The woman caught in adultery

January 3, 2016

31 minutes ago, jackson said:

.You act incredulous at my post but you still have not answered why many in Paul's audience were still under the law after Christ's death ( 1 Cor 19:20)

You mean 1 Cor 9:20

20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law.

When you receive Christ by faith you go from under law to under grace, but what you are receiving happened 2000 years ago "in Christ Jesus". It is a finished work. Your faith doesn't make it so, for it already was accomplished in the doing and dying of Christ.

As to Ellen White:

Quote

Was the human nature of the Son of Mary changed into the divine nature of the Son of God? No; the two natures were mysteriously blended in one person—the man Christ Jesus. In Him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. When Christ was crucified, it was His human nature that died. Deity did not sink and die; that would have been impossible. Christ, the sinless One, will save every son and daughter of Adam who accepts the salvation proffered them, consenting to become the children of God. The Saviour has purchased the fallen race with His own blood.

This is a great mystery, a mystery that will not be fully, completely understood in all its greatness until the translation of the redeemed shall take place. Then the power and greatness and efficacy of the gift of God to man will be understood. But the enemy is determined that this gift shall be so mystified that it will become as nothingness (Letter 280, 1904).

January 3, 2016

1 hour ago, jackson said:

Of course what you may now receive is due to what happened 2000 years ago, but so what . What the sinner has to know is how does he appropriate this gift unto himself. How does he make it his own?

Then what you are stating is Christ's finished work is meaningless until we respond.

Tell that to those who are saved, but yet do not even know the name of Christ.

Tell that to all those who died before they could exercise faith, yet are saved and will be in Christ's kingdom.

Yes, to the one who knows of Christ and rejects His finished work, he or she is under the curse.

January 4, 2016

On 1/1/2016 at 10:00 AM, Wingnut said:

Please ignore the above; This is JoeMo and not a quote from Wingnut. I cant make this box go away; and I can't type below it. The only way I can put a meaningful mental construct around how salvation is "fair" to all is to go with 8thdaypriest's "*th Day study, found on her website. I won't attempt to regurgitate it here.

January 4, 2016

5 hours ago, jackson said:

First of all , His work was not finished at the cross, for He is our High priest in the sanctuary above and ever liveth to make intercession for us.

Oh, I see, so when Christ said "It is finished" He didn't really mean what He cried out?

When God the Father rested the 7th-day from His perfect and complete work "in Christ" that rest was really only a 20 min nap then back to work again?

Here's Paul:

Therefore, when He came into the world, He said: “Sacrifice and offering You did not desire, But a body You have prepared for Me. In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You had no pleasure. Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come—In the volume of the book it is written of Me—To do Your will, O God.’”...By that will (i.e., by Christ's doing & dying) we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. [Heb 10:5-7,10]

But of Him (God the Father) you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God—and our justification and sanctification and redemption (i.e., glorification) [1 Cor 1:30]

In Christ you already stand justified, sanctified and glorified!

That's a finished work.

Now let me quote Ellen White:

Perfection through our own good works we can never attain. The soul who sees Jesus by faith, repudiates his own righteousness. He sees himself as incomplete, his repentance insufficient, his strongest faith but feebleness, his most costly sacrifice as meager, and he sinks in humility at the foot of the cross. But a voice speaks to him from the oracles of God's word. In amazement he hears the message, "Ye are complete in him". Now all is at rest in his soul. No longer must he strive to find some worthiness in himself, some meritorious deed by which to gain the favor of God.

If you are incomplete, if you repentance is really insufficient and your strongest faith, feeble, and your most selfless act, meager, then you aren't good enough to enter heaven. Where then are you good enough? Answer: In Christ Jesus. You are complete "in Him" and He thus represents the sinner in Himself before God and His holy law.

Quote

Secondly, it has not been revealed how God saves or condemns those who have not heard the gospel

To those who can't comprehend the gospel, cognitively, the Bible does reveal:

Rom 5:18 So then as through one transgression (Adam's) there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness (Christ's, the 2nd Adam) there resulted justification of life to all men.

