Reconciled to God

[Samie]

Samie: Are you saying these people have known Christ because in DA 638 they are recognized as the children of God and that they will not perish?  DA 638 comes to me as saying these people have no personal knowledge about Christ.

Pnatt:  It says the know little of theology, but they know his voice.  The context also says that they are born of God and know God. (look at the immediately preceding paragraph).

You seem to have not directly answered my question. I just wanted to know what you really believe. Again, Do you believe these people that DA 638 refer to have personal knowledge about Christ and that He died on the cross for them?

[pnattmbtc]

Samie: Are you saying these people have known Christ because in DA 638 they are recognized as the children of God and that they will not perish?  DA 638 comes to me as saying these people have no personal knowledge about Christ.

Pnatt:  It says the know little of theology, but they know his voice.  The context also says that they are born of God and know God. (look at the immediately preceding paragraph).

Samie:You seem to have not directly answered my question. I just wanted to know what you really believe. Again, Do you believe these people that DA 638 refer to have personal knowledge about Christ and that He died on the cross for them?

This isn't the same question you asked above.  I did answer that question, in the affirmative, that they know Christ.  Now you are asking if they have personal knowledge about Christ that He died on the cross for them.  I couldn't speak to every case, because I don't know what the Holy Spirit would be revealing to them.  The text in Zechariah tells us that some will not know all the details.  So they do have a personal knowledge of Christ (since the Holy Spirit always presents Christ to whomever He is dealing with), but as to the specifics of that knowledge, that will differ from case to case. 

[Samie]

 

This isn't the same question you asked above.  I did answer that question, in the affirmative, that they know Christ.  Now you are asking if they have personal knowledge about Christ that He died on the cross for them.  I couldn't speak to every case, because I don't know what the Holy Spirit would be revealing to them.  The text in Zechariah tells us that some will not know all the details.  So they do have a personal knowledge of Christ (since the Holy Spirit always presents Christ to whomever He is dealing with), but as to the specifics of that knowledge, that will differ from case to case. 

Thanks, brother. I can safely say, that with your answer, we are on the same page in DA 638. Praise God!

[pnattmbtc]

Thanks, brother. I can safely say, that with your answer, we are on the same page in DA 638. Praise God!

Yes, it's good to find some common ground.  I think we also agree that God will save as many as possible, and will take all to haven who will be happy there.

[8thdaypriest]

I'll just quote Ephesians 2:11-13: 
[Written to believers at Ephesus]  "Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called "uncircumcised" by those who call themselves "the circumcision" (which is done in the body by human hands)-- 12 remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13 But now [since they believed and were baptized] in Christ Jesus, you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ."

"without God" -- "separate from Christ" -- "without hope" (of eternal life) --- not part of any "covenant of promise". 

But Samie comes along, and preaches that every person who would ever live was "in Christ" (in His body on the cross), and was "in God", and was "in the Book" for eternal life -- all from eternity.  

[Samie]

I'll just quote Ephesians 2:11-13: 
[Written to believers at Ephesus]  "Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called "uncircumcised" by those who call themselves "the circumcision" (which is done in the body by human hands)-- 12 remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13 But now [since they believed and were baptized] in Christ Jesus, you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ."

"without God" -- "separate from Christ" -- "without hope" (of eternal life) --- not part of any "covenant of promise". 

But Samie comes along, and preaches that every person who would ever live was "in Christ" (in His body on the cross), and was "in God", and was "in the Book" for eternal life -- all from eternity.  

Had you took time to consider the next succeeding verses up till v19, you would have noticed that the Ephesian believers to whom Paul addressed his letter (and therefore you say the letter is applicable only to them and not to us?) were attached to the Body of Christ - where & when? Scriptures say, on the cross. On the cross, a new man was created: Christ the Head, Humanity - Jews and Gentiles, Circumcision and Uncircumcision, His Body.  Isn't it quite absurd to say that the new man created on the cross was Christ the Head and Ephesian believers His Body?  Were the Ephesian believers already believers when Christ diedon the cross? Did I hear you say "No"? I have the same answer, too.

v15 emphatically tells us Christ has abolished or destroyed the ENMITY, the enmity that existed between God & man.  This He did just ONCE, by His death on the cross.  Being done but ONCE, it is for us ALL, not just for the Ephesian believers. When that enmity was abolished, not just the Ephesian believers - who, like us, also believed many years after the cross - but all people, both before and after the cross, were reconciled to God through Christ. Being His Body, we were with Him when He died, and through that death, the enmity that existed between God and man was abolished.

