These are NOT the same gospel

[Idolater]

Well then we need to look at it again with fresh eyes. I think what Paul says in Romans 11 makes it very clear.

It's not explicit. It doesn't conflict with the idea that there is a 'pause' in there somewhere, but it also doesn't prove that any 'pause' happened either.

In contrast the New Covenant is called "eternal" and or "everlasting" explicitly.

 

[Tambora]

Of course we can when you argue who the "we" is talking about, instead of showing scripture that proves your claim about Peter knowing about justification through faith because he was a Jew.

It is Paul that included himself and Peter in the "we" of his statement.
You can believe Paul or not for all I care.

 

[Tambora]

No Gentile nor Jew has any covenant with God during this dispensation. No covenant is needed because His grace is sufficient.

If you disagree with that...well...

Genesis 17:1-6 ESV
(1) When Abram was ninety-nine years old the LORD appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless,
(2) that I may make my covenant between me and you, and may multiply you greatly.”
(3) Then Abram fell on his face. And God said to him,
(4) “Behold, my covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations.
(5) No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations.
(6) I will make you exceedingly fruitful, and I will make you into nations, and kings shall come from you.

 

[glorydaz]

I think both Peter and Paul were fulfilling their role to bring men from all nations to Christ since they both knew that was the desire of God.

God had (and still has) other plans for Peter, and it doesn't include preaching the gospel of grace.

 

[glorydaz]

It is Paul that included himself and Peter in the "we" of his statement.
You can believe Paul or not for all I care.

So instead of repeating that over and over, could you take a few minutes and explain to me how Peter would know about justification by faith.
There should be something you can find that would prove Peter understood this.

Gal. 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

How do you think that Peter knew about being justified by faith? If Peter knew, then why didn't any other Jews know about it?
If you want to have a discussion, you'll need to enter into the conversation.
You know very well how the royal "we" was used all the time. John, especially, uses it.
Besides the fact, that Paul had just explained his gospel to the leaders there.

 

[glorydaz]

It's not explicit. It doesn't conflict with the idea that there is a 'pause' in there somewhere, but it also doesn't prove that any 'pause' happened either.

In contrast the New Covenant is called "eternal" and or "everlasting" explicitly.

The proof is in the pudding -- so to speak.

Remember, Jesus and the Apostles said the kingdom was "at hand".
According to prophecy, the death and resurrection would be followed shortly by vexation and wrath before the 2nd coming.

The nation of Israel refused to recognize their Messiah, so God turned to the gentiles. (MYSTERY). The original timeline of prophecy will continue when this 'church age' is finished. When the church is taken up in the rapture, the timeline will resume as if it had never been interrupted.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Saying it doesn't make it so.

Then prove her wrong, Tam. Shouldn't be that hard.

 

[musterion]

(16) yet we [that would be Peter & Paul] know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ

Yes, they both knew that NOW because Paul told the 12 that's the way it was NOW. But it is not how things had been BEFORE for obedient Jews. We know this from Acts 13:39 and Romans 10:4-5. That's why Peter caved backwards into legal observance, and why Paul rebuked him.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Your faith has to endure also.

Wrong, and it's because you aren't grasping the context.

"Endure to the end" (But he who endures to the end shall be saved. - Matthew 24:13 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew24:13&version=NKJV) is 1) Jesus talking to Israel 2) about enduring until the end of the Great Tribulation 3) by keeping the New Covenant, at which point their nation will be saved from destruction (saved from Armageddon).

It has literally nothing to do with the Body of Christ, which at the time Jesus said those words, did not exist yet, and was still a mystery hidden in God.

You just don't understand scripture.

Saying it doesn't make it so.

Hardly.
You believe the same, that one's faith must endure to be saved.
You just say it differently by saying that if they quit having faith then they were not saved to begin with.
Which is just another way to say their faith did not endure.

"Not having faith to begin with" is nowhere near the same thing as "not enduring in their faith."

Saying it doesn't make it so.

The entire thread is still here for everyone to read, Tam. You made no argument in response to what RD said. If you did, it would still be in the thread. Therefore, you have no right to say "Saying it doesn't make it so," because it IS so.

