Moderators Gerr Posted June 18, 2011 Moderators Posted June 18, 2011 Look, Rob. Paul or JS or you were not the only ones who understood the Gospel. The Gospel according to Jesus as reported by Matthew is: ESV | Mt 4:23 And he went throughout all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom and healing every disease and every affliction among the people. ESV | Mt 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. And according to Mark, the Good News is Jesus Christ, Mk 1:1 And according to Luke quoting Isaiah, the Gospel is liberty to the captives & oppressed, recovery of sight to the blind, and God's favor, Lk 4:18,19. And the Gospel according to Paul, is the gospel from God "regarding His Son", Rom 1:1-3; it is God's power for the saving of everyone who believes, Rom 1:16-17, and that in the gospel is revealed, a righteousness from God which is to be received by faith. See also Rom 3:21-22; it's about the death & resurrection of Jesus, 1 Cor 15:1,2. Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted June 18, 2011 Moderators Posted June 18, 2011 Unfortunately, because of the heavy emphasis on the law, spirituality waned and not a few became decidedly legalistic. Pride, self-assurance, and complacency entered our ranks. What was missing was a living experience with Christ—the joy and peace that comes from a relationship with Christ. The law and keeping the law became all-important. Ellen White, looking at the situation, wrote, “As a people we have preached the law until we are as dry as the hills of Gilboa that had neither dew nor rain. We must preach Christ in the law." Gerhard Pfandl Show me where I've been talking about the law in this thread. Quote
Musicman1228 Posted June 18, 2011 Posted June 18, 2011 Jesus Christ is righteous, that is 'sinless'. This goes without saying. A person that is unrighteous is not sinless; they have sin IN them. This also goes without saying. If this sinful person is IN Christ does that not mean that Christ now has sin IN Him? And since it is impossible for Jesus Christ to have any sin IN Him it is impossible for Him to have anyone who is still sinful IN Him. Does this make sense? Quote
Sonny Posted June 18, 2011 Author Posted June 18, 2011 Look, Rob. Paul or JS or you were not the only ones who understood the Gospel. True, but what about you? Can you explain the gospel? Quote
Sonny Posted June 18, 2011 Author Posted June 18, 2011 Show me where I've been talking about the law in this thread. Gerry: And if you don't understand what it means to have "Christ in you," you'll fall into antinomianism. Quote
cheddar Posted June 18, 2011 Posted June 18, 2011 Originally Posted By: cheddar Every human being is born with a sinful nature and .... So we stand condemned or guilty for having a sinful nature? You didn't answer the question about what Windsor said was wrong? When you talk about 'in Christ' I agree with most of what you say but when you talk about 'in Adam' it's like you’re saying something different. The two Adams are mirror images of each other, what applies to the one applies to the other. The entire human race was in Adam and received 'Condemnation unto Death' for something we had no part in. likewise: The entire human race was in Christ and received 'Justification unto Life' for something we had no part in. In both cases we receive something that we had no part in. So what’s the moral of the story? What we 'do' is nothing and what we 'believe' is everything. Quote
Guest Posted June 18, 2011 Posted June 18, 2011 Originally Posted By: RLH Any gospel that doesn't change a person, is not from God. The gospel is what God did in Christ. What part of this don't you understand? If this is your understanding in a nutshell, then you should probably focus on the parts that YOU don't understand, and stop trying to explain it to others. Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted June 18, 2011 Moderators Posted June 18, 2011 Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo Show me where I've been talking about the law in this thread. Gerry: And if you don't understand what it means to have "Christ in you," you'll fall into antinomianism. ONE statement about antinomianism in a thread of 9-10 pages is "HEAVY EMPHASIS" on the law? Tell me how you can preach the gospel without mentioning the law!!! No law, no gospel. It's that simple! But before I attempt to answer your other question, let me expand further what the gospel is. You quoted Rev 14:6. It mentions the "everlasting gospel." Since it is "everlasting", it must be the same gospel from Gen to Rev. The writer of Heb confirms that the good news that came came in NT times was the same gospel that was preached in OT times. Most scholars recognize the statement in Gen 3:15 as protogospel. That the serpent will be eventually vanquished. Noah found the gospel in a Covenant of Grace, Gen 6:8. Did he split and separate sanctification from justification? No!!! His being accounted as righteous & blameless, was accompanied by, "Noah walked with God." Gen 6:9. 2 b cont'd. Quote
