Results 21 - 40 of 119
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Unanswered Bible Questions Author: Bill Mc Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | Is the Christian under Law? | Ex 1:1 | Bill Mc | 12807 | ||
Is the Christian under Law? Dear Joe and Christiankl, God's design for our lives as Christians is to let Christ live His life thorugh us, not to keep the law. Please look at the Scriptures, brothers: Consider the church in Galatia. Paul had preached Christ crucified and risen again in their midst. This was a church of, as far as we can tell, believers in Christ who the Judaizers were trying to put back under the law and all it's requirements. Notice Paul's admonitions: Galatians 2:19 - Paul died to the Law so that he could live to God 3:10 - If you're under law, you're under it's curse - if you sin, you die 3:13 - Christ redeemed us from this curse 3:19 - The Law was added UNTIL the seed (Christ) would come 3:23 - Before faith in Christ came, we were under law's custody 3:24 - Law leads us to Christ so we can be justified by faith 3:25 - Now that faith in Christ is reality, we are no longer under the tutor (the Law) Romans 6:14 - we are not under the law but under grace 6:15 - again, we are under grace 7:4 - we were made to die to the Law so that we can be joined to Christ 7:6 - We have been released from the Law so that we can serve in the newness of the Spirit NOT according to the letter (law) Brothers, are these Scriptures not clear? If you were married to a woman you loved (see Paul's analogy in Roman's 7) and she died, as horrible as that would be, what relationship would you have with her? She would be dead and all the duties you had to her would be null and void. Would that mean you were against her or hated her? No. You would still, in fact, love her. But, you would no longer be in a relationship with her. The relationship is over. She would be dead. Now, Paul says that we were made to die to the Law through Christ's death (Rom 7:4) so that we could be joined to Christ. The first relationship has to end before the next can be binding. But the Law didn't die. We did. We are free of ANY relationship to it, not because there is something wrong with it, but because it has fulfilled it's purpose. It showed us exceedingly sinful so that we could come to Christ. And our relationship with Him will lead us to go places that the Law could never touch. The Law buried us under sin, as Christ did in the gospels (...the Law says...but I tell you...) so we would see our need to be justified by His death and saved by His life. So, obviously, I have a contention with your 3 conclusions: 1. The Holy Spirit now convicts the believer of sin and points us to Christ as sufficient - not the Law. 2. God doesn't want a moral people. The Pharisees were very moral. God wants a people who have Christ living through them. This goes beyond morality to miraculous. We don't need to eat from the morality Tree (of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, right and wrong), we need to eat from the Tree of Life, Jesus Christ. 3. We live out our sanctification. We do nothing to obtain it. Our spirits are 100 percent sanctified at conversion and we have the privelege of seeing that 'worked out' through our souls and bodies as we trust in Christ as our sufficiency and grow in His love. See Titus 2:11 - God's GRACE, not the Law, teaches us to live righteously and godly lives. As you said, God, through Christ, has met all His own moral demands. We, on our own, never could. We have been made holy not by our actions, but by His. We have HIS righteousness, not our own. And we have the joyful experience of living it out. We don't live holy, godly lives to gain sanctification. We live holy, godly lives because 'by this will (New Covenant) we have been sanctified through the body of Jesus Christ ONCE FOR ALL. For by one offering He has perfected for ALL TIME those who are sanctified.' - Hebrews 10:10,14 What do you think? In Christ, Bill Mc In Christ |
||||||
22 | Are Positional and Practical truths true | Ex 1:1 | Bill Mc | 12897 | ||
Dear Joe, thanks for the reply. Please allow me to respond to a couple of things you said: "Our spirits however, are not 100 percent SANCTIFIED at conversion." See Eph 1:4; Eph 5:27; Col 1:22 and especially 1 Cor 1:2 - '...to those who HAVE BEEN (past tense) sanctified in Christ Jesus' 1 Cor 6:11 - '...but you WERE (past tense) washed, but you WERE sanctified, but you WERE justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ...' Heb 10:10 - 'by this will we HAVE BEEN (past tense) sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ...' Heb 10:29 - '...and has reguarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he WAS (past tense) sanctified...' There is only three things you can do with these verses, Steve: 1. Accept them as truth. 