"In Christ" what does that mean?

[Gerr]

And Christ warned us about attributing the work of the Spirit to the works of another spirit!

[Twilight]

And Christ warned us about attributing the work of the Spirit to the works of another spirit!

Indeed.

Why?

Because that work is essential.

But if we are labelling the indwelling work of the Holy Spirit as "legalism", then we are indeed greiving the Holy Spirit.

How can He do His work, if we deny it is even necessary?

The evidence however, is that if He is not doing the work, the fruits will not be appearing.

A very sad catch 22 situation...

Mark

[Robert]

Where is there, in this quote, anything that Mark said which could be construed as his denying that "in Christ" we are complete?

Mark, are we complete "in Christ"? Yes, no...

[Robert]

I believe the Gospel is about what Christ does in us.

Then we are incomplete "in Christ"?

[Robert]

Originally Posted By: Robert

Okay Gerry' date=' maybe Christ will allow you to test for heaven based on your performance. Will I see you in heaven? No! Why? You ain't good enough...you aren't living His life....No one is.... [/quote'] Will I or anyone ever love exactly to the same degree that God loves? Not for eternity!

Then according to the law's demands (you shall be perfect, even as God is perfect) you aren't measuring up and hence you are saved by what Christ did 2000 years ago, no?

[pnattmbtc]

But grace says that when we love, we have fulfilled what the law requires

This is nice.

[Robert]

Originally Posted By: Gerry

But grace says that when we love, we have fulfilled what the law requires

This is nice.

But incorrect....

"Agape is the fulfillment of the law"....It takes agape to do anything where there's no bent-to-self.

If I keep the command, "you shall not commit adultery" without "agape" I am really sinning even though I am not outwardly committing adultery.

So any fruit produced in us (like helping the little old lady across the street) must be done through "agape" or, as Paul states in 1 Cor 13:3, it is worthless...it self-righteous.

So yes, the believer will bear fruit, but what kind? Only if we have the yfull assurance of salvation can we bear fruit that is in harmony with "you shall love your neighbor as yourself".

[pnattmbtc]

Originally Posted By: karl

I believe the Gospel is about what Christ does in us.

Then we are incomplete "in Christ"?

I'm sure what karl means is that the good news of salvation includes the work that Christ does in us, as well as the good news of what Christ accomplished. To believe this does not imply that one is not complete in Christ.

I don't think you're communicating very effectively. (and I've been defending the "in Christ" idea, which should be clear from my contributions to this thread).

Instead of short snippets, complaining about what others are saying, and using strong, pejorative language, why not explain what you believe to be the truth in a clear and kind way?

I think the concepts are not being communicated very clearly. People disagreeing with you don't even understand what you believe, I don't think. And you're disagreeing with things people aren't saying.

[pnattmbtc]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

This is nice. [/quote']

But incorrect....

"Agape is the fulfillment of the law"....It takes agape to do anything where there's no bent-to-self.

If I keep the command, "you shall not commit adultery" without "agape" I am really sinning even though I am not outwardly committing adultery.

So any fruit produced in us (like helping the little old lady across the street) must be done through "agape" or, as Paul states in 1 Cor 13:3, it is worthless...it self-righteous.

So yes, the believer will bear fruit, but what kind? Only if we have the yfull assurance of salvation can we bear fruit that is in harmony with "you shall love your neighbor as yourself".

Being justified by faith, the love (agape) of God is shed abroad by the Holy Ghost, which is given to us, so that grace says that when we love, we have fulfilled what the law requires.

[Guest]

Hello Everyone,

I am new to this forum so please be gentle with me.

"In Christ" what does that mean? To me, it means that my entire being is of Christ, my thoughts, my actions, & my words. If my outward appearance (meaning what can be seen) is not reflecting Christ, then even though he is always with me, I am not allowing him to be in control of my life.

I believe you are right about that Maxine, welcome to the forum.

Php 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

Then according to the law's demands (you shall be perfect, even as God is perfect) you aren't measuring up and hence you are saved by what Christ did 2000 years ago, no?

If we are saved solely by what Jesus did 2000 yrs ago and nothing else to be done, THEN ALL should be saved. YES or NO?

