At what point in our salvation is the blood of Christ applied?
- Thread starter Beckworth
- 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.
Well... OK.
But, that does not reveal what was needed to know.
To show you an example?
I will give you an easy one.
Using any of your favorite translations?
What would you tell those at a Bible study, what Titus 2:9-10 is saying to us?
I will just pick the NIV for now...
For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people.
It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to
live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age. Titus 2:9-10
What would your short interpretation be?
In Christ
You only trust your own understanding of a translation.
Not the Bible.
Stop running away.
Fifty years is nothing compared to the eternity we will all be learning in.
What would you tell those at a Bible study, that Titus 2:9-10 is saying to us?
What would your short interpretation be?
50 years of study and you can not even tell us?
Not the Bible.
Stop running away.
Fifty years is nothing compared to the eternity we will all be learning in.
What would you tell those at a Bible study, that Titus 2:9-10 is saying to us?
For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people.
It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to
live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age. Titus 2:9-10
What would your short interpretation be?
50 years of study and you can not even tell us?
I am not trying to one-up anybody.
I only wish to open some eyes for what would make their walk with God's Word richer in their lives.
Some claim they do not need to better understand the original languages.
Languages that Bible translations were derived from.
There are those amongst us that think that their English translations will tell us all that we need to understand the Bible.
That we need no one to teach us what the original languages were saying.
For those who think that is true?
What would you tell those at a Bible study, that Titus 2:9-10 is saying to us?
What would your interpretation be?
I only wish to open some eyes for what would make their walk with God's Word richer in their lives.
Some claim they do not need to better understand the original languages.
Languages that Bible translations were derived from.
There are those amongst us that think that their English translations will tell us all that we need to understand the Bible.
That we need no one to teach us what the original languages were saying.
For those who think that is true?
What would you tell those at a Bible study, that Titus 2:9-10 is saying to us?
For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people.
It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to
live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age. Titus 2:9-10
What would your interpretation be?
Well, someone needs to understand the original languages in order to provide translations into other languages,
but any reputable translation is like a brand of gas: put it in the tank and it will burn. Thus, to say everyone NEEDS
to learn the original languages is not correct. It is more correct to say that learning them is helpful for fine tuning.
but any reputable translation is like a brand of gas: put it in the tank and it will burn. Thus, to say everyone NEEDS
to learn the original languages is not correct. It is more correct to say that learning them is helpful for fine tuning.
“Well, someone needs to understand the original languages in order to provide translations into other languages,”
Isn’t that how the translations we have now into our modern languages today ?
the kjv for instance was translated by the fifty four best translators to be found at the time in tbe world into the english language . from the Greek and Hebrew and Aramaic texts.
Or the original niv from the early 1980s also was translated by many expert translators into modern English from those Greek and Hebrew and Aramaic texts . This is true of any ancient literature. Or text
Isn’t that how the translations we have now into our modern languages today ?
the kjv for instance was translated by the fifty four best translators to be found at the time in tbe world into the english language . from the Greek and Hebrew and Aramaic texts.
Or the original niv from the early 1980s also was translated by many expert translators into modern English from those Greek and Hebrew and Aramaic texts . This is true of any ancient literature. Or text
You may misunderstand what I am saying.
Our salvation is based only on the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross.
What I mean is that the atonement itself is a gift and cannot be earned.
Now are we held accountable for our Christian life?
Obviously we are fully accountable if someone bothers to read the apostles letters.
We can end up years later denying Jesus because that results in the termination of our salvation.
We must obey the Lord's commandments and remain faithful to Jesus.
Simple equation; believe in Jesus and your saved, lose that faith in Jesus and you lose your salvation.
Our salvation is based only on the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross.
What I mean is that the atonement itself is a gift and cannot be earned.
Now are we held accountable for our Christian life?
Obviously we are fully accountable if someone bothers to read the apostles letters.
We can end up years later denying Jesus because that results in the termination of our salvation.
We must obey the Lord's commandments and remain faithful to Jesus.
Simple equation; believe in Jesus and your saved, lose that faith in Jesus and you lose your salvation.
Yes, of course, and even reputable paraphrases are sufficient for salvation.
For those of us who are not translators, knowing the original languages is helpful rather rarely.
The best example I learned from RBT is that the original Greek genders for faith and rock in Matt. 16:18
precludes Peter from being the pope on which Christ's church would be built.