Dr. Rich Posted June 18, 2011 Posted June 18, 2011 Jesus Christ is righteous, that is 'sinless'. This goes without saying. A person that is unrighteous is not sinless; they have sin IN them. This also goes without saying. If this sinful person is IN Christ does that not mean that Christ now has sin IN Him? And since it is impossible for Jesus Christ to have any sin IN Him it is impossible for Him to have anyone who is still sinful IN Him. Does this make sense? Of course it does! Jesus said He is ONE with His Father so that would mean that Jesus was IN His Father. For unity, Jesus prayed to His Father for His disciples to be one in the Father as was He. But this can only happen when the Holy Spirit dwells in both the Father and the disciple at the same time. Problem is, the Holy Spirit will not dwell in anyone who sins or that would make the Holy Spirit sinful too. Therefore, those who say they are "In Christ" and are not because they are still sinners (believe in a lie and are not righteous), are in danger of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit which is a sin that will NOT be foregiven as Matthew 12:31-32 clearly states. Interestingly, Paul said that He was 'In Christ' yet he said that he was still a sinner. Therefore, by simple deduction, Paul committed a sin against the Holy Spirit (blasphemy). Matthew 12:36-37 clearly says that one who makes a careless word; one without knowing for sure what the real truth is and EVERYONE with 'faith only' has done, shall have to render an accounting for this on the day of judgment. Preaching any other gospel other than the one Jesus gave is going to place this person on the 'hot seat'. Paul did this and everyone who continues to teach what Paul and EGW teach are also in danger of the same thing. Teaching that one is 'in Christ' when they are yet still a sinner is pure plasphemy! Quote
Sonny Posted June 18, 2011 Author Posted June 18, 2011 The entire human race was in Adam and received 'Condemnation unto Death' for something we had no part in. Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted June 18, 2011 Moderators Posted June 18, 2011 Cont'd. How did Abel understand the Gospel? He understood it by putting his faith in the person of a substitute by offering a lamb. Gen 4 & Heb 11. Again, one package. How did Abraham understand the gospel? He understood the gospel in terms of a Covenant promise, and by believing this Covenant promise, it was "counted ...to him as righteousness," Gen 15:6. Did his faith add anything to God's Covenant Promises? No! But the Covenant Promises would have been useless unless he accepted it. Notice that this gospel comes as a package, not split into two or more independent parts. The writer of Hebrews testifies that his faith was not split into justification by faith and sanctification by faith. He believed God & by faith obeyed, Gen 15:6, Heb 11:8 2 B cont'd Quote
Sonny Posted June 18, 2011 Author Posted June 18, 2011 Tell me how you can preach the gospel without mentioning the law!!! With that I agree. Christ, as the son of man, had to answer the demands of the law in order to save you. Do you know how He did it? Quote
Sonny Posted June 19, 2011 Author Posted June 19, 2011 If this is your understanding in a nutshell, then you should probably focus on the parts that YOU don't understand, and stop trying to explain it to others. I have my understanding, if it's wrong disprove me. I'm open. Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted June 19, 2011 Moderators Posted June 19, 2011 Cont'd How about Leviticus? This book probably gives the clearest understanding of the gospel in types by way of the sacrificial system. The sinner brings his sacrifice at the entrance of courtyard, confesses his sins, and the animal slain and offered at the altar (justification). Is that the end of it? The sinner represented by the priest takes the blood into the holy place. But before he could enter the tabernacle, he washes with water in the sea (cleansin from sin). And when he enters the tabernacle, there is the bread, and the lamp (Jesus the Bread & Light). Jesus said, ESV | Jn 6:53 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. On the Day of Atonement, in order for the priest to come into the presence of God, there is a putting away of sin. Let me ask again, where is the saving of the sinner split into its independent component parts? That is a notion that is totally foreign to Scripture. The Good News comes as a package!!! Quote