As to those who have never heard the gospel:

Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

Quote

We also know that everyone is born with a measure of faith and Christ lighteth everyone that comes into the world. (Rom 12:3 and John 1:9)

"God has allotted to each a measure of faith."

"That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world."

I agree, this is in line with Romans 1:20, but it can't include anyone who cannot comprehend the gospel, cognitively.

The good news, my man, is better than you think!

Robert

January 4, 2016

On 1/1/2016 at 9:59 AM, Robert said:

Then doesn't this imply that Christ wasn't progressive in the OT? Is that problematic because of Himself He said, "I change not"?

Justice never rests on grace. For example if the policeman tears up your speeding ticket he is breaking the law he was employed to enforce!

So really the question, in my mind, remains unanswered:

Why wasn't mercy extended in the OT towards the man gathering wood on the Sabbath, but in the NT not once did Christ demand the sinner's death for the transgression of the law?

Just coming from Egyptian slavery, just being "newborn" as a nation, the LORD had to enforce the Law (Covenant) He had just given. Not to enforce His newly given Law, would have nullified it. The people would have no respect for the Law, or for the God who gave it. These were people - for the most part at level 2 on the moral maturity development chart. I'm referring to Kholberg's Stages of Moral Development. I have a study on my website, which looks at Yahweh's relationship with Israel, in light of Kholberg's Stages.

http://www.prophecyviewpoint.com/htdocs/37-Kholberg.pdf

Rachel Cory, prophecyviewpoint.com

January 4, 2016

On 1/1/2016 at 0:11 PM, Robert said:

That's not a yes or no answer.

For example, infants who die before the age of accountability are saved, but they didn't know or could they accept Christ as their personal Savior.

And folks in heathen lands, who didn't know Jesus as their personal Savior, but through what was created believed in that which they didn't know, will also be saved.

This one has been debated in other threads, many times!! Whenever I see you restate your belief, I feel I must respond with mine.

I believe that one MUST hear the truth and RESPOND to the truth with BELIEF. Infants cannot believe. Mentally disabled folks cannot believe. Ignorant pagans cannot believe, because they have not HEARD. None of such people can be given eternal life - not UNTIL they BELIEVE.

Which means they must be resurrected to continue their physical lives, must then be taught the truths of God, and then must BELIEVE - before they can be given eternal life.

I believe all of those who did not have the maturity, or the information to CHOOSE, during their physical lifetimes, will be resurrected at the 8th millennium, as "the rest of the dead". They will then HEAR the truths of God, and then have to CHOOSE whether they will worship and serve Christ of LORD. Those who refuse will come up as the army of Gog/Magog. God will defend His City, with fire.

The final Great White Throne judgment, and the final "lake of fire" will come AFTER the Gog/Magog Battle.

I refer you to the studies at my website prophecyviewpoint.com

January 4, 2016

On 1/1/2016 at 2:20 PM, Wingnut said:

As an aside...

I don't see the difference between this woman caught in adultery and the woman of Samaria whom Christ spoke to at the well who had 5 "husbands". Did he condemn her?

Did Christ condemn any of the sinners He interacted with? Truly, Christ came not to condemn, but to save.

John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

I seems we are talking about the ROLE of Christ at different times. WHEN He incarnated as a human being, to live a perfect life and die a perfect death, He was not - at that time - the judge or executioner of justice. WHEN He returns in glory, THEN He will be coming to act as judge, and as the executioner of judgment.

Because He did not execute anyone, or call for their execution, WHILE He lived on earth as a man, does NOT MEAN that God's Law had been set aside.

When Jesus fulfilled the TERMS of the Sinai Covenant, He then would "inherit the land". He would rule "the land" of Israel, and Israel would "rule the nations".

Jesus would recover the DOMINION which Adam lost to Satan. With the DOMINION comes the right to rule over everything within that dominion. With the DOMINION comes the right to say just who will be welcome to live within His DOMINION, and who will not. Hence the right to judge.

