Did Jesus Die on The Cross for The Just/Elect/Saved Whose Names Are Written in The Book of Life OR

[TheDivineWatermark]

I don't see how that in any way the phrase "faith of Jesus Christ" can be misconstrued as being nonsensical.

[btw, I'll come back an address your previous post... the one addressed to me... at a later time. I only have a moment here...]

It means Christ's faith. Do you not think that Christ had faith as He is the author and finisher of faith:

[Heb 12:2 KJV] 2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of [our] faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Consider:

--that Heb12:2 doesn't say "our" faith" (as you likely are aware... the italics show this was added);


--so this verse says, "THE [G3588] faith" that He is the founder/originator/chief-leader and completer/consummater of ("THE [G3588] faith" showing in the Greek-- see here: https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/heb/12/2/t_concif_1145002 );


--so with the definite article ('the'), it is more like what we see written in Gal3:23,25 "23 But before THE [G3588] faith came [ https://www.blueletterbible.org/esv/gal/3/23/t_concif_1094023 ]" and "25 But now THE [G3588] faith has come [ https://www.blueletterbible.org/esv/gal/3/23/t_concif_1094025 ]"... neither of these is talking about "our faith [as in, personal faith in/toward Christ]"... but more like, "that body of truth" (concerning Christ and His finished work; not His personal "faith" He exercised [as in, simply, belief / trust / etc]...; and which [body of truth] we find recorded in our NT following the Cross [and including His death/burial/resurrection/exaltation, 1Cor15:1-4 for example, encapsulating it]).



How are you reading Galatians 3:23,25? ("before the faith came" and "but now the faith has come"<--what are these referring to, as you see it?)...[/QUOTE]

 

[rogerg]

I am not denying that

I am denying that God regenerates us in sin, so we can believe to be justified.

And I am denying that my trust in God I did not come up on my own, nor is it a work..

I do not merit salvation because I looked to the cross and trust God to save me

I dunno, I am not following you at all. You may be referring to statements you've made in prior post that
formed the basis of what you're saying here that I am unfamiliar with.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

I dunno, I am not following you at all. You may be referring to statements you've made in prior post that
formed the basis of what you're saying here that I am unfamiliar with.

Do you deny the fact that you have said that if we have faith in Christ and believe we are saved by that alone, we are working to earn salvation?

or have you changed your tune?

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

[Jde 1:3 ESV] 3 Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.

We are to earnestly contend for "THE faith" ("THAT BODY OF TRUTH"), not personal faith [belief / trust--what we exercise (as supposedly having been poured into us)]; This, instead, ("THAT BODY OF TRUTH") is what was "once [for all] DELIVERED"

(and is what we find recorded in Scripture following the Cross [but including that info also, as in 1Cor15:1-4, etc--"For I [Paul] DELIVERED [G3860] unto you first of all that which I also received..." v.3 [i.e. Paul delivered [G3860] "THAT BODY OF TRUTH"]--See "G3860" also in Jude 1:3])

 

[rogerg]

--that Heb12:2 doesn't say "our" faith" (as you likely are aware... the italics show this was added);

There is only one faith and it originated from and remains with Christ. Since it resides within Him, to have it, one must be given it by Him.

How are you reading Galatians 3:23,25? ("before the faith came" and "but now the faith has come"<--what are these referring to, as you see it?

In two ways: 1) that Christ's offering brought faith to fruition, and 2) that those whom God had chosen to salvation, have received true faith as a gift given from Him.

 

[rogerg]

We are to earnestly contend for "THE faith" ("THAT BODY OF TRUTH"), not personal faith [belief / trust--what we exercise (as supposedly having been poured into us)]; This, instead, is what was "once [for all] DELIVERED"

(and is what we find recorded in Scripture following the Cross [but including that info also, as in 1Cor15:1-4, etc--"For I [Paul] DELIVERED [G3860] unto you first of all that which I also received..." v.3 [i.e. Paul delivered "THAT BODY OF TRUTH"]--See "G3860" also in Jude 1:3])

Disagree. We believe in the body of truth BECAUSE we have been given faith - one is the "how", the other the "what".

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Disagree. We believe in the body of truth BECAUSE we have been given faith - one is the "how", the other the "what".

None of those texts we are presently discussing, say that or express such a thing. = )

 

[rogerg]

None of those texts we are presently discussing, say that or express such a thing. = )

[1Co 2:14 KJV] 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.

[Gal 2:16 KJV] 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.

 

[rogerg]

Do you deny the fact that you have said that if we have faith in Christ and believe we are saved by that alone, we are working to earn salvation?

or have you changed your tune?

It seems to me that you are combining dissimilar doctrine and attributing them to me. Let me make this completely
clear. What I've said, and what I say, is that we are saved completely and fully by Christ alone as He is the Saviour, and by nothing that we can do nor can we contribute to it. It is fully a gift from God.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

It seems to me that you are combining dissimilar doctrine and attributing them to me. Let me make this completely
clear. What I've said, and what I say, is that we are saved completely and fully by Christ alone as He is the Saviour, and by nothing that we can do nor can we contribute to it. It is fully a gift from God.