Sonny Posted June 19, 2011 Author Posted June 19, 2011 He understood the gospel in terms of a Covenant promise, and by believing this Covenant promise, it was "counted ...to him as righteousness," Gen 15:6. That's before Christ came.....We are 2011 AD, not BC. We should know the gospel. If not, how can we preach it? Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted June 19, 2011 Moderators Posted June 19, 2011 Cont'd How did Isaiah understand the Gospel? He amplifies what was taught in Leviticus and makes it even clearer. Isaiah answers your question as to HOW Jesus did it more clearly than Leviticus. In Leviticus, the sinner is saved from sin by substituting a lamb in his place. Isaiah makes clear that that lamb is none other than His Servant, who "was wounded FOR OUR transgressions; He was crushed FOR OUR iniquities; UPON HIM was the chastisement that brought US peace, and with HIS STRIPES we are healed....and the LORD has LAID ON HIM the iniquity of us all....by His knowledge shall the righteous one, my Servant, make many ACCOUNTED RIGHTEOUS, and He SHALL BEAR THEIR INIQUITIES....because He poured out His soul to death and was numbered with the transgressors, yet He BORE THE SIN OF MANY and MAKES INTERCESSION for the transgressors." Isa 53. Paul understood it thus when he said: ESV | 2 Co 5:21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. And so understood Peter: ESV | 1 Pe 3:18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, Again, where is the Gospel split into independent parts? No, Sonny. It all comes as a package. Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted June 19, 2011 Moderators Posted June 19, 2011 Originally Posted By: RLH If this is your understanding in a nutshell, then you should probably focus on the parts that YOU don't understand, and stop trying to explain it to others. I have my understanding, if it's wrong disprove me. I'm open. That's what I have been trying to do in reviewing how different people at different times understood the gospel. Where does a Bible writer present the gospel as justification ALONE? No, Rob. The Gospel is tied up in the person of Christ, who takes upon Himself the penalty of my transgression, and delivers me from the power and continuing presence of sin in my life, and even takes away my taste for sin. If there is better news than that, I'd like to hear it. Quote
Musicman1228 Posted June 19, 2011 Posted June 19, 2011 This is an interesting discussion because it is causing us to isolate and identify the significant components of salvation an see where they fit together and where they diverge. I believe (in spite of the impression I may give from time to time) that grace plays a significant role in salvation. I also believe the Law has an equally significant role. There are those on both sides of the issue that would eliminate one in favor of the other and this is where the confusion lays. [This explanation may take a while, but I think you will find it worth it.] Was Jesus a 'legalist'? Did He not talk constantly about being obedient to the 10 Commandments and the Covenant? Did he not speak specifically about sin and how it would separate us from the Father? Of course He did. Does that make Him a 'legalist'. Certainly not. Did Jesus ever say that because of His death we as individuals would be made righteous and would no longer need to keep the commandments? He did not. Did Jesus ever say that because of the grace of God and His own sacrifice that we would no longer be held accountable for our deeds? Again, certainly not. This being said did Jesus ever directly say that grace had no role whatsoever in making us fit for eternal life? Again, no. Jesus was not a legalist, wherein He taught that it was ONLY by obeying the Law/10 Commandments/Covenant that we would be saved. This is what the Pharisee's believed. Neither did He ever teach that His death would provide grace by which men and women could decide whether to obey or not to obey His Commandments, and still be saved. This is what Paul proposed, and Jesus did not teach this. Jesus came expressly to do the will of His Father. He kept the 10 Commandments, and in doing so showed us that we could also. It is in this that we learn to overcome sin. In this Jesus was LAWFUL. And like Him so must we be. And in order to be LAWFUL we must have intimate knowledge of AND practice the Law, as did He. To do this we must learn to abide in HIS words which teach LAWFULNESS. In this we are made righteous as is HE. We also must realize that it is not by our own righteousness that we gain eternal life. Even if we transfer our allegiance from the kingdom of the world to the Kingdom of Heaven and turn our sinful nature into the righteous nature of Jesus through the process of sanctification (John 17:17) we are still under the death penalty to which God justifiably sentenced Adam and Eve for disobedience to the Law of God. That penalty must be paid in the shed blood of either the person who disobeyed OR by the shed blood of an innocent human being who was not guilty of disobedience. In other words, we could pay our own penalty but in order to do