ECT There is one Gospel/salvation, Heb 2:3

[SaulToPaul 2]

There is a thread here about them not knowing about his death until it actually happened. That is a MAD fabrication, among others. I believe it is one of Jerry's. It says that they never heard of that until the post Trans announcement, and then they rejected it/had it hidden from them. To me that is starting the drama with the first 2 chapters deleted.

Amateur psychology, unbelief.

 

[God's Truth]

There is a thread here about them not knowing about his death until it actually happened. That is a MAD fabrication, among others. I believe it is one of Jerry's. It says that they never heard of that until the post Trans announcement, and then they rejected it/had it hidden from them. To me that is starting the drama with the first 2 chapters deleted.

Most of them are Galilean, 1-2 of them are actual zealots. That group especially needed to change from its zealot ways. (In the Jerusalem region, most people just acquiesced to Roman control; a major revolt had started under Judas the Galilean in the year of the Lk 2 census and is mentioned in Acts 5.) A crucified Messiah did not suit their tastes.

All rebels/insurrectionists/zealots were crucified. Some 2000 were executed that way in the year Christ was crucified. That's why the trial of Jesus has a foment to it that is a regular scene; his was not the only trial of its kind by any means, and Pilate truly could not pin down anything wrong about him, like he could have many others and Bar-abbas. Note in Mt 2:22 that all through his childhood, policing the zealots was a high priority, enough to relocate his parents upon their return from Egypt.

Okay, right, the Romans did not want the Savior of the Jews (whom all knew was coming), would go against their rule and king.

So while Jesus kept himself distinct from the zealots, there is a bit of Galilean resentment for Jerusalem that comes through in his crucifixion, because he should have been released by current trial standards. God meant for him to be counted as one of the evil ones, symbolic of the general condition of mankind. Is 53:9, 12.

It was the Jews who now wanted Jesus killed, because they thought that they would lose their temple and their nation.

John 11:47 Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the Sanhedrin.

“What are we accomplishing?” they asked. “Here is this man performing many signs. 48 If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our temple and our nation.”

49 Then one of them, named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, “You know nothing at all! 50 You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.”

51 He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation, 52 and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring them together and make them one. 53 So from that day on they plotted to take his life.


Now this is how I see it; Caiaphas the high priest dreams that Jesus would die---however, Caiaphas does not understand that it is for the forgiveness of sins, but rather he thinks Jesus is going to die so that the Romans will not take away their temple and their nation.


However, the Pharisees and teachers of the law did not understand what the other Jews who had faith in Jesus understood.

The Pharisees and teachers of the law were the Jews who were cut off and hardened.

But what the disciples expected was a Messiah who would not be treated that way. Would not get caught as a secret zealot. Would organize enough of a resistance to provide overwhelming force, etc. And then be the king. And all this would be supernatural, miraculous.

It is OK for MADs to say (like Jerry) that Mt 16:16 is that kind of Christ EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT HIS DEATH AND TRUE MISSION WAS ALREADY EXPRESSED. MADs try to say they were not. They read the songs of Lk 1-2 in the same non-Christian sense as those materials that are from the exile. RD says the old covenant continues until the death of Christ--even in how a person is supposed to read the synoptics (you can't really do this in John).

Okay then, from what I hear you saying is that the madists are confusing all Jews with each other instead of separating the lost sheep from those without faith, who would be the Jewish leaders.

There is no denying that the lost sheep of Israel believed in Jesus and his ability to forgive sins. It is the Jewish leaders who could not understand and believe, even though this too was somewhat hard for the disciples to fully understand until after Jesus' resurrection. The disciples had teachings and knowledge that the Jewish leaders did not understand at all.

The obvious questions arise: how did Mt 1:21 get written, then? Was Matthew adding it back in after the fact because Christ told him to? Wasn't it already there?--that is the plain meaning of the text.

Even the Samaritan woman recognized Jesus as the Savior of the world. John the baptizer shouted it out that he was the Lamb of God.

What can you explain to me more? Thank you for helping me understand Madism more.

 

[Interplanner]

Okay, right, the Romans did not want the Savior of the Jews (whom all knew was coming), would go against their rule and king.

It was the Jews who now wanted Jesus killed, because they thought that they would lose their temple and their nation.