I hope and pray you soon realize this profound truth. I can't and don't blame you for your position. I was long once in your shoes.

[Samie]

Yes, it's good to find some common ground.  I think we also agree that God will save as many as possible, and will take all to haven who will be happy there.

And I guess overcomers of evil with good will be happy there because they had been happy following the will of God on earth. Praise God for the agreement.

[pnattmbtc]

v15 emphatically tells us Christ has abolished or destroyed the ENMITY, the enmity that existed between God & man.  This He did just ONCE, by His death on the cross.

If you read the A. T. Jones article, you'll see that he refers to the fall, and what happened there, when explaining the enmity.

The Scriptures speak of our being "enemies in our own mind" and "alientated from God".  The cross is the means to bring us back to God, when we believe (1 Pet. 3:18).

The enmity is destroyed when we believe in Christ!  "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God."  Notice what's happening here!  The enmity is being destroyed!

Notice:
1.Before believing in Christ:
a.Enemies in our own mind (<- the enmity), and alienated from God.

2.After believeing in Christ, being justified by faith:
a.Peace with God.

What is "peace with God"?  It is the opposite of enmity; the enmity has been taken away!  When?  When we believe.

The enmity is in our mind, so what needs to be fixed is there, in the mind.  Peace comes in the place of enmity when we believe, and this is how the wall which separates the Jews and Gentiles is taken down (which Jones explained in his article).  As Jones explained, the problem which causes the separation between Jews and Gentiles is the separation which exists between God and man (e.g. Jews and God, and Gentiles and God).  When each party is reconciled to God, by believing in Christ and being justified by faith, then they are brought at peace with each other.

 

[pnattmbtc]

From Waggoner on Romans, talking about verse 5:1, "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God."

Peace:  What is peace? Most people have the idea that it is a sort of ecstatic feeling. They think that peace with God means an indescribable heavenly feeling; and so they always look for that imaginary feeling as evidence that they are accepted with God. But peace with God means the same thing that it means with men: it means simply the absence of war. As sinners we are enemies of God. He is not our enemy, but we are his enemies. He is not fighting against us, but we are fighting against him. How then may we have peace with him? Simply by ceasing to fight, and laying down our arms. We may have peace whenever we are ready to stop fighting. 

“Peace with God” Note that when we have peace with God we are not simply at peace with him, but we have his peace. This peace has been left on the earth for men; for the Lord has said, “Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you.” John 14:27. He has given it to us. It is ours, therefore, already. It has always been ours. The only trouble has been that we have not believed it. As soon as we believe the words of Christ, then we have in very deed the peace, which he has given. And it is peace with God, because we find the peace in Christ, and Christ dwells in the bosom of the Father.  John 1:18 

Peace and Righteousness:  “Great peace have they which love thy law.” Psalm 119:165. “O that thou hadst hearkened to my commandments! then had thy peace been as a river, and thy righteousness as the waves of the sea.” Isaiah 48:18. Righteousness is peace, because our warfare against God was our sins that we cherished. God’s life is righteousness, and he is the God of peace. Since the enmity is the carnal mind and its wicked works, peace must be the opposite, namely, righteousness. So it is simply the statement of an obvious fact, that being justified by faith we have peace with God. The righteousness that we have by faith carries peace with it. The two things cannot be separated. 

[Samie]

If you read the A. T. Jones article, you'll see that he refers to the fall, and what happened there, when explaining the enmity.

The Scriptures speak of our being "enemies in our own mind" and "alientated from God".  The cross is the means to bring us back to God, when we believe (1 Pet. 3:18).

The enmity is destroyed when we believe in Christ! "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God."  Notice what's happening here!  The enmity is being destroyed!

Notice:
1.Before believing in Christ:
a.Enemies in our own mind (<- the enmity), and alienated from God.

2.After believeing in Christ, being justified by faith:
a.Peace with God.

