"Released from the Law"

August 24, 2009

Just mentioning that He would die to His disciples is not emphasizing His death. He was preparing His disciples for the inevitable, that He must die to pay the penalty for our sins. Wayfarer has said that at least two times.

Paul's gospel is a gospel of death; die to self, die with Christ, preaching NOTHING but Christ crucified. Jesus preached and taught life; life in His word, the narrow gate that leads to life, righteousness leading to life, the water/wellspring of life, whoever hears my words passes from death to life, the Son like the Father has life in Himself, eat the food that brings eternal life. I could go on and on.

The gospel that Jesus preached is the gospel of the Kingdom (Matt.24:14). That gospel is that you must be in the Kingdom of Heaven to be saved (John 3).

His gospel says that you must be sanctified as He sanctified Himself (John 17:17-19).

The reason that many Christians do not believe that there is a difference between the gospel of Jesus and the gospel of Paul is that most Christians spend most of their time studying Paul and not Jesus.

Try this challenge; take one month and do not spend any time with Paul or EGW, spend it ONLY with the gospel and life of Jesus Christ, and that only in Matthew, Mark and John. Do it every day. Also, you must suspend your current belief system and go into the challenge in as unbiased way as possible.(Do not use Luke because he was a convert of Paul and got most of the information for his gospel from Paul.) After that month of total immersion into Jesus Christ then go back and look at Paul and see if you don't see a difference. If you do then you will know that there is a problem with Paul. If not then you will have confirmed your original belief and you will be none the worse for trying, and you will have come to know Jesus in a different more personal way. Just that will be worth it to you.

I don't think that neither of you, wayfinder and musicman, are taking the time to weigh evidence. How can anyone dare to say that the apostle Paul's Gospel is only a Gospel of death!!! Sorry but this is getting ridiculous bordering blasphemy. Have you never read 1 Cor.15:1-5 and many other passages where Paul is extolling His life, death, resurrection, and His intercession in the sanctuary above?

sky

August 24, 2009

I will quote Ted Oplinger:

Is God so lax with His Word He allows deceit, fraudulent testimony and perjury into His Word? It is precisely that point which makes your position unsustainable.

First, that the devil would aid the Gospel by making sure it was heard in all languages present that day is absolutely ridiculous. About as sensible as the Jews accusing Christ of casting out demons by the power of Beelzebub. Christ showed the utter absurdity of that reasoning.

In that same spirit, let's now demonstrate absurdity with absurdity...

UNLESS you can prove Jesus penned His teachings Himself, or can show people the videos of you and Christ together, you cannot say you depend upon the sayings of Christ.

August 24, 2009

Originally Posted By: Richard Holbrook

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. Jhn 3:16

There is enough truth in that one text for you to be saved.

Without his death and life, there is no salvation.

His life and death is the gospel.

And may I add, His resurrection.

"if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up—if in fact the dead do not rise. For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable.

But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive." 1 Cor 15:13-23 NKJV

Blessings!

August 24, 2009

Yes you may.

August 24, 2009

The reception of the Holy Spirit is the beginning of eternal life.

sky

"He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life."1 John 5:12 NKJV

Which just goes to show, God is One, not two or three. But that's another thread.

"Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one!"Deuteronomy 6:4 NASB

"Jesus answered him, “The first of all the commandments is: ‘Hear, O Israel, the LORD our God, the LORD is one."Mark 12:29 NKJV

Blessings!

August 24, 2009

Yes you may.

And the Lord parted the waters.

August 24, 2009

Where in John 3:16 does it say that Jesus is going to die? It says that God gave His son, it does not say that He gave His son to die. If you read John 18:37 you will find out in Jesus' own words what He came to earth to do. And don't forget John 3:19-21. Do you not think those words are important and significant?

August 24, 2009

Richard,

That is exactly why I made the challenge I did. You know what Paul said, you don't really know what Jesus said. Accept the challenge and see if it doesn't change your life. Or not. The only reason not to accept the challenge is because you are afraid. If you don't accept the challenge of 30 days with Jesus then ask yourself, "What am I afraid I will learn?" Remember, you should not do this to prove me wrong, you should do it because you really want to get closer to Jesus Christ. And what could possibly be wrong with that?