John 11:47 Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the Sanhedrin.

“What are we accomplishing?” they asked. “Here is this man performing many signs. 48 If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our temple and our nation.”

49 Then one of them, named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, “You know nothing at all! 50 You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.”

51 He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation, 52 and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring them together and make them one. 53 So from that day on they plotted to take his life.


Now this is how I see it; Caiaphas the high priest dreams that Jesus would die---however, Caiaphas does not understand that it is for the forgiveness of sins, but rather he thinks Jesus is going to die so that the Romans will not take away their temple and their nation.


However, the Pharisees and teachers of the law did not understand what the other Jews who had faith in Jesus understood.

The Pharisees and teachers of the law were the Jews who were cut off and hardened.




Okay then, from what I hear you saying is that the madists are confusing all Jews with each other instead of separating the lost sheep from those without faith, who would be the Jewish leaders.

There is no denying that the lost sheep of Israel believed in Jesus and his ability to forgive sins. It is the Jewish leaders who could not understand and believe, even though this too was somewhat hard for the disciples to fully understand until after Jesus' resurrection. The disciples had teachings and knowledge that the Jewish leaders did not understand at all.


Even the Samaritan woman recognized Jesus as the Savior of the world. John the baptizer shouted it out that he was the Lamb of God.

What can you explain to me more? Thank you for helping me understand Madism more.

The only thing I can think to add right now has to do with the Jewish leaders being misguided/lost. It can't just be them. The zealots were also a problem. So much that the influence of the zealots on the 12 made them reject his crucifixion. Something happened between the start and the Confession/Transfiguration so that what they knew of the cross was despised and rejected when Jesus made a point of making it clear that that's where he was going.

But if, like Jerry, you just pick up Lk 18 on their unwareness/hiddenness, it makes it sound like they were that way all along.

Both leaders of Judaism and zealots rejected what Christ claimed. But the zealot rejection was far more inflammatory when it came to Rome, because zealots wanted an overthrow and independence. People around Jerusalem were willing to do dual-worship--payment (tax) to Rome for the right to worship, even though such payment was considered by Rome to be honoring its deities.

 

[God's Truth]

The only thing I can think to add right now has to do with the Jewish leaders being misguided/lost.

Of course, the Jewish zealots were the part of the Jews who were cut off and hardened. They are the Jews who could not hear Jesus and be saved WHILE Jesus walked the earth. When Jesus was crucified that is when all could come to him to be saved.

It can't just be them. The zealots were also a problem. So much that the influence of the zealots on the 12 made them reject his crucifixion.

No, as I said, Jews were cut off. Which Jews were cut off? All the Jews who did not have faith and who did not follow Jesus. The zealots did not follow Jesus. They were cut off and hardened Jews.

Something happened between the start and the Confession/Transfiguration so that what they knew of the cross was despised and rejected when Jesus made a point of making it clear that that's where he was going.

But if, like Jerry, you just pick up Lk 18 on their unwareness/hiddenness, it makes it sound like they were that way all along.

You lost me there because I said Jesus taught it to the Jews who were NOT cut off and hardened.

Both leaders of Judaism and zealots rejected what Christ claimed.

As I said before, Jesus came for lost sheep of Israel. Those are the people who already belonged to God by faith. Faith was going to be the bases for the new covenant. The old law did not require faith. Some Jews had faith and some did not; however, all Jews were expected to obey.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

The only thing I can think to add right now has to do with the Jewish leaders being misguided/lost. It can't just be them. The zealots were also a problem. So much that the influence of the zealots on the 12 made them reject his crucifixion. Something happened between the start and the Confession/Transfiguration so that what they knew of the cross was despised and rejected when Jesus made a point of making it clear that that's where he was going.

But if, like Jerry, you just pick up Lk 18 on their unwareness/hiddenness, it makes it sound like they were that way all along.

Both leaders of Judaism and zealots rejected what Christ claimed. But the zealot rejection was far more inflammatory when it came to Rome, because zealots wanted an overthrow and independence. People around Jerusalem were willing to do dual-worship--payment (tax) to Rome for the right to worship, even though such payment was considered by Rome to be honoring its deities.

Amateur psychology, humanism, unbelief.

