pnattmbtc Posted July 22, 2015 Posted July 22, 2015 If the law were not given.... Robert:Speculation. EGW warns of such.... The point of the question is not to speculate, but to get at what the function of the law is. There actually was a time before the law was given, so asking if there was transgression during this time is not a speculative question. Was there transgression before the law was given? Quote 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.
pnattmbtc Posted July 22, 2015 Posted July 22, 2015 Robert, why is it necessary to be born again? Quote 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.
pnattmbtc Posted July 22, 2015 Posted July 22, 2015 Robert, I'm trying to get a handle on what you believe in terms of how a person receives eternal life. My understanding of your position: 1.When a person is born, until the age of accountability, if they died, they would go to heaven. 2.When a person reaches the age of accountability, at that instance, they pass from the status of would-go-to-heaven-if-they-died to would-not-go-to-heaven-if-they-died, *unless* they accept what Christ has already done for them (or perhaps you might say not reject what Christ has already done for them). I have some questions about this, but I'll pause a moment to make sure I'm correctly articulating your position. Quote 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.
Robert Posted July 22, 2015 Author Posted July 22, 2015 Robert, I'm trying to get a handle on what you believe in terms of how a person receives eternal life. My understanding of your position: 1.When a person is born, until the age of accountability, if they died, they would go to heaven. 2.When a person reaches the age of accountability, at that instance, they pass from the status of would-go-to-heaven-if-they-died to would-not-go-to-heaven-if-they-died, *unless* they accept what Christ has already done for them (or perhaps you might say not reject what Christ has already done for them). I have some questions about this, but I'll pause a moment to make sure I'm correctly articulating your position. This is suppose to be about Romans 7 Quote
Robert Posted July 22, 2015 Author Posted July 22, 2015 Robert, why is it necessary to be born again? Not about Romans 7 Quote
Robert Posted July 22, 2015 Author Posted July 22, 2015 There actually was a time before the law was given, so asking if there was transgression during this time is not a speculative question. Was there transgression before the law was given? No,not transgression....Yes, folk were sinning, but where there is no law neither is there any transgression. They were dying, not because of law breaking, but because they shared Adam's fallen life, indwelt with the law of sin (self-love). Quote
pnattmbtc Posted July 22, 2015 Posted July 22, 2015 No,not transgression....Yes, folk were sinning, but where there is no law neither is there any transgression. They were dying, not because of law breaking, but because they shared Adam's fallen life, indwelt with the law of sin (self-love). Was it necessary for Christ to die for them? Quote 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.
pnattmbtc Posted July 22, 2015 Posted July 22, 2015 Robert, I'm trying to get a handle on what you believe in terms of how a person receives eternal life. My understanding of your position: 1.When a person is born, until the age of accountability, if they died, they would go to heaven. 2.When a person reaches the age of accountability, at that instance, they pass from the status of would-go-to-heaven-if-they-died to would-not-go-to-heaven-if-they-died, *unless* they accept what Christ has already done for them (or perhaps you might say not reject what Christ has already done for them). I have some questions about this, but I'll pause a moment to make sure I'm correctly articulating your position. Robert:This is suppose to be about Romans 7 I think this a rather odd response. You make every thread to be about perfectionism, even though I've raised the subject. However, I've answered any questions you've asked regardless. The only questions I've not answered are personal ones for which I couldn't see any theological connection. When we're talking about Romans 7, we're talking about the Gospel. How you interpret Romans 7 is dependent upon how you understand the Gospel. These things go together, so the question is pertinent. You just recently quoted something about Adam and Eve. Is that relevant? I actually think it is, and was going to discuss it, but are you interested in discussing what was said about Adam and Eve, or will you say that it doesn't have to do with Romans 7, even though you were the one who posted it? Quote 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.
pnattmbtc Posted July 22, 2015 Posted July 22, 2015 Robert, I'm trying to get a handle on what you believe in terms of how a person receives eternal life. My understanding of your position: 1.When a person is born, until the age of accountability, if they died, they would go to heaven. 2.When a person reaches the age of accountability, at that instance, they pass from the status of would-go-to-heaven-if-they-died to would-not-go-to-heaven-if-they-died, *unless* they accept what Christ has already done for them (or perhaps you might say not reject what Christ has already done for them). I have some questions about this, but I'll pause a moment to make sure I'm correctly articulating your position. Robert:This is suppose to be about Romans 7 I had another point, which I'll make separately. Everything you write, on every thread that you write on, depends upon your view of the Gospel. I've been discussing the Gospel with you on a number of different threads. For any of these, our communication will be enhanced if I can verify that I've correctly understood your position. I don't understand why you wouldn't want it know if your position is being correctly understood or not. Quote 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.
pnattmbtc Posted July 22, 2015 Posted July 22, 2015 Robert, why is it necessary to be born again? Robert:Not about Romans 7 You stated yourself that Roman 7 is dealing with the process of conversion, which is what being born again is, so how is being born again not Romans 7? Quote 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.