What is "peace with God"?  It is the opposite of enmity; the enmity has been taken away!  When?  When we believe.

The enmity is in our mind, so what needs to be fixed is there, in the mind.  Peace comes in the place of enmity when we believe, and this is how the wall which separates the Jews and Gentiles is taken down (which Jones explained in his article).  As Jones explained, the problem which causes the separation between Jews and Gentiles is the separation which exists between God and man (e.g. Jews and God, and Gentiles and God).  When each party is reconciled to God, by believing in Christ and being justified by faith, then they are brought at peace with each other.

How does your statement I bolded in red above agree with this:

^NKJ Ephesians 2:14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, ¹⁵having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace,

What 's the need of abolishing that which had been abolished by Christ Himself? Can we add anything more to what Christ has done for us?

[pnattmbtc]

How does your statement I bolded in red above agree with this:

NKJ Ephesians 2:14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace,

What 's the need of abolishing that which had been abolished by Christ Himself? Can we add anything more to what Christ has done for us?

Both the article and I explained this, in the article and in my posts.  The enmity involves what we think.  Again, this was explained in the article.  The Scriptures say that we are "enemies in our own mind".  This is the enmity.  It's in our mind.  The scriptures says "friendship with the world is enmity with God."  This is also in our mind.

When it says, "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God" this is also in our mind.

Everything important that reconciles us to God happens in our mind, because this is where the problem lies, this is where the enmity is.  When the Scriptures says that Christ abolished in His flesh the enmity, that means that Christ, by the cross, abolished the enmity which was in our mind.  How is this done?  "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God."

To understand Eph. 2:14, we need to know what the enmity is.  Once we understand that the enmity is in our mind, we can correctly interpret the text.

[Samie]

Ok, I respect your position. 

But for me, when Christ has abolished the enmity, and Scriptures EXPLICITLY says so, I simply believe He indeed has, and there's nothing more that remains for man to abolish.  All that remains for us to do now is believe He indeed has abolished the enmity instead of believing that the enmity can only be abolished if we believe.  For me I just believe that God has reconciled us to Himself by the death of His Son, instead of believing that I can only be reconciled if I believe.

 

[Samie]

Part of ATJones Sermon #11 (emphases and highlighting mine):

Oh, the blessed news that the enmity is abolished! It is abolished; thank the Lord. There is therefore now no need whatever of our having any friendship with the world. No need of our having any lack of obedience to the law of God. No need of any failure to be subject to God, for Jesus Christ has taken the enmity out of the way. He has abolished it, destroyed it. He has destroyed the wicked thing in which lies friendship with the world, in which lies lack of subject to God and failure to be subject to His law. It is gone; in Christ it is gone. Not outside of Christ; in Christ it is gone, abolished, annihilated. Thank the Lord. This is freedom indeed.

I can't see how the above quote jibes with Pnatt's position:

If you read the A. T. Jones article, you'll see that he refers to the fall, and what happened there, when explaining the enmity.

The Scriptures speak of our being "enemies in our own mind" and "alientated from God".  The cross is the means to bring us back to God, when we believe (1 Pet. 3:18).

The enmity is destroyed when we believe in Christ! 1"Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God."  Notice what's happening here!  The enmity is being destroyed!

Notice:
1.Before believing in Christ:
a.Enemies in our own mind (<- the enmity), and alienated from God.

2.After believeing in Christ, being justified by faith:
a.Peace with God.

What is "peace with God"?  It is the opposite of enmity; the enmity has been taken away!  When?  When we believe.

The enmity is in our mind, so what needs to be fixed is there, in the mind.  Peace comes in the place of enmity when we believe, and this is how the wall which separates the Jews and Gentiles is taken down (which Jones explained in his article).  As Jones explained, the problem which causes the separation between Jews and Gentiles is the separation which exists between God and man (e.g. Jews and God, and Gentiles and God).  When each party is reconciled to God, by believing in Christ and being justified by faith, then they are brought at peace with each other.

[pnattmbtc]

Ok, I respect your position. 