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

This is nice. [/quote']

But incorrect....

"Agape is the fulfillment of the law"....It takes agape to do anything where there's no bent-to-self.

If I keep the command, "you shall not commit adultery" without "agape" I am really sinning even though I am not outwardly committing adultery.

So any fruit produced in us (like helping the little old lady across the street) must be done through "agape" or, as Paul states in 1 Cor 13:3, it is worthless...it self-righteous.

So yes, the believer will bear fruit, but what kind? Only if we have the yfull assurance of salvation can we bear fruit that is in harmony with "you shall love your neighbor as yourself".

"Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law." Rom 13:10 ESV.

The more bent theology, the more bent the explanations.

[pnattmbtc]

If we are saved solely by what Jesus did 2000 yrs ago and nothing else to be done, THEN ALL should be saved. YES or NO?

It really depends upon what one means, which I wish Robert would be more clear about.

The Scripture says that Christ is "the Savior of the world" also "the Savior of every man, especially of those who believe." The SOP says that Christ "saved the world." So there is a sense in which it is true that the whole world was saved by Jesus Christ, as these statements make clear. However, these statements are not speaking of individual salvation, which depends upon faith (which not everyone exercises) but upon a work which Christ did, entirely apart from anything man did. Man's part in Christ's work was to crucify Him.

However, in Robert's posts, I don't sense his making the distinction clear. We can't be individually saved by what Christ did 2000 years ago because, as you point out, if that were the case, everyone would be saved.

Something else to make clear is that it's often said that yes, Christ died for you, but it doesn't do you any good unless you accept it. This is true to a point, insofar as one's individual salvation is concerned, but as a general statement to say this is very incorrect, as "to the death of Christ we owe even this earthly life." Not one, saint or sinner, partakes of his daily bread but he is nourished by the blood of Christ. (see DA 660)

[teresaq]

...The Holy Spirit works in me, as I co-operate with Him.

My part is to continually give Him my will.

The rest of it is His part....

yes, the Holy Spirit does work "in" me by reasoning with my mind in the hopes that i will accept Gods thought instead of my own.

but i cant see how He could be working "in" my brain nerves...that seems like He would be working against my knowledge and will. "to co-operate with Him" implies conscious agreement.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

And Christ warned us about attributing the work of the Spirit to the works of another spirit!

But if we are labelling the indwelling work of the Holy Spirit as "legalism", then we are indeed greiving the Holy Spirit.

has that been said in some form?

are is it more accurate to say that is what is being heard but not said, and quite possibly not meant.

not to you alone, but if we divest ourselves of our emotional investment in our "side", our cherished belief, it makes it much easier to understand what the one we think we are disagreeing with is actually saying.

sorry, to some of you on both sides, i know this will be offensive and i am sorry about that, but i come view through this thread and have to laugh at the emotional responses when there isnt that much disagreement. and what disagreement there is is so minor as to be of not much importance.

i understand the emotional responses to accusations, but not to "arguments".

how about, 'i disagree', 'i see it this way', yada, yada...?

[Robert]

I'm sure what karl means is that the good news of salvation includes the work that Christ does in us, as well as the good news of what Christ accomplished.

No...that implies Christ's work of redemption was incomplete. This was the message of the Judaizers....It's subtle legalism.

[Robert]

when we love, we have fulfilled what the law requires.

So, if I do not kill because "agape" is working in me, but I commit adultery, steal, lie, lust and covet, then I am counted a law keeper?

[Robert]

Originally Posted By: Robert

Then according to the law's demands (you shall be perfect, even as God is perfect) you aren't measuring up and hence you are saved by what Christ did 2000 years ago, no?

If we are saved solely by what Jesus did 2000 yrs ago and nothing else to be done, THEN ALL should be saved. YES or NO?

If we are saved by living Christ's life then none will be saved....

[Robert]

"Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law." Rom 13:10 ESV.

The more bent theology, the more bent the explanations.

"love [agape] is the fulfillment of the law"

Agape is the ingredient it takes to keep the law....Everything you do must be without self in mind....Hence the motive must be selfless.