2. Reject them as lies. 3. Redefine sanctification and what it is. Redefination is the road most often chosen. Most theologians get around the truth of these verses by saying what the Bible does not say and that is... "There are three dimensions to our sanctification as revealed in Scripture: initial, progressive, and final." Please show me these words used of our sanctification in the New Testament. They are not in there. What you are really saying is that you DON'T BELIEVE that Christ has done it ALL and that, somehow, YOU must do it. So theologians relegate their unbeliefs into "Positional" and "Practical" truths. "Positional" means, as I understand it, that "God said it so, somehow it's true, but it doesn't make sense to me so it's a positional truth." "Practical" means, "Though I know what God says, here is what my experience tells me. So I'll rely on what experience says instead of God and His Word." Please don't take this the wrong way, Steve, but 'hogwash.' Truth is truth. Truth is God's viewpoint and His perspective is reality. Christ has done it ALL. Because people will not except the Scripture as true they decide to put their own spin on it and attempt to invalidate what Christ has done. Or they say, "Well, yes, this is truth, but it only applies to when we get home, in God's presence." Support? "Final justification occurs when the believer enters God's presence, and is made perfect in righteousness." Let me ask you, child of God, what is it about the physical death of your body that would make you justified in spirit, soul, or body before a holy God? What is it about being 'in God's presence' that would justify you? What impact would the death of your body have upon you being righteous, holy and blameless before God? I believe that Christ alone and His work justifies me before a holy God. The state of my body is inconsequential. If a holy God can now dwell in me, it is ONLY because He has already made me holy. Paul says that the temple of God is holy and THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE. Not 'what you will be.' "We may positionally be seated with Christ, but I think you would agree that that is practically not the case in our lives as we now live them." I don't agree, brother. Again, you need to resort to positional and pratical truths because you will not accept what God says as TRUTH. I am spiritually (in God's true, eternal, outside-of-time realm) seated with Christ (Eph 2:6) though my physical body is seated in a chair typing this note. Just as I was crucified, raised, and seated with Christ spiritually 2000 years ago. In this dimension called time, I get the wonderful experience of 'seeing' what I know to be truth by faith 'worked out' in my life. We live godly lives, brother, because Christ lives in us. If Babe Ruth's spirit came inside you, would you want to take up ballet? What would you want to do if Babe Ruth's spirit dwelt in you? Well, we have Christ's Spirit, the Holy Spirit, living inside of us. He causes me to live a holy life, not so I WILL BE holy, but because, I AM HOLY. But it is not because of what I do or don't do. It is because, through Christ, I have become a NEW CREATION, created in righteousness. Do I do good works? Yes. But not to affect my status before God. I do them because OF my status before God. "God wants righteousness from His people." No, brother, God wants His people to accept and believe in the righteousness that comes FROM God. The Jews sought to establish THEIR OWN righteousness through keeping the Law. And the Pharisees would agree 100 percent with your statement and tell you exactly what that should look like. So, Steve, are you going to believe what God says about your sanctification, exercise faith and accept it, or are you going to cling to your nice little 'positional' and 'practical' truths? The truth is there, dear brother. As the Keeper of the Holy Grail said, "Choose wisely..." In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
23 | What is your identity in Christ? | Ex 1:1 | Bill Mc | 12900 | ||
Dear Joe, Please see my "Are Positional and Practical truths true?" posting before you read this one. Once again, brother, you are trying to redefine the terms. In the last posting, you redefined sanctification into 3 facets. Here you do the same thing with the Law. The Scriptures I mentioned only say " the Law." You don't believe it so you have redefined the Law into your own 3 terms: "The Law still exists in a moral sense. It is the sacrificial and ceremonial aspects of the law which were fulfilled in Christ's life, death, and resurrection." So, you've taken the word 'Law' that Scripture uses and relegated it to: 1. Moral law 2. Ceremonial law 3. Sacrificial law This way YOU can decide for yourself which of the three has been fulfilled and passes away. Joe, why not accept what God says for what it says? It has been my experience that God says what He means and means what He says. He does not stutter. And, Joe, if Christ kept and fulfilled the Law (you pick which one), and you are in Him, then haven't you also, by your union with Him, fulfilled it? Look at Romans 5:19 - Because of Adam's disobedience, we were all made and born sinners, right? Is this a positional truth or a practical truth? Are we born as positional sinners or practical sinners? Do we positionally sin or practically sin? The verse continues by saying, "even so through the obedience of the One (Christ) the many (us) will be made righteous." Is this positionally righteous or practically righteous? If God says that, because of Adam's sin, our old nature is sinful, then, using the same hermanuetic, our new nature is righteous, right? When are we made righteous, Joe? When we die? What does death have to do with your identity? Those 'in Adam' are sinners because of their birth, not because of their destination - hell. We are righteous because of a new birth, not because we will one day get to heaven. Birth, my friend, determines your identity - not where you end up. I'm going to heaven because Christ has MADE me righteous, not to be made righteous. Rest in that, won't you? In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
24 | I'm sorry, Readers, and Reformer Joe | Ex 1:1 | Bill Mc | 12951 | ||