But for me, when Christ has abolished the enmity, and Scriptures EXPLICITLY says so, I simply believe He indeed has, and there's nothing more that remains for man to abolish.  All that remains for us to do now is believe He indeed has abolished the enmity instead of believing that the enmity can only be abolished if we believe. 
 
There's two different things going on here, Samie.  One is what Christ did.  What Christ did is a done thing, and extremely important.  When we believe in Christ, we believe in what Christ did.  The more we know about what Christ did, the better.  One of the things which Christ did was to abolish the enmity.  What does this mean?  A. T. Jones explained this in his article, and I also explained this.

It's not just a matter of seeing something, and thinking "the scriptures says this" but we should understand what it means.  So when it says that the enmity was abolished, what does that mean?  This is why I have kept asking you what the enmity is.

I don't want to rewrite everything I wrote in several posts, but very briefly, as A. T. Jones explained, the enmity entered in by unbelief when Eve believed the lie of the serpent, so the enmity was abolised by revealing the truth.  It is absolutely the case that this is something which Christ accomlished at the cross, but since the enmity is in our own minds, that's where the problem needs to be fixed, and that cannot happen without our participation.  Consider, for example, 2 Cor. 5:

18 All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19 that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. 20 We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God.

Notice what Paul says, "We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be reconciled to God."  Obviously if we were *already* reconciled to God, Paul wouldn't be imploring us to do so!

There seems to be some confusion as to what's actually happening.  It does us little good to simply repeat words or phrases without understanding what's going on.  This is why I've asked you on several occastions to explain what you think God is trying to accomplish.  I've done so on quite a few occasions, and will do so again briefly here.

Satan has misreprented God's character, and sin causes us to think things about God which are not true.  In order to counteract this, God sent His Son to show us what God is really like, and also the consequences of sin.  Christ, thorugh His life, and death on the cross, accomplished a perfect revelation, and in so doing, defeated the enemy (Satan), and abolished the enmity (the mind of Satan).  If we choose, we may become a part of God's kingdom, and receive the mind of Christ, living by the principles of His kingdom (the "mind of Christ" Phillipians 2).  These things happen when we believe.

Notice John 1:

18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

This verse explains the purpose of Christ's mission.

11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

These verses explain our participation.  If we "believe on His name", then we may become the "sons of God."

For me I just believe that God has reconciled us to Himself by the death of His Son, instead of believing that I can only be reconciled if I believe. 

Believing is the means by which we are reconciled!  To be reconciled is to believe.  You cannot have one without the other.

Once again, if we could be reconciled without believing, then Paul would hardly emplore us to be reconciled to God!  Indeed, our message, ambassadors of Christ, is to implore others to be reconciled to God.  That's what 2 Cor. 5 says:

20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.

[pnattmbtc]

Part of ATJones Sermon #11 (emphases and highlighting mine):

I can't see how the above quote jibes with Pnatt's position:

 

 

From Jones:

It is true that, although a man may have all this in Jesus, He cannot
profit by it without himself being a believer in Jesus. Take the man
who does not believe in Jesus at all tonight. Has not Christ made all
the provision for him that He has for Elijah, who is in heaven tonight?
And if this man wants to have Christ for his Saviour, if he wants
provision made for all his sins and salvation from all of them, does
Christ have to do anything now in order to provide for this man's sins
or to save him from them? No. That is all done. He made all that
provision for every man when He was in the flesh and every man who
believes in Him receives this without there being any need of any part
of it being done over again. He "made one sacrifice for sins forever."
And having by Himself purged us from our sins, He sat down on the right
hand of the Majesty on high. Thus it is all in Him and every believer
in Him possesses it all in Him and in Him is complete. It is in Him and
that is the blessedness of it. "In Him dwelleth all the fullness of the
godhead bodily." And God gives His eternal Spirit and us eternal life--
eternity in which to live--in order that that eternal Spirit may reveal
to us and make known to us the eternal depths of the salvation that we
have in Him whose goings forth have been from the days of eternity. p.
14, Para. 23, [GC1895].

It's the same thing as with Scripture; you need to get the whole point that is being made, not selective out certain ideas without regard to context. 

[Samie]

 

From Jones:

It's the same thing as with Scripture; you need to get the whole point that is being made, not selective out certain ideas without regard to context. 

