| Author | Message | ||
| jtree |
THE SEED AND THE PROMISE Galatians 3:19-23 The promised Seed is Christ. The promise is the promise God the Father made to God the Son before the world began. That promise was the promised gift of grace, salvation, and eternal life by the Holy Spirit to his elect. It was a promise made on condition of Christ's obedience and death, upon condition of righteousness established by him for us as our Substitute. The law given at Mt. Sinai was given to Israel in the hands of a mediator who was but a man. But the promise was given to Christ our Mediator from God our Father; and these two are one God. Look at the Scriptures. That is the meaning of Paul's words in verse 20 ó "Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one." God the Father promised eternal life to His elect before the world began. But He made the promise to Christ His Son as our covenant Surety and Mediator (Tit. 1:1-3). We who believe have obtained this promise of eternal life in Christ because the Lord Jesus Christ purchased it and effectually obtained it for the seed of Abraham, Abraham's true, spiritual seed (Gal. 3:13-14; Heb. 9:12; 2:16). Galatians 3:21 "Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law." What a plain statement this is. It is utterly irrefutable. The law which was given by Moses cannot be contrary to the promise of eternal life to God's elect before the world began. It is monstrously absurd to imagine that God would sacrifice His darling Son for nothing! If righteousness could be obtained by us doing something, God would never have sacrificed His Son at Calvary to bring in righteousness for us. Galatians 3:22-23 "But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed." The law of God was not given to make us righteous, but to shut us up to Christ. Being set forth in Holy Scripture, it concludes all under sin. We are all under sin by birth, by nature, by choice, and by practice (Rom. 3:19-23). We lived in spiritual death in sin's corruption, under sin's dominion, under its curse, with its penalty hanging over our heads. Here's the reason ó "That the promise (the same promise he has been discussing throughout the chapter, the promise of grace, salvation, and eternal life) by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe." Grace, salvation, and eternal life come to chosen sinners upon the ground of and because of the faith, faithfulness, or faithful obedience of Jesus Christ as our Substitute. It was Christ who alone brought in everlasting righteousness for us. It was Christ alone who redeemed us. It was Christ alone who put away our sins. It was Christ alone who made atonement for us by satisfying the justice of God with His own blood. It was Christ alone who, with His own blood, obtained eternal life for us! Our faith in Him has no part in the accomplishment of these things! What does faith do? Not a blessed thing! Faith receives! Believing God, we have grace, salvation, and eternal life by God the Holy Spirit, because God the Father promised it and God the Son purchased it! "Salvation is of the LORD!" Before faith came, that is before we came to trust Christ, before God gave us faith in His Son, "we were kept under the law." We were by nature children of wrath, just like everyone else. Though we were justified from eternity by God's decree and justified at Calvary by Christ's blood atonement, we knew nothing about it. We lived under the curse and condemnation of God's law. Our first convictions, our first thoughts toward God, filled us with terror. When the law came, sin revived, and I died. (Rom. 7:9). That is what every believer has experienced. Thus, by the terror of God's holy law on our consciences damning us, we were shut up to Christ. "Shut up unto the faith which should afterward be revealed." | ||
| jtree |
LOVE FULFILLS THE LAW Having freely obtained a right standing before God through faith apart from the law, is it not an insult to the grace of God to once again return to the law to maintain that standing? It is indeed. For "if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing! (Gal 2:21). But wait! Does this mean that believers are without a moral code? Is there no standard of righteousness for the child of God to pursue? Of course there is! But it is not a commandment etched in stone or enforced by a Levitical hierarchy. It is the single, all-encompassing command of our new high priest and law-giver, Jesus Christ: "A new command I give you: love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another" (John 13:25). Can such an apparently simple and singular command possibly be adequate to fulfill the righteous requirements of an infinitely holy God? Yes! because according to Paul, "1ove is the fulfillment of the law" (Rom 13:10). | ||
| jtree |
