Who is the One New Man Created on the Cross?

[pnattmbtc]

Quote

In 1 John, John writes that as many as have Christ have life, and He who has not the son has not life.  That's five.  And this one is worth commenting on a bit, since it so clearly contrary to your idea.  John says, "He who has the Son has life" and "He who has not the Son has not life."  So there are two classes of people, those who believe, and those who don't.  Those who believe have life, and those who do no, don't. Those who do not believe, who are dead, may receive life by receiving Christ,

Quote

 

Wait again. Don't hurry. You could trip. What 5, when there's not even one yet. To have Christ, is to be in Christ. And when were we in Christ? When we died with Him!!! And that's on the cross.  And that's why Scriptures say we were made alive TOGETHER with Him, because we already were part of His body when He resurrected.

So again, your proof verse does not say what you want it to say. Next try:

 

Samie, you just ignored the verse completely.  It says he that has the son has life, and he that has not the son has life.  That's it.  The means, there are two classes of people, those who have the Son (these are alive spiritually), and those who have not the Son (these are dead spiritually).

This completely contradicts what you've been asserting. 

[pnattmbtc]

The problem with your idea is:

Samie: Not my idea. 

Of course it's your idea.  You're the one who wrote it.

1.It doesn't make logical sense

Samie: It is logical. Why would it not be?

Because it is not logical that things can happen to objects which do not exist.

It’s Scriptures. Here again are those Scriptures which you say does not make logical sense:

NKJ 2 Corinthians 5:14-15   ¹⁴ For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died;  ¹⁵and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.

NKJ Ephesians 2:4-5   4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,  5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ

 

You're reading this in a weird way if you think it's saying that things can happen to objects which don't exist.  That doesn't make sense.  For example, if I say, "I fixed the car", that implies that the car that I fixed exists.

2.It contradicts what Paul says a couple of verses later

Samie: It actually contradicts what you are saying.

Yes, it does that too (it is what you write; you contradict both Paul and me).

3.It contradicts what Paul says throughout his writings.

Samie: It actually contradicts what you have been posting.

Yes, you contradict me as well as Paul.

4.It contradicts other Bible writers.

Samie: It contradicts those posters not believing it.

Which is everyone I think.

You yourself know and admit this!! You admit that your idea contradicts John, but then suggest that John needed correcting.  

Samie: I have already explained why, long ago.

You didn't really explain why.  You just made a comment that it was like Peter. But the very concept that Bible readers need to be corrected, and you need to explain why, is an odd reaction to having an idea exposed as not agreeing with Scripture.  Rather than admit error, you assert that John was in error!  Amazing!

Why do you think Samie knows better than John?  Why doesn't Samie need correcting?

Samie: It's you saying that, not me.

No, it's you.  Right here:

Quote

two of the above are problem texts from one who had been corrected of his wrong notion, just like Peter.

You were referring to John 1:12 and 1 John 1:9.  You've also expressed the idea that John was incorrect in John 1:18.

Now that we've settled this, I have the same question.  Why do you think Samie knows better than John?  Why doesn't Samie need correcting?  Do you believe the Scriptures are inspired?  I'm not understanding what your thought process could possibly be.  When I come across something I don't understand in Scripture, I think about it, sometimes for years, until I come up with some way of understanding things which makes sense with how I view the rest of Scripture.  I've never thought about the idea that the Scriptures were what was wrong, and I should just continue thinking the way I was thinking.  If you think like this, how could you ever become convinced of an error?  When evidence is presented to you to convince you that you are in error, rather than admit the error, you say the evidence is wrong.  That's hard to fathom.  Why not write your own Bible?

[Samie]

16 hours ago, pnattmbtc said:

You didn't respond to what I wrote.  I'll repeat it here for your convenience.  I don't know what you're thinking if you don't respond.  Your understanding of 2 Cor. 5 isn't the only possible interpretation,

Samie: You are the one interpreting; I simply believe it telling us All died because Christ died for all. Why don’t you just simply believe it?  Because it contradicts what you are teaching? Here again:

NKJ 2 Corinthians 5:14-15   ¹⁴ For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died;  ¹⁵and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.

See that? Paul’s logic is far too different from yours. Your logic is we could not have possibly died with Christ because we were not yet existing then. But for the apostle, even if Christ died alone on the cross, yet he tells us we all died because Christ died for all.