Reading your quote of Jones, I think Jones and I are not on the same page when it comes to benefiting from Christ's annihilation of the enmity.  Like you, he believes that it is only AFTER one has believed Christ has annihilated the enmity that the person benefits from what Christ has done. For me your last quote from Jones is a far cry from his sermon #11.

I guess I don't have to repeat myself many times over.  God reconciled us to Himself by the death of His Son; His death caused the annihilation of the enmity that separates man from God. In Jones' words (sermon #11): "in Christ, it is gone, abolished, annihilated. Thank the Lord. This is freedom indeed."  I simply believe that Christ has, for, whether I knew it or not, He has destroyed, removed & abolished that which separates us from God and so reconciled us to God. Paul's saying be ye reconciled to God (2 Cor 5:20), for me simply means, live reconciled lives. Just like, having been made holy, be holy.

I don't think Paul is saying that unless we believe in Christ we cannot be reconciled to God, because he himself said we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son and that we have received that reconciliation (Rom 5:10, 11). And he wrote these words to the Romans to whom he has not yet preached the gospel before (see Rom 1:7-15; 15:20-24).  In effect he was saying to those to whom he has yet to preach Christ that they already were reconciled to God and that they have received that reconciliation.

[LifeHiscost]

 

I don't think Paul is saying that unless we believe in Christ we cannot be reconciled to God, because he himself said we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son and that we have received that reconciliation (Rom 5:10, 11). And he wrote these words to the Romans to whom he has not yet preached the gospel before (see Rom 1:7-15; 15:20-24).  In effect he was saying to those to whom he has yet to preach Christ that they already were reconciled to God and that they have received that reconciliation.

As I look back on my personal past experiences, when far greater disasters could have taken place, I tend to agree wholeheartedly with what you are proposing Samie. OTOH it has been a long journey of learning until I realized how much I could have avoided in difficulty if I had taken God at His Word at a much younger age. IOW the blessings were true and available but I had not yet the faith and/or biblical knowledge yet to access them. 

Contrarywise;

 In

reviewing our

past

history, having traveled over every step of advance to our present standing, I can say, Praise God! As I see what God has wrought, I am filled with astonishment, and with confidence

in

Christ as leader. We have nothing to fear for

the

future, except as we shall forget

the

way

the

Lord has

led

us, and His teaching

in

our

past

history.

{CET 204.1}  

22 And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive....Matthew 21

 

24 Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name: ask, and ye shall receive, that your joy may be full....John 16
 

God is Love!  Jesus saves! 

[pnattmbtc]

Me: From Jones:

It's the same thing as with Scripture; you need to get the whole point that is being made, not selective out certain ideas without regard to context. 

Samie: Reading your quote of Jones, I think Jones and I are not on the same page when it comes to benefiting from Christ's annihilation of the enmity.  

Indeed!  I've been making this point for awhile.  Just as you have been selectively reading Scripture to agree with an idea you had, you were selectively reading Jones.

Like you, he believes that it is only AFTER one has believed Christ has annihilated the enmity that the person benefits from what Christ has done. For me your last quote from Jones is a far cry from his sermon #11.

Actually Jones was saying the same thing in Sermon #11.  You were just misreading it to conform with an idea you had, similarly to how you are reading Paul.

I guess I don't have to repeat myself many times over.  God reconciled us to Himself by the death of His Son; His death caused the annihilation of the enmity that separates man from God. In Jones' words (sermon #11): "in Christ, it is gone, abolished, annihilated. Thank the Lord. This is freedom indeed."  I simply believe that Christ has, for, whether I knew it or not, He has destroyed, removed & abolished that which separates us from God and so reconciled us to God. 

Christ absolutely has done this!  This is true, and this is the gospel.  But what is it that separates us from God?  That which separates us from God is in the mind.  Christ destroyed the "mind of Satan" (to coin a phrase, the "enmity" as Paul calls it) and each of us may choose to receive the mind of Christ (Phillipians 2) if we so wish.

Paul's saying be ye reconciled to God (2 Cor 5:20), for me simply means, live reconciled lives. Just like, having been made holy, be holy.