I'm sorry, Readers and Joe, if my comments about Reformer Joe came across as an insult to him or his doctrinal beliefs. That was not intended. I do not personally know him, but I was not attempting to undermine the body of work that Joe has contributed to this forum or call his character into question. I know it could be taken that way. We do need to learn from each other. I was seeking to get Joe's reasons for his interpretation of the words 'sanctification' and 'the Law.' We, if you have been following this thread, obviously disagree on a few things. But we are still brothers in Christ, and, Joe, if you're reading this, I'm sorry. We are all entitled (and responsible) for our interpretations of Scripture. I was seeking to accertain where the concept of positional/practical truths is taught. Perhaps I missed something, I don't know. None of us are infallible. But I would urge everyone to be a 'Berean' and search these things in the Scriptures to see if they are so. And to let God's Word speak for itself. I'm sure Reformer Joe would agree. |
||||||
25 | Joe, is the Bible not sufficienct? | Lev 16:34 | Bill Mc | 20191 | ||
Dear Joe, You write: 'Saying "all I need is me and my Bible" doesn't work, either, because most of what we hold regarding the Holy Scriptures was taught to us by others...' Are you saying that if a person knew how to read and all that he had was the Bible, that it would not be enough for him to arrive at a saving faith? If so, that is a pretty strong statement, even for you. Granted, most all of us sit under someone's teaching. But how do you know if it is valid teaching or not? The Bible. I do believe that all that is necessary in a humble soul, the Bible, and the Holy Spirit of God. In fact, I would recommend that any new Christian avoid sitting under anyone's teaching for at least a year so that only he and the Holy Spirit can spend time learning what God's Word says and means before having it filtered through someone else. I don't know about you, but I have no desire to chew someone else's food to get my nourishment. God promised me that he would lead me into all truth through His Word. Right or wrong, I trust Him to do so. Commentaries are exactly that - 'com'ments from 'men', nothing more, nothing less. I recently tried to discuss an issue with my pastor and all he wanted to do is read from his commentary. I said, "Pastor, why can't we just stick with God's Word and let the Holy Spirit and other scripture interpret this passage." "Oh, this commentary explains it very well," he replied. Made me what to puke. Commentaries have their place AFTER God's Word, not before it or alongside it. What do you think? Does one truly require more than the Bible and the Holy Spirit to know truth? In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
26 | Do all TEACHERS teach the truth? | Lev 16:34 | Bill Mc | 20198 | ||
Dear kalos, Thanks for the response but it was not an answer. Why? How do you know whether or not these TEACHERS are teaching the truth? Do we trust everyone who is a TEACHER? Do all TEACHERS teach the same? I think not. If I sat under Joe's teaching for a year and then sat under Tim's teaching for a year, how would I know which line of thinking is the truth? We all know that their are false TEACHERS amongst us (in the organized church). Not everyone who teaches, should be teaching. So how do you make the determination of who is 'given by God' and who is not? In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
27 | Is job security being threatened here? | Lev 16:34 | Bill Mc | 20232 | ||
Dear kalos, Sounds like someone's 'job security' is being threatened here, doesn't it? Do we really have to resort to drawing an analogy between a 'sola scriptura' attitude and the start of a cult? They re-wrote the Bible. Did I ever once suggest that? To even imply that someone with just a Bible and no supplemental material is the sure way to a cult is ludicrous. You missed my point entirely, kalos. In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
28 | Lionstrong, maybe this will clarify... | 2 Chr 7:14 | Bill Mc | 17624 | ||
Dear Lionstrong, I am not sure that I understand your statement. Yes, the whole of Scripture (the Bible) is inspired. Do I believe that that inspiration extends down to the verse level and word level? Yes, I do. But, per my prior post, not every verse is given for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness. Everything that we need is contained in the Bible (but is actually found in Jesus Christ - 2 Pet 1:3 'seeing that His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence.') Permit me to illustrate. (Illustrations are not scripture but sometimes they are helpful.) Let's say that I hire you as a modern-day scribe. I am going to dictate to you an owner's manual for my 1990 Ford Aerostar van. You transcribe everything that I tell you on your word-processor. When I am done dictating, I say, "Lionstrong, I trust that you wrote down everything that I told you. Whoever uses this manual will find it useful for vehicle orientation, operation, scheduled maintenance, repair, and servicing of this vehicle." Now, if you did your job correctly, what you wrote down is 'inspired' by me. (As a said, don't take this illustration too far. The writers of the Scripture did not dictate as such. They were not robots merely transcribing.) But the manual has divisions in it. You would not consult the 'Operation' section to find out where the nearest service center is. You would not look in the 'Repair and Servicing' section to see how to turn on the windshield wipers. You would not search through the 'Scheduled Maintenance' section to find out how to change a tire. The entire manual would be 'inspired' by me but I would have organized it into sections to make it user-friendly for the owners. This is all I am saying. All of the Scripture is inspired by God but He has organized it to make it 'user-friendly' for us. (Obviously, if we don't read it, it won't do us much good.) But we need to use the right scriptures for the right application. This is something that I believe the Holy Spirit and study will enable us to do. Lionstrong, does this help explain the reason for my post? Complete in Him, Bill Mc |