August 24, 2009

Lutz13, working the night shift, I did that for seven years.

I don't argue the fact that Christ said He would die and rise again. I said that Christ never emphasized His death in the context of salvation like Paul does. Paul emphasizes Christ's death as the fundamental element of his salvation theology. The fundamental element of the Son of God's salvation theology is learning and practicing the truth.

1Co 2:2

For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.

I actually enjoy working at night. Well except for my mondays, when my sleep schedule is backwards and I have to reset it.

Actually, Jesus did emphasize His death in the context of salvation. "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up."(John 3:14) So just as the serpent was raised up for the children of Israel to look upon to cure their afflictions. So is Jesus lifted up for us to look to. "And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself."(John 12:32)

August 24, 2009

Just mentioning that He would die to His disciples is not emphasizing His death. He was preparing His disciples for the inevitable, that He must die to pay the penalty for our sins. Wayfarer has said that at least two times.

Paul's gospel is a gospel of death; die to self, die with Christ, preaching NOTHING but Christ crucified. Jesus preached and taught life; life in His word, the narrow gate that leads to life, righteousness leading to life, the water/wellspring of life, whoever hears my words passes from death to life, the Son like the Father has life in Himself, eat the food that brings eternal life. I could go on and on.

The gospel that Jesus preached is the gospel of the Kingdom (Matt.24:14). That gospel is that you must be in the Kingdom of Heaven to be saved (John 3).

His gospel says that you must be sanctified as He sanctified Himself (John 17:17-19).

The reason that many Christians do not believe that there is a difference between the gospel of Jesus and the gospel of Paul is that most Christians spend most of their time studying Paul and not Jesus.

Try this challenge; take one month and do not spend any time with Paul or EGW, spend it ONLY with the gospel and life of Jesus Christ, and that only in Matthew, Mark and John. Do it every day. Also, you must suspend your current belief system and go into the challenge in as unbiased way as possible.(Do not use Luke because he was a convert of Paul and got most of the information for his gospel from Paul.) After that month of total immersion into Jesus Christ then go back and look at Paul and see if you don't see a difference. If you do then you will know that there is a problem with Paul. If not then you will have confirmed your original belief and you will be none the worse for trying, and you will have come to know Jesus in a different more personal way. Just that will be worth it to you.

Sorry my friend. I trust God, and I trust Him well. I once went down the road of twisting His word to my own bias and picking it apart. The problem with doing so is eventually you will keep picking it apart until there is nothing left. I wasn't listening to the warnings God was giving me, so He let me experience it. I fell away for a few months because I had nothing! Yet God as amazing as He is, pulled me back into the boat once again. I do not think you know what you ask me to do. You are asking me to stop trusting God and to trust you. I cannot do that.

August 24, 2009

I do not think you know what you ask me to do. You are asking me to stop trusting God and to trust you. I cannot do that.

Amen! That is excactly right.

August 24, 2009

Try this challenge; take one month and do not spend any time with Paul or EGW, spend it ONLY with the gospel and life of Jesus Christ, and that only in Matthew, Mark and John. Do it every day. Also, you must suspend your current belief system and go into the challenge in as unbiased way as possible.(Do not use Luke because he was a convert of Paul and got most of the information for his gospel from Paul.) After that month of total immersion into Jesus Christ then go back and look at Paul and see if you don't see a difference. If you do then you will know that there is a problem with Paul. If not then you will have confirmed your original belief and you will be none the worse for trying, and you will have come to know Jesus in a different more personal way. Just that will be worth it to you.

*****************

The problem is not with the apostle Paul or with Luke but with you sir. I cannot even begin to fathom how one can join any adventist forum and make the kind of statements you have made regarding the apostle Paul and now Luke!!!

I have spent at least 30 years studying the writings of Paul and the writings of E.G. White and I am all the better for it. And I would exchange the precious gems of truth I have discovered in their writings for the speculations of uninspired men? Never.