The right to judge comes with the DOMINION. (Christ was NOT given DOMINION right after He returned to Heaven.)

Christ does NOT YET have the DOMINION. It will be given to Him at the judgment of Daniel 7, which does not take place until the END of 3.5 years of persecution, at the "time of the end".

Daniel 7:14 "Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, That all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, Which shall not pass away, And His kingdom the one Which shall not be destroyed."

Concerning those who are to share in Christ's dominion: "Then the kingdom and dominion, And the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven, Shall be given to the people, the saints of the Most High. His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, And all dominions shall serve and obey Him." (Dan 7:27)

Concerning Satan: Daniel 7:26 "But the court shall be seated, And they shall take away his dominion, To consume and destroy it forever."

_____________________

DURING THE TIME OF ISRAEL (before they had a King): This was a theocracy. The Son of God - serving as mediator for the Father, DID act as lawgiver, as judge and as executioner (in some instances). God had dominion over Israel, BECAUSE they had entered into a Covenant with Him.

_____________________

I repeat: We have to consider the different time periods, when we look at the actions of Christ at different TIMES.

January 4, 2016

On 1/1/2016 at 4:07 PM, Robert said:

I like the way you think.

Jesus as God never died. You know that, right? Even Ellen White states this Biblical fact:

"Humanity died; divinity did not die"

Whose humanity?

Answer: Our fallen, humanity that all of us share with Adam.

That's why Paul states, "our old life was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with" (Rom 6:6) because "when One died, all died" (2 Cor 5:14). Christ's death as the son of man was a corporate death. It involved our corporate life from Adam. That life, our life, died in the humanity of Christ.

Hence has far as the law is concerned, justice has been served and through faith we as individuals do not have to experience the 2nd death. We have been delivered from the curse of the law, legally!!!!

Here we go AGAIN! This has been debated in at least six threads, that I know of. Probably more, if you count all of Samie's threads.

January 4, 2016

On 1/2/2016 at 10:15 PM, Robert said:

Paul thoroughly and unequivocally disagrees with your position:

Romans 7:4 "you also died to the law through the body of Christ"

In order for God the Father to legally deliver you from under law (i.e., condemnation) your old life had to die in the humanity of Christ. Once that occurred you were legally delivered from under condemnation to a state of grace and forgiveness.

The verse from Romans 7:4 is ADDRESSED to believers at Rome.

"you[believers] also died to the law [in the eyes of the Law] through [belief in] the body of Christ".

"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you shall be saved." (Acts 16:31).

Romans 10:9 "if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved"

January 4, 2016

On 1/1/2016 at 1:20 PM, Wingnut said:

Did Christ condemn any of the sinners He interacted with? Truly, Christ came not to condemn, but to save.

John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Quote

8th day: It seems we are talking about the ROLE of Christ at different times. WHEN He incarnated as a human being, to live a perfect life and die a perfect death, He was not - at that time - the judge or executioner of justice. WHEN He returns in glory, THEN He will be coming to act as judge, and as the executioner of judgment.

This is sort of an aside to Wingnut's aside, but it seems to me that Christ's teaching had to do with condemnation not being something imposed upon others by God, or Christ, but that condemnation is brought about by the unbeliver himself. In the context of John 3:17, it says this very thing, and elsewhere Jesus said that He would not judge/condemn anyone, but that His words would accomplish this:

Quote

If anyone hears My words and does not believe, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him— the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day. " John 12:47-48

I understand this to mean what I stated above, that the condemnation which comes upon unbelievers is not an imposed sentence from God, or Christ, but reflects reality; the unbeliever has destroyed himself by his unbelief; his refusal to come to Christ.

January 4, 2016

Quote

Robert: Now according to 1 John 1:8 & Romans 3:23 (and other texts) everyone has sinned and therefore there is none without sin.

The question is why did God allow sinners to execute sinners in the OT, but in the context above opposed the execution of the adulteress?