 

[Interplanner]

GT wrote:
No, as I said, Jews were cut off. Which Jews were cut off? All the Jews who did not have faith and who did not follow Jesus. The zealots did not follow Jesus. They were cut off and hardened Jews.

Not all Jews were cut off.

2, the zealots were 'leaders' in a sense, but not the ones identified in the scenes in the gospel accounts.




GT also wrote:
As I said before, Jesus came for lost sheep of Israel. Those are the people who already belonged to God by faith.

They wouldn't be lost if they already belonged by faith. They are lost in a different sense at that point. They are 'near' the law but can't see what it really means. They have the advantage of its background but the official leaders are misguiding them. Some historians say the official leaders were actually generating the zealots by perpetuating the belief in an actual monarchy in their own way.




But now, one more try about the background and denial of the disciples. They grew up in zealot infested places, and 2 of them were zealots, including the eventual betrayer. That background kept on, stayed intact, until it came to a head at the Confession/Transfiguration scenes, where it explodes in Peter the spokesperson. I think it is the 'unless you take up your cross line' that really causes the uproar. It is loaded with paradox, beyond just personal discipleship. The last thing they wanted to do was be one of the many zealots and malcontents crucified (ie caught by Roman admin). And Jesus did not mean that He (Jesus) was going to actually die as a failed/caught zealot. He meant that he was going to die sacrificially and that their "cross" was going to be the mission taking that message around and on to the world. That is the "cross" they were going to have to take up. The closest you get to this in the followers own words is Paul in Galatians, ch 2 and 6.

(This conflicts with today's popular 'discipleship' method of using this verse; so be it. The meaning of an expression depends entirely on the group to whom it is originally addressed. It did call for a self-denial among that kind of zealot-background person, and the particulars are quite different from the affluent, self-satisfied suburban college kid today).

So: what happened between the starting announcements and calls to discipleship by Jesus and the Con/Trans? It is an issue only in the synoptics; this is not an issue in John, which does not feature the Con/Trans the same way. Instead, there is Jn 6 which is where a following, that recently wanted to force him to be king, that gives up on him EXCEPT for the disciples, who solidly believe in his sacrificial death--they understand 'eating and drinking the flesh and blood of Christ.'. I have not resolved these two views myself.

I think in the synoptics they believed he was a miracle-Messiah who would surely be able to summon such powers in a conflict with Rome. They began blocking out anything that had heard about the Lamb, the dying for sins, the burial, etc. When the Con/Trans happened they were quite sure he was completely confused.

The problem with MAD here or with Jerry is not accounting for what happened from the start to the Con/Trans. The confusion the disciples claim to exist in Christ at the Con/Trans is believed by MAD and Jerry to be a decision made just then to die, never thought of before, based on an assessment that Israel had rejected Him. This is why Jerry makes a huge deal of a split between 'being the Christ' and 'dying for sins.' He thinks they are unrelated and has some Dallas Seminary quote to support it, which is ridiculous.

What was the rejection at the Con/Trans for? I don't know, because MAD and the two-program people have the whole plot so totally mixed up. I don't even know why wanting a monarchy would be the ground for rejecting him in a system that thinks he was going to set up a monarchy.

The synoptics texts give us a ground for rejecting him: that he returned to the original announcements that he was to perish sacrificially and NOT provide a independent, free Israel monarchy. That is why the disciples fled from him. As for the leaders of Judaism, it was the claim of being the anointed Messiah and Son of God figure from the OT. There is a slight overlap in the rejection, but the leaders of Judaism of that generation never wanted to be very vocal about having a separate king. Caiahphas (as you quoted) wanted to 'save' Israel grief by getting rid of Jesus, and appear helpful to Rome doing so.

This kind of stuff spirals so far out of control that I have even heard a two-program pastor say that before the millenium starts in the future, Jesus would be crucified again so that the Jews would have the chance to accept and believe that all over again! (Sorry I don't have the source on that.) He was trying to solve how Jews would be saved in the future when they don't believe any of the events of the Gospel actually happened as preached by the apostles. Talking about demanding signs!

 

[God's Truth]

The Jews were called the children of God.

These children of God had to obey many things to be able to be called children of God.

God gave commandments to Moses for the people of Israel.