For those of us who are not translators, knowing the original languages is helpful rather rarely.
The best example I learned from RBT is that the original Greek genders for faith and rock in Matt. 16:18
precludes Peter from being the pope on which Christ's church would be built.
-
1
- Show all
Yes, absolutely (they spoke the languages), but they did not REQUIRE any special knowledge of languages of others. In other words, they did not make it a stipulation in order to be a teacher. Thats all I am saying. AND, my opinion is, that it, the knowledge of languages, is not required for us, the common people, to be able to UNDERSTAND what God.says. And if I was JUST looking for others to agree with me, I would have left this site years ago! lol.
-
1
- Show all
Faith only per James 2:24 equates to an empty profession of faith/dead faith that remains "alone" barren of works. See James 2:14 - says/claims to have faith but has no works (to evidence their claim). That is not genuine faith but a bare profession of faith. *Not to be confused with faith that trusts in Jesus Christ "alone" for salvation and not in works. (Romans 4:5-6; Ephesians 2:8,9)
We are saved by grace through faith, not works (Ephesians 2:8,9) and obedience which "follows" having been saved by grace through faith is works. In regard to Romans 1:5, although Paul can speak of people’s initial response of choosing to believe the gospel as an act of obedience, in which he describes it as "obeying the gospel" (Romans 10:16; 1:16), the purpose of Paul’s apostleship was not merely to bring people to conversion but also to bring about transformed lives that were obedient to God.
*Notice that Paul said they have (already) received grace and apostleship for/unto obedience to the faith. Just as in Ephesians 2:10, Paul said that we are created in Christ Jesus for/unto good works. We are clearly saved for good works and not by good works (Ephesians 2:8-10). Paul did not say that they did not receive grace and apostleship until they produced obedience afterwards. We have access by faith into grace.. (Romans 5:2) and not faith "and" obedience/works.
We are saved by grace through faith, not works (Ephesians 2:8,9) and obedience which "follows" having been saved by grace through faith is works. In regard to Romans 1:5, although Paul can speak of people’s initial response of choosing to believe the gospel as an act of obedience, in which he describes it as "obeying the gospel" (Romans 10:16; 1:16), the purpose of Paul’s apostleship was not merely to bring people to conversion but also to bring about transformed lives that were obedient to God.
*Notice that Paul said they have (already) received grace and apostleship for/unto obedience to the faith. Just as in Ephesians 2:10, Paul said that we are created in Christ Jesus for/unto good works. We are clearly saved for good works and not by good works (Ephesians 2:8-10). Paul did not say that they did not receive grace and apostleship until they produced obedience afterwards. We have access by faith into grace.. (Romans 5:2) and not faith "and" obedience/works.
Ummmm
Unless you have singlehandedly rewritten the rules of persuasive writing....you may get off your feelings.
I'm married to an exemplary English teacher....who now works for a much larger salary in medical research.
I believe I know more than you....and you haven't said anything to convince me otherwise.
Especially by someone confused with the meanings of what they, themselves wrote. Because they just want to argue....sorry....I'm not here for that.
You may feel free to engage someone else to argue with. I'm not interested.
Unless you have singlehandedly rewritten the rules of persuasive writing....you may get off your feelings.
I'm married to an exemplary English teacher....who now works for a much larger salary in medical research.
I believe I know more than you....and you haven't said anything to convince me otherwise.
Especially by someone confused with the meanings of what they, themselves wrote. Because they just want to argue....sorry....I'm not here for that.
You may feel free to engage someone else to argue with. I'm not interested.
Faith alone per James 2:24 equates to faith alone. Not your subjective "empty profession of faith".
Faith alone is a sincere and correct belief that Jesus is all that He claimed to be, the same belief that the demons have and tremble.
But James calls it a dead faith because it is void of works.
James 2:20: "But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?"
Not works of merit but the works of obedience toward God.
We may debate what these works of obedience may be but not the need to obey them.
Dead faith equals faith without works.
It does not equal your "empty profession of faith".
Faith alone is a sincere and correct belief that Jesus is all that He claimed to be, the same belief that the demons have and tremble.
But James calls it a dead faith because it is void of works.
James 2:20: "But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?"
Not works of merit but the works of obedience toward God.
We may debate what these works of obedience may be but not the need to obey them.
Dead faith equals faith without works.
It does not equal your "empty profession of faith".