If you change the words of the Bible author, you can make him say whatever you want, and it becomes imposssible to disprove any belief.  What Paul actually said was that our message as Christ's ambassadors is "be ye reconciled to God", which makes it clear that the hearer of the message is not reconciled to God.  If you want to change that to "live a reconciled life", that's your prerogative, but you cannot make an argument that your idea is in harmony with Scripture.

I don't think Paul is saying that unless we believe in Christ we cannot be reconciled to God, because he himself said we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son and that we have received that reconciliation (Rom 5:10, 11).

If Paul had meant, "by virtue of what Christ did, you, without any participation, were reconciled to God", he could not have said our message as Christ's ambassadors is "Be reconciled to God."  You have misunderstood what Paul was wanting to communicate, and rather than recognize that, you would change his words from "be reconciled to God" to something else which agrees with your misunderstanding.

And he wrote these words to the Romans to whom he has not yet preached the gospel before (see Rom 1:7-15; 15:20-24).  In effect he was saying to those to whom he has yet to preach Christ that they already were reconciled to God and that they have received that reconciliation.

Paul surely had in mind for the Romans the same thing he had in mind for the Corinthians.

[Samie]

Indeed!  I've been making this point for awhile.  Just as you have been selectively reading Scripture to agree with an idea you had, you were selectively reading Jones.

Actually Jones was saying the same thing in Sermon #11.  You were just misreading it to conform with an idea you had, similarly to how you are reading Paul.

Christ absolutely has done this!  This is true, and this is the gospel.  But what is it that separates us from God?  That which separates us from God is in the mind.  Christ destroyed the "mind of Satan" (to coin a phrase, the "enmity" as Paul calls it) and each of us may choose to receive the mind of Christ (Phillipians 2) if we so wish.

If you change the words of the Bible author, you can make him say whatever you want, and it becomes imposssible to disprove any belief.  What Paul actually said was that our message as Christ's ambassadors is "be ye reconciled to God", which makes it clear that the hearer of the message is not reconciled to God.  If you want to change that to "live a reconciled life", that's your prerogative, but you cannot make an argument that your idea is in harmony with Scripture.

If Paul had meant, "by virtue of what Christ did, you, without any participation, were reconciled to God", he could not have said our message as Christ's ambassadors is "Be reconciled to God."  You have misunderstood what Paul was wanting to communicate, and rather than recognize that, you would change his words from "be reconciled to God" to something else which agrees with your misunderstanding.

Paul surely had in mind for the Romans the same thing he had in mind for the Corinthians.

That's for sure. But Paul does not agree with you; and if you are correct about Jones' view,  Paul is against his view as well.

Take note that when Paul wrote to the Romans, he had not yet preached Christ to them. But he addressed them as:

^YLT Romans 1:7 to all who are in Rome, beloved of God, called saints; Grace to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ!

He also told them that all men were justified FREELY (Rom 3:23, 24; 5:18), and that they were reconciled to God by the death of His Son and that they have received that reconciliation (Rom 5:10, 11)!  He was telling the Romans these things when he was writing his letter, and prior to that point in time Paul has not preached Christ to them yet. So in fact he was telling these people who were not aware what Christ has done, that they have been justified and reconciled to God, without their knowing it.  And this is contrary to what you are saying.

[pnattmbtc]

Software did something funny, so I was responding to something different than I thought I was.  I'll respond shortly.

Edited October 5, 2015 by pnattmbtc

[pnattmbtc]

Samie: That's for sure. But Paul does not agree with you; and if you are correct about Jones' view,  Paul is against his view as well.

I agree with Paul who wrote:

18 All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19 that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. 20 We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. 

Our message, as Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us, is "We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God."  I agree completely with Paul.  You are not agreeing with Paul.

Take note that when Paul wrote to the Romans, he had not yet preached Christ to them. But he addressed them as:

YLT Romans 1:7 to all who are in Rome, beloved of God, called saints; Grace to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ!

Paul wasn't the only one who preached the gospel.  Paul addressed his letter to believers, which the Scriptures refer to as "saints".  You're doing the same thing as before, by reading in your ideas to the text, instead of letting the text speak.  You're trying to force it, but it won't work, because what you are thinking is not how Paul thought.