||||||
29 | Was Nahum 2:4 fulfilled in Acts 2:1? | Nah 2:4 | Bill Mc | 15640 | ||
Dear Nolan, I'm not sure if this is a prophecy for the automobile or not. It does say 'chariots'. However, we know that the New Testament did fulfill much of the prophecy of the Old. That being the case, it is possible that this was indeed a prophecy that was fulfilled in Acts 2:1. Here it states that the disciples were all in one Accord, (KJV) obviously a Honda. Note that the last part of the verse does say that they were in one place. I'll need to check my commentaries here but I think it is probably because gasoline had not been invented yet. What do you think? In Him, Bill Mc |
||||||
30 | Steve, are these verses in your Bible? | Matt 6:14 | Bill Mc | 16246 | ||
Dear Steve, Jesus Christ provided forgiveness for everyone, before the cross and after the cross, AT THE CROSS. You write, "We need to forgive them as this verse says. Verse 15 gives the result. If we don't forgive, it will be very hard on us." But Jesus said, after He said the above statement, in Luke 23:34 - "Father, forgive them, because they don't know what they are doing." HOWEVER, that forgiveness is only received upon placing one's faith in Christ. Once that is done, no more forgiveness is necessary or provided for the believer. Forgiveness is part of redemption. Proof? Eph 1:7 In Him we HAVE redemption through His blood, the FORGIVENESS of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace. Col 1:14 in whom we HAVE redemption, the FORGIVENESS of sins. Col 2:13 When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having FORGIVEN us ALL our transgressions. Eph 4:32 Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also HAS FORGIVEN you. Col 3:13 bearing with one another, and forgiving each other, whoever has a complaint against anyone; just as the Lord FORGAVE you, so also should you. 1 John 2:12 I am writing to you, little children, because your sins HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN you for His name's sake. Acts 26:18 to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God, that they may RECEIVE FORGIVENESS of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me.' (When is it received? When they turn to God.) Heb 9:26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to PUT AWAY SIN by the sacrifice of Himself. (Did He do this?) Heb 10:17 "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE." I have to wonder, brother, are these verses in YOUR Bible? Or are the only verses you know that deal with forgiveness of sins Matthew 6:14 and 1 John 1:9? You seem stuck, stuck, stuck, like a broken phonograph on the forgiveness issue. That's too bad. The Jesus I know said that, "It is finished! Paid in full!" Is this the same one you know? I wonder, Steve, in your theology, did the blood that Christ shed on the cross for the forgiveness of sins (Matt 26:28) do anything? John the Baptist said, "Behold, the Lamb of God who TAKES AWAY the sins of the world." Did He do that or does your Bible stop after the gospels? Even Rev 1:5 says, "To Him who loves us and released us from our sins by His blood--" When and how were we released from our sins? By our death? Hardly. By the blood shed at His death - without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins. In your copy of scripture, are these verses there? Or do you just chose to not believe them? In your view, what is the difference as far as the forgiveness of sins goes, between the blood of bulls and goats offered in the OT and the blood of your Savior offered in the NT? Just curious, Bill Mc |
||||||
31 | Steve, are these verses in your Bible? | Matt 6:14 | Bill Mc | 16272 | ||
Dear Steve, Jesus Christ provided forgiveness for everyone, before the cross and after the cross, AT THE CROSS. You write, "We need to forgive them as this verse says. Verse 15 gives the result. If we don't forgive, it will be very hard on us." But Jesus said, after He said the above statement, in Luke 23:34 - "Father, forgive them, because they don't know what they are doing." HOWEVER, that forgiveness is only received upon placing one's faith in Christ. Once that is done, no more forgiveness is necessary or provided for the believer. Forgiveness is part of redemption. Proof? Eph 1:7 In Him we HAVE redemption through His blood, the FORGIVENESS of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace. Col 1:14 in whom we HAVE redemption, the FORGIVENESS of sins. Col 2:13 When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having FORGIVEN us ALL our transgressions. Eph 4:32 Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also HAS FORGIVEN you. Col 3:13 bearing with one another, and forgiving each other, whoever has a complaint against anyone; just as the Lord FORGAVE you, so also should you. 1 John 2:12 I am writing to you, little children, because your sins HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN you for His name's sake. Acts 26:18 to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God, that they may RECEIVE FORGIVENESS of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me.' (When is it received? When they turn to