| Author | Message | ||
| Graceambassador |
Dear Patti and Cindy: Great exchange again! My humble take on all of this as a preacher of Grace only is that: we dwell too long in the GOD FORBID and totally forget the THEREFORE in Romans 6;2-4 In the other instances where Paul exclaims "GOD FORBID" we again dwell in the GOD FORBID and totally neglect the GRACE-FULL revelation of the BUT GOD..., in Romans 15:16-17. In Romans 7 the "GOD FORBID" also is explained with the THEREFORE... of chapter 8 verse 1. In summary, Paul was not inspired to preach "GOD FORBID", but the "BUT GOD..." GOD ALTERING THE PREVIOUS CLAUSE, and "THEREFORE", or that which has been eternally accomplished in us. The dwelling in the GOD FORBID can lead the most Grace minded preacher into RETURNING TO THE DARKEST DEPTHS OF LEGALISM. Again, just my humble unsolicited opinion! Grace Ambassador | ||
| Graceambassador |
CORRECTION: I goofed. In the post above, the second reference is Romans 6:15-17. Sorry if I started a new doctrine! Grace Ambassador | ||
| Graceambassador |
By the way: Anyone who studies Pauline language, know that Paul uses his "BUT" a lot. (no irreverent pun intended). The most glorious revelations of Grace-full things brought by Paul are in the form of "but" and "therefore". Here are some: We were dead in our trespasses and sins... But God made us alive... Ephesians 2 In times past ye were without Christ... But now in Christ Jesus... Ephesians 2:12-13 (you have to read it) The weapons of our warfare are not carnal... BUT THEY ARE MIGHTY!!! You can find many more... THEREFORE: OH! wretched man that I am... There is now THEREFORE (THERE IS IS ADDED BY THE TRANSLATORS) no COMDEMNATION... Romans 6:24-8:1. Who has delievered us from offenses... THEREFORE being justified with Christ, we have peace with God... (what a Revelation!) Romans 4:25, 5:1. It is called Pauline style. It was inspired by the Holy Spirit! Grace Ambassador | ||
| Max |
Hi GA, I appreciate the helpful way you have dug up some of the many "therefores" in Paul. I especially like the one you pointed out in Romans 5:20--6:4. Boiled down to its inescapable logic, the passage reads like this: 1. Yes, sin has increased, but grace has increased much more than sin was able to do. 2. Shall we go on sinning, then, so that grace may continue to increase? 3. "Never!" Or "God forbid!" Or "Absolutely not!" How can we continue to live in sin if we are dead to it? 4. THEREFORE (not "yes but"), having been resurrected with Christ, WE TOO MAY LIVE A NEW LIFE! (6:4). To try to force a "no changed life" construction on this text is nonsense. Not that that was what you were trying to do. But let's be clear about Scripture. Especially on this key issue. Blessings to you Grace Ambassador, Max of the Cross | ||
| Graceambassador |
Dear Max: You are absolutely correct! To go even deeper in interpretation, unpolluted by tradition, I believe we should see it this way: THE WORK THAT GOD WROUGHT IN YOU IS IRREVESSIBLE. IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN INTERFERE WITH. IT IS FINISHED AND INDELIBLE. BY NO MEANS, IN ANY POSSIBLE WAY, ABUSE IT. AND I IN MY AUTHORITY AS AN APOSTLE SAY TO YOU THAT I DO NOT ALLOW YOU TO ABUSE THIS WONDERFUL WORK OF GOD, NEITHER DOES GOD, WHICH IS EVEN MORE SERIOUS. WHAT I AM SAYING, IN THE SAME APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY, AND INSPIRED OF THE SPIRIT IS THAT, SINCE THIS WORK HAS BEEN WROUGHT IN YOU, LIVE IN ACCORDANCE TO IT BY LIVING THE NEW LIFE CREATED IN YOU BY CHRIST. It is a paraphrase, but in context with other teachings of Paul, IT IS NOT A STRECH! Paul warns us in Galatians that if we abuse this right by "sowing in the flesh" (which is Galatians is equivalent to going back to the Law of Moses), thereof we will reap corruption, meaning that something tragic may happen to us in this life. So, Paul's warning says that those who abuse this wonderful work called Grace will always live like they are still under the "curse of the law". As I said many times: Just as Lazarus right after resurrection - ALIVE, BUT AS A MUMMY, he had to be freed in order to enjoy his NEW life! Just food for thought. A trivial meal for thought from this humble FELLOW bond slave of Christ! Grace Ambassador | ||
| Max |