These commandments were things for the Jews to do and for things not to do.

There were also another set of rules and regulations that the Jews had to do.

These other things were called works of the law.

The works of the law was called the purification/ceremonial works.

Those purification/ceremonial works were not based on faith, but all the Jews had to do those works just to be able to be near God's Spirit, His Spirit which was in the tent and later the temple.

All those who did not do the purification/ceremonial works were called UNCLEAN, and they were DEAD in their sins. They were enemies of God because they did not do these ceremonial/purification works.

God did not like it that the Jews could sin, give a sin offering to clean themselves, but not really be sorry for their sins. That is why God did not like their righteous acts of animal sacrifices. God said He would make a new covenant one day, and that a person would be made clean just by faith, and that the Gentiles would also be called His people just by their faith too.

That does NOT mean no one has to obey God anymore. It means that we do not have to clean ourselves.

When Jesus came to earth, he came to fulfill the Old Testament. The whole Old Testament was about Jesus. Jesus was going to give the guidelines and rules for the New Covenant. Then Jesus was going to be crucified and shed his blood that will clean us and reconcile us to God.

That is for Jews and Gentiles. Jesus' body makes the two men one.

When Jesus came to earth to give us the New Covenant, God had cut off the Jews who did not ALREADY had faith in Him. Remember, it did NOT take faith to be called a child of God in the old law, it took ceremonial works. Some Jews had faith and ceremonial works, and some Jews did NOT have faith and they did the ceremonial works. When Jesus came to earth and started his earthly ministry, only the Jews who already belonged to God by faith could they hear what Jesus was saying and believe. The other Jews, like the Pharisees and teachers of the law, the zealots, they were CUT OFF and HARDENED so that when Jesus came and talked, those Jews could not hear and understand. Jesus came first for those who already belonged to God by faith. They were God's and now they had to go through Jesus to remain God's. Jesus said he would not lose one that God gave him.

When Jesus was crucified, then all could come to him to be saved, but all in due time.

 

[Interplanner]

The Jews were called the children of God.

These children of God had to obey many things to be able to be called children of God.

God gave commandments to Moses for the people of Israel.

These commandments were things for the Jews to do and for things not to do.

There were also another set of rules and regulations that the Jews had to do.

These other things were called works of the law.

The works of the law was called the purification/ceremonial works.

Those purification/ceremonial works were not based on faith, but all the Jews had to do those works just to be able to be near God's Spirit, His Spirit which was in the tent and later the temple.

All those who did not do the purification/ceremonial works were called UNCLEAN, and they were DEAD in their sins. They were enemies of God because they did not do these ceremonial/purification works.

God did not like it that the Jews could sin, give a sin offering to clean themselves, but not really be sorry for their sins. That is why God did not like their righteous acts of animal sacrifices. God said He would make a new covenant one day, and that a person would be made clean just by faith, and that the Gentiles would also be called His people just by their faith too.

That does NOT mean no one has to obey God anymore. It means that we do not have to clean ourselves.

When Jesus came to earth, he came to fulfill the Old Testament. The whole Old Testament was about Jesus. Jesus was going to give the guidelines and rules for the New Covenant. Then Jesus was going to be crucified and shed his blood that will clean us and reconcile us to God.

That is for Jews and Gentiles. Jesus' body makes the two men one.

When Jesus came to earth to give us the New Covenant, God had cut off the Jews who did not ALREADY had faith in Him. Remember, it did NOT take faith to be called a child of God in the old law, it took ceremonial works. Some Jews had faith and ceremonial works, and some Jews did NOT have faith and they did the ceremonial works. When Jesus came to earth and started his earthly ministry, only the Jews who already belonged to God by faith could they hear what Jesus was saying and believe. The other Jews, like the Pharisees and teachers of the law, the zealots, they were CUT OFF and HARDENED so that when Jesus came and talked, those Jews could not hear and understand. Jesus came first for those who already belonged to God by faith. They were God's and now they had to go through Jesus to remain God's. Jesus said he would not lose one that God gave him.

When Jesus was crucified, then all could come to him to be saved, but all in due time.

Very good, GT!

The 2nd to last paragraph is great. The lost sheep of Israel is not all of them as a race/nation, but the ones who lived by faith in the midst of all those with the externality of Judaism in that generation.