God.) Heb 9:26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to PUT AWAY SIN by the sacrifice of Himself. (Did He do this?) Heb 10:17 "AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE." I have to wonder, brother, are these verses in YOUR Bible? Or are the only verses you know that deal with forgiveness of sins Matthew 6:14 and 1 John 1:9? You seem stuck, stuck, stuck, like a broken phonograph on the forgiveness issue. That's too bad. The Jesus I know said that, "It is finished! Paid in full!" Is this the same one you know? I wonder, Steve, in your theology, did the blood that Christ shed on the cross for the forgiveness of sins (Matt 26:28) do anything? John the Baptist said, "Behold, the Lamb of God who TAKES AWAY the sins of the world." Did He do that or does your Bible stop after the gospels? Even Rev 1:5 says, "To Him who loves us and released us from our sins by His blood--" When and how were we released from our sins? By our death? Hardly. By the blood shed at His death - without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins. In your copy of scripture, are these verses there? Or do you just chose to not believe them? In your view, what is the difference as far as the forgiveness of sins goes, between the blood of bulls and goats offered in the OT and the blood of your Savior offered in the NT? Just curious, Bill Mc |
||||||
32 | How does Matt 6:14 look in the NT? | Matt 6:14 | Bill Mc | 16308 | ||
How does Matthew 6:14 look in the New Covenant? Steve, I am not saying that Christians shouldn't or don't forgive. They should and do. What I am saying is that our motivation to forgive changes. The Spirit of God goes so much farther than rules ever could. How so? If we, as believers, only go by the letter of the law on this verse, many will forgive not because it is the Christ-like thing to do, but because they are afraid that God won't forgive them. It's like if you wronged me, I would then think, "Gee, I HAVE TO forgive Steve because, boy, if I don't, then God won't forgive me." So I forgive you (or at least say I do) purely out of selfish motive. I am worried, not about our relationship as brothers in Christ, but about my status before God. God has something better. Here it is: Eph 4:32 Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also HAS FORGIVEN you. Col 3:13 bearing with one another, and forgiving each other, whoever has a complaint against anyone; just as the Lord FORGAVE you, so also should you. If you've wronged me, I can say, "You know what? God, in His grace, because of the blood of Jesus Christ, has forgiven Steve EVERY sin he has ever or will ever commit. God has accepted Steve as His child. And God has done the same for me. If the Lord forgave me, and forgave Steve, then who am I to hold a grudge. Am I greater than God's grace? Steve and I are brothers in Christ. That is a fact. So we need to act like brothers. Steve, you've wronged me but I care about our relationship so much that there must be a way to work this out." See where my motivation is now? Is it on myself? Or is it on Christ and what He has done? (He forgave us both and He has made us brothers in the same family) When I understand what Christ has truly done and how much I have been forgiven, then I will be prone to forgive BECAUSE I have been forgiven, not to OBTAIN it. Do you understand what I am saying here? In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
33 | Shouldn't we obey ALL God's Word? | Matt 6:14 | Bill Mc | 16344 | ||
Steve, Lev 5:5 'So it shall be when he becomes guilty in one of these (sins), that he shall confess that in which he has sinned. Lev 5:6 'He shall also bring his guilt offering to the LORD for his sin which he has committed, a female from the flock, a lamb or a goat as a sin offering. So the priest shall make atonement on his behalf for his sin. Do you do this everytime you sin? Why not? According to your interpretation, THUS SAITH THE LORD, right? Isn't this in God's Holy Word? Do you have the right to cut this verse out of God's Word? Or are you going to twist it? Wasn't this a command to God's people? Aren't you one of God's people? Isn't God the same, yesterday, today, and forever? Doesn't His Word stand forever? THOU SHALT DO IT! To quote a forum authority on the proper interpretation of God's Word, "You may choose to ignore this passage, or think it does not fit with the rest of the Bible. But, I think you need to accept it and obey it." Wouldn't you agree with him? |
||||||
34 | Does this passage mention Christ? | Matt 6:14 | Bill Mc | 16354 | ||
Steve, If you then go to Christ, then two observations must be made: 1) You have violated this passage. This passage says nothing about 'going to Christ'. According to this passage, this is not an option. No mention of Christ is made here whatsoever. God says to bring a lamb or goat. Granted, you do have the option of bringing two turtledoves, two pigeons or a tenth of an ephah of fine flour. But this passage makes no mention of any other offering being acceptable. 2) You cannot go to Christ. Christ is physically seated at the right hand of God. How can you get there? And how would you get your lamb, goat or other offering there? If we go strictly by this passage, and throw out any future revelation of God's plan of grace and forgiveness, then you have violated this means of forgiveness, my friend. Can't you see how foolish it is to 'camp' on older revelation and not accept the newer? Matthew 6:14 is the same. You cannot say, 'If I don't forgive, then God won't forgive' and also say, 'God has forgiven all my sins.' They are mutually exclusive. In Him, Bill Mc |