Dear GA, Agreed. And it's interesting that the entire book of Hebrews was written to new Jewish Christians to show them how sinful it is -- not only only to lie, cheat, steal, commit adultery, or murder -- but also to fall back into the sin of relying on required circumcision, Sabbath- keeping, tithe-paying, and ham-shunning! The book of Hebrews is soooo apropos to OFTAs. MC | ||
| Max |
Ps. And don't let any OFTA tell you that circum- cision is not still a requirement. It is an un- spoken requirement (obviously because of what the New Testament says about it), but a requirement all the same. Ever met an OFTA man who "boasted" of being uncircumcised? Or who would refuse to let his male offspring be circumcised because of what Paul called it in Galatians? He called it "mutilation"! | ||
| Cindy |
Valerie, I guess we just interpret that quote differently...:-)) I still think the gospel message ("in its' entirity"!) can be misunderstood at first! To me the gospel is "CHRIST CRUCIFED FOR YOU!"... a COMPLETE, PERFECT, AND FINISHED ACT OF GOD ALONE! This proclaimation of Christ's WORK on the Cross IS the gospel message! Only later do we even get into the "therefores" of our 'response'... I think we need to always keep distinct the actual MESSAGE and the EFFECT this message has on us... Not to say we don't encourage holy living... but again it is only the effect, the response... to this indescribable gift! And based only, always, on the Cross of Christ as being the motivation to live in the REALITY of that salvation... already ours! Grace always, Cindy | ||
| Cindy |
Grace Ambassador/Uncle Milt...:-)) I am always glad to see your name appear when I turn my computer on! Thank-you again... for posting the texts above along with your always "grace-full" comments! Grace always, Cindy | ||
| Max |
Cindy, I don't want to get into an argument. And I certainly do appreciate your insights on the primacy of grace. But don't you think that the faith-response CAN be immediate? When Jesus called the rich young ruler, for example, he gave him an immediate test of his faith response: GO, SELL everything that thou hast, then COME back and FOLLOW me! I don't think that Luther's emphasis on the primacy of grace rules out the IMMEDIATE faith-response of repentance, obedience and submission to our Lord Jesus Christ. What do you think? MC | ||
| Graceambassador |
Dear Cindy and Max: Cindy: Thank you for your words of encouragement. They mean a lot to me! Max: Without getting in an argument, let me propose something for you (perhaps you've done this before): Check ALL the orders that Jesus gave during His days and balance them with: THE TIMING AND THE DEGREE OF REVELATION GOD INTENDED TO BRING DURING JESUS' DAYS THE TIMING AND THE DEGREE OF THE REVELATION PAUL RECEIVED AND PROCLAIMED, WHICH WE CALL GRACE. Without calling me a HYPER DISPENSATIONALIST, which some do, you may find the SUPREMACY OF GRACE (or the primacy of Grace) that you are bringing about. Example: TO BE SAVED: JESUS TOLD NICK TO BE BORN AGAIN HE TOLD THE YOUNG RULER TO SELL EVERYTHING HE HAD IN MATTHEW HE SAYS THAT BY FEEDING THE HUNGRY, CLOTHING THE NAKED, AND VISITING THE PRISIONERS WE WILL BE DOING FOR HIM AND THEREBY BE SAVED TO ZACHEUS HE ACTUALLY TOLD NOTHING ABOUT SALVATION. IT JUST HAPPENED WITH ALL ITS NUANCES. Ask yourself if the purpose of the GOSPEL IS TO SHOW SALVATION BY GRACE OR THE SAVIOR and the Savior with all His aspects such as DELEGATED authority (exhousia in the Greek) and authority POWER (dunamus in the Greek) to indicate HIS DIVINITY. You will find that the interactions of Jesus during the times of the Gospel and even through Acts, when the Disciples were pretty much good Jewish boys, are specifically to indicate and to certify him as the Savior. Faith was important then because it was a BLASPHEMY to proclaim to be the Son of God. People had to believe even if it would take some miracles for such a belief to be inspired. What I mean is that, after the PERIOD of the GOSPELS AND THE PERIOD OF THE JEWISH CHURCH, THE BABY CHURCH FINISHED - ACTS -, God, in His adminstration of time (a biblical term) reveals THE MYSTERY THAT WAS HIDDEN THROUGH THE AGES to Paul. THE GRACE that I speak about. This GRACE has supremacy over faith. In another forum, and I will