He also told them that all men were justified FREELY (Rom 3:23, 24; 5:18), and that they were reconciled to God by the death of His Son and that they have received that reconciliation (Rom 5:10, 11)! 

Yes, the same as 2 Cor. 5.  Romans 5:1 says, "therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God."  Reconciliation means peace with God, and the means is justification by faith.  Paul is in agreement with himself.

He was telling the Romans these things when he was writing his letter, and prior to that point in time Paul has not preached Christ to them yet. So in fact he was telling these people who were not aware what Christ has done, that they have been justified and reconciled to God, without their knowing it.

Paul addressed his letter to believers whom *he* had not met before.  Paul wasn't the only instrumentality by whom the Gospel was presented.  

You are wrong that Paul's hearers didn't know Christ.  He addressed them as "saints", meaning they were believers.

Take a look at any introduction to Romans and you'll see that your conclusions here are unwarranted.

And this is contrary to what you are saying.

I doubt there is anyone, outside of yourself, that has the opinion that Paul wrote Romans to people who did not know what Christ had done.  This is contrary to the evidence of the letter itself.  He addressed them as "saints", which means they were believers, and did know Christ.

[pnattmbtc]

This is from the first introduction to Romans I came across.

 

B. Destination: A Jewish/Gentile Church in Rome

1. There was an early church in Rome (possibly from before A.D. 49)

a. There was certainly a church already in Rome when Paul wrote the book of Romans (1:13; 15:23-24)

b. From a statement by Suetonius, there may be evidence that Christianity was in the capital of Rome by A.D. 4911

c. This church may well have been started through converts of Paul who lived in Rome12, rather than through any particular evangelistic effort13 since neither Paul (in Romans), nor Luke (in Acts),14 nor any other NT document mentions any.

2. The Composition of the church in Rome was probably mixed (Jewish/Gentile)

a. Rather than one large church, the Romans seem to have been made up of five household churches:

1) Five households are greeted (16:5,10,11,14,15)

2) Paul does not address the letter to the “Church” at (cf. 1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Cor. 1:1; 1 Thess. 1:1), but to “all that are at Rome”15 (1:7).

b. The Romans were made up of both Jews and Gentiles (with a probable emphasis upon Gentiles)

1) Paul writes to Gentiles

a) Paul was an apostle to the Gentiles (1:5; 11:3; Gal. 2:7-8)16

 Paul speaks to Gentiles who receive mercy through Jewish unbelief (11:12-13)

c) Paul compares the Romans with other Gentiles, not just Gentiles (1:12-14)

d) Paul refers to the Jews as “my” brethren, and not “our” brethren (9:3)

e) Out of the twenty-four names in chapter 16, over one half are Latin and Greek

2) Paul writes to Jewish believers

a) Paul wrote with many references to the Old Testament (but see Galatians too)

 Paul speaks of Abraham as “our” father in 2:1 (but see 1 Corinthians 10:1 where he does the same thing)

c) Chapters 9--11 are about the nation Israel (but they show that those who had privilege could loose it)

d) Paul describes a Jewish/Gentile problem in the church (“weak and strong”)

 

Take a look at any introduction to Romans.  Your ideas about Paul's hearers not knowing Christ are completely unfounded (based solely on the idea that that couldn't have known Christ since Paul hadn't preached to them before, as if Paul was the only means by which the Gospel could be known), and simply wrong.

[Samie]

This is from the first introduction to Romans I came across.

Take a look at any introduction to Romans.  Your ideas about Paul's hearers not knowing Christ are completely unfounded (based solely on the idea that that couldn't have known Christ since Paul hadn't preached to them before, as if Paul was the only means by which the Gospel could be known), and simply wrong.

Simply wrong?  Then you are right and Paul wrong? Wow, you amaze me, brother.

When you can't find refuge in Scriptures you turn to extra-biblical haven. Sorry, Paul has said that he has not preached the gospel to them yet and that it is not his intention to preach Christ to places where Christ had already been preached. The fact that he preach to Rome via his letter to them is proof enough he did not know of any other that preached Christ to the Romans before him.  Did you read the verses I gave? Rom 1:7-15; 15:20-24. Read them again please, and tell me what you think of these verses.

