"In Christ" - the gospel explained

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

You state in one place that it is impossible that "sin" was placed on Christ at the cross.

But in another you state that "sin" was placed in Christ at His birth.

You make it so hard. It's like talking to a tree.

1] You are the sinner

2] You stand condemned under law

3] The law puts you in death row awaiting your execution.

4] The law demands your death.

5] You have to die.

In order for the law to be legally satisfied you have to die.

And you did "in Christ". See Romans 6:6/7:4

Since you are a sinner, indwelt with the sin nature, and since Christ took you into Himself, that means that as the Son of Man our sin nature was in Him because your humanity was there.

You did not answer my question Sonny.

Why is it possible for Christ to have taken our sin into Himself (not biblical, but for the sake of argument) at the incarnation?

But it is not possible for it to happen at the cross?

[Sonny]

Galatians 4:4 is a statement of fact that Mary birthed Jesus Christ. As we have further pointed out Matthew chapter one states that Mary was conceived by the Holy Spirit and therefore was an Incubator/Surrogate person!

You don't know how unreasonable you can be....I mean it's total nonsense.

If God just wanted to create a man (like Adam before the fall) He could have created the 2nd Adam in the same way He did the first - from the dust of the earth.

This "incubator" thing borders on nutty talk....I mean come on it makes no sense. It's childish thinking.

Jesus was a son of humanity. He came from a human mother indwelt with sin. The Holy Spirit's function was two-fold:

1] To unit Jesus as God to our corporate life that need redeeming.

2] To make sure that the mind of Christ was under control of the Spirit and not the flesh.

[Twilight II]

[Words edited by moderator. Remember our agreement to make attacks on Paul et al only on those discussions that are devoted to that topic.]

Amazing how the whole early Christian church accepted Paul, including the apostles, but only now has it been revealed to you and your friends don't you think?

How does it feel to be more spiritually astute than all the early apostles who were taught at the feet of Jesus?

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: miz3

NO! Sonny that is not true. What you assert is not possible.

The only time such a thing could happen is on the CROSS!

This is complete and utter nonsense.

In order for your humanity to be put into Christ, and thus Christ take the curse, your humanity had to be in Him before these things could take place.

Clearly according to Gal 4:4 our humanity was placed into Christ at His inception. If not, prove me wrong. Just stating that I'm wrong doesn't make it so with me.

_______

True.

sky

[Sonny]

Why is it possible for Christ to have taken our sin into Himself (not biblical, but for the sake of argument) at the incarnation?

But it is not possible for it to happen at the cross?

Dude...you aren't reading what I write. Forget sin. Sin, in and of itself isn't the problem. It's sin in me...that's the problem. It's sin in my humanity. Sin (singular) leads to sins (plural). Get rid of sin and sins go away.

In order to defeat sin Christ has to assume the whole man, not just his sin nature. The whole man need redeeming.

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: miz3

Galatians 4:4 is a statement of fact that Mary birthed Jesus Christ. As we have further pointed out Matthew chapter one states that Mary was conceived by the Holy Spirit and therefore was an Incubator/Surrogate person!

If God just wanted to create a man (like Adam before the fall) He could have created the 2nd Adam in the same way He did the first - from the dust of the earth.

Christ did not come as pre-fall Adam.

He came with our physical body, but Gods moral nature.

He was not the same as Adam.

And He was not the same as us.

Jesus was something different.

[Sonny]

Our humanity was not "put into Christ".

Christ clothed Himself with our physical post fallen body.

This is lie from hell. Not calling you a liar, but what you are repeating is.

You can't put on humanity like a pair of pants. That's a metaphor. Paul and Ellen White clearly state that your life was placed into Christ at the incarnation.

[Sonny]

Christ did not come as pre-fall Adam.

He came with our physical body, but Gods moral nature.

He was not the same as Adam.

And He was not the same as us.

Jesus was something different.

Hogwash....

What lengths will you go to in order to separate from Christ the humanity He came to redeem? I mean it just get more ridiculous by the day...

[Sonny]

Originally Posted By: Sonny

In order for your humanity to be put into Christ, and thus Christ take the curse, your humanity had to be in Him before these things could take place.

True.

sky

Common sense prevails.