Free From The Law - O Happy Condition! In Christ every believer is totally free from the law. "We are not under the law, but under grace" (Rom.6:15). We are not, justified (Rom. 3:19-24), sanctified (Gal.3:1-3), motivated (II Cor.5:14), ruled (Tit.2:11- 12), or glorified (Jude 24-25) by the law, but by grace. "CHRIST IS THE END OF THE LAW FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS T0 EVERYONE THAT BELIEVETH" (Rom. 10: 4). Do you ask what that means? It means that Christ is the fulfillment of the law, the satisfaction of the law, and the termination of the law to all who believe on him unto life everlasting. It means that there is no righteousness to be had, of any kind, to any degree, by our own works of obedience to the law. The only way anyone can have righteousness before God is by faith in Christ. He is "THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS" (Jer.23:6). And we are the righteousness of God in him (Jer. 33:16; II Cor. 5:21). "YE ARE BECOME DEAD TO THE LAW BY THE BODY OF CHRIST" (Rom, 7:4), Do you ask what that means? It means that if you are a believer, if Christ died for you, insofar as the law of God is concerned you are dead. It can make no demands upon you. It can require nothing from you. It can do nothing to you. If you and I are in Christ by faith, we have no covenant with the law, no curse from the law, and no commitment to the law. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE ARE AGAINST THE LAW. God forbid! We are not antinomians, We delight in the law of God (Rom.7:22). The real antinomian is the legalist who pretends to keep the law. He lowers the standard of the law to the measure of his own obedience. Otherwise he could find no comfort in his obedience. So the legalist turns the law of God into lasciviousness. That is a complimentary word for his pretended obedience to the law! WHY ARE WE S0 DOGMATIC IN DECLARING THE BELIEVER'S FREEDOM FROM THE LAW, AS IT IS SET FORTH IN THE SCRIPTURES? Let me give you three reasons for our dogmatism: First, the legalist would rob Christ of the glory of his grace, making some part of salvation dependent upon the works of the law. Second, the legalist would rob the believer of the joy of faith; the joy of assurance, and the joy of service to Christ, making assurance to be based upon obedience and service to Christ mercenary acts. Third, the legalist would rob the world of the hope of salvation, for if salvation requires any good work from sinners then there is no hope. jtree | ||
| Bill Twisse |
Patti, you state this about Calvinism, "I believe it redefines grace, much as the Catholics do, to mean some kind of power inside the believer rather than the undeserved favor God shows to sinful humans. Grace originates in God, it is His great mercy, NEVER anything inside of us. So when hyper-Calvinists refer to irresistable grace, they seem to be speaking of a power that draws them to God rather than an objective pronouncement of sinful humans as justified, reconciled to God, in the sight of a holy God because of the salvific act of Jesus Christ. Secondly, it is the flip side of legalistic exclusivism. The legalists on the one hand say they are saved because they have earned, at least in part, the favor of God. The hyper-Calvinists say they are saved because they were especially chosen (elitism) of God, to the exclusion of many other would-be Christians. This is an extremely repulsive idea to me. The results are the same: A hierarchializing of Christians. If I am missing something, I wish someone would explain it to me." I can assure you most emphatically that nothing is further from the truth--than this notion that the views of grace taught by Luther, Calvin, Knox, Whitefield, Spurgeon & all the great Reformers have anything to do with Catholicism. The Council of Trent was just as condemning of sovereign election as it was of justification by faith, perhaps even more so! (see the canons). Grace is indeed unmerited favor from God resulting in our justification. Paul also says 'by the grace of God I am what I am.' The fact that God works in us to create faith in the gospel is certainly the result of his unmerited favor. If grace only provided objective salvation and does not result in the power of the Holy Spirit drawing us to God through faith, we are still in our sins. Hyper-Calvinism may exclude would-be Christians but not the doctrine of God's election taught in the Bible. Anyone who is made to desire salvation by God's grace will certainly receive it. On 'denying salvation for some,' that is biblical. There is a real hell where those who are outside of grace will experience the opposite. Let us make it a part of our lifestyle to know this; we will have far more compassion for the lost as a result. On the matter of accusing someone of 'obviously being one of the non-elect,' we know what scripture has to say about that. Paul was the chief of sinners before he came to Christ; anyone in 'the Way' would have been tempted to think he was non-elect. The real pride for Christians is that of Jonah; running from the fact that he knew God had chosen him and that he had to do what God commanded. We have been chosen, our flesh is attemting to drag away and scream in rebellion--lusting after the the possibliity of opting out. But God will put is in the belly of a whale, if necessary, in order to bring us to our senses. He is the hound of heaven and we cannot run from him. --Twisse | ||
| Bruce H |