||||||
35 | Why the forgiveness strawman? | Matt 6:14 | Bill Mc | 16356 | ||
Dear schwartzkm, Yes this is a strawman. I am attempting to demonstrate that it is dangerous to take one scripture (in this case Matthew 6:14) and say that this applies to all people for all time, and that it is the heart of the forgiveness issue. And while I know that no Christian group teaches OT sacrifice, I feel that my argument is a valid one. I have not used the sabbath because the central issue here is the forgiveness of sins and I am trying to stay with that subject. Forgiveness of sins has always been based upon Hebrews 9:22, the shedding of blood. This forgiveness was credited in the OT by the atonement (covering) of the blood of animals (which pointed to Christ). The forgiveness of sins in the NT is secured by the shedding of our Lord's blood - nothing else. Steve's point is that, in his view, looking only at Matthew 6:14, forgiveness is based upon forgiving others. If this view is correct, then Christ's death and blood was unneccessary, indeed needless. All we would have to do to get forgiveness of our sins from God is to forgive our fellow man for their sins and this act alone would make us right or wrong with a holy God. Does the rest of NT scripture substantiate this lop-sided view? In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
36 | I do agree with most of your post, but.. | Matt 6:14 | Bill Mc | 16362 | ||
Dear schwartkm, I agree with most of your post. But I am not a Paulian. I am a Christian. The same Jesus that walked the face of the earth appeared to Paul and reveal the gospel to him. The same Spirit that indwelt Christ indwelt Paul to the extent that Paul said, "I no longer live, but Christ lives in me." And I am in no way trying to nullify all the teachings of Christ. But, as even you have stated, there is a progressive revelation in scripture. Why do you think Peter was so relunctant to hang out with the Gentiles. The disciples were amazed that the Gentiles could come to God through Christ. Please don't take this the wrong way, but I disagree with your definition of a Christian. Please hear me out on this. A Christian is not one who follows the teachings of Christ. It is much deeper than our futile attempts to mimic the Son of God. No one has EVER completely followed the teachings of Christ. Christ said, "Be perfect. How perfect? As perfect as your Father in heaven." Has anyone 'followed' this teaching? I think not. God's standard is perfection, our attempts to follow are insufficient. By that definition, Christians are those who follow the teachings of Christ, we are never completely Christians for none of us can do it perfectly. A Christian is one who has Christ living IN THEM - Romans 8:9-11. This is the essence of Christianity, Christ IN you, the hope of glory. Merely trying to follow Christ's teachings is not true Christianity because our 'trying' will always fall short. Being a Christian is a change of identity. It is anologous to a caterpillar changing into a butterfly. No matter how hard the caterpillar reads the flight manuals or follows the butterfly's teaching, he cannot do what the butterfly does (fly) because his nature is still a caterpillar. He can try to fly all he wants but he will always fall short. But, through a miracle, the caterpillar is changed into a butterfly. Only then can he do what butterflies are designed to do. Until we see that we are, indeed, new creations in Christ, we will be forever trying to follow the teachings of our Lord and failing. When we do come to realize that 'old things have passed away, behold, all things have become new', Christ Spirit inside us will fulfill God's own requirements through us. He who began a good work in you WILL BE faithful to complete it. It is God at work IN you to do His will. Please don't take this as a rebuke, schwartkm. It is not intended that way. It is intended as a clarification of the truth that you stated. In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
37 | Tim, here is my explanation - 3 parts | Matt 6:14 | Bill Mc | 16539 | ||
Dear Tim, I'll post this as a question so that you'll be able to see it (and hopefully Steve also). Sorry it's taken so long to answer but it took me a while to get all my thoughts organized, type it out, and try to keep it as concise as possible. Please, please look up the scripture references. Don't believe it just because I say it (I'm probably not risking that danger here on the forum anyway). It's in 3 parts. Here goes: Let’s start by laying down a couple of foundational principles concerning the forgiveness of sins: 1) The wages of sin is death – Rom 6:23; Eze 18:4. Why? Because, in God’s economy, He has stipulated that disobeying Him results in forfeiture of life. This ‘life’ is primarily spiritual life (union with God), with physical death being a picture of spiritual death (separation from God). When Adam and Eve sinned, they spiritually died that very day although they physically died much later – Gen 2:17. This forfeiture of life is physically represented by the shedding of blood, where Lev 17:11 says that physical life dwells. Therefore, whenever anyone sins, they deserve to be spiritually separated from God (spiritually dead) with physical death as an illustration of that principle. But God, not wanting His creation to be or remain separate from Him, provided forgiveness for sins by the shedding of blood – Heb 9:22. This, I believe is the only means of providing forgiveness for sins. 2) Only God can forgive sins – Mark 2:7. Why? Because, being holy and righteous, sins are a personal offense against Him and His character. 