[Sonny]

Born of a woman

[phkrause]

Amazing how the whole early Christian church accepted Paul, including the apostles, but only now has it been revealed to you and your friends don't you think?

How does it feel to be more spiritually astute than all the early apostles who were taught at the feet of Jesus?

[skyblue888]

[Dr. Rich]

Originally Posted By: Dr. Rich

[Words edited by moderator. Remember our agreement to make attacks on Paul et al only in the discussions devoted to that topic.]

Amazing how the whole early Christian church accepted Paul, including the apostles, but only now has it been revealed to you and your friends don't you think?

How does it feel to be more spiritually astute than all the early apostles who were taught at the feet of Jesus?

Rev. 2:2 to those in Asia (Ephesus) "I know your deeds and your toil and perserverance, and that you cannot endure evil men, and you put to test those who called themselves apostles, and they are not, and you found them to be false."

[Words edited by moderator for same reason as given above.]

[Musicman1228]

Sonny,

There you go again, passing judgement on someone just because the disagree with you. Maybe it is you that is 'nutty' and not miz3.

What is it about 'sinless' and 'Passover Lamb' that you don't understand. Had Jesus been born of a sinful human woman He would have been found unsuitable to be the Passover Lamb and we who desire to be inside the Kingdom of Heaven (John 3:3,5) in order to be saved would never have had that opportunity. Jesus as the Passover Lamb purchased a Kingdom for God and for the Lamb from all of the tribes, nations, tongues and peoples of the world (Rev.5:9-10).

The only evidence that Jesus had a sinful human nature comes from the writings of Paul; you will not find this concept expressed either in the words of Jesus Christ via His eyewitness disciples, or in the words of God in the OT. You have obviously not spent a lot of time in the OT studying the requirements for the Passover, the Day of Atonement and festivals, all of which go into great detail as to the 'type' of which Jesus is the 'anti-type'.

Give it some careful thought.

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

Christ did not come as pre-fall Adam.

He came with our physical body, but Gods moral nature.

He was not the same as Adam.

And He was not the same as us.

Jesus was something different.

Hogwash....

What lengths will you go to in order to separate from Christ the humanity He came to redeem? I mean it just get more ridiculous by the day...

If you cannot discuss things politely Sonny, then I will not bother discussing anything with you.

[Twilight II]

It is an attack on the doctrine of Christ, making of none offect the plan of redemption.

sky

No Sky, it is nothing of the sort.

It is an attack on one of your fundamental beliefs, that is plain.

But if one of your fundamental beliefs is wrong, then you should be open to having it challenged and discussed.

And you should be able to defend it from the bible.

Labelling those things you do not agree with as "anti-christ", "an attack on the gospel" without showing that with scripture (Jones isn't scripture I might add), does not give your argument any credibility.

All you are saying is "I will not accept those things are true, so I will just deny them as "heretical"."

How does that engender honest open discussion?

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

Amazing how the whole early Christian church accepted Paul, including the apostles, but only now has it been revealed to you and your friends don't you think?

How does it feel to be more spiritually astute than all the early apostles who were taught at the feet of Jesus?

Not sure where you got your mistaken information from, but the above proves that Paul was preaching and teaching a totally different gospel than was the eyewitness disciples of Jesus Christ.

It proves nothing Rich, other than that you have a different gospel to those that accepted Paul (aka Peter).

But as I do not think there is an ounce of truth in what you are saying here, and that it is clear you will never consider you might be in error, my conversations are over with you on this subject.

[miz3]

Born of a woman

This more tortured logic, and misreading of Scripture from Jack S.

[miz3]

Rev. 2:2 to those in Asia (Ephesus) "I know your deeds and your toil and perserverance, and that you cannot endure evil men, and you put to test those who called themselves apostles, and they are not, and you found them to be false."

Paul's admission that this was true: 2Tim. 1:15 As Paul writes to Timothhy while Paul is in prison (house arreset): "You are aware of the FACT that ALL of those in Asia turned away from me..." And verse 18 "the Lord grant to him to find mercy from the Lord on that day and you know very well what services he rendered at Ephesus."