Your teaching reminds me of the days of the Reformation when Luther had to meet with similar errors. Some were teaching that they could dispense with the Scriptures altogether because, as they said, they now had the Spirit. Munzer, the leader of this fanatical group had said, "He who possesses this spirit possesses the true faith, although he should never see the Scriptures in his life." G.C.191. As a consequence, they went to great extremes. Some even burned their Bibles, exclaiming, "The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life."

"Munzer's teaching appealed to men's desire for the marvelous, while it gratified their pride by virtually placing human ideas and opinions above the Word of God. His doctrines were received by thousands." See The Great Controversy, pp.191.

This is what you and your friend are doing, placing human ideas and opinions above the Word of God.

I predict that if you and your friends who are following you do not repent of your false teachings, you will end up rejecting the Bible entirely.

sky

August 24, 2009

For over a year now I have believed that the teachings of Jesus are all we need. I have called it the straight and narrow path. But I do not believe other scriptures are from Satan. I was appalled to see that sentiment. And I was appalled that anyone would refer to EGW as Jezebel or the great harlot of Revelation. And I was appalled that anyone would say the Apostle Paul was a fraud. These statements get traction only because of the misguided fundamentalist idea that scripture and inspiration are inerrant. Fundamentalism and these statements are of Satanic origin, and prove beyond any doubt that Satan isn't really as intelligent as he is thought to be.

August 24, 2009

These statements get traction only because of the misguided fundamentalist idea that scripture and inspiration are inerrant.

oldsailor, could you elaborate on this phrase? thank u :)

August 24, 2009

Also, you must suspend your current belief system and go into the challenge in as unbiased way as possible.(Do not use Luke because he was a convert of Paul and got most of the information for his gospel from Paul.)

Again I will quote Ted Oplinger because he says it so well:

In that same spirit, let's now demonstrate absurdity with absurdity...

UNLESS you can prove Jesus penned His teachings Himself, or can show people the videos of you and Christ together, you cannot say you depend upon the sayings of Christ.

Not a single word came from Christ's pen, not a single word of the Gospels were written during His life here on earth. Every single word of "His" testimony is, in fact, the words of other men, and you cannot prove them to be words of Christ unless He actually penned them down (and were somehow mysteriously left out of the Bible Canon), or unless you were personally there to witness them. Yet, with the latter, your testimony today becomes merely a second-hand account no different from any other, unless you had the videos to show otherwise.

That aside, let's see how well your rationale holds up with your often-repeated claim you depend more on the words of Jesus and His "eyewitnesses", and find the rest untrustworthy by comparison.

The Gospel of Mark is the earliest written Gospel, nearly 20 years after the fact. That it was written by John Mark, with Peter's heavy influence, makes it out of the Bible, according to your own logic. With Peter being untrustworthy, and John Mark not being an "eyewitness" we can't be sure whose words are really there, can we? And 20 years is a long time to be depending on an somewhat trustworthy memory, wouldn't you agree?

Then there's the Gospel of Luke. Not an eyewitness, and untrustworthy as he is suspected of getting the Pentecostal account wrong. Throw that one out immediately.

That's half of the Gospel accounts, gone. Over half of Christ's testimony, gone. Let's move on.

The Gospel of Matthew seems to be a fine candidate, as Matthew was an eyewitness, and is credited with writing the Gospel bearing his name.

That is, until the critique comes out that the first 8 chapters are second-hand accounts, as Matthew doesn't come onto the scene until the 9th chapter of that Gospel. Because of that fact, we cannot trust the Gospel is indeed an eyewitness reckoning, for we have no knowledge with which to discriminate how much of Matthew's Gospel was indeed his contribution, and how much was second-hand information being passed off as eyewitness testimony. This is noted because it is so similar to the other 2 easily dismissed Gospels, it must contain the very same kind of non-eyewitness second-hand lack of credibility Luke and Mark have. Reluctantly, we must put Matthew aside as well.

