Then please tell me which post number we can see that one of those in the Neo-MAD crowd gave an interpretation of the meaning of the verse?
You wouldn't listen anyway. So, what's the use? You're that kind of guy.
Then please tell me which post number we can see that one of those in the Neo-MAD crowd gave an interpretation of the meaning of the verse?
Plenty have over the years.
You wouldn't listen anyway. So, what's the use? You're that kind of guy.
Jerry, you are making a fool of yourself.
What a fool you continue to make of yourself before all who read this decades old insistence of yours.
Paul Sadler, the President of the Berean Bible Society and one of the chief spokesmen of the Neo-MAD view, says that salvation according to the gospel of circumcision could not be achieved apart from "works":
"We should add that the gospel of the circumcision and the gospel of the kingdom are inseparably bound together. Both are based upon a 'performance system.' It is this program and message that James was laboring under when he wrote his epistle...How often James must have heard one of his countrymen say, 'I believe in God.' But James observed that there were no fruits in his life that substantiated his claim, which was essential under the gospel of the circumcision" [emphasis added] (Sadler, "Studies in the Epistle of James", The Berean Searchlight, January, 2006, p.8-9).
Pastor Sadler continues, writing that "According to James, Abraham served as a 'pattern' to the circumcision that faith and works were 'required' for salvation under their program" [emphasis added] (Ibid., p.10).
Hoow can that be said since we read here that those who believe are saved:
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (Jn.3:16).
The Neo-MADs on this forum are absolutely convinced that the Jews who lived under the Law could not be saved apart from works. How can they be certain of that with John 3:16 in view.
That verse says that all who "believe" are saved but those in the Neo-MAD camp say the the Jews who lived under the Law could have "faith" but they are not saved unless they do works.
Every time I bring John 3:16 up to the Neo-MADs I never get an answer. They refuse to give their interpretation of the meaning of that verse.
They say that they follow Paul but the certainly do not follow him when he says that he "kept back nothing that was profitable unto you" and "I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God" (Acts 20:20, 27).
Will they continue to run and hide from John 3:16 or will they finally give their interpretation of the meaning of the verse?:
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (Jn.3:16).
Hi , Jerry S , and John 3:16 by CONTEXT is written to Israel , so John 3:16 as does John 3:5 also belong to Jews !!
Plenty have over the years. But what can you expect from someone who one size fits all everyone who he thinks does not agree with him, into this Neo label of his.
He has yet to lay out what said Neo's beliefs supposedly are.
Only that he alone has the truth and has been given some special dispensation of some sort that he conduct this fool, decades old hunt down of these Mid Acts criminals his Don Quixote joke of mind compels him to hunt down and try them by the fire of his hot air.
he has ancient dispensation secrets ?
Rom 4:6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,The Jews who believed and lived under the law were saved the same way which David was saved, apart from works:
"But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin" (Ro.4:5-8).
what fact ?There is no great mystery to this truth but those in the Neo-MAD community are unable to understand this fact.
Abram's first covenant was faith only Gen 15:5-6In fact, Paul made it plain that those who lived under the law were saved by grace through faith:
"Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all" (Ro.4:16).
Since the Jews under the law were saved by grace through faith it is obvious that they were saved apart from works. That is because if it is of works then it cannot be described as being of grace:
"Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt" (Ro.4:4).
This is so simple but those in the Neo-MAD community just refuse to believe it.
What do you think? do you think that the Jews who lived under the law were saved by grace through faith apart from works?
so are you saying he isWay 2 go, the sense of what you are asserting by way of your bringing up Saul, as an example, is very simple to follow, when one actually has an open mind to the views of others, and doesn't just call for that from them.
What's his name wrote "The Neo-MADs on this forum are absolutely convinced that the Jews who lived under the Law could not be saved apart from works. How can they be certain of that with John 3:16 in view."
You responded with "1Sa 16:14 Now the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and a harmful spirit from the LORD tormented him."
You brought up Saul as an example of , and in your response to what's his name's assertion that "Jews who lived under the Law could not be saved apart from works."
Not that I agree, or disagree. My point is that what you wrote is very simple to follow when some one actually has an open mind, and is not just blowing hot air at others about how they would get what he is talking about if they had an open mind.
One more case of the blow hard what's his name proves himself to be; exposing his inability by his own words, in his failure once more, to get the sense of another's simple words, unless he's first read some interpretation about them in some fifty, sixty, one hundred year old external source somewhere.
I know the Jews under the law had to offer sin offerings Lev 4:25 Lev 4:29
Paul Sadler, the President of the Berean Bible Society and one of the chief spokesmen of the Neo-MAD view, says that salvation according to the gospel of circumcision could not be achieved apart from "works":
"We should add that the gospel of the circumcision and the gospel of the kingdom are inseparably bound together. Both are based upon a 'performance system.' It is this program and message that James was laboring under when he wrote his epistle...How often James must have heard one of his countrymen say, 'I believe in God.' But James observed that there were no fruits in his life that substantiated his claim, which was essential under the gospel of the circumcision" [emphasis added] (Sadler, "Studies in the Epistle of James", The Berean Searchlight, January, 2006, p.8-9).
Pastor Sadler continues, writing that "According to James, Abraham served as a 'pattern' to the circumcision that faith and works were 'required' for salvation under their program" [emphasis added] (Ibid., p.10).
Hoow can that be said since we read here that those who believe are saved:
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (Jn.3:16).
The Neo-MADs on this forum are absolutely convinced that the Jews who lived under the Law could not be saved apart from works. How can they be certain of that with John 3:16 in view.
That verse says that all who "believe" are saved but those in the Neo-MAD camp say the the Jews who lived under the Law could have "faith" but they are not saved unless they do works.
Every time I bring John 3:16 up to the Neo-MADs I never get an answer. They refuse to give their interpretation of the meaning of that verse.
They say that they follow Paul but the certainly do not follow him when he says that he "kept back nothing that was profitable unto you" and "I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God" (Acts 20:20, 27).
Will they continue to run and hide from John 3:16 or will they finally give their interpretation of the meaning of the verse?:
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (Jn.3:16).
Get some help already, o neurotic one of this Gestapo "grace" of yours.
I had the hope that you were finally going to give your interpretation of the meaning of John 3:16 but once again I was wrong.
Instead, all you did is to attack me personally in the hope that no one will notice that you remain silent about the meaning of that verse.
You must enjoy embarrassing yourself because every time you post on this thread and refuse to address John 3:16 you are an embarrassment!
We agree, that I refuse to, lol
You think it is funny that you refuse to give your interpretation of the meaning of John 3:16 but in truth your refusal leads one to question why you just flat out refuse.
Why is that? Are you so short on spiritual discernment that you haven't figured it out yet?
You are nothing but a pest with no intention of actually addressing the subject of this thread.
My recent bee sting to your decades old pestering gnat, lol
You have no interest in discussing what is written in the Scriptures so you are a complete waste of time.