Really?
Did not Christ began a good work with the 12 apostles?

Yes, but it wasn't the same good work in us in Him.

I've posted plenty of scripture, just to have you say I was reading it wrong.

And we have shown you why you are reading it wrong.

It is you that reads it wrong.

So make the argument, Tam.

We can go back and forth with this type of argument till the cows come home.

You might be able to, but I'd rather we make productive arguments, actually defending our beliefs, than bickering.

 

[Right Divider]

Saying it doesn't make it so.

It's true.

 

[Tambora]

Yes, they both knew

That's what I said.

 

[Right Divider]

What you fail to see is that the New Covenant was put on hold because the Jews crucified their King when He came.

Actually, it was NOT just because they crucified their King when He came. It was because of their continued unbelief.

This prophecy explains it:

Luke 13:6-10 (AKJV/PCE)
(13:6) ¶ He spake also this parable; A certain [man] had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none. (13:7) Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground? (13:8) And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung [it]: (13:9) And if it bear fruit, [well]: and if not, [then] after that thou shalt cut it down. (13:10) And he was teaching in one of the synagogues on the sabbath.

God gave them a little more time... but that was it.

That happened about the time that Stephen was stoned and God raised up Paul.

 

[Tambora]

Wrong, and it's because you aren't grasping the context.

You aren't.
If one does not have believing faith that endures they won't be saved.
If you quit having believing faith you won't be saved.

It has literally nothing to do with the Body of Christ

It has to do with all.
If you quit having believing faith you won't be saved.

Saying it doesn't make it so.

Saying it doesn't make it not so.

"Not having faith to begin with" is nowhere near the same thing as "not enduring in their faith."

Well, duh.
That's not the argument I made.
My argument is that if you quit having believing faith you won't be saved, you have fallen from grace.

The entire thread is still here for everyone to read, Tam. You made no argument in response to what RD said. If you did, it would still be in the thread. Therefore, you have no right to say "Saying it doesn't make it so," because it IS so.

I have the right to say it.

You might be able to, but I'd rather we make productive arguments, actually defending our beliefs, than bickering.

I'll believe that when I see it.

 

[Right Divider]

You aren't.
If one does not have believing faith that endures they won't be saved.
If you quit having believing faith you won't be saved.

Is Jesus wrong?

John 5:24 (AKJV/PCE)
(5:24) Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

Jesus doesn't mention "enduring to the end" to receive eternal life.

Perhaps "saved" is not always talking about eternal life and we must be careful to take the CONTEXT into account.

 

[musterion]

That's what I said.

The real Tambora was fearless but humble and honest ... never cherry picking, never evasive, and if she didn't understand something, she was willing to admit it. That isn't you. You are ignorant, arrogant, and lazy. Back on ignore with you.

 

[Tambora]

Back on ignore with you.

Good.
You offer nothing of value.

 

[Tambora]

Is Jesus wrong?

Never.

Jesus doesn't mention "during to the end" to receive eternal life.

Perhaps "saved" is not always talking about eternal life and we must be careful to take the CONTEXT into account.

If one stops having believing faith they are cut off, unless you think Paul was wrong.

 

[Right Divider]

Never.

Good call.

If one stops having believing faith they are cut off, unless you think Paul was wrong.

What about what Jesus said? Are you going to just continue to ignore what others post?

 

[Tambora]

Good call.

What about what Jesus said? Are you going to just continue to ignore what others post?

Maybe you have forgotten that it was Jesus that said some will for a while, but stop.

Matthew 13:20-21 ESV
As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy, yet he has no root in himself, but endures for a while, and when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately he falls away.


And unless you think Paul was wrong, he tells us:

Romans 11:22-23 ESV
Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God's kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off.
And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again.

 

[Right Divider]

Maybe you have forgotten that it was Jesus that said some will for a while, but stop.

Some will WHAT "for a while"? Have ETERNAL LIFE for a while?

Matthew 13:20-21 ESV
As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy, yet he has no root in himself, but endures for a while, and when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately he falls away.

Perhaps you'd like to try to prove that "he that falls away" was someone that "hath eternal life" and had "passed from death to life".