Robert Posted July 23, 2015 Author Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) You stated yourself that Roman 7 is dealing with the process of conversion, which is what being born again is, so how is being born again not Romans 7? No, I said the man of Romans 7 is converted....He is a believer. Edited July 23, 2015 by Robert Quote
Robert Posted July 23, 2015 Author Posted July 23, 2015 Was it necessary for Christ to die for them? Christ is God, deity cannot sink and die, Humanity died...our corporate humanity. The life we share with Adam died "in Christ"! Quote
Robert Posted July 23, 2015 Author Posted July 23, 2015 "By His obedience to all the commandments of God, Christ wrought out a redemption for man. This was not done by going out of Himself to another, but by taking humanity into Himself....To bring humanity into Christ, to bring the fallen race into oneness with divinity, is the work of redemption." The Review and Herald, April 5, 1906 Quote
Robert Posted July 23, 2015 Author Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) I think this a rather odd response. You make every thread to be about perfectionism, even though I've raised the subject. No, I don't make it the subject, you bring it up in your theology and then I point it out.... Your views remind me of what Christ stated about the Pharisees: Matthew 23:4 They load you with impossible demands that they themselves don’t even try to keep, 5 “Everything they do is done for show" Edited July 23, 2015 by Robert Quote
pnattmbtc Posted July 23, 2015 Posted July 23, 2015 Robert:No, I don't make it the subject, you bring it up in your theology and then I point it out.... Your views remind me of what Christ stated about the Pharisees: To make such a statement I think you must be confused as to what my view is, although I've stated it several times. What do you think my view is? I appreciate you're carrying on a conversation with me. I've explained what my purpose is in these discussions. What is your purpose? I'm asking because if I know I can try to cooperate with whatever it is you wish to accomplish by means of these discussions. Quote 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.
pnattmbtc Posted July 23, 2015 Posted July 23, 2015 You stated yourself that Roman 7 is dealing with the process of conversion, which is what being born again is, so how is being born again not Romans 7? Robert:No, I said the man of Romans 7 is converted....He is a believer. You should start believing me when I said you said something. I don't know why you don't remember what you yourself say. You stated yourself that Roman 7 is dealing with the process of conversion, which is what being born again is, so how is being born again not Romans 7? Robert: Yes, so from this point of view the law aided his conversion.. We were speaking specifically about Romans 7. This was just a couple of days ago. It makes it confusing when you state your view on something, and then when I make a comment on that, you deny you said it. This is one of the reasons that I ask for clarifications as to what your view is. I wrote out what my understanding of your view is, and asked you if that is correct or not, and you refused to answer. What is it that you want? Quote 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.
Robert Posted July 23, 2015 Author Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) "The law aided his conversion" is not a process. He saw Himself a sinner and accepted Christ. Paul counted all his law righteousness as dung. That's not a process. He accept the righteousness of Christ by faith. Edited July 23, 2015 by Robert Quote
Robert Posted July 23, 2015 Author Posted July 23, 2015 What is it that you want? I want nothing from you. You present "another gospel". You base eternal life on what Christ does in the believer. It's evident from your numerous comments. Christ will never work in the believer in order that he might gain heaven. He only works in the believer who is resting in Christ's finished work. That infers all who are relying on what Christ does in them for heaven are experiencing self-righteousness and not the genuine article, agape. Quote
pnattmbtc Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 What is it that you want? Robert:I want nothing from you. You present "another gospel". You base eternal life on what Christ does in the believer. It's evident from your numerous comments. What statement did I make that gave you this idea? I know you're wrong, because I don't think in these terms. I would never use the phrase "what Christ does in believers". That's one of your phrases. It's not cricket for you to impose your own false ideas upon me, and then complain they are wrong. What would be OK would be for you to quote something I've actually said, and present some sort of argument in regards to that. I've pointed this out to you several times, Robert. It really is not OK for you to make any accusations you want without presenting any evidence for your claims. You say I present "another gospel". Do you believe Christ presented "another Gospel"? I believe Christ preached the Gospel. I'm happy to quote Christ to present the Gospel. Quote 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.
pnattmbtc Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 Robert: "The law aided his conversion" is not a process. He saw Himself a sinner and accepted Christ. Paul counted all his law righteousness as dung. That's not a process. He accept the righteousness of Christ by faith. So when you said, "the law aided his conversion" you mean "the law aided his conversion, but did not aid the process of his conversion." I don't see the distinction here, but let's go with what you wrote here: Paul saw Himself a sinner and accepted Christ. Is this enough for one to be saved? Or is something else necessary in addition to this? Quote 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.
Robert Posted July 24, 2015 Author Posted July 24, 2015 Me: Paul saw Himself a sinner and accepted Christ. You: Is this enough for one to be saved? Or is something else necessary in addition to this? And that's why I said "You present another gospel'.... What answer are you looking for? Do we need to do something in addition to accepting Christ by faith? Quote
Robert Posted July 24, 2015 Author Posted July 24, 2015 What statement did I make that gave you this idea? I know you're wrong, because I don't think in these terms. I would never use the phrase "what Christ does in believers". That's one of your phrases. If it quacks like a duck it must be a duck. If sounds like legalism, even subtle legalism, it must be legalism. Quote
pnattmbtc Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 And that's why I said "You present another gospel'.... What answer are you looking for? Do we need to do something in addition to accepting Christ by faith? Why don't you answer the question? You do this a lot, not answer questions. I'll answer your question, so please answer mine. I answer yes. Quote 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.
Robert Posted July 24, 2015 Author Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) Why don't you answer the question? You do this a lot, not answer questions. I'll answer your question, so please answer mine. I answer yes. Of course your answer is "yes".... My answer is: Rom 4:1 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? 2 If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about--but not before God. 3 What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness." 4 Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. 5However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. Edited July 24, 2015 by Robert Quote
pnattmbtc Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 This begs the question as to what it means to be justified by faith. When you wrote, "Paul saw himself a sinner and accepted Christ," that seems to me a good description of "justification by faith." Since you wrote this yourself, I would assume you agree with this. So may we conclude that a person is justified by faith if he seems himself as a sinner and accepts Christ? Quote 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.
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.