Here’s part of your wonderful logic:

and if it leads you to contradict other things that the same author wrote (or others, but especially the same), it cannot be correct.  

Samie: Since I did not interpret but simply believed the verses per se, so basically you are saying what Paul wrote could possibly lead to contradict what he wrote somewhere else in Scriptures, and if it did contradict, which is what you are trying to show in the remaining part of your post, then what Paul wrote in 2 Cor 5:14-15 cannot be correct.

So you need to address what the author has written elsewhere.  Paul wrote *tons* about justification by faith.  I'm including an outline of a couple of Paul's ideas below.  If the order is like this: justified by faith ->receive the Spirit who testifies you are a child of God (alive spiritually; maybe you disagree here(?); I don't know what you disagree with when you don't respond) then the order must have been that faith was exercised before one became a child of God.  Do you disagree with this?

Samie: It’s Paul himself who seemed to disagree with you. Remember Areopagus where Paul spoke to the Athenians?

^CJB Acts 17:29 So, since we are children of God, we shouldn't suppose that God's essence resembles gold, silver or stone shaped by human technique and imagination.

He identified himself with those unbelievers as children of God, proving your position incorrect, brother.

To be clear I'm asking, do you disagree that by faith one becomes a child of God?

Samie:  If what you are trying to say is, unless one first believes he cannot be a child of God, then Yes, I disagree. Even Paul disagreed long ago. He told the Athenian unbelievers they are children of God.     

I'm not understanding what you're missing here.  Paul says the following:

1.Not everyone has the Holy Spirit. (maybe those who grieved and refused the HS)

2.To those who do, the Spirit testifies they are sons of God. (Did the HS say when they became God’s sons?)

3.To become sons of God, they had to be made alive. (And they were made alive TOGETHER with Christ when He resurrected)

4.They received the Spirit when they were justified by faith. (After they were made alive, not before)

For Paul, when one is justified by faith, one becomes a child of God, and receives the Holy Spirit, who testifies to that fact.  Since they became sons of God by being justified by faith, they had to be justified by faith *before* they became sons of God.

Samie: You don’t have to attribute to Paul what’s in your mind. Paul said all sinned and were justified FREELY through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. 

^NKJ Romans 3:23-24   ²³ for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,  ²⁴being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,

^NKJ Romans 5:18 Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.

See that? It was through the righteous act of Jesus that we were justified, not by our own righteous act (like believing, as you said). And Jesus redeemed us by His blood on the cross. Therefore, it was on the cross that justification of everyone occurred.

I ‘m afraid the writings of Paul are against your teachings, brother.

 

[pnattmbtc]

10 hours ago, Samie said:

10 hours ago, Samie said:

 

 

On 11/13/2015, 9:24:34, pnattmbtc said:

You didn't respond to what I wrote.  I'll repeat it here for your convenience.  I don't know what you're thinking if you don't respond.  Your understanding of 2 Cor. 5 isn't the only possible interpretation,

Samie: You are the one interpreting; I simply believe it telling us All died because Christ died for all. Why don’t you just simply believe it?  Because it contradicts what you are teaching? Here again:

NKJ 2 Corinthians 5:14-15   ¹⁴ For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died;  ¹⁵and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.

See that? Paul’s logic is far too different from yours. Your logic is we could not have possibly died with Christ because we were not yet existing then. But for the apostle, even if Christ died alone on the cross, yet he tells us we all died because Christ died for all.

Here’s part of your wonderful logic:

and if it leads you to contradict other things that the same author wrote (or others, but especially the same), it cannot be correct.  

Samie: Since I did not interpret but simply believed the verses per se, so basically you are saying what Paul wrote could possibly lead to contradict what he wrote somewhere else in Scriptures, and if it did contradict, which is what you are trying to show in the remaining part of your post, then what Paul wrote in 2 Cor 5:14-15 cannot be correct.

So you need to address what the author has written elsewhere.  Paul wrote *tons* about justification by faith.  I'm including an outline of a couple of Paul's ideas below.  If the order is like this: justified by faith ->receive the Spirit who testifies you are a child of God (alive spiritually; maybe you disagree here(?); I don't know what you disagree with when you don't respond) then the order must have been that faith was exercised before one became a child of God.  Do you disagree with this?