Well done.

 

[God's Truth]

2, the zealots were 'leaders' in a sense, but not the ones identified in the scenes in the gospel accounts.

I already explained that the zealots were part of the cut off Jews. If they were not zealots, they would have believed in Jesus.

They wouldn't be lost if they already belonged by faith.

That is not so, for they were called ‘sheep’. Sheep is a name given to those whom God has saved. They were lost because they did not have a shepherd to shepherd them. They had the hypocrite Pharisees and teacher’s of the law.

They are lost in a different sense at that point. They are 'near' the law but can't see what it really means. They have the advantage of its background but the official leaders are misguiding them. Some historians say the official leaders were actually generating the zealots by perpetuating the belief in an actual monarchy in their own way.

The purification/ceremonial works had to be obeyed. There were Jews who had faith in God and they also did the ceremonial works, and then there were the Jews who obeyed the ceremonial works and did not have faith in God. God came first for those who already belonged to Him and He cut off the rest. Here is the scripture that says they were God’s:

John 17:6 "I have revealed you to those whom you gave me out of the world. They were yours; you gave them to me and they have obeyed your word.

The other Jews were cut off and hardened and could not hear Jesus to be saved at that time.

But now, one more try about the background and denial of the disciples. They grew up in zealot infested places, and 2 of them were zealots, including the eventual betrayer. That background kept on, stayed intact, until it came to a head at the Confession/Transfiguration scenes, where it explodes in Peter the spokesperson. I think it is the 'unless you take up your cross line' that really causes the uproar. It is loaded with paradox, beyond just personal discipleship. The last thing they wanted to do was be one of the many zealots and malcontents crucified (ie caught by Roman admin).

Are you losing sight of the fact that it is the JEWS who had Jesus killed?

And Jesus did not mean that He (Jesus) was going to actually die as a failed/caught zealot. He meant that he was going to die sacrificially and that their "cross" was going to be the mission taking that message around and on to the world. That is the "cross" they were going to have to take up. The closest you get to this in the followers own words is Paul in Galatians, ch 2 and 6.

Well, during the laying of the foundation, many would be killed for preaching the Truth.

(This conflicts with today's popular 'discipleship' method of using this verse; so be it. The meaning of an expression depends entirely on the group to whom it is originally addressed. It did call for a self-denial among that kind of zealot-background person, and the particulars are quite different from the affluent, self-satisfied suburban college kid today).

Well the foundation has already been laid, but that is not saying we will not be judged and even maybe prosecuted in one way or another for our belief in the truth. Some are ostracized by family and friends and society, and there are still Christians killed for their beliefs. I do agree though that Jesus’ teachings are not so hard as if I am taking up a cross every day, for my giving up sin was a pleasure, in hindsight.

So: what happened between the starting announcements and calls to discipleship by Jesus and the Con/Trans? It is an issue only in the synoptics; this is not an issue in John, which does not feature the Con/Trans the same way. Instead, there is Jn 6 which is where a following, that recently wanted to force him to be king, that gives up on him EXCEPT for the disciples, who solidly believe in his sacrificial death--they understand 'eating and drinking the flesh and blood of Christ.'. I have not resolved these two views myself.

Eating and drinking Jesus is believing and obeying Jesus.

I think in the synoptics they believed he was a miracle-Messiah who would surely be able to summon such powers in a conflict with Rome. They began blocking out anything that had heard about the Lamb, the dying for sins, the burial, etc. When the Con/Trans happened they were quite sure he was completely confused.

Maybe they knew very well, but it was just that it was hard to take when the day finally arrived.
Remember how they looked for Jesus expecting him to rise from the dead after he died.

The problem with MAD here or with Jerry is not accounting for what happened from the start to the Con/Trans. The confusion the disciples claim to exist in Christ at the Con/Trans is believed by MAD and Jerry to be a decision made just then to die, never thought of before, based on an assessment that Israel had rejected Him.

That is almost unbelievable. Do you think they really think that?.

This is why Jerry makes a huge deal of a split between 'being the Christ' and 'dying for sins.' He thinks they are unrelated and has some Dallas Seminary quote to support it, which is ridiculous.

It is ridiculous.