Oh I agree

But we MUST receive his grace. of our own free will.. Or he will nto save us.

When I trust in the work of someone else to save me, I am not saving myself. nor an I meriting my salvation. I did not work. the rescuer did it all. I just sat and allowed him to work to save me,, and did not work against him.

 

[rogerg]

Oh I agree

But we MUST receive his grace. of our own free will.. Or he will nto save us.

When I trust in the work of someone else to save me, I am not saving myself. nor an I meriting my salvation. I did not work. the rescuer did it all. I just sat and allowed him to work to save me,, and did not work against him.

Of our own free will, we never will receive it. We must be given it, and from that, believe it.

[1Co 2:14 KJV] 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Of our own free will, we never will receive it. We must be given it, and from that, believe it.

Thats not true. And you just proved th epoint I was making about you.. see how we came full circle. You denied you said it, then here you are saying it again)

[1Co 2:14 KJV] 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.

So your saying God is not powerful enough to convict you of sin righteousness and judgment?

 

[rogerg]

Thats not true. And you just proved th epoint I was making about you.. see how we came full circle. You denied you said it, then here you are saying it again)


So your saying God is not powerful enough to convict you of sin righteousness and judgment?

Honestly, I just don't see how you got to that conclusion from what I said. Of course, God is powerful enough, and does convict us of sin, but that conviction is not what saves us, instead, conviction of our sin only comes after we become saved, not before. Do you see below that our sin must first be remitted BEFORE we can gain a knowledge of salvation, but it only given to those whom
He has chosen as being of His people; that is, salvation is a prerequisite to the gaining of spiritual knowledge.

[Luk 1:77 KJV] 77 To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins,

 

[rogerg]

Everlasting-Grace, I wanted to reply to a question you posed to me previously, and which, I did not have the opportunity to reply to sooner. It is a very important question, so I wanted to provide my opinion.

But we are just as saved on the first day as the last.



Salvation can not be lost. Its a gift of God.

I definitely agree with you that there is only one salvation, and it cannot be lost once given, and I wasn't trying to say otherwise. Instead, I wanted to try to convey that in the Bible, the "shall be saved" can refer to salvation's final act - of salvation from the wrath of God on the last day - when those who became saved during their lives are physically redeemed by Christ upon His return. The Bible does refer to a being saved occurring on the last day, but which, is solely given to those who have become saved during their lifetimes - the first resurrection.

What I was attempting to convey was that the ("shall be saved") is in the future tense, and I believe there are biblical verses which support that conclusion. I realize that many people on this site differ with me regarding how one becomes saved, but regardless of that difference, I think most believe that when whatever what we believe is required to become saved occurs - that first resurrection - salvation is immediately given to the person, and not given sometime in the future. So, the "shall be saved", cannot be referring to that immediate part - the first resurrection part of salvation - because that part is over and done with, nevertheless, the verse does say “shall be saved”. So, it must then be referring to a future event. I think the following verse can serve as a good example of what I was trying to convey. If you will, please notice the "endure unto the end" portion, with that ” end” occurring on the last day. We can thereby associate the “unto the end” to the “shall be saved”, which makes the “shall be saved” as a future, not a current event, yet still occurring within the whole context of the salvation process, but also described by the Bible as being saved. I think that whenever we encounter verses in the Bible which contain "shall be saved", that are referring to this.
Hope this is understandable.

[Mat 24:13 KJV] 13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

[Rev 20:6 KJV] 6 Blessed and holy [is] he that hath part in the first resurrection: on

 

[rogerg]

Hope this is understandable.

Everlasting-Grace, I accidently left out the last part of verse Rev 20:6 in my last post to you - sorry.
Here is the complete verse.

[Rev 20:6 KJV] 6 Blessed and holy [is] he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

 

[rogerg]

We are to earnestly contend for "THE faith" ("THAT BODY OF TRUTH"), not personal faith [belief / trust--what we exercise (as supposedly having been poured into us)]; This, instead, ("THAT BODY OF TRUTH") is what was "once [for all] DELIVERED"

(and is what we find recorded in Scripture following the Cross [but including that info also, as in 1Cor15:1-4, etc--"For I [Paul] DELIVERED [G3860] unto you first of all that which I also received..." v.3 [i.e. Paul delivered [G3860] "THAT BODY OF TRUTH"]--See "G3860" also in Jude 1:3])

Paul may have delivered unto the presenting of it, but it is God alone who delivered unto it being within them. Observe:

[1Co 3:6-7 KJV]
6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

[Mat 24:13 KJV] 13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

E-G was right when he/she earlier pointed out to you that this ^ is a tribulation-period context passage; It corresponds to:


--"Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved out of it." - Jeremiah 30:7;



[and also passages such as...]