Samie: It’s Paul himself who seemed to disagree with you. Remember Areopagus where Paul spoke to the Athenians?

^CJB Acts 17:29 So, since we are children of God, we shouldn't suppose that God's essence resembles gold, silver or stone shaped by human technique and imagination.

He identified himself with those unbelievers as children of God, proving your position incorrect, brother.

To be clear I'm asking, do you disagree that by faith one becomes a child of God?

Samie:  If what you are trying to say is, unless one first believes he cannot be a child of God, then Yes, I disagree. Even Paul disagreed long ago. He told the Athenian unbelievers they are children of God.     

I'm not understanding what you're missing here.  Paul says the following:

1.Not everyone has the Holy Spirit. (maybe those who grieved and refused the HS)

2.To those who do, the Spirit testifies they are sons of God. (Did the HS say when they became God’s sons?)

3.To become sons of God, they had to be made alive. (And they were made alive TOGETHER with Christ when He resurrected)

4.They received the Spirit when they were justified by faith. (After they were made alive, not before)

For Paul, when one is justified by faith, one becomes a child of God, and receives the Holy Spirit, who testifies to that fact.  Since they became sons of God by being justified by faith, they had to be justified by faith *before* they became sons of God.

Samie: You don’t have to attribute to Paul what’s in your mind. Paul said all sinned and were justified FREELY through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. 

^NKJ Romans 3:23-24   ²³ for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,  ²⁴being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,

^NKJ Romans 5:18 Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.

See that? It was through the righteous act of Jesus that we were justified, not by our own righteous act (like believing, as you said). And Jesus redeemed us s blood on the cross. Therefore, it was on the cross that justification of everyone occurred.

I ‘m afraid the writings of Paul are against your teachings, brother.

This is a very difficult format to respond to.

1.Unless you read and write ancient Greek, you're interpreting.  Not only that, you are selecting certain translations over others, which is also interpreting.

2.You didn't deal with the  contradiction!  That is, you are suggesting an interpretation of 2 Cor. 5 which would be contradicted just a couple of verses later, where Paul says our message as Christ's ambassadors is "by reconciled to God."  If all were already reconciled to God, that couldn't be our message as Christ's ambassadors, so your interpretation of what Paul wrote here can't be correct.  He would hardly contradict himself a few verses later.

3.Regarding children of God, is it your position that we are not children of God by faith in Christ?  John 1:12 says "to as many as received Him, gave He power to become the sons of God, even by believing in His name".  What do you think this means?

4.It look like in your interpretation of Romans 8, you're wanting to deny there are two classes of people.  But Paul says, "If any has not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."  So there are two classes.  Regarding when the Spirit testifies that the sons of God are sons of God, it is when they have received the Spirit, which is when they are made Sons, which is when they are justified by faith.

Paul speaks of justification by faith throughout Romans.  You seem to have no place in your thought regarding justification by faith, yet this is the heart of the Gospel.

5.Regarding what I'm attributing to Paul, I'll quote him:

 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

² For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

³ For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

⁴ That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

⁵ For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

⁶ For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

⁷ Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

⁸ So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

⁹ But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

¹⁰ And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

¹¹ But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

¹² Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.

¹³ For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.

¹⁴ For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

¹⁵ For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

¹⁶ The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

¹⁷ And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

None of this agrees in the least with what you are asserting.  To consider just one verse, look at verse 8.  This contradicts what you're thinking.

Regarding our being justified, we are justified by faith.  That's what Paul teaches.  For example:

⁹ That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

¹⁰ For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

¹¹ For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

¹² For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

 

In what you assert, you never deal with any of these texts, and these are far more numerous than the corporate ones.  It's as if in your Bible, only 0.01% of it counts.

The only aspect of individual participation which I see you comment on is overcoming, yet, as I've pointed out, there are only my two dozen texts on overcoming, but over 500 regarding faith.

The heart of the Gospel is justification by faith, which involves individual participation, as Paul explains here.

I agree there is a corporate aspect to the Gospel, so I have no bone to pick with you there, but rather with your not recognizing the individual aspect.

For example, Jesus said, "You will not come to me that you might have life."  I never see you mention this.  Jesus said, "I have come that you might have life, and have it abundantly."  This is speaking about knowing Jesus Christ, inviting Him into your heart as your personal Savior.  I don't see you talk about this.