Paul to those he presented HIS gospel to at Galatia: Gal. 1:6 "I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting him who called you by grace of Christ, for a different gospel..." Verse 11: "..the gospel which was preached by ME is NOT according to man, for I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it..." And in 2:11 "But when Peter (Cephas) came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned." (Hmm, what kind of 'love' is this?

1Jn. 2:19: "They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us, but they went out, in order that it might be shown that they all were not of us."

And Paul admitted this too: Gal. 2:6 "But from those who were of high reputation....contributed NOTHING to me." and verse 13 "And the rest of the Jews joined him (Peter) in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy."

So Twilite, it appears you were confused. Not sure where you got your mistaken information from, but the above proves that Paul was preaching and teaching a totally different gospel than was the eyewitness disciples of Jesus Christ.

Like Sonny, Dr. Rich you are stringing a bunch of texts together that were never meant to be connected in the phony way you are making them. You are not a real Bible student or you would not do this kind of damage the Word of God!

You have proved nothing, except you don't know how to study the Bible correctly!

[Sonny]

Originally Posted By: Sonny

Born of a woman

This more tortured logic, and misreading of Scripture from Jack S.

You are so confused you have no idea who you're reading. You know what? until you are ready to honestly look at those statements from Paul you'll go on spouting your preconceived ideas.

Tell me when you are ready because I won't be playing your games.....

BTW, "Born of a woman" was from A.T. Jones

[Sonny]

If you cannot discuss things politely Sonny, then I will not bother discussing anything with you.

How can one be polite in the face of total nonsense?....Even Paul didn't hold back on ridiculousness:

Gal 5:12 As for those agitators [see Acts chapter 15:1,5], I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!

[Sonny]

Labelling those things you do not agree with as "anti-christ", "an attack on the gospel" without showing that with scripture (Jones isn't scripture I might add), does not give your argument any credibility.

Sky is quoting from 2 John 1:7

For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who don't confess that Jesus Christ came in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the Antichrist.

[Dr. Rich]

miz3 wrote: "Like Sonny, Dr. Rich you are stringing a bunch of texts together that were never meant to be connected in the phony way you are making them. You are not a real Bible student or you would not do this kind of damage the Word of God! You have proved nothing, except you don't know how to study the Bible correctly!"

Ok Miz3, don't tell me, show me my error. Put me to the test! I am so fed up with people who condemn the person but can't provide any evidence from the words of Jesus Christ to prove their point!

1. Paul went to Asia to preach His Gospel.

2. Paul went to Jerusalem and went to the temple as found in Acts 21:27-29 where those from Asia saw Paul and cried out for help with the men of Israel to let them know that Paul was the one who was teaching and preaching lawlessness to everyone. Well, yes, Paul did teach lawlessness to them and they reported it. Then Paul later admitted the same to Timothy.

3. Later, when Jesus sent His angel to John to give him the information He received from His father (Revelation), Jesus let John know that those in Asia (Ephesus) put Paul's teachings to a test against the words of Jesus and found them to be false. Case closed!

Therefore Miz3, show me where and why I am in error!?? Please! It is your duty to do so. If you can't do this, then my so called error will be on your neck come the day of judgment.

[skyblue888]

2 John 1:7 must be read with Rom.1:3 and Heb.2:14 and Heb.4:15.

These passages make it clear that the teaching that Christ did not take upon Himself our sinful flesh is the doctrine of antichrist.

sky

[miz3]

Rev. 2:2 to those in Asia (Ephesus) "I know your deeds and your toil and perserverance, and that you cannot endure evil men, and you put to test those who called themselves apostles, and they are not, and you found them to be false."

Paul's admission that this was true: 2Tim. 1:15 As Paul writes to Timothhy while Paul is in prison (house arreset): "You are aware of the FACT that ALL of those in Asia turned away from me..." And verse 18 "the Lord grant to him to find mercy from the Lord on that day and you know very well what services he rendered at Ephesus."

Paul to those he presented HIS gospel to at Galatia: Gal. 1:6 "I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting him who called you by grace of Christ, for a different gospel..." Verse 11: "..the gospel which was preached by ME is NOT according to man, for I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it..." And in 2:11 "But when Peter (Cephas) came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned." (Hmm, what kind of 'love' is this?

1Jn. 2:19: "They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us, but they went out, in order that it might be shown that they all were not of us."