not repeat here, I wrote a post which demonstrates a foundational distinction between FAITH FOR TEMPORAL THINGS and THE FAITH OF CHRIST, as CORRECTLY rendered by the KJV in Galatians 2:16-20, (correct because it is more in context with the whole text). The NIV renders FAITH IN CHRIST, which baffles me because the NIV, in the same text translates THE LAW OF GOD for the same Greek declination they translated FAITH IN CHRIST. So, if it is FAITH IN CHRIST, then it should be LAW IN GOD. Plus, in verse 20 (Galatians 2) Paul repeats ...I live in the faith OF THE SON OF GOD, not IN the Son of God. Follow me? The faith response of repentance, as you said, is nothing that we can possess. It is important and it is a step that the elect is lead to take at Salvation. But is something that Christ GIVES to us spiritually. This spiritual faith COMES BY GRACE ALONE! Thus the belief that Grace is supreme! Again, please, let us not get argumentative about! Am I wrong? Well, I can vouch for the many hours and the many debates I had on the subject. I am willing to discuss with anyone who spent the same amount of time and effort studying the subject. Other than that, I DEFER MY OPINION TO THEIR OPINION because Grace is so Grace-full that does not demand us to be right theologically all the time! Always admiring your insights! By the way, I am indeed reducing my posts! I am growing weary and heavy laden, filled with a load of care... But I will never be discouraged taking to the Lord in prayer! So if you care to respond and I do not COUNTER RESPOND, please, be sure that I read your response and will always gain insight from it. Grace Ambassador | ||
| Max |
Hi GA, Indeed, "GRACE has supremacy over faith." But I am unaware of a single New Testament instance in which imposed-from-without free grace was not answered by the elect with what I will call the big ROS: R - Repentance in the face of overwhelming grace, O - Obedience to the test Christ ALWAYS presents, and S - Submission to the will of God. When Peter walked on water he was acting in ROS to Christ's command, "Come." When he sank, he acted in ROS by crying out to his Lord, "Save me!" When the rooster crowed, he acted in ROS by going out and weeping bitterly. When Saul was lying blinded on the ground on the road to Damascus as a result of God's "fist to the face" grace, he acted in ROS by obeying Christ's command, "Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do." The two brothers -- Peter and Andrew -- acted in ROS when Jesus commanded, "Come, follow me, and I will make you fishers of men." For, "At once they left their nets and followed him." When the thief on the cross stopped his mocking and cursing of the Christ on the cross next to his and instead rebuked his fellow robber and prayed to Jesus, he was acting in ROS. When the publican smote himself and prayed, "Lord, be merciful to me a sinner," he was responding in ROS. There are dozens of other examples. The important thing to note here is that in all of these instances we are not dealing just another a New Testament preacher here, but with the Son God Himself. For when the Holy Spirit comes to us with uninvited, intrusive, imposing, free grace, He is acting in the Person of the Son God and the Father God, for God is One. First comes uninvited, intrusive, imposing, free grace. Then comes ROS. There IS a connection: an action on the part of God and a reaction on the part of the believer. And that connection is never an anemic "yes but." In the elect it is always a robust THEREFORE! Blessings upon thee, Max of the Cross | ||
| Cindy |
Max, Morning, :-)) I certainly do think the faith=response can be immediate. I appreciate how you put that response as ROS: repentance, obedience, and submission. These are GIFTS also, that are given BY GOD (as our dear Grace Ambassador says). They accompany the preaching of the Gospel. My concern is that by stressing this "faithresponse" we miss out in preaching the only thing that even genuinely generates this faith-response: the message of CHRIST'S all-sufficient sacrifice and substitution at the Cross! The SUPREMACY of this Grace is the basis for all our response. I would agree with Uncle Milt's analysis above...:-)) Wish I had more time now to continue...well, the weekend is almost here! :-)) And, Max!... I'd only want to get into "friendly" arguments with you... or anyone here! You have all have been a blessing to me, even if we interpret things slightly different at times. :-)) Grace Ammmbassador said it so well! "Grace is so Grace-full that does not demand us to be right theologically all the time!" Grace always, Cindy | ||
