no more had to be "broken down."

The lost are in the same boat, so you asserting that you must know something, implied by you, much more, is misguided, save Hebrews 11:6 KJV.

 

[john w]

I posted a scripture and I didn't expect you to recognise it. Your lack of recognition does not in any way void the scripture.

I've never seen or heard Dr Phil or Oprah and I have no wish to acquaint myself with them.

Bless you.

For I see you are poisoned by bitterness and bound by wickedness.

No you did not-you lied-you made an assertion, about obedience,with NADA scripture,just talk show "IMO," I responded, I challenged it,and you responded with the above, which is a display of perverting the gospel of Christ.

 

[Truster]

No you did not-you lied-you made an assertion, about obedience,with NADA scripture,just talk show "IMO," I responded, I challenged it,and you responded with the above, which is a display of perverting the gospel of Christ.

Your words and your attitude say more about you than they do about me. You've obviously been triggered by the truth again.

Bless you.

 

[john w]

Your words and your attitude say more about you than they do about me. You've obviously been triggered by the truth again.

No, lost one, your posts, misdirection, lies say all we need to know about you, as you pervert the gospel of Christ, again, by the above post, confirming that you are a fruit inspector, another self righteous rejector of the gospel of Christ, not perceiving the standard, which the LORD God requires, to be in His presence, which is the righteousness of God, as defined by the Lord Jesus Christ, as you are a dirty rat, but think, "Well, I am a rat, but I am not as dirty as my fellow rats, as I display more 'fruits' than they do, and am 'cleaner' than my fellow rats, so I must be saved."

Get saved, rat.

Bless you.

Save it-you don't mean that, fraud. All lost people, to "cleanse" their guilt, say that. You are "meshak IV."

 

[Right Divider]

I was referring to their having allowed themselves having been swayed from what else Paul had obviously taught them - about the assurance of THEIR resurrection.

I just don't see Paul going into a synagogue, stating Christ died for your sins according to the Scriptures, was buried and rose again, according to the Scriptures, and leaving it at just those two statements.

The Lord took the Twelve through much more than that as to Who He was, in Luke 24, and the Bereans are said to have studied the Scriptures - not two passages - DAILY.

What does the Lord's dealing with the TWELVE have to do with Paul and the gospel of the grace of God?

Another long-winded Danohian babble-fest.

 

[Danoh]

Misdirection, as you argued, to be saved, there is more to it than 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV, and you would say to a Roman Catholic, such as I was, "Well, you cannot be saved by 1 Cor. 15:1-4,".....or you are playing games, Danoh. Knock it off. I was saved by trusting in the dbr, as given in 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV, for it is the power of God unto salvation, unto me, when I believed. That was it, as no more had to be "broken down."

The lost are in the same boat, so you asserting that you must know something, implied by you, much more, is misguided, save Hebrews 11:6 KJV.

Along with Steko (and RD to a much lesser degree), I've always considered you one of the most well -informed MADs on here, even though I might disagree with various of you on one thing, or another, and vice-versa, I'm sure.

Still, I'm really surprised some of you, of all people, haven't been able to see what it is I have been pointing out.

I mean, these other aspects are present in 1 Cor. 15.

Not obvious, right away, but present there, nevertheless.

More obvious, elsewhere in Paul's writings.

Musti, I can see not getting it. The guy has never demonstrated having gotten much on his own past what ever he learned from others.

And the fool is too blinded by his animosity towards me and its resulting agenda.

How many posts is it going to have to take on my part for the lights to finally come on.

"So there."



Rom. 5:6-8.

 

[Danoh]

What does the Lord's dealing with the TWELVE have to do with Paul and the gospel of the grace of God?

Another long-winded Danohian babble-fest.

Another, obviously spoon-fed "MAD."

Rom. 5:6-8.

 

[Right Divider]

Another, obviously spoon-fed "MAD."

Rom. 5:6-8.

I took you off of my ignore list. What a mistake.

Danoh-- The One True MAD

Back to ignore.

 

[musterion]

[MENTION=16688]Danoh[/MENTION],

Pate says preaching the DBR is an incomplete gospel. He explained why.

You have now doubled down that you too believe it's an incomplete gospel, but you have not explained why.

What does Paul say a convicted sinner must believe (in addition to the DBR for his sins) to be saved?

Bullet point it for us.

 

[musterion]

Can't wait to hear the true complete saving gospel according to Pope Danoh I.

 

[Rosenritter]

Did @Danoh ever take care of this?

What exactly, Danoh, is incomplete about believing that content and unable to save without it?

What else, ON TOP OF the DBR for the sins of all, MUST the lost know and believe, else they won't be saved?

Bullet point it for everyone, please.

(now watch what happens)

Glass houses, stones, and so forth. Don't you still have a question put to you that you refuse to answer?

 

[Right Divider]

Glass houses, stones, and so forth. Don't you still have a question put to you that you refuse to answer?

What are you? The forum police?

 

[Rosenritter]

What are you? The forum police?

The person who asked him the question that he flatly refused to answer.

 

[Right Divider]

The person who asked him the question that he flatly refused to answer.

So what?

So you get to follow him around nagging him?