What was the rejection at the Con/Trans for? I don't know, because MAD and the two-program people have the whole plot so totally mixed up. I don't even know why wanting a monarchy would be the ground for rejecting him in a system that thinks he was going to set up a monarchy.

Some madists have explained to me that Jesus gives commands for only the Jews to obey. Why would Jesus only want Jews to obey? Why would the Old Testament prophecy about Jesus dying for OUR SINS have obedience excluded? Why would they think that Paul would teach we have another gospel? I believe that Augustine, Luther, Calvin, and others have brought confusion because of scriptures that they do not understand. Many of the scriptures are confused by misunderstanding Paul when he says not of by works. So then, one false belief must also spin another false teaching, and then another, etc.

The synoptics texts give us a ground for rejecting him: that he returned to the original announcements that he was to perish sacrificially and NOT provide a independent, free Israel monarchy. That is why the disciples fled from him. As for the leaders of Judaism, it was the claim of being the anointed Messiah and Son of God figure from the OT. There is a slight overlap in the rejection, but the leaders of Judaism of that generation never wanted to be very vocal about having a separate king. Caiahphas (as you quoted) wanted to 'save' Israel grief by getting rid of Jesus, and appear helpful to Rome doing so.

This kind of stuff spirals so far out of control that I have even heard a two-program pastor say that before the millenium starts in the future, Jesus would be crucified again so that the Jews would have the chance to accept and believe that all over again! (Sorry I don't have the source on that.)

I believe you. I have heard people say the Jews were going to do animal sacrifices again after Jesus lives on earth with them. How in the world would they ever get that Jesus is going to let these people worship him that way when HE IS THE LAMB that takes away sins?

He was trying to solve how Jews would be saved in the future when they don't believe any of the events of the Gospel actually happened as preached by the apostles. Talking about demanding signs!

Exactly! When Jesus comes again, it will not to be to bear sins, so if any are not in him by the time he comes again, it will be too late, for he comes as a thief in the night. We are all bound now to the same place. The cut off Jews were bound over to the same place the Gentiles were, and that is without God. We all are condemned until we come to him in living faith.

 

[God's Truth]

Very good, GT!

The 2nd to last paragraph is great. The lost sheep of Israel is not all of them as a race/nation, but the ones who lived by faith in the midst of all those with the externality of Judaism in that generation.

Well done.

Thank you!

 

[serpentdove]

There is just one Gospel, announced by the Lord that saves men. It was first announced by him, then confirmed by those who had heard him. Heb 2:3.

Everytime you give the Bible the chance not to be interpreted by RD, STP, Must, Tam and Jerry, it does NOT SAY WHAT THEY SAY.

Men have always been saved the same way--by grace through faith (Eph 2:8-9). By faith Abel (Heb 11:4a), by faith Enoch (11:5a), by faith Noah (11:7a), by faith Abraham (11:8a, 9, 12, 17–18), [etc. Sarah (11:11a), Isaac (11:20a), Jacob (11:21a), Joseph (11:22a), Moses’ parents (11:23a), Moses (11:24, 27a, 28a), the people of Israel (11:29a, 30a), Rahab (11:31a), Gideon (11:32a), Barak (11:32b), Samson (11:32c), Jephthah (11:32d), David (11:32e), Samuel (11:32f), all the prophets (11:32g).] Willmington, H. L. (1999). The Outline Bible (Heb 11:4–32). Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers.

 

[Interplanner]

Men have always been saved the same way--by grace through faith (Eph 2:8-9). By faith Abel (Heb 11:4a), by faith Enoch (11:5a), by faith Noah (11:7a), by faith Abraham (11:8a, 9, 12, 17–18), [etc. Sarah (11:11a), Isaac (11:20a), Jacob (11:21a), Joseph (11:22a), Moses’ parents (11:23a), Moses (11:24, 27a, 28a), the people of Israel (11:29a, 30a), Rahab (11:31a), Gideon (11:32a), Barak (11:32b), Samson (11:32c), Jephthah (11:32d), David (11:32e), Samuel (11:32f), all the prophets (11:32g).] Willmington, H. L. (1999). The Outline Bible (Heb 11:4–32). Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers.