----The real pride for Christians is that of Jonah; running from the fact that he knew God had chosen him and that he had to do what God commanded. We have been chosen, our flesh is attemting to drag away and scream in rebellion--lusting after the the possibliity of opting out. But God will put is in the belly of a whale, if necessary, in order to bring us to our senses. He is the hound of heaven and we cannot run from him. AMEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Boy does that say it. He is my Father and you think he is going to let me choose HELL no way he Loves me and knows what is best for me. Bruce He | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Bruce and Bill, you guys have a powerful faith! And more shall be added unto you, of that I'm sure. God has even greater plans for both of you. Praising him for that, Jude | ||
| Plain Patti |
Patti, you state this about Calvinism, No, Bill. Perhaps you misread me, or perhaps I did not make myself clear. I said those things about "hyper-Calvinism." Having said that, let me assure you that after dealing with SDAism for a lifetime, I am very reluctant to claim the name of any human being. There are many points about Calvinism that I find comforting, and there are many things that Luther has to say that I agree with. I also find disagreements with both. It is a good thing that none of us is saved by (or lost without) a perfect theology, huh? :) | ||
| Bill Twisse |
Patti, My confusion was that you were criticizing the doctrine of irresistable grace, which is something that has always been taught by 'regular' (not hyper) Calvinists. It is one of the five points. I believe in irresistable grace with all of my heart. Paul is its chief example. It is important to confess that all who receive irresistable grace are given the gift of faith. In contrast, all of the hyper-Calvinists that I have interacted with said that we are saved by God's election alone, whether we believe or not. That is a different doctrine altogether. Being strictly a Christian nonconformist, I do not claim any labels either. Including that of Calvinist. Calvinism, although emphasizing much truth, has historically been associated with obeying the law-covenant as an evidence of receiving grace. In the light of the New Testament gospel, that is too horrible of a thought for me to entertain. --Twisse | ||
| Bruce H |
Jude God has Called us all especially you. We are all her not by accident but for a divine purpose, I cant wait to see what God has in mind for He Will impower us all. Bruce Heinr | ||
| Jeff H |
I have read most of the archived discussions but not all so this may have been covered. I talked to an SDA pastor friend of mine once and he pointed out that it was a doctrinal error to believe the law was done away with and that what paul was talking about was only the ceremonial law. He also said at least 80% of christian denominations believe this. I thought how could you get that from what paul wrote. I mean what paul wrote wouldn't even make sense if paul was just talking about the ceremonial law. I think bruce's post a while back made that very clear. And on a deeper level, christ's blood then would only save us from the ceremonial laws again not making any sense. Then I thought all we have to do is show once that when paul says the "law" he is including the 10 commandments, and you can clearly see that paul is including the 10 commandments into his use of the word "law" in Romans 7:7 For I would not have known what it was to covet if the LAW had not said, "Do not covet." So clearly paul in using the word LAW throughout his writings is including the 10 commandments. A side note, I did tell this pastor that a new law was given in its place that was far more comprehensive than the old. This is such simple stuff and seems so obvious it is to bad we have to waste so much energy on it and can't get on to more important things such as spreading the gospel so we can all go home. | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Jeff, Are you the same Jeff that posted this back in March? "A well known speaker started off his seminar by holding up a $20 bill. In the room of 200, he asked, "Who would like this $20 bill?" Hands started goin up. He said, "I am going to give this $20 to one of you but first, let me do this." He proceeded to crumple the dollar bill up. He then asked, "Who still wants it?" Still the hands were up in the air. "Well", he replied, "What if I do this?" And he dropped it on the ground and started to grind it into the floor with his shoe crumpled and dirty. "Now who still wants it?" Still the hands went into the air. "My friends you have all learned a very valuable lesson. No matter what I did to the money, you still wanted it because it did not decrease in value. It was still worth $20. Many times in our lives, we are dropped, crumpled, and ground into the dirt by the decisions we make the circumstances that come our way. We feel a though we are worthless. But no matter what has happened or what will happen, you will never lose your value in God's eyes. To Him, dirty or clean, crumpled or finely creased, you are still priceless to Him." What ever the case, yours or not, it was a great post! Maryann | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Hi Jeff, Good job of hanging in there with the Adventist minister. I don't think you were wasting your time and energy on "simple stuff," however. This "Old Law vs. New Law" stuff may be obvious to us, but how can it be obvious to those who have veils covering their hearts? 