| Valm |
Dear GA, Please tell me what do you mean when you say: Am I wrong? Well, I can vouch for the many hours and the many debates I had on the subject. I am willing to discuss with anyone who spent the same amount of time and effort studying the subject. Valerie | ||
| Cindy |
Grace Ambassador/Uncle Milt, I hope your day goes well...I know so well myself the feeling you expressed of being "weary and heavy laden"...I loved how you continued with that songs' words..."take it to the Lord in prayer." I will pray for your strength to be strong in the GRACE of God. You have an important work to do-- in HIS strength alone! God says to all of us as He said to Joshua: "Have I not commanded you? Be STRONG and of GOOD COURAGE. Do not be afraid, nor be dismayed, FOR THE LORD YOUR GOD IS WITH YOU WHEREVER YOU GO." Wherever we go...:-)) Grace always, Cindy | ||
| Valm |
Dear Cindy, I suppose where we differ in our opinion is that I believe that the "therefores" are a part of the Gospel message and/or a part of the New Covenant we have with our God. I can not imagine getting up in the morning without the Holy Spirit! I can not imagine that the kingdom of Heaven does not begin now. These are my deep held beliefs and sometimes I feel they are trampled upon in these discussions. I have the utmost of respect for your point of view. I consider your view as valid as mine, just different. I have always appreciated your kind words and have admired the respect you have shown to others in your posts. For me what I struggle with most in this (and any of these discussions) is when I hear a striking overtone of individuals claiming the superiority of their views. I am having a hard, hard time with it because is smacks with the attitude we all experienced as SDAs. I have to tolerate this attitude in my family and I was hopeful to come to this place and find that there would be deep mutual respect for each others beliefs. (I suppose my FAF honeymoon is over!) We all claim that our focus is on the Cross of Christ and then we get caught in this sparring which brings the focus back to us in whose views are more superior. This does not add up to me. I have a deep concern that while we left the SDA church we did not critically look at what things were toxic about it other than it was scripturally incorrect. While the message we carry is different, the MO in which we function is still much the same as when we were Adventists. Does this make sense to anyone? I truely consider myself in the "we" above. I am a recovering Adventist. And much like an alcoholic I must remember where I come from and continue day to day healing. The first thing I think in the morning is that God's grace is sufficient for me. Then I think that the kingdom of heaven is now. I remember that I am sealed as God's own by the Holy Spirit and that I will tap into the Holy Spirit to live the life God wishes for me. Seize the day all! Valerie | ||
| Graceambassador |
Dear Max and Valm: Just finished my taxes and found a zillion errors. First Max: I agree with you. No difference foundationally. My emphasis is in WHAT THE SPIRIT LEADS US TO DO BECAUSE OF GRACE, rather than WHAT WE DO WITH THAT WHICH WE WERE LEAD BY THE SPIRIT TO DO...I mean it is the SPIRIT CREDIT anyway and that He does it because of GRACE. Because of Grace we are lead and "made alive" to: - REPENT - SUBMIT TO THE WILL OF GOD TO THE POINT THAT IT BECOMES OUR PLEASURE TO DO HIS WILL and ALL the other aspects you menioned! But again, you are foundationally correct! Valm: Please read this: Paul says: "...bring Grace to the hearers..." And that in context with ...speak the truth one to another...