What comes to my mind is the following:

Quote

Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. Matt. 19:8

That is, there are many things which happened in the Old Testament which are not representative of God's will (i.e. God's ultimate/perfect/ideal will, as opposed to God's permissive will). Only in the revelation of Jesus Christ to we see God's will perfectly revealed.

January 4, 2016

5 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Which means they must be resurrected to continue their physical lives, must then be taught the truths of God, and then must BELIEVE - before they can be given eternal life.

Right, you've stated that before, but you can't find this concept in the Bible and therefore I have to reject it.

January 4, 2016

4 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Here we go AGAIN! This has been debated in at least six threads, that I know of. Probably more, if you count all of Samie's threads.

Yes, because the gospel is the most important doctrine in the NT. It is everything!

January 4, 2016

4 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

The verse from Romans 7:4 is ADDRESSED to believers at Rome.

"you[believers] also died to the law [in the eyes of the Law] through [belief in] the body of Christ".

Then only the Romans will be saved..... teehee

BTW, your comments in brackets do not agree with the context. You make the gospel conditional good news, not good news....

January 4, 2016

1 hour ago, pnattmbtc said:

That is, there are many things which happened in the Old Testament which are not representative of God's will (i.e. God's ultimate/perfect/ideal will, as opposed to God's permissive will). Only in the revelation of Jesus Christ to we see God's will perfectly revealed.

Okay....

January 4, 2016

5 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Just coming from Egyptian slavery, just being "newborn" as a nation, the LORD had to enforce the Law (Covenant) He had just given. Not to enforce His newly given Law, would have nullified it. The people would have no respect for the Law, or for the God who gave it. These were people - for the most part at level 2 on the moral maturity development chart. I'm referring to Kholberg's Stages of Moral Development. I have a study on my website, which looks at Yahweh's relationship with Israel, in light of Kholberg's Stages.

http://www.prophecyviewpoint.com/htdocs/37-Kholberg.pdf

Rachel Cory, prophecyviewpoint.com

I'm in 100% agreement. I've heard that a number of times, from Doug Batchelor, Steven Bore(sp), Steve Wahlberg, etc.

January 5, 2016

1 hour ago, Robert said:

Right, you've stated that before, but you can't find this concept in the Bible and therefore I have to reject it.

The "rest of the dead" DO live "again". The only way to do THAT, is to be resurrected.

The question is: "Who are the rest of the dead?"

You CANNOT PROVE from Scripture that they are all of the condemned, from 6000 years since Adam sinned.

January 5, 2016

6 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Here we go AGAIN! This has been debated in at least six threads, that I know of. Probably more, if you count all of Samie's threads.

Quote

Robert: Yes, because the gospel is the most important doctrine in the NT. It is everything!

I think common agreement could be found on the point that the gospel is everything, but it is rather odd to conceive of the fate of newborns, about which the Bible is almost completely silent, as being the essence of, or an essential to, the gospel. There are many similar sidelights, such as marriage in heaven, and lots of other things regarding which one can speculate, but what God has inspired writers to communicate regarding the gospel concerns primarily the person of Jesus Christ.

Regarding Rachel's view, I have a similar concern regarding the lack of scriptural evidence for it, however what is appealing to me regarding her view is that it is reasonable, by which I mean, that God would proceed in the manner which Rachel suggests is reasonable; there is nothing arbitrary about it. The idea that God will take all to heaven if they are ignorant smacks of being arbitrary.

What Ellen White suggests is there is a group of people who will not be resurrected, because they were not responsible for their actions (e.g., not being able to reason). This is an explanation which appeals to one's reason. What Rachel suggests also appeals to one's reason (meaning that such who were unable to make a choice during this lifetime will be given a chance later on). To suggest that an entire of class of people, those who cannot reason, will be taken to heaven, does not appeal to one's reason. Why should not being able to reason result in eternal life?

January 5, 2016

2 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

The "rest of the dead" DO live "again". The only way to do THAT, is to be resurrected.