2 Corinthians 3:13-14 NIV: "We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to keep the Israelites from gazing at it while the radiance was fading away. But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant [law including 10Cs] is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away." If we take this text seriously, then we're going to have to admit that anyone who still has a veil covering his heart is not "in Christ," since, "only in Christ is it taken away"! This is serious stuff. It's not shallow or simplistic at all. And as as far as evangelising SDAs -- especially the ministers -- is concerned, I don't think there is anything any more important than showing them how the Mt. Sinai STATEMENT of the Old Covenant law in all its entirety has been totally and utterly replaced by the person of Jesus Christ, including his STATEMENT of the New Covenant law as given on Mt. Blessings. This IS the "spreading of the gospel" in verity. To say that this is not spreading the gospel is to say the whole book of Hebrews is not spreading the gospel. For the author of Hebrews spends the first TEN chapters of this thirteen-chapter book "taking away the veil" by presenting Christ as superior to the Old Covenant Law in every detail. And, incidentally, we are ALREADY HOME if we have Christ, for it was Jesus himself who told the SDAs [Pharisees] of his day, "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you." And how 'BOUT those streets of gold! (Psst. The "streets of gold" symbolize the traffic of agape love in the kingdom of heaven that already exists beneath our feet.) Already there, Jude | ||
| Jeff H |
Yes I am the same Jeff H that posted that earlier message. Yes you are right it is not a waste of time and is very important because it is in essence an understanding of the gospel. I think what I was trying to express was that it seems we (including myself especially) try and make things more difficult than they have to be. That is a good point that we are already home I tend to forget that. | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Jeff, I hasten to add you seem exceptionally well suited to making things clear and easy, not muddy and difficult. I have learned a great deal from your posts. Jude | ||
| Bruce H |
Jeff I agree with Maryann and Jude. We could use your posting a little more often | ||
| jeff H |
Thank you both for your encouragement. I will try and post more often. Maryann I am glad you liked that post of the story about the 20 dollar bill it was encouraging for me as well. | ||
| Bruce H |
The Ten Commandments Deut 4:13 13 "So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone. So the Ten Commandments was the Covenant given at Mount Siani (Deut 4:9-13, Exo 34:28; 1Kings 8:6,9) and the New Covenant or Testament has this to say about the Ten Commandments in, 2 Cor 3:2-17. Old Covenant (Ten Commandments). Written with ink, on tablets of stone, of the letter, letter kills, ministry of Death, ministry of condemnation, glory fades now has no glory, done away. Is it true that this Ten Commandments is not eternal, is it inadequate, let us look at it very carfully. Adventist will tell you that all the Law written in the Book of the Law, or Law of Moses was done away with but the Ten Commandments are eternal and forever. Let us look at these Ten Commandments very carefully and see if this is true. Example #1. If I have a next door neighbor and I ignor him and even hate him and am very angry with him, never Talk to him and even curse him which of the TEN COMMANDMENTS Have I broken. None of them. Example # 2 If I eat a meal of pork chops, bowl of clam chowder, with a side of bottom feeding shrimp and scallops, which of the TEN COMMANDMENTS have I broken. None of them. Example #3 If I do not Love God, but have no other Gods before God, and I have no carved images and do not bow down to any carved which of the TEN COMMANDMENTS have I broken. None of them. Example # 4 Tatto my face arms and legs, as well as my chest and back but none of the tattos have the image of God, which of the TEN COMMANDMENTS have I broken. None of them. Example #5 Looked at Porno Movies all day long, six day's a week, but before the Sabbath I prerecord all the porno so I do not have to get up from the chair and I program the video machine to go on automatcally, and did not watch any of the videos on the sabbath, and my parents did not care that i did this. which of the TEN COMMANDMENTS have I broken. None of them. Example #6 Pracitce Homosexuality, but not being married to any women, which of the TEN COMMANDMENTS have I broken. None of them. Example #7 decide to marry and unbeliever, who is a pagan prostitute which of the TEN COMMANDMENTS have I broken. None of them. Example # 8 Go to church on the false day of worship the Popes fake Sabbath the mark of the Beast day, Sunday, but I rest on Saturns