Do you think it is important to know Jesus Christ as your personal Savior? To invite Him into your heart?

[Wingnut]

22 hours ago, pnattmbtc said:

 

The heart of the Gospel is justification by faith, which involves individual participation, as Paul explains here.

I agree there is a corporate aspect to the Gospel, so I have no bone to pick with you there, but rather with your not recognizing the individual aspect.

For example, Jesus said, "You will not come to me that you might have life."  I never see you mention this.  Jesus said, "I have come that you might have life, and have it abundantly."  This is speaking about knowing Jesus Christ, inviting Him into your heart as your personal Savior.  I don't see you talk about this.

Do you think it is important to know Jesus Christ as your personal Savior? To invite Him into your heart?

Oh no Pnatt - you hit Samie with his kryptonite.  

[Samie]

4 minutes ago, Wingnut said:

Oh no Pnatt - you hit Samie with his kryptonite.  

What!!?? Are you saying Samie is Superman, only a kryptonite can knock him out? You have a good sense of humor, my brother. You make me smile.  Next post is the antidote.

[Samie]

What is the antidote? Scriptures, the Word of God - the Sword of the Spirit.

Overcoming and believing - the exercise of faith, are closely related, in that, believing is simply a child of overcoming: it is overcoming the evil of unbelief. Hence the tons of Scriptures on faith and the exercise of it, simply speak about overcoming.  And each of us, being part of His Body, derives power from Christ Who is our Strength for overcoming evil with good.  And as had been for long pointed out, overcoming is doable only if one is spiritually alive.  And Scriptures EXPLICITLY tell us that we were made alive TOGETHER with Christ.

Hence, to say that a person is only made alive AFTER or WHEN he believes, is saying that that person was not made alive TOGETHER with Christ, and is simply not according to Scriptures:

Ephesians 2:4-5   ⁴ But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,  ⁵ even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved)

See that? Addressing the Ephesian saints, Paul, identifying himself with them, said “when we were dead in trespasses, God made us alive together with Christ”. And the reason he gave was that God is rich in mercy and that He greatly loved them.  But did God love only Paul and the Ephesian saints? How about those in Corinth? Our loving Savior tells us God so loved the world!!!  And that obviously includes every one – Adam & Eve and all their descendants.

So why would the apostle tell the Ephesian saints that he and them were made alive together with Christ, when he and them were not corpses when Jesus died on the cross? Why make people alive when they are not dead?  The reason is simple: for Paul, all died when Christ died.

NKJ 2 Corinthians 5:14-15   ¹⁴ For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died;  ¹⁵and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.

Yes, all died when Christ died, yet Jesus hung alone on his cross. He it was Who died. How could have all died when He died? Paul explains by speaking of the One New Man which God through Christ created on the Cross: Christ the Head, and Humanity (Jews & Gentiles) the Body (see Eph 2:11-19). When the Head died, of course His Body died with Him; and when the Head was resurrected, naturally, His Body was resurrected TOGETHER with Him.

Praise God! We all, being His Body, died with Him, and when He resurrected, we were also made alive together with Him. Marvelous love and grace of the Father and the Son. And having been made alive, we are admonished to live for Him Who died for us and live again. This is simply overcoming evil with good. And only overcomers will not be blotted out from the BOL.

I think any other related issue that anyone brings up against the above truth, becomes moot and academic. We already died with Christ; we were already made alive together with Him. And one thing is expected of us: To become overcomers.

 

[Samie]

See you again, brethren. Just have to prepare for a day long appointment.

[pnattmbtc]

You didn't respond to the question. 

On 11/14/2015, 3:04:07, pnattmbtc said:

Do you think it is important to know Jesus Christ as your personal Savior? To invite Him into your heart?

[Wingnut]

7 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

You didn't respond to the question. 

The question was "Do you think it is important to know Jesus Christ as your personal Savior? To invite Him into your heart?"

The band has struck up. And Samie is about to start his two-step - dancing around this question - as he has for the last 34 pages of this thread.  

[Samie]

As pointed out in an earlier thread, when the One New Man was created on the cross, both Jews and Gentiles became part of the Body of Christ and members of the household or family of God (Eph 2:11-19). In one big family, not everyone has the same ability, hence not the same responsibility.  It’s the parents who decide what responsibility to give to a specific child at any stage of his development. But good parents assign only those responsibilities that are commensurate with a child’s abilities. So with each of us in this big family of God. Our Father in heaven makes sure that the spiritual responsibilities we have is commensurate with our spiritual level of maturity.