And Paul admitted this too: Gal. 2:6 "But from those who were of high reputation....contributed NOTHING to me." and verse 13 "And the rest of the Jews joined him (Peter) in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy."

So Twilite, it appears you were confused. Not sure where you got your mistaken information from, but the above proves that Paul was preaching and teaching a totally different gospel than was the eyewitness disciples of Jesus Christ.

Ok, Dr. Rich, lets take each of these in the order you made them.

"To the angel[a] of the church in Ephesus write:

These are the words of him who holds the seven stars in his right hand and walks among the seven golden lampstands: 2 I know your deeds, your hard work and your perseverance. I know that you cannot tolerate wicked men, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false. 3 You have persevered and have endured hardships for my name, and have not grown weary.

4 Yet I hold this against you: You have forsaken your first love. 5 Remember the height from which you have fallen! Repent and do the things you did at first. If you do not repent, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place. 6 But you have this in your favor: You hate the practices of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate."

Revelation 2:1-6.

1. This text does not mention Paul nor does it even remotely infer that Paul is one of those fake apostles.

2. These Ephesians would not know any Truth at all if it were not for Paul. Thus, when Jesus Christ tells them they lost their FIRST LOVE Jesus must HERE BE REFERRING TO PAUL! Why? Because Paul was the first to give them the Gospel.

3. That means this text is actually supporting Paul and not saying what you are asserting.

4. This takes care of you first text and you go down in flames.

NEXT:

"What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus. 14 Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you—guard it with the help of the Holy Spirit who lives in us.

15 You know that everyone in the province of Asia has deserted me, including Phygelus and Hermogenes.

16 May the Lord show mercy to the household of Onesiphorus, because he often refreshed me and was not ashamed of my chains. 17 On the contrary, when he was in Rome, he searched hard for me until he found me. 18 May the Lord grant that he will find mercy from the Lord on that day! You know very well in how many ways he helped me in Ephesus."

2Timothy 1:13-18.

1. It is clear that Paul is writing to Timothy while in prison in Rome.

2. He commands Timothy to do what he Paul has been doing.

3. Paul tells Timothy those in Asia have deserted him. Asia is more than just Ephesus.

4. He singles out two culprits especially.

5. Paul also states that the Lord through Onesiphorus helped in Ephesus.

6. If there is any connection between this text and Revelation chapter two it would to uphold Paul and the First Love of God and the Gospel they had in Ephesus and now have lost that First Love that Paul gave them. The fault is with the Ephesians, it is NOT WITH PAUL!

NEXT:

"I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! 9 As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!

10 Am I now trying to win the approval of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ.

11 I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. 12 I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ."

Galatians 1:6-12.

1. Notice the Gospel Paul preached was revealed to Paul by JESUS CHRIST! Dr. Rich you left this part in your post. How convenient?

2. The Galatians were straying from that Gospel.

3. What was the Gospel Paul was preaching? Read on in Galatians and Paul tells you the Gospel is JESUS CHRIST!

4. Reading on further in Galatians chapter one you find that Peter, James and the other Apostles approved of Paul's Gospel! I believe Peter and James were EYEWITNESSES.

5. This text has no connection whatsoever to the Revelation text either in fact or in context.

6. This text actually strengthens Paul's Gospel! It destroys many of your assertions.

NEXT:

"When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong. 12 Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray."

Galatians 2:11-13.

1. Notice that it was Peter's behavior of hypocrisy that Paul opposed.

2. It was not that Peter and Paul had opposite Gospels. It was not a theological disagreement.

3. It was a behavior issue.

4. Again this text is not connected the way you say in any way either in fact or in context.

NEXT:

"Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us."

1John 2:18-19.

1. This text says nothing about Paul in anyway shape or form either in fact or in context.

2. This text does not single out the converts of Paul in any way shape or form either in fact or in context.

3. This text is not connected in any way shape or form either in fact or in context to any of the other texts you cited.

Like I said counselor you are stringing texts together and taking them out of fact and out of context and connecting them to each other when in fact and in context they are not connected at all.

As a lawyer you ought to know better. As a Bible student I believe I have proved beyond even any shadow of doubt that you are indeed a horrid Bible Scholar and Bible Student.

I rest my case!