that we would have to die eternally. This is not a viable option for most of us. Since Jesus is our Creator He has the option of paying that penalty for us, shedding His blood for ours. In this He is the Precedent (comes before) because He was in existence before those whom He created. Since we are human beings a human being then must pay this penalty; the blood of animals cannot be the substitute for the blood of a human being. This is why Jesus was born as a human being. In this He is the Antecedent (comes after). He must be like us in order to qualify as the payment. He must also be God the Creator to qualify, because only the Creator can pay the penalty for the created. This is where GRACE enters the picture. We begin our transformation by being justified in baptism (water cleansing) and enter the process of sanctification whereby we learn to become righteous as is Jesus through the power of the Holy Spirit (fire cleansing). If we die before that process is complete (and so far this has happened to everyone) then the grace of Jesus Christ carries us over the second death, and into eternal life. But this grace only applies to those that are in the process of sanctification, who are preparing themselves for entry into the Kingdom of Heaven, by learning to be obedient (Lawful) to the Law of God. [This is unlike how Paul describes grace, whereby anyone that professes love for Jesus and accepts Him as their personal savior receives grace and is no longer subject to the Law.] This is what I have gleaned from my study of the words and teachings of Jesus Christ. Others may tell a different story, and that is OK with me. Just remember the wide gate and the narrow gate, and base your decision as to whom is correct on that understanding. Quote
Sonny Posted June 19, 2011 Author Posted June 19, 2011 The Gospel is tied up in the person of Christ, who takes upon Himself the penalty of my transgression, and delivers me from the power and continuing presence of sin in my life, and even takes away my taste for sin. Again, you might as well join the RCC. What you are doing is injecting something you do to get a reward, i.e., heaven. God saved you in Christ. You didn't make any contribution to this. You have turned the gospel from "Not I, but Christ" to "I plus Christ" This is Catholicism. This is Babylon. Quote
miz3 Posted June 19, 2011 Posted June 19, 2011 The Plan of Salvation or The Gospel Made Simple: 1. God declared all humans were guilty of Adam's sin. By Fiat! 2. As guilty ones they would receive God's Wrath which is eternal death. By Fiat! 3. God placed Adam's sin and also our guilt on Jesus Christ on the Cross. By Fiat! 4. God vented His Wrath on Jesus Christ. By Fiat! 5. All humans (Romans chapter 5) were not only declared but were actually made Just (Justification) by God because His Wrath for Adam's sin and ours was taken care of by Jesus Christ. By Fiat! 6. God takes ownership of all humans and sends the Holy Spirit to clean up all their sinful nature and internal darkness. By Fiat! (you are not your own you have been bought with a price text). By Fiat! 7. Either the Holy Spirit works and the person continues to be rehabbed or the human REJECTS not only God's Justification but REJECTS the Sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit. (sin against the Holy Spirit). God either continues to rule by Fiat or by Fiat leaves the person to rot in hell. (very little of the human if any and a whole lot of God!) Quote
Sonny Posted June 19, 2011 Author Posted June 19, 2011 How did Isaiah understand the Gospel? Isaiah was BC. Paul, which was AD, was set apart by God to present the gospel to the Gentiles. We have no excuses for not knowing the gospel, but instead many of us have perverted the gospel by adding "I". The moment you add anything to God's perfect work that moment you have denied that God's work of redemption in Christ is perfect..... Quote
miz3 Posted June 19, 2011 Posted June 19, 2011 God placed your life substance into Christ 2000 + years ago. He did this by uniting the humanity in Mary's womb (a humanity that all of us share) with the Divinity of Christ. In so doing Christ rewrote your human history. Hence in Him (not what He does in you) This is not Scriptural! Its the Cross Sonny. Everything revolves around the Cross. Quote
Sonny Posted June 19, 2011 Author Posted June 19, 2011 Sonny you are not being honest about the seven points I posted. Quote
Sonny Posted June 19, 2011 Author Posted June 19, 2011 This is not Scriptural! Wow, do you have that kind of authority where you can simply state such? I'd like to see proof myself. Let's start with Romans 7:4 "you also died to the law through the body of Christ" 1] Who is the "you"? (hint: when One died, all died) 2] Where did we die? (hint: in the body of Christ) 3] What demanded our death? (hint: the law) Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.