The Ethiopian eunuch is one good example.

This son of God traveled more than a thousand miles to Jerusalem to worship our Father in heaven.  He had no plans to meet with Philip whom he does not know; neither did Philip had plans to meet with him and did not know him either. Their meeting was God’s plan. I can only surmise that because God has seen that this son of his has grown up into such a level of spiritual level of maturity, He decides it is for the eunuch’s best interest to know Christ and Him crucified.  So He worked out how the eunuch can be taught his new responsibility using Philip for this purpose.  And the good son responded positively.

Is it important to know Christ as our personal Savior? Of course, it is important. Why would it not be?  Just like asking, is it important for children to know their parents do their best for their welfare? But, important as it is, not everyone in the family knows about this. There are even those who don’t know the names of their parents. The infants do not. And there are infants in Christ in this big family of God. 

But when these infants have grown up and reached that spiritual level of maturity where our good Father in heaven determines they need to know about Christ, then He will commission His “Philips” to accomplish His purpose.  Those who positively respond, like the eunuch, are the overcomers.  Those who refuse are non-overcomers.  And only overcomers will not be blotted out from the BOL.

[pnattmbtc]

Quote

 

Samie: Is it important to know Christ as our personal Savior? Of course, it is important. Why would it not be?  Just like asking, is it important for children to know their parents do their best for their welfare? But, important as it is, not everyone in the family knows about this. There are even those who don’t know the names of their parents. The infants do not. And there are infants in Christ in this big family of God. 

But when these infants have grown up and reached that spiritual level of maturity where our good Father in heaven determines they need to know about Christ, then He will commission His “Philips” to accomplish His purpose.  Those who positively respond, like the eunuch, are the overcomers. Those who refuse are non-overcomers.  And only overcomers will not be blotted out from the BOL.

 

I don't know how I didn't pick up on this earlier.  It seems that Wingnut has.

You're still not answering the question, although you said, "of course" it is important.  But what are we talking about?  I'm not at all sure we're talking about the same thing.  When I ask the question, "Is it important that we accept Jesus Christ as our person savior?" or "Is it important that we invite Him in our heart", I have something very in different in mind than merely the fact that He died for our sins 2,000 years ago.  Do you know that is? (that I have in mind)

The answer to this question is vital; it's not just chit-chat.

[Samie]

4 hours ago, pnattmbtc said:

When I ask the question, "Is it important that we accept Jesus Christ as our person savior?" or "Is it important that we invite Him in our heart", I have something very in different in mind than merely the fact that He died for our sins 2,000 years ago.  Do you know that is? (that I have in mind)

Unless you tell me, how would I know what is in your mind, brother?

[Wingnut]

2 minutes ago, Samie said:

Unless you tell me, how would I know what is in your mind, brother?

This is what is on Pnatt's mind.

"Do you think it is important to know Jesus Christ as your personal Savior? To invite Him into your heart?"

I don't think that question needs any further clarification.  But it requires a better answer from you.  Such as "Yes!"

 

[Samie]

4 minutes ago, Wingnut said:

This is what is on Pnatt's mind.

"Do you think it is important to know Jesus Christ as your personal Savior? To invite Him into your heart?"

I don't think that question needs any further clarification.  But it requires a better answer from you.  Such as "Yes!"

So, this earlier post of mine did not appear to you as a Yes answer to his question?

5 hours ago, Samie said:

As pointed out in an earlier thread, when the One New Man was created on the cross, both Jews and Gentiles became part of the Body of Christ and members of the household or family of God (Eph 2:11-19). In one big family, not everyone has the same ability, hence not the same responsibility.  It’s the parents who decide what responsibility to give to a specific child at any stage of his development. But good parents assign only those responsibilities that are commensurate with a child’s abilities. So with each of us in this big family of God. Our Father in heaven makes sure that the spiritual responsibilities we have is commensurate with our spiritual level of maturity.

The Ethiopian eunuch is one good example.