(Ephesians). This teaches me that even truth has to be seasoned with GRACE! If we can't show Grace when speaking the truth, we should perhaps not say it... ONE MORE INSTANCE OF THE PREACHER NEEDING HIS OWN PREACHING! So, perhaps I should not have said it that way because it may give people the impression that I am arrogant. But I BEG YOU, let me explain: When I TASTE AN ORANGE say that it is sweet and someone says it is tarty, I expect that person to know at least the same about the orange that I do. If not, I will simply believe that such person is witholding knowledge about the orange that I do not have, or perhaps NEVER TASTED THE ORANGE. It happened before, in forums over the Web that the party I was discussing with, had no knowledge of whereof he/she spoke. I was sad because I wasted so much time in presenting my ideas racionally with no reciprocity. I decided that in this cases I will simply defer to the other persons opinion, obeying another command of Paul "consider each other superior to yourself" or "have the other in high regard" (paraphrased), without compromising mine own beliefs. It is useless discussing with someone about an orange's taste if that someone has never tasted it! Remember that the word "arrogance" comes from a Latin word that means "ab rogare" which is "to claim a right to himself". I claim my right of not discussing endlessly if the other party seem not to give me the same courtesy of studying the subject as I do. That without ascribing any evil character to that person, but simply, not arguing! (YOU HAVE NOT CALLED ME ARROGANT, I AM GETTING AHEAD OF MYSELF WILLFULLY). In a lighter note, I DO NOT MIND WHEN BROTHERS OR SISTERS IN THE LORD DO NOT AGREE WITH ME. WHEN WE GET TO HEAVEN, THEY'LL KNOW ALL THINGS, AND THEN, KNOWING ALL THINGS, THEY WILL OBVIOUSLY AGREE WITH ME!!  Humbly asking you to forgive me if I in any way or degree offended you. IT IS 10:40AM here in Michigan, it is snowing and I have not get much sleep, but I think VALM AND MAX deserved an explanation. Grace Ambassador | ||
| Valm |
Dear GA, Thank you in your gracious reply. I will remind you that taste is in the perception of the taster. I would encourage you to let whether you wasted your time or not in God's hands as we ultimately never know the true outcome of our well intended actions. Not everyone is going to be able to give the Bible the same amount of time of study. I do not know your situation but perhaps it allows more time than others. I would caution anyone not to use this as their ace card. Then the focus is not on the message but of our achievement in understanding the message. Some may have a better grasp of the message in 15 minutes of study than those who have studied for years! I wished I were one of those. Have a great day. Do you cross country ski? Perhaps today should be a mental health day rather than a working stiff day!!!! I say that as I go out the door. HI HO HI HO........ Valerie | ||
| Max |
Greetings all! Let's try to keep in mind that when we post thousands are reading or will read in the course of a week (according to stats from Richard Tinker). It's like a panel discussion in front of a stadium of onlookers. That said, Greetings again! Cindy and Grace Ambassador (Uncle Milt?), I want to thank you two especially. I learned something from you. And I only realized what I learned this morning when I awoke: You're absolutely right: We do NOT preach faith-response or ROS. That's not our job. We don't even preach grace. That's not our job either. Not the grace that is detached from the cross, as it is in what Bonhoeffer calls "cheap grace" or what Jude calls "changed grace" (Jude 4) or what I have called pseudograce. We preach neither faith nor grace -- if either is detached from "Christ on the cross." We preach "Christ on the cross" alone. That's it. That's our sole preaching function. And even that is a gift of God. There are plenty who preach "cheap faith" or "changed faith" or pseudofaith. Here are some examples from Hank Hanegraaff's CHRISTIANITY IN CRISIS (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1993): Simon-Sorcerers all! I will take them on one by one in subsequent posts. Here's goes: | ||
| Max |
Simon Sorcerer ESSEK WILLIAM KENYON Chief heresy: "What I confess, I possess." Notice that "I" is the center and what exposes him as an antichrist. Giveaway confession: "Every man who has been born again is an incarnation, and Christianity is a miracle. The believer is as much an incarnation as was Jesus of Nazareth." |