[pnattmbtc]

Simply wrong?  Then you are right and Paul wrong? Wow, you amaze me, brother.

Well, you amaze me too.

Paul clearly recognizes his hearers as believers.  This is evident throughout the letter.

When you can't find refuge in Scriptures you turn to extra-biblical haven. 

No, that's not the case.  There are people who have studied these things out who know more than you do about it, people who have studied what the circumstances of the letter were, the grammar, background, things like this.  Now if there is disagreement, then there can be arguments one way or another (e.g. if Paul wrote a given letter, when exactly it was written, etc.), but if there is universal agreement, then it's likely correct.  And this was for your benefit, because your suggestion that those to whom Paul addressed did not know Christ indicates a lacking of basic foundation in understanding of the letter.

Sorry, Paul has said that he has not preached the gospel to them yet and that it is not his intention to preach Christ to places where Christ had already been preached. 

No he didn't.  First of all, the letter itself makes is clear that he was addressing believers in a fully functioning church.  For example:

1I commend to you our sister Phoebe, who is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea; 2that you receive her in the Lord in a manner worthy of the saints, and that you help her in whatever matter she may have need of you; for she herself has also been a helper of many, and of myself as well.…(Romans 16)

The fact that he preach to Rome via his letter to them is proof enough he did not know of any other that preached Christ to the Romans before him.

Read the letter from beginning to end, especially the last chapters of the letter.  It's very clear that Paul was addressing believers.  Compare his counsel in Romans to his counsel in other letters and you can see this.  There are many ways to see this.  Look at Romans chapter 8.  What sense would this make to unbelievers?  The same with chapters 9-11.  What sense would it make to present this argument to unbelievers?  They wouldn't have any clue what he was talking about.  Nor would the rest of the letter.

Did you read the verses I gave? Rom 1:7-15; 15:20-24. Read them again please, and tell me what you think of these verses. 

 

Here is Romans 15:

14 I know that you are wise and good, my brothers, and that you know these things so well that you are able to teach others all about them. 15-16 But even so I have been bold enough to emphasize some of these points, knowing that all you need is this reminder from me; for I am, by God’s grace, a special messenger from Jesus Christ to you Gentiles, bringing you the Gospel and offering you up as a fragrant sacrifice to God; for you have been made pure and pleasing to him by the Holy Spirit. 17 So it is right for me to be a little proud of all Christ Jesus has done through me. 18 I dare not judge how effectively he has used others, but I know this: he has used me to win the Gentiles to God.19 I have won them by my message and by the good way I have lived before them and by the miracles done through me as signs from God—all by the Holy Spirit’s power. In this way I have preached the full Gospel of Christ all the way from Jerusalem clear over into Illyricum.

20 But all the while my ambition has been to go still farther, preaching where the name of Christ has never yet been heard, rather than where a church has already been started by someone else. 21 I have been following the plan spoken of in the Scriptures where Isaiah says that those who have never heard the name of Christ before will see and understand. 22 In fact, that is the very reason I have been so long in coming to visit you.

This text makes it very clear that Paul is addressing fellow believers.  He calls them "my brothers", and says " you know these things so well that you are able to teach others all about them."  He explains why he hasn't come sooner, which is because they are already believers!!

So how you can Romans and come to the conclusion that Paul was writing to unbelievers is incredible.

The text in Romans 1 alsy makes this clear.  He says, "For your faith in God is becoming known around the world." (This means they were believers). The whole letter is like this, from beginning to end.  

 

 

[Samie]

Hi Pnatt;

To save space, I won't be quoting your last post. This post will naturally be in response to that post.  And I will not be going into many other issues. Just the main one, that Paul was writing to "all who are in Rome", as reflected in Rom 1:7, a verse you did not address in your last post.  Were "all who are in Rome" believers at the time Paul was writing his letter? I believe "all who are in Rome" are not all believers. Some may have never heard of Christ yet.

^NKJ Romans 1:7 To all who are in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

In his letters to the other churches, Corinth, Galatia and Thessalonica, Paul explicitly addressed his letters to the churches in those places.  In his letters to the Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians, he explicitly addressed his letters to the saints and believers in those areas.

But in his letter to the Romans, he simply said “To all who are in Rome”.