3) God devised two ways of administering forgiveness of sins to mankind. In the Old Testament (Covenant), God, in His mercy, allowed animal blood to be shed in substitution for human blood. This mainly had to be done once a year by the high priest on the Day of Atonement. This animal blood covered ‘atoned for’ sins but did not take them away – Heb 10:11; Heb 10:4. Why? Because the animals had not sinned, man had. And although God personally took no pleasure in the sacrifices Heb 10:6,8, under law, He allowed them to be made. While the animal sacrifices covered sins, those sins were actually not paid for by human blood until Christ died at the cross. Heb 9:15 makes this clear. So… 4) Under the New Testament (Covenant), God, in amazing grace and mercy, accepted the sinless blood of His Son, Jesus Christ, as full payment for the sins of all mankind. This propitiation on Christ’s behalf ‘takes away’ the sins of all mankind (those born before the cross and those born after) permanently – Rom 3:25; Heb 2:17; Heb 9:26; 1 John 2:2; 1 John 4:10. 5) So, Christ death and shedding of blood on the cross becomes the focal point of the whole forgiveness issue. His precious blood took away all sins for all people for all time. It was an eternal act of God, being executed in time but not bound by it – Heb 4:3. His death is what ushered in the New Covenant of which He is the mediator. Heb 9:16,17 makes it clear that the New Covenant, Testament, Will (all the same word in Greek) did not go into effect until the death of the One who made it. Even in our society, your will, if you have one, does not go into effect until the day you die. Once you die, your will cannot be changed or revised and all wills prior to your last one are null and void. And, I believe, that the Old Will (Covenant) is no longer binding – Heb 8:13; Heb 10:9,10. It was only a shadow of the reality of Christ in us, the hope of glory – Heb 10:1. End of part 1 - See part 2 |
||||||
38 | Forgiveness - Part 2 of 3 | Matt 6:14 | Bill Mc | 16540 | ||
Forgiveness - Part 2 or 3 That being said, we must understand that when Christ was physically here on earth, the Old Covenant was still in full effect. Gal 4:4 states that Christ was born under law (Old Covenant law) and most of His teaching surrounded it. He Himself said that He did not come to abolish it, with His life, but to fulfill it. And having fulfilled the Old Covenant perfectly, He has brought in a New Covenant, a covenant of grace. Now, let’s take a look at the passage in question, Matthew 6:14: “For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.” I feel that the best explanation of this passage can be found in Matt 5:23, 24: "Therefore if you are presenting your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your offering there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering.” Here we see that Jesus says, ‘If you bring your offering to the altar (obviously a sin offering), and there remember that there’s a problem between you and your brother (another Jew), leave your offering, go make things right with your brother, then come back and offer your sacrifice.’ The Jews as a people, at this point in time, only knew of only one way to get forgiveness of sins – animal sacrifice. This system was still operational while Christ walked the earth. They understood that. It was the only system that they had every known for having their sins forgiven. And Christ never refuted it during His earthly life. Rather, He upheld the law. But He was also trying to get His listeners to look beyond the ceremony and tradition to see their hearts as God saw them. So He admonished them (my loose paraphrase), ‘If you’re coming to get forgiven by God, don’t just go through the motions. The law is summed up in loving God and loving your neighbor as yourself. So, yes, forgiveness is provided for you. But go beyond the requirements of the law and see that God cares about relationships. Try to heal those and then seek God’s provision of forgiveness and it will mean something to you.’ Christ condemned religious tradition for the sake of tradition alone. He wanted people to get past the rules to the relationships. So He says, ‘Forgive your brother, THEN come and offer your sacrifice. He NEVER said, ‘Don’t offer your sacrifice at the temple.’ Why not? Because that system, that pointed to His once-for-all sacrifice, had not YET been done away with. So why doesn’t He mention sacrifice in Matthew 6:14? I feel that it is because the Jews already knew what, under law, was required to provide forgiveness. If you had told a Jew at that time, “You sinned, you need forgiveness,” he would have tried to find an appropriate sacrifice and trotted off to the temple. But Christ was trying to show them that God looks on the heart. End of part 2 - see part 3 |
||||||
39 | Forgiveness - part 3 of 3 | Matt 6:14 | Bill Mc | 16541 | ||