The question is: "Who are the rest of the dead?"

You CANNOT PROVE from Scripture that they are all of the condemned, from 6000 years since Adam sinned.

Here's the difference between your view and my view:. Your view comes from a highly symbolic book. My view comes from straight from the Apostle Paul. One is symbolic and needs interpreting; the other is clear and needs no interpretation.

January 5, 2016

2 hours ago, pnattmbtc said:

I think common agreement could be found on the point that the gospel is everything, but it is rather odd to conceive of the fate of newborns, about which the Bible is almost completely silent, as being the essence of, or an essential to, the gospel.

I don't believe that I linked newborns and their salvation as being the essence of the gospel.

The gospel is how Christ legally saved the human race in Himself while remaining true to His own law that condemns the sinner.

Quote

which the Bible is almost completely silent

It's only silent if you can't see the truth as it is "in Christ". Clearly what Christ did saved the human race. It was a one time event and therefore a finished work. Because of His finished work our condemnation in Adam has been reversed "in Christ" and therefore we enter this world justified unto life (see Rom 5:18/Eph 2:5,6).

Here's Ellen White's view:

"the faith of the believing parents covers the children"

"Whether all the children of unbelieving parents will be saved we cannot tell, because God has not made known His purpose in regard to this matter...."

Well, I disagree with her position. For one she is not the final word; neither am I.

How can the faith of another person save some else? Remember "faith" is not the Savior. Christ is the Savior. I cannot believe for someone else. If I could then I am the vessel of salvation for that person and to me that is blasphemy. Only God can save....

January 5, 2016

11 hours ago, Robert said:

I don't believe that I linked newborns and their salvation as being the essence of the gospel.

When Rachel about this point, that you keep bringing it up, you defended yourself by saying this was the Gospel, or something like that.

January 5, 2016

Quote

The gospel is how Christ legally saved the human race in Himself while remaining true to His own law that condemns the sinner.

Can you show this as being the case from any of the Gospels?

January 5, 2016

Quote

"the faith of the believing parents covers the children"

"Whether all the children of unbelieving parents will be saved we cannot tell, because God has not made known His purpose in regard to this matter...."

Well, I disagree with her position. For one she is not the final word; neither am I.

How can the faith of another person save some else? Remember "faith" is not the Savior. Christ is the Savior. I cannot believe for someone else. If I could then I am the vessel of salvation for that person and to me that is blasphemy. Only God can save....

When one says she is not the final word, what is being discussed certainly is important to consider. For example, regarding the statement, "because God has not made known His purpose in regard to this matter," this is the type of statement where she is the final world, given that she is not misrepresenting her role.

Regarding how the faith of one saves another, it makes sense if one views the role of the parent in terms of influence as opposed to legally.

Your entire paradigm looks to be only legal. This is an area where our views differ greatly. I think the legal issues (by which I mean "forensic") are incidental, not essential. What is essential is what John articulates in John 1:18, that no one has seen God at any time, but His only begotten Son has declared Him.

January 5, 2016

12 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

Can you show this as being the case from any of the Gospels?

The gospels, primarily, gives us an account of Christ's life. Paul was chosen by God the Father and Christ to explain the mechanics of the gospel. So why not stay with Paul?

January 5, 2016

17 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

When Rachel about this point, that you keep bringing it up, you defended yourself by saying this was the Gospel, or something like that.

The gospel is more than just Christ's justification of infants....The gospel incorporates the whole, fallen human race.

Sign In

The woman caught in adultery

Recommended Posts

Robert

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Tom Wetmore

Tom Wetmore

JoeMo

Robert

JoeMo

Robert

8thdaypriest

8thdaypriest

8thdaypriest

8thdaypriest

8thdaypriest

pnattmbtc

pnattmbtc

Robert

Robert

Robert

Robert

phkrause

8thdaypriest

pnattmbtc

Robert

Robert

pnattmbtc

pnattmbtc

pnattmbtc

Robert

Robert

Browse

Activity