Try reading it slower. It might help.
I literally just said that, Hoping!
And then I said something else which EVERY SINGLE PERSON who I have this conversation with COMPLETELY IGNORES! It's like their eyes glaze over the moment they finish reading about Christians, and completely miss the part about NON-Christians, whom the law is NOT ended for!
Do you acknowledge, Hoping, that those who are NOT dead to the law, are still under the law? Or are you going to say that because we Christians are no longer under the law, therefore no one is?
The Law is over.
If folks want to go on living under it, it is to no avail.
1) "Reborn" has nothing to do with Christians.
It sure does, as no man will receive eternal life without being born again. (John 3:3)
2) Christians are not who I'm talking about. I'm talking about NON-believers still being under the law.
It could be looked at that way, but the Law is over. It has proven to be useless in procuring salvation.
Those who say they are still under the Law are like those who say they still live in Confederate states.
In the Body of Christ, yes.
Good, now see that there are only two types of men: those in Christ and those outside of Christ.
Those outside of Christ range from atheist to Moonie and everything in between.
There is a difference between the Gospel of the New Covenant, and the Gospel of the Grace of God.
I do not accept that.
You're still not getting it.
Jewish believers under the NEW COVENANT were (they all died centuries ago) not under the Gospel of Grace.
You are saying there is a third covenant.
I don't accept that.
Jewish believers under the Gospel of Grace are no longer Jews, they are simply members of the Body of Christ.
Weren't the Jews post day of Pentecost members of the body of Christ too?
The 3000 were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of past sins, and into Christ Himself...just as we are today. (Acts 2:38, Rom 6:3-7)
The results were the same for all of us.
A Jewish convert who had been baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of past sins.
Now a member of the body of Christ.
Hate? In what way is not forgiving someone who has not repented "hate"?
I wish you had just answered the question.
Or do you think that repentance is superfluous, completely unnecessary, to be forgiven?
It is absolutely necessary for forgiveness.
The gift from God of repentance from sin is part of how we become non-sinners.
Baptisms were a requirement of the law for Israel, and they didn't just baptize themselves, they baptized their couches, their homes, and plenty of other things. Yes, with water.
Baptism under the Gospel of Grace is NOT a work, because WE aren't the ones doing it, it happens automatically the moment we believe, and there's no water required nor involved.
Nothing but the works of the Law is a work.
And the gift of the Holy Ghost is the reward for turning from sin and getting cleansed by the blood of Christ...at our water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.
Like the twelve at Ephesus.
That's why I said "baptize" (as a command) was law. Commanding someone to baptize makes it a law.
If God commanded Moses to do it it was Mosaic Law.
Commandments by Jesus or His apostles are not Mosaic Law.
You don't know what remission means?
It's a diminution of the seriousness or intensity of disease or pain; a temporary recovery.
For those in the New Covenant, it means that the seriousness of their sin nature (the "disease") is diminished, while it isn't fully eliminated. A "temporary recovery" indeed
I know that remission of sin is the elimination, expungement, forgiveness, of past sins.
The sin nature is killed with the remainder of "us" at our crucifixion with Christ.,. at out baptism into Him and into His death. (Rom 6:3-6)
"Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new." (2 Cor 5:17)
Your doctrine is an accommodation for sin.
Jesus' entire message was to *gasp* the lost sheep of the House of Israel. "Endure to the end" is, by definition, a command, something that must be done in order to achieve salvation. That makes it law, not grace. And it is SPECIFICALLY telling Israel that they will have to endure because of the coming Tribulation.
It pains me that obeying the commandments from the One who holds the keys to death and hell is so outrageous to you.
But I realize your Personal Law has its quirks.
Paul preached it to Jews and Gentiles for their salvation.
Paul was obviously not a proponent of your Personal Law.
Even if that were true, it doesn't change the fact that he stated, specifically:
For
Christ did not send me to baptize,
but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect. - 1 Corinthians 1:17
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1Corinthians1:17&version=NKJV
It is true.
Jesus didn't send him to eat and drink either, but he did those things.
And then he states that there weren't any others that he could think of that he baptized. You'd think that if baptism was so important for the Body of Christ, he would have done it more, or at the very least, given more names than that!
Do you wonder at all why Paul wrote Romans 6, about water baptism?
Or that he himself was baptized into Christ?
It does so wrongly, based on the common belief that remission means forgiveness.
Merriam/Webster's dictionary provides some synonyms of "remission"...
absolution, amnesty, forgiveness, pardon, remittal
I'm pretty sure I explained the difference between the meaning of "hope" back then and the meaning of "hope" today, but if I haven't, let me do so again:
Back in Paul's time, "hope" had a more certain connotation to it. It was an expectation of something that WILL be.
Today, it's not so much of an expectation as it is a desire for something that might be.
You put too much emphasis on a difference between "will" and "might"
Why
hope for something already completed?
Like Paul himself wrote..."For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?
25 But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it." (Rom 8:24-25)
Sounds to me like an expectation of something that might be...if we endure faithfully till the end.
Saying it doesn't make it so, and there is nothing in either verse to be able to say such.
What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh?For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:“Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, And whose sins are covered;Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin.” - Romans 4:1-8
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans4:1-8&version=NKJV
What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him?If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food,and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit?Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble!But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect?And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” And he was called the friend of God.You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. - James 2:14-26
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James2:14-26&version=NKJV
Here's another set of verses that are the antithesis of each other:
Then Peter opened his mouth and said: “In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality.But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him. - Acts 10:34-35
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts10:34-35&version=NKJV
VS
But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared,not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit,whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior,that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. - Titus 3:4-7
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Titus3:4-7&version=NKJV
You can't see my points and I can't accept yours.
I guess we should go the tie breaker.