This son of God traveled more than a thousand miles to Jerusalem to worship our Father in heaven.  He had no plans to meet with Philip whom he does not know; neither did Philip had plans to meet with him and did not know him either. Their meeting was God’s plan. I can only surmise that because God has seen that this son of his has grown up into such a level of spiritual level of maturity, He decides it is for the eunuch’s best interest to know Christ and Him crucified.  So He worked out how the eunuch can be taught his new responsibility using Philip for this purpose.  And the good son responded positively.

Is it important to know Christ as our personal Savior? Of course, it is important. Why would it not be?  Just like asking, is it important for children to know their parents do their best for their welfare? But, important as it is, not everyone in the family knows about this. There are even those who don’t know the names of their parents. The infants do not. And there are infants in Christ in this big family of God. 

But when these infants have grown up and reached that spiritual level of maturity where our good Father in heaven determines they need to know about Christ, then He will commission His “Philips” to accomplish His purpose.  Those who positively respond, like the eunuch, are the overcomers.  Those who refuse are non-overcomers.  And only overcomers will not be blotted out from the BOL.

 

[Wingnut]

24 minutes ago, Samie said:

So, this earlier post of mine did not appear to you as a Yes answer to his question?

 

Samie referred to this previous answer......

"Is it important to know Christ as our personal Savior? Of course, it is important. Why would it not be?  Just like asking, is it important for children to know their parents do their best for their welfare? But, important as it is, not everyone in the family knows about this."

 

It is not an unqualified "Yes" to me.  It hardly passes as a "yes".  It is the weakest attempt at a "yes".

This can be seen from what follows.  

1)  Ask a question to evade the issue "Why would it not be?"

2) Now you actually quantify the importance saying "Just like asking, is it important for children to know their parents do their best for their welfare?"

What is wrong with this is that it is nice to know your parents, but many children grow up fine not knowing their parents.  

BUT NOBODY GROWS UP FINE NOT KNOWING GOD.

Thus the only answer acceptable to me is one which starts with an unqualified "YES!!!" not one which has parables and stories.

3) Then you add "But, important as it is, not everyone in the family knows about this."

I think you are saying, "But not everyone in the human family knows about their Heavenly Father".

So it's not essential after all "to know Jesus Christ as your personal Savior? To invite Him into your heart".

Your weak, reluctant, qualified and dragged out profession of a need to know Christ as your personal Saviour has therefore been utterly nullified, and is null and void.

So no, your answer to this question is utterly unsatisfactory to me.  But I don't count.  Give that answer to Christ and see what He thinks of it.

 

 

[8thdaypriest]

On 10/27/2015, 11:49:33, pnattmbtc said:

This is an important question, and I think there's an answer to this which makes sense.  From Romans 1 (and other places as well) and the SOP I quoted from DA 638, there will be some who will be saved who have not had the Gospel explicilty preached to them as Paul preached it, for example.  Well, first of all, by digression, let me ask, how does anyone hear the Gospel in a way that saves?  It must be through the Holy Spirit, and if we consider Abraham for example, we can see it's possible for a heathen to be saved, without having access to the Scriptures, because God is able to preach the Gospel directly to whomever as needed.  And, indeed, if any of us are saved, it is because God Himself has preached the Gospel to us; He may use human beings, or Scripture, or some other means to do so, but if we are saved, it will be because we have believed the Gospel that God Himself has preached to us (Galatians 3, for example, deals with this idea).

Now back to the question, if people can be saved without our doing something, like preach to them, then why should we preach to them?  First of all, just becaus someone *might* be saved without our preaching the Gospel to them, do not mean the *will* be saved.  There may well be people who will be lost because of our actions.  I think a lot of the tears being wiped away will have to do with this sad fact.  It is reality that what we do makes a difference.

Secondly, what is the purpose of communicating the Gospel to others?  It is that they may more of God, that they may know the wondeful truth about who He is, and what He has done for them in giving the most awesome of all gifts, His Son.  Just on the face of it, how can we keep quiet regarding such news?  And the truth is that people's lives are certainly better hearing and believing the Good News than not.

This applies perfectly to those who will ENTER the Kingdom at the 8th millennium, who were resurrected as individuals from "the rest of the dead".

To resurrect an infant or young child into the Kingdom,with eternal life, means the LORD must manipulate the mind of that child, so that he continues to live in harmony with the principles of the Kingdom - NOT BY CHOICE, NOT because he understands those principles, but because the LORD is controlling to prevent any - even the slightest, variance from the LORD's revealed will.  A young child cannot even understand the LORD's will, therefore an override would be necessary UNTIL understanding can kick in. 