They think it is faith, too, but that there have been different objects of faith, even for justification from sins. I do not. It may appear that way in the OT if read without the NT, but Gal 3:8-9 shows us the official view we are supposed to have. Even 'all nations will be blessed in your Seed' was a proclamation of the one Gospel as the one object of faith.

 

[serpentdove]

They think it is faith, too, but that there have been different objects of faith, even for justification from sins.

I'm well aware of what they

believe (Jud 4); but when you challenge

what they believe here (2 Pe 2:1), you are banned (Ro 14:4, Ps 105:15). :banned: I can reply to you not them (Eph 6:12).

Related:

Lordship

 

[God's Truth]

Men have always been saved the same way--by grace through faith (Eph 2:8-9). By faith Abel (Heb 11:4a), by faith Enoch (11:5a), by faith Noah (11:7a), by faith Abraham (11:8a, 9, 12, 17–18), [etc. Sarah (11:11a), Isaac (11:20a), Jacob (11:21a), Joseph (11:22a), Moses’ parents (11:23a), Moses (11:24, 27a, 28a), the people of Israel (11:29a, 30a), Rahab (11:31a), Gideon (11:32a), Barak (11:32b), Samson (11:32c), Jephthah (11:32d), David (11:32e), Samuel (11:32f), all the prophets (11:32g).] Willmington, H. L. (1999). The Outline Bible (Heb 11:4–32). Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers.

Those people had to have faith with obedience.


18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?

..........
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?

23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.


…..
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

25 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?

26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.



Did you read that?

James says that the faith Abraham is spoken of as having that justifies is faith with obedience.

 

[serpentdove]

Those people had to have faith with obedience.

We know all about them. What does that have to do with you? You preach a false Christ (Matt. 24:4-5, 24) and false gospel (Gal. 1:6-12). For some reason you think you're good (Ro 3:12) and have much to offer the Lord (Is 64:6). You have nothing to offer but ___________ [insert your weight here] pounds of sin.

As a reminder God's Truth is number 39 on Satan, Inc. (TOL Heretics list) in "The 'Jesus is not God' people (Non-trinitarians) category. :burnlib:

 

[God's Truth]

We know all about them. What does that have to do with you? You preach a false Christ (Matt. 24:4-5, 24) and false gospel (Gal. 1:6-12). For some reason you think you're good (Ro 3:12) and have much to offer the Lord (Is 64:6). You have nothing to offer but ___________ [insert your weight here] pounds of sin.

As a reminder God's Truth is number 39 on Satan, Inc. (TOL Heretics list) in "The 'Jesus is not God' people (Non-trinitarians) category. :burnlib:

I preach obedience to Christ. You call that false.
You do not even have sense that is common.

 

[serpentdove]

[As a reminder God's Truth is number 39 on Satan, Inc. (TOL Heretics list) in "The 'Jesus is not God' people (Non-trinitarians) category. :burnlib:] I preach obedience to Christ.

Mt 7:5

 

[Interplanner]

Those people had to have faith with obedience.


18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?

..........
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?

23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.


…..
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

25 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?

26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.



Did you read that?

James says that the faith Abraham is spoken of as having that justifies is faith with obedience.

Yes, faith in Christ does produce fruit, but it is not a 'law' of producing fruit, which would miss the point. The person is changed by the Gospel on the inside.

Don't forget the guy in Mt 18 who was also forgiven but went out and pounded another debtor because he thought he has only given MORE TIME TO PAY BACK the master. He thought that is what forgiveness was: MORE TIME TO WORK, TO OBEY, TO PEFORM. It is not that at all.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Yes, faith in Christ does produce fruit,

How much proves you have faith?

 

[God's Truth]

Yes, faith in Christ does produce fruit, but it is not a 'law' of producing fruit, which would miss the point. The person is changed by the Gospel on the inside.

Don't forget the guy in Mt 18 who was also forgiven but went out and pounded another debtor because he thought he has only given MORE TIME TO PAY BACK the master. He thought that is what forgiveness was: MORE TIME TO WORK, TO OBEY, TO PEFORM. It is not that at all.

No, that is not what happened. He was forgiven for his debt but failed to forgive someone who owed him a debt.

We have to obey Jesus, for Jesus says, "But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins." See Matthew 6:15.