Now, you're down to one last Gospel in the Biblical Canon: John's Gospel.

He's an eyewitness. Check. Authored the Gospel bearing his name. Check. So far, so good.

But we have this nagging little point, that John repeats the same errors of Paul's teachings in 1 John chapters 1-3. The very same teachings your "false apostle" was found spreading in Romans, Ephesians, both Corinthians, Galatians, and Philippians.

If he's so fast and loose there, how can we trust the Gospel bearing his name? It is, after all, so very different from the rest...

To boot, it was written 40+ years after the fact. You should know that even "eyewitness" memories fade within just a few years of the events. And you're going to credit a 40+year memory as being mistake-proof when it comes to the testimony John SAYS Christ bore?

Just a little bit inconsistent, wouldn't you say?

So where are you really depending upon the words of Christ? All four Gospels are found to be not really trustworthy, based upon the rationale of higher critique. They become merely the words of men being passed off as the words of Christ.

Yet that is precisely what you must logically do to remain true to your "higher criticism" rationale.

This is where "higher criticism" leads its followers, - to a place where they think they are depending upon the words of Christ, when in fact they have jettisoned the very foundation through which Christ gave His testimony.

Frankly, I dismiss all of that "higher critical" reasoning and rationale as garbage. All it does is undermine faith, and destroy the anchor that keeps us from being tossed to and fro on the waves of human philosophy...

Seems Paul knew precisely what he was talking about.

August 24, 2009

RH,
This brings me back to the original statement. Show me where Paul's teaching and Christ's teaching are the same, for instance, Christ proclaimed the kingdom of heaven/God, Paul taught Christ crucified; these are not the same. Christ taught that one must be born again to enter the kingdom of heaven to gain eternal life. Paul says one must die with Christ to have life. One teaching is to be born of the Spirit and one is to die and be resurrected.

The New Testament without Paul is a very small book...

Mark :-)

August 24, 2009

Paul does not say to die to self, he says "I am crucified with Christ therefore I no longer live, but Jesus Christ lives in me (Gal.2:20). Paul does not say die to self anymore than Christ died to self. In fact Paul says "I no longer live", so the spirit of Christ is living in his body. Jesus taught obedience to the will of God, which is the truth. When we are obedient to the truth we are no longer self centered.

So you believe you can keep the Law in your own strength?

Mark

August 24, 2009

If we walk after the Spirit we will be led into all truth. We will be scantified by the truth, which is the word of God. When Christ was crucified He did not die to self, He died the second death to remove the second death from us, so those who love and practice the truth would not taste of the second death. This is not the same as being crucified with Christ it is payment made by Christ on behalf of those who would be born again and enter the kingdom of God.
Paul did not say die to self, he said die to the flesh and live to the Spirit, this Jesus never taught.

Flesh = self = carnal nature = old man

August 24, 2009

It's the same thing!! You're being tripped up by semantics. Jesus died to self while he was alive. He was tempted like us. He denied himself. He could have turned the stones into bread, and he was hungry. But he denied himself.

Jesus was tempted to use His Divine nature, that was the thing He was tempted on. :-)

August 24, 2009

I know

August 24, 2009

Richard,
That is exactly why I made the challenge I did. You know what Paul said, you don't really know what Jesus said. Accept the challenge and see if it doesn't change your life. Or not. The only reason not to accept the challenge is because you are afraid. If you don't accept the challenge of 30 days with Jesus then ask yourself, "What am I afraid I will learn?" Remember, you should not do this to prove me wrong, you should do it because you really want to get closer to Jesus Christ. And what could possibly be wrong with that?

MM, can you give me the direct transcript recorded of Jesus' words, by Jesus?

Because if I am not going to have anything other than those words directly spoken by Jesus, I will need it in an autobiography format.

Do you have that?

August 24, 2009

Also, you must suspend your current belief system and go into the challenge in as unbiased way as possible.(Do not use Luke because he was a convert of Paul and got most of the information for his gospel from Paul.)

I will quote Ted Oplinger because he says it so well: