Not By Works
- Thread starter dcontroversal
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Circumcision was the sign of joining the Jewish community. Could a person of Hebrew descent been saved without being circumcised? Yes. Could they have participated in the community of faith that centered around God dwelling in the tabernacle and temple? No.
Salvation comes by faith, the only way it would have been an issue of salvation is if God directed them to be circumcised and they refused. But the method of salvation was not the circumcision or keeping of the law, and the life promised under Sinai was not the eternal life promised by Jesus.
Salvation comes by faith, the only way it would have been an issue of salvation is if God directed them to be circumcised and they refused. But the method of salvation was not the circumcision or keeping of the law, and the life promised under Sinai was not the eternal life promised by Jesus.
I already explained to you, you have to show your faith by obeying what God commanded.
Before Christ came, what did God command the Jews to do in Genesis 17:14?
14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.
In time past, He commanded circumcision to everyone of Abraham's desecendants. If you disobey God's commandmant, you would be cut off from the nation Israel.
And how did Abraham respond?
23 And Abraham took Ishmael his son, and all that were born in his house, and all that were bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham's house; and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin in the selfsame day, as God had said unto him.
24 And Abraham was ninety years old and nine, when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.
At age 99, it must have been ouch for him. But he obeyed and that showed his faith. He did not tell God "Hey I thought in Genesis 15:6 you already declared me righteous because I believe you would give me numerous descendants?"
But now, circumcision is no longer commanded.
Before Christ came, what did God command the Jews to do in Genesis 17:14?
14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.
In time past, He commanded circumcision to everyone of Abraham's desecendants. If you disobey God's commandmant, you would be cut off from the nation Israel.
And how did Abraham respond?
23 And Abraham took Ishmael his son, and all that were born in his house, and all that were bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham's house; and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin in the selfsame day, as God had said unto him.
24 And Abraham was ninety years old and nine, when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.
At age 99, it must have been ouch for him. But he obeyed and that showed his faith. He did not tell God "Hey I thought in Genesis 15:6 you already declared me righteous because I believe you would give me numerous descendants?"
But now, circumcision is no longer commanded.
I already explained to you, you have to show your faith by obeying what God commanded.
Before Christ came, what did God command the Jews to do in Genesis 17:14?
14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.
In time past, He commanded circumcision to everyone of Abraham's desecendants. If you disobey God's commandmant, you would be cut off from the nation Israel.
And how did Abraham respond?
23 And Abraham took Ishmael his son, and all that were born in his house, and all that were bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham's house; and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin in the selfsame day, as God had said unto him.
24 And Abraham was ninety years old and nine, when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.
At age 99, it must have been ouch for him. But he obeyed and that showed his faith. He did not tell God "Hey I thought in Genesis 15:6 you already declared me righteous because I believe you would give me numerous descendants?"
But now, circumcision is no longer commanded.
Before Christ came, what did God command the Jews to do in Genesis 17:14?
14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.
In time past, He commanded circumcision to everyone of Abraham's desecendants. If you disobey God's commandmant, you would be cut off from the nation Israel.
And how did Abraham respond?
23 And Abraham took Ishmael his son, and all that were born in his house, and all that were bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham's house; and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin in the selfsame day, as God had said unto him.
24 And Abraham was ninety years old and nine, when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.
At age 99, it must have been ouch for him. But he obeyed and that showed his faith. He did not tell God "Hey I thought in Genesis 15:6 you already declared me righteous because I believe you would give me numerous descendants?"
But now, circumcision is no longer commanded.
I'm in full agreement with both of those statements, though simply taking what's written on a page is not doing what God commands.
God engages us personally and directs our lives if we allow Him, and faith requires listening for what He actually directs and trusting Him. Not simply believing in but truly believing God.
-
2
- Show all
Yes, God no longer requires physical circumcision for anyone of us who is saved in the But now time period. It was established in Acts 15.
What God commanded us is given in Paul's letters from Romans to Philemon. I have already quoted Romans 4:5 to you
"But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
When we obey that commandment, God will count our faith for righteousness
What God commanded us is given in Paul's letters from Romans to Philemon. I have already quoted Romans 4:5 to you
"But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
When we obey that commandment, God will count our faith for righteousness
Again, that's taking the verse out of context. Romans 4 is an argument about how Abraham was justified to apply it to us so to say that 4:1-4 apply to Abraham but 4:5 applies to us but not Abraham is carving the Bible up into little bits rather than letting it speak.
The works specified in Romans are to be understood in the context of the discussion, which focuses on the question of when Abraham was justified. The point of pretty much all of Romans is that the old covenant("law") was never God's means of justification but instead was part of a plan to bring sin to its final extent. And Romans 4 is no different since immediately following the statement you ripped out of the text is this " Is this blessing then on [d]the circumcised, or on [e]the uncircumcised also? For we say, “Faith was credited to Abraham as righteousness.” 10 How then was it credited? While he was [f]circumcised, or [g]uncircumcised? Not while [h]circumcised, but while [i]uncircumcised; " so the works most likely in mind are works of the law, specifically the things the Jewish converts were attempting to place on the gentiles in Sabbaths and diet.
As for your approach to the Bible, I fear we are too far apart to even begin to find common ground. Carving up the Bible into parts that apply to you is wrong both for its novelty and for the strong possibility of twisting the Bible to suit self rather than being transformed by it.
The works specified in Romans are to be understood in the context of the discussion, which focuses on the question of when Abraham was justified. The point of pretty much all of Romans is that the old covenant("law") was never God's means of justification but instead was part of a plan to bring sin to its final extent. And Romans 4 is no different since immediately following the statement you ripped out of the text is this " Is this blessing then on [d]the circumcised, or on [e]the uncircumcised also? For we say, “Faith was credited to Abraham as righteousness.” 10 How then was it credited? While he was [f]circumcised, or [g]uncircumcised? Not while [h]circumcised, but while [i]uncircumcised; " so the works most likely in mind are works of the law, specifically the things the Jewish converts were attempting to place on the gentiles in Sabbaths and diet.
As for your approach to the Bible, I fear we are too far apart to even begin to find common ground. Carving up the Bible into parts that apply to you is wrong both for its novelty and for the strong possibility of twisting the Bible to suit self rather than being transformed by it.
It seems to me the question is a bit of a misnomer, since the idea of a hereditary jew only really solidified after the diaspora. Circumcision is what made a member of the tribes of Israel a member of the tribes of Israel.
But if a physical descendant of Abraham wasn't personally directed by God to get circumcised then I don't think it would go against faith in God to not be circumcised.
In the same way, in order to participate in the church of God a person must be baptized, but baptism doesn't determine salvation.
But if a physical descendant of Abraham wasn't personally directed by God to get circumcised then I don't think it would go against faith in God to not be circumcised.
In the same way, in order to participate in the church of God a person must be baptized, but baptism doesn't determine salvation.
-
1
- Show all
The truth that works complete a saved person (new works outwardly mirroring their new heart), does not contradict the truth that a person is saved because they believed in Jesus, and were born again. They are not saved because they showed fruit, but quite the opposite, they showed fruit in time because they were saved. This distinction is important.
The reason why we capitalize on grace is just like there are lawless people out there who trample grace that you warn about, there are also people out there, that nullify grace, and the Gospel, that we warn about. There are also various people who over the course of this thread denied that they have ever sinned in any regard since they accepted Christ, so since they are doing better than the apostles, maybe the apostles weren't saved.
I did not see any one of our friends fight against obedience, or deny obedience. We ONLY emphasize that obedience springs from salvation. This is in response teachings that we must "keep working to maintain salvation", and other teachings contradicting the Scriptures and denying eternal security, such as where it says that Holy Spirit was deposited into us as a GUARANTEE, or Christ promising to timely complete the good work He started in us. We are here because capitalizing on obedience combined with denying eternal security is a toxic brew, and it's not the Gospel. It's the unconditional love and grace that changes a person and causes them to want to obey and they are then shepherded with Jesus' staff (and rod if needed), unto obedience and producing fruit. But there are some people that seem to believe that God doesn't know what He's doing.
Jeremiah 32:40 And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me.
As opposed to Romans 3:18 quoting Psalms about the ungodly, "There is no fear of God before their eyes."...
So there's not going to be departing, "walking away", people of the New covenant have a new heart. We get chastisements and warnings in the New testament exactly because God is working these to shepherd His people from walking away. We are sons not bastards, and we are chastised and warned so we do not end up condemned with the world (1 Cor 11:32). One who will not obey God and ignores Him to death, from these verses, did not have a new birth/new heart. So like you said, salvation and obedience do go together, the problem is when people apply an unbiblical causality between them, and then go on to deny Biblical eternal security - this is as bad as preaching security with kicking obedience out (like megachurches do), neither is the Gospel as taught by the apostles. Cheers
The reason why we capitalize on grace is just like there are lawless people out there who trample grace that you warn about, there are also people out there, that nullify grace, and the Gospel, that we warn about. There are also various people who over the course of this thread denied that they have ever sinned in any regard since they accepted Christ, so since they are doing better than the apostles, maybe the apostles weren't saved.
I did not see any one of our friends fight against obedience, or deny obedience. We ONLY emphasize that obedience springs from salvation. This is in response teachings that we must "keep working to maintain salvation", and other teachings contradicting the Scriptures and denying eternal security, such as where it says that Holy Spirit was deposited into us as a GUARANTEE, or Christ promising to timely complete the good work He started in us. We are here because capitalizing on obedience combined with denying eternal security is a toxic brew, and it's not the Gospel. It's the unconditional love and grace that changes a person and causes them to want to obey and they are then shepherded with Jesus' staff (and rod if needed), unto obedience and producing fruit. But there are some people that seem to believe that God doesn't know what He's doing.
Jeremiah 32:40 And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me.
As opposed to Romans 3:18 quoting Psalms about the ungodly, "There is no fear of God before their eyes."...
So there's not going to be departing, "walking away", people of the New covenant have a new heart. We get chastisements and warnings in the New testament exactly because God is working these to shepherd His people from walking away. We are sons not bastards, and we are chastised and warned so we do not end up condemned with the world (1 Cor 11:32). One who will not obey God and ignores Him to death, from these verses, did not have a new birth/new heart. So like you said, salvation and obedience do go together, the problem is when people apply an unbiblical causality between them, and then go on to deny Biblical eternal security - this is as bad as preaching security with kicking obedience out (like megachurches do), neither is the Gospel as taught by the apostles. Cheers
-
1
- Show all
Not at all, circumcision served as a marker for carrying the promise and that did come through an unbroken physical descent, but that doesn't mean someone who somehow wasn't circumcised as a baby within Israel must join that community. Abraham's household extended beyond his relatives, and Israel was always a spiritual reality existing in the physical realm rather than a purely physical phenomenon.
So Paul's writings apply as commands, right? Did you miss the discussion between Magenta and I where she highlighted the command for baptism from Colossians that just happened?
So Paul's writings apply as commands, right? Did you miss the discussion between Magenta and I where she highlighted the command for baptism from Colossians that just happened?
Considering they were circumcised at 8 days old I'm not sure such a choice was even offered them. Certainly they wouldn't have had the privileges that came via circumcision such as dwelling with God. Do you mean to ask if a Hebrew refused to circumcise their son at 8 days old?
God's covenant with Israel wasn't about them attaining eternal life, though, so the bigger question is whether non-Israelites during the time preceeding Christ had access to eternal life and whether a person who was hereditarily linked to Abraham had to join the community of Israel to attain salvation. That's the one I entertain is possible.
God's covenant with Israel wasn't about them attaining eternal life, though, so the bigger question is whether non-Israelites during the time preceeding Christ had access to eternal life and whether a person who was hereditarily linked to Abraham had to join the community of Israel to attain salvation. That's the one I entertain is possible.