Forgiveness - part 3 of 3 (pant, pant) Now can Christ’s statement, “For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, but if you do not forgive others, then your heavenly Father will not forgive your transgression” be true after the cross? I submit that it cannot. See these verses: Col 2:13 - When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us ALL our transgressions. Eph 4:32 - Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also HAS FORGIVEN you. Col 3:13 - bearing with one another, and forgiving each other, whoever has a complaint against anyone; just as the Lord FORGAVE you, so also should you. We now, as New Testament believers, forgive as, because, we HAVE BEEN forgiven. When were we forgiven ALL our sins? At the cross. Our forgiveness is part of our redemption – Eph 1:7; Col 1:14. It is no longer, I believe, conditional. The ultimate sin offering, the body of Christ has been made once-for-all – 1 Pet 3:18; Heb 9:26; Heb 10:12,14. Forgiveness of sins is secured. It is finished! So, what happens if a Christian does not forgive? According to scripture, we will give an account for what we do in our bodies – Rom 14:10-12. There is still rewards to be had. But I don’t believe that we will not be forgiven. There is too many verses that say otherwise. In closing, please see Heb 10:17,18. This is an important verse that describes one of the blessings that we, as well as future Israel, participate in under the New Covenant. God says here that He remembers our sins no more. Do we believe this verse? Isn’t Christ the mediator of this Covenant? Why does God remember our sins no more? Is it because He is having memory problems? Hardly. It is because of verse 18. It is because there IS forgiveness for ALL sins for ALL mankind for ALL time. This forgiveness exists. But it is only received upon placing one’s faith and trust in Jesus Christ’s sacrifice that was made 2000 years ago – Acts 10:43; Acts 26:18. Is there any other offering for sin? Not according to verse 18. Christ’s offering was COMPLETELY sufficient. We need to rest in that. We need to be thankful for that sacrifice and proclaim to the world, “To Him who loves us and released us from our sins BY HIS BLOOD – and He has made us to be a kingdom, priests to His God and Father – to Him be the glory and the dominion forever and ever. Amen. – Rev 1:5 - Bill Mc I hope this helps. I hope it answers your question. And, though you may not agree with me, that's OK, at least you know the reason for the hope within me. Blessings in Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
40 | Forgiveness, is it conditional? | Matt 6:14 | Bill Mc | 16568 | ||
Dear Tim, Please let me respond to your questions and, if you could add anything further, I would be interested and most appreciative. 1) Yes, I believe that forgiveness was obtained through the animal sacrifice in the OT. However, did God just issue a, for lack of a better word, 'blanket forgiveness' for everyone? Or did He actually look at individual's hearts and accept the offering based upon their attitudes? I am not honestly 100 percent sure here. I know that He told Saul, "Obedience is better than sacrifice." I.e. 'Don't just do what YOU want to do, and then come to Me with a sin offering and think that I HAVE to accept it.' I'm not sure where the scripture reference is (help me out here), but in one place God said something to the effect of, 'Stop your offerings, they are making Me sick because your hearts are far from Me.' Sorry that I can remember the reference or exact wording. So, I think a strong case can be made that, just like in salvation, the people needed to exercise faith in what God provided and God honored and responded to that faith. Is this way Christ told them to, basically, check their hearts before offering their sacrifice? Obviously, in the OT, the sacrificial system required that the offerings be made, but did everyone place their faith in them? Probably not. So was everyone forgiven just because they brought an offering? I don't think so. There was even a problem between Cain and Abel's offerings (I know, different type). But you know, Tim, I can't count the times in the past that I have gone to the altar (under the New Covenant obviously) to seek forgiveness when my own heart was not right? I just wanted forgiveness without being changed. God always sees my heart. And He KNOWS if I am sincere. As you know from my infamous 1 John 1:9 post, I no longer ask for forgiveness. It is not faith to ask for what God has already given me. But it is faith to thank Him for it and ask Him to show me where I am not walking in the Spirit, where I sin, where I am still walking in the flesh. So, yes I 'confess', I agree with God, but I don't ask for forgiveness. 2) I still don't feel that forgiveness is conditional. I do believe in concept of unlimited atonement (but I wouldn't use that word. Atonement is no where found in the Greek NT and I think that it reinforces that Christ's blood only 'covers' as opposed to takes away our sins). But you and I disagree as to what folks call 'eternal security' for reasons that we have already discussed. I see a way too many scriptures in the proper New Covenant (after Christ's death) that substantiate that we are baptized into Christ, united with Him, made a new creation, adopted by God, made alive with Him, born again, called children of God, citizens of heaven, made complete in Him, heirs of God, indwelt by His Spirit, partakers of the Divine nature, reconciled to God, redeemed, made righteous, called saints, saved, sealed, translated out of darkness into light, etc. (What a mouthful) If it is true that we can stop being all these things and remove ourselves from God and His forgiveness, I sure wish He would have prodded the NT writers to discuss it more fully and with greater clarity. If you can 'lose your salvation' or whatever label you want to stick on it, it seems like something with such dire consequences (ending up in Hell) would have been addressed much more than 2 or 3 verses of 'if you continue.' :) I'm not poking fun, but I do recall our prior interaction and, no, I still don't have an answer. Well, my fingers are getting tired... Thanks again, Tim. Grow in grace. In Him, Bill Mc |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] Next > Last [6] >> |