[karl]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

I'm sure what karl means is that the good news of salvation includes the work that Christ does in us, as well as the good news of what Christ accomplished.

No...that implies Christ's work of redemption was incomplete. This was the message of the Judaizers....It's subtle legalism.

I believe it is just as legalistic to claim that Christ does it all as it is to claim that we do it all. Both are legal solutions. Neither solution gets us yoked up with Christ, which is the only way we can be made fit for heaven.

I believe that Christ's mission was to get us yoked up with Him. The selflessness, power and wisdom of God combine to provide the motivation and inspiration for us to give up on self and to invite Christ in.

God could not solve the sin problem and yet leave us alive and unchanged because sinners ARE the sin problem. If you look carefully at the Scripture and SOP you will find that the problem to be fixed is not sins. It is sinners. Sins cannot be changed. Sinners can.

God had to either wipe out the rebellion, or convert the rebellious into loyal subjects. The solution turns out to be a little of both.

There really is no other alternative if the rebellion is to be stopped.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

when we love, we have fulfilled what the law requires.

So, if I do not kill because "agape" is working in me, but I commit adultery, steal, lie, lust and covet, then I am counted a law keeper?

i was completely lost on that one. if "agape" is working in a person and they dont kill, wouldnt that same "agape" "working in them" keep them from stealing, lying, lusting and coveting?

if "agape" is working in a person it is working in them in all areas, isnt it?

[pnattmbtc]

I believe it is just as legalistic to claim that Christ does it all as it is to claim that we do it all. Both are legal solutions. Neither solution gets us yoked up with Christ, which is the only way we can be made fit for heaven.

[karl]

The very attributes that belonged to the character of Satan, the evil one represented as belonging to the character of God. Jesus came to teach men of the Father, to correctly represent him before the fallen children of earth. Angels could not fully portray the character of God, but Christ, who was a living impersonation of God, could not fail to accomplish the work. The only way in which he could set and keep men right was to make himself visible and familiar to their eyes....

Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.(ST 1/20/90)

This is really good stuff, but by emphasizing this we open ourselves up to the criticisms leveled against Abelard - that we are too concerned with God's moral influence and not concerned enough with His legal solution in paying the debt we owe.

I see God's addressing our past (though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow,) which we know we cannot affect, as liberating to our cooperation with Him in changing our present and future. Why would we cooperate with Him if the unchangeable past were hanging over us like a sword?

What do you think?

[John317]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

"Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law." Rom 13:10 ESV.

The more bent theology, the more bent the explanations.

"love [agape] is the fulfillment of the law"

Agape is the ingredient it takes to keep the law....Everything you do must be without self in mind....Hence the motive must be selfless.

Romans 13: 10 is saying that if you really have agape/love for people and for God, you will fulfill the law. You won't steal if you love your neighbor, nor will you want His wife or anything else that belongs to your neighbor. Otherwise we could say that it's enough simply to love one another and we don't have to be concerned with anything else. But other parts of the Bible tells us that love means keeping the commandments of God.

Do you think it's a sin to want to be saved in God's kingdom and to live with Him? I ask this because it seems to me that wanting to be saved is having self in mind. I think if a drowning man is thrown a rope to hold on to in order to be rescued, there's no harm in his thinking of himself and of how He wants to be saved. The problem, of course, would be if the man thinks only of himself and casts children or other people to their deaths in order to hold on to the rope; but provided that is not the case, there seems to me nothing wrong in considering what he can do to be saved. Doesn't God want us to be concerned very much about our soul's salvation?

[Robert]

Originally Posted By: Robert

No...that implies Christ's work of redemption was incomplete. This was the message of the Judaizers....It's subtle legalism.

[/quote']

I believe it is just as legalistic to claim that Christ does it all as it is to claim that we do it all. Both are legal solutions. Neither solution gets us yoked up with Christ, which is the only way we can be made fit for heaven.

Christ, in his doing and dying, legally justified all men unto life. Those who receive Christ are receiving salvation full and complete.....You can't add to it, you can only experience what Christ has already accomplished. Read 1 Cor 1:30