I do NOT believe our LORD is a manipulator.  How much easier to resurrect all children into the Kingdom - with flesh - not immortal spiritual bodies, then allow them to "grow up", to learn, to hear the truths of God - THEN CHOOSE whom they will serve.  No manipulation necessary.  After their final choice, they can be given immortality, or die at Gog/Magog.

 

[8thdaypriest]

Last night I was listening to that great old hymn, "Amazing Grace".  I realized that this hymn would NOT be true, if Samie is correct.

"I once was LOST, but now am FOUND", WAS BLIND but now I see."

Samie's version would be "I once was saved, and now I'm still saved, was blind, but that was ok, and now I see more." 

Just doesn't have the same heart. 

[Samie]

6 minutes ago, Wingnut said:

What is wrong with this is that it is nice to know your parents, but many children grow up fine not knowing their parents.  

BUT NOBODY GROWS UP FINE NOT KNOWING GOD.

If I remember right, I was one among those who gave you Scriptures telling us God gave the ability to all to know about Him, and hence no one is excused from not knowing Him.

^NKJ Romans 1:18-20   ¹⁸ For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,  ¹⁹ because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.  ²⁰ For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse

But I guess you did not require your newborn to know your name right away, did you? Did he grow up fine till one year old not knowing your name?

[Samie]

3 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Last night I was listening to that great old hymn, "Amazing Grace".  I realized that this hymn would NOT be true, if Samie is correct.

"I once was LOST, but now am FOUND", WAS BLIND but now I see."

Samie's version would be "I once was saved, and now I'm still saved, was blind, but that was ok, and now I see more." 

Just doesn't have the same heart. 

One is lost when he strays. When he strays, that means he was once in the right way. But we strayed. We need to overcome the evil of being in the wrong way, and be in the right way again.

[Wingnut]

2 minutes ago, Samie said:

If I remember right, I was one among those who gave you Scriptures telling us God gave the ability to all to know about Him, and hence no one is excused from not knowing Him.

^NKJ Romans 1:18-20   ¹⁸ For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,  ¹⁹ because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.  ²⁰ For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse

But I guess you did not require your newborn to know your name right away, did you? Did he grow up fine till one year old not knowing your name?

One CANNOT know God through knowing the creation (rambles through nature).

One knows Christ by having a personal relationship with Him.  This is no philosophical knowledge.

Samie, nothing you say will distract me from the fact that you don't see a personal relationship with Christ as ESSENTIAL.  Anything else is bulk filler.

[Samie]

1 minute ago, Wingnut said:

One CANNOT know God through knowing the creation (rambles through nature).

One knows Christ by having a personal relationship with Him.  This is no philosophical knowledge.

Samie, nothing you say will distract me from the fact that you don't see a personal relationship with Christ as ESSENTIAL.  Anything else is bulk filler.

My posts are clear as to my position. You may consider them as junk, if you want to. It's your right and I respect it.

[Wingnut]

4 minutes ago, Samie said:

My posts are clear as to my position. You may consider them as junk, if you want to. It's your right and I respect it.

Any response which does not address a personal relationship with Christ achieves nothing except to prolong the thread.  

I never used the word "junk".  I say you are padding your responses, hoping I will forget the important question.

[Samie]

3 minutes ago, Wingnut said:

Any response which does not address a personal relationship with Christ achieves nothing except to prolong the thread.  

I never used the word "junk".  I say you are padding your responses, hoping I will forget the important question.

Your problem is in not seeing that my position talks of us as being ALREADY in Christ, because of what God through Christ has done for us ALL at the cross.  Is that not personal relationship?  Does the infant have no personal relationship with his mom just because the infant does not know her mother's name yet?

[Wingnut]

If you were to ask me about the importance of my personal relationship with Jesus and God, I would not be evasive.

I would say it is the most important thing in my life,  I would happily lose everything including my life, than lose my love walk with Him.  I talk to Him.  He talks to me.  I have known God since the earliest memories of my life.  This relationship is what I would wish on everyone.

Even your last post above speaks to a philosophical, theoretical relationship which all are somehow born into equally. 

This has nothing to do with a personal relationship with Christ.