day. Which of the TEN COMMANDMENTS have I broken. None of them. Example # 9 Did not properly prepare for the Sabbath on friday and get all my food prepared for the Sabbath and while passing by a grain field pick some grain and rubbed it in my hands and eat it which of the TEN COMMANDMENTS have I broken. The Fourth. Example #10 Tell a Man on the Sabbath to pick up his Bed pallet put it on his shoulder and to carry that heavy thing clear across town which of the TEN COMMANDMENTS have I broken. The Fourth. Example # 11 I have a 5 day work week and I rest from my work on the sabbath and I keep the day Holy and on sunday I sit around and eat popcorn and watch football games and play with the kids at the park, which of the TEN COMMANDMENTS have I boken. The Fourth. I guess that is why we walk buy the Spirit. BH | ||
| Jude the Obscure |
Bruce: With the home team down three-zip in the bottom of the ninth with two out and the bases loaded, you hit the ball outta the park with that post! | ||
| Patti |
It seems that whenever one tries to present the Gospel of grace alone to those who insist that our works play a part in our salvation, we are accused of obliterating the law of God. This has been the theme of multiple posts lately in answer to us who try to direct the attention of others to Christ and His finished work for us. This has caused me to wonder: Who really is demeaning the law of God? Let us consider the statements on both sides (faith alone vs. faith and works). 1. Faith alone: Man, in the fallen of nature, is not capable of fulfilling the requirements of the law. 2. Faith and works (or faith that works): Man can and must keep the law with the indwelling of Christ. I submit to you that those who believe that God's law is infinite in scope and perfection give more honor to it than those who maintain that fallen humans, even with God's help, can and must keep it. In order to maintain that fallen humans can keep the law, one must miniaturize the law, and God Himself, to make it possible for man to please Him with his obedience (be it inspired and aided by the Holy Spirit or not). Because everyone who is honest with himself knows deep inside that he is not keeping the law to the perfection required by God, a variety of believer-centered doctrine have had to be invented to give men an "out" to the demands for perfect obedience required of God. Purgatory is one example of such a doctrine. In modern American Christianity, the "out" is a watering down of the demands of the law with a "Santa Claus" kind of God who loves us so much that He will let us slide by into heaven if we try or if our motives are good. It is significant that the more "legalistic" a belief becomes, the less they do honor to the law of God. Merely the act of defining what should and should not be "done" limits the law and God to our perception of Him. So here, again, it seems, we have an optical illusion. When a believer says the law can and must be kept, he limits God and His everlasting law to what sinful man can perceive and produce. It seems to me that, in this case, man is creating God in his sinful image, and not doing honor to the infinity, majesty and glory of the Creator of all the Universe. 1. Faith alone: Christ is primarily our Substitute, both in life and in death. Christ is the sinless Lamb of God who perfectly fulfilled all things God requires. In Him, (and only in Him) His only Son, God is well-pleased. 2. Faith and works: Christ is primarily our example to show us how to live. He died for forgiveness of sins, and then lives in our hearts so that our deeds are acceptable to God. We can and must follow the example of Christ so that we can become acceptable to God. You will find SDAs and other Arminians scattered all over the spectrum of this category. Some actually believe that Christ was human just as we are and had to overcome all the weaknesses of fallen human flesh. Some believe that He was the Son of God, but could have fallen. Some believe that He had to overcome evil thoughts and temptations. By making the "Christ in me" more important than the historical Christ, they downplay the work of Christ for us and elevate sinful humanity by emphasizing what happens in us. Looking at number one and number two, tell me: Which one gives God and Christ more glory? Which view puts man in the more humble position and exalts Christ to the throne of heaven? Not all doctrine are as pious and holy as they sound. It is truly up to the believer to prove all things. And what should be the plumb-line with which the beliver judges all things? Jesus Christ and Him crucified. Worthy is the Lamb. To Him be all glory and majesty forever. | ||
| Maryann |
Hi Patti, You stated: "It seems that whenever one tries to present the Gospel of grace alone to those who insist that our works play a part in our salvation, we are accused of obliterating the law of God. This has been the theme of multiple posts lately in answer to us who try to direct the attention of others to Christ and His finished work for us." When you mentioned "theme of multiple posts lately," does that include ANY or EVEN ONE post I have made? Please answer!;-)) Maryann |