--Hosea 5:14-6:3, where it says (of Israel), "I will go and return to my place, till they acknowledge their offence, and seek my face: in their affliction they [Israel] will seek me early." (etc...);




It parallels (the idea surrounding):

--Romans 11:27 - "For this is my covenant unto them [/unto Israel], when I shall take away their sins." See parallel passage Isaiah 27:9,12-13 (which verses 12-13 are the very thing Matthew 24:29-31 is speaking of... at the "GREAT" trumpet [this is not "our Rapture"!]... THEY will be gathered "ONE BY ONE" [not "AS ONE," as WE will be!]... to one place UPON THE EARTH [not "IN THE AIR" as WE will be!], where they will "worship the Lord in the holy mount, AT JERUSALEM"); parallel also Dan9:24[parts] (per that "time-prophecy").





[IOW, Matthew 24:13's context is NOT about "the Church which is His body," is NOT about "our Rapture" [when our salvation is completed], and is NOT about all time-periods]

 

[rogerg]

E-G was right when he/she earlier pointed out to you that this ^ is a tribulation-period context passage; It corresponds to:


--"Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved out of it." - Jeremiah 30:7;



[and also passages such as...]

--Hosea 5:14-6:3, where it says (of Israel), "I will go and return to my place, till they acknowledge their offence, and seek my face: in their affliction they [Israel] will seek me early." (etc...);




It parallels (the idea surrounding):

--Romans 11:27 - "For this is my covenant unto them [/unto Israel], when I shall take away their sins." See parallel passage Isaiah 27:9,12-13 (which verses 12-13 are the very thing Matthew 24:29-31 is speaking of... at the "GREAT" trumpet [this is not "our Rapture"!]... THEY will be gathered "ONE BY ONE" [not "AS ONE," as WE will be!]... to one place UPON THE EARTH [not "IN THE AIR" as WE will be!], where they will "worship the Lord in the holy mount, AT JERUSALEM"); parallel also Dan9:24[parts] (per that "time-prophecy").





[IOW, Matthew 24:13's context is NOT about "the Church which is His body," is NOT about "our Rapture" [when our salvation is completed], and is NOT about all time-periods]

I'm not going to get into a debate with you (or anyone) now about the how things will unfold at the end of time, nor was it my intention to do so in my reply to Everlasting-Grace. My intention was only to demonstrate that the word "saved" is used by the Bible in a context other and later than the saving of someone during their lifetime, yet still part of the overall salvation process. and not why it was used that way.
A debate about the end-times would require its own thread as strong beliefs exists in that regard comprising many different points of view.

 

[MikeIsraelite72]

Is your premise that the early church was made up of only those of Jewish ancestry?

my premise is that a “spiritual israel” is not supported by scripture. i was raised in the church and held to the doctrine of “spiritual israel” for over 3 decades of my life, i can admit that although i was well versed in the new testament, i never studied the old testament rigorously with the exception of psalms and proverbs of which i was well acquainted. it wasn’t until i was 36 that i read the scripture cover to cover and i continued to do so for 3 years. as i studied intensively i started to have questions that i never had before and my eyes started to see things that were not visible in my first 35 years of following christ. The idea of a “ spiritual israel” is not only scriptural but it has its roots in gnostism and new age doctrine. in fact, when rome adopted christianity in the 3rd century, they did soo as a means to spread their influence further and as a mechanism to wield power over the citizenry. the churches that the disciples and paul built resisted rome and it wasn’t until the 6th century that were absorbed by the roman church. it was romes thirst for power and influence that twisted church doctrine into an all inclusive universalist church. the same spirit that worked through rome then is still perverting doctrine today and you see it with openly gay clergy and authorizing gay marriages. the book of revelation is very clear about this perversion and it started just 300 years after christ ascended to the right hand of the father.

for the record, i am always learning and relearning as i study scripture and i came to this forum so that i could find fellow believers to learn from and share perspective with, i am willing to lay out the scriptural framework to defend my position regarding “spiritual israel” if you are interested. praise Yahweh

 

[tylerbones1313]

my premise is that a “spiritual israel” is not supported by scripture. i was raised in the church and held to the doctrine of “spiritual israel” for over 3 decades of my life, i can admit that although i was well versed in the new testament, i never studied the old testament rigorously with the exception of psalms and proverbs of which i was well acquainted. it wasn’t until i was 36 that i read the scripture cover to cover and i continued to do so for 3 years. as i studied intensively i started to have questions that i never had before and my eyes started to see things that were not visible in my first 35 years of following christ. The idea of a “ spiritual israel” is not only scriptural but it has its roots in gnostism and new age doctrine. in fact, when rome adopted christianity in the 3rd century, they did soo as a means to spread their influence further and as a mechanism to wield power over the citizenry. the churches that the disciples and paul built resisted rome and it wasn’t until the 6th century that were absorbed by the roman church. it was romes thirst for power and influence that twisted church doctrine into an all inclusive universalist church. the same spirit that worked through rome then is still perverting doctrine today and you see it with openly gay clergy and authorizing gay marriages. the book of revelation is very clear about this perversion and it started just 300 years after christ ascended to the right hand of the father.

for the record, i am always learning and relearning as i study scripture and i came to this forum so that i could find fellow believers to learn from and share perspective with, i am willing to lay out the scriptural framework to defend my position regarding “spiritual israel” if you are interested. praise Yahweh

I'll find you scripture please wait