PDA

View Full Version : “I never knew you - depart from Me” [I][B]are Christians[/B][/I] (Matt.7:23)



Pages : [1] 2

Walls
Apr 8th 2018, 01:40 PM
The text under consideration is Matthew 7:21-23;


21 "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
22 Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?'
23 And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'"

Because of the thousand years that the Roman Church hid the Bible and forbade the Laity of reading, studying and commenting on their studies, we still suffer from some Roman myths. One of the most devastating of these is the commonly taught doctrine that when men die they either land in heaven or in hell, and that the earth will be destroyed at length. Thus, salvation is not connected to God’s original plan with man in Genesis 1:26, “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.” But God’s councils are immutable and the TWO things that man is to be are still the main theme of the Bible;

Which men get to be in the image of God?
Which men get to be rulers of this earth and its environs of sea and sky?

While vitally important, I will, for this treatise, not deal with point #1. What is clear from point #2 is that the Bible starts with God’s plan that man should be the ultimate rulers of the earth, and it ends with a City, New Jerusalem, made of men in resurrection and who rule the earth “forever” (Rev.22:5). In between these two verses lies a primeval battle for this earth. And if so, any man who does not end up ruling on this earth cannot claim to be fully saved. “Salvation” is not only to be saved from the Lake of Fire. It is, who will be in the image of Christ, and who will rule with Him. It includes the rebirth of the human spirit, possessing the divine nature, the salvation of the soul, the resurrection of the body, being conformed to the image of Christ AND being re-instated as ruler who replaces “the prince of this world” - Satan. Besides large portions of the New Testament dealing with this subject, prophets of old like Daniel predicted the great Governmental powers of this earth and their end in an everlasting Kingdom of God to be ruled according to heavenly precepts.

The Book of Matthew introduces the Coming and Everlasting King - Jesus, Son Abraham for ruling the earth (Rom.4:13) and Son of David for ruling Israel. And in this Book, as it unfolds the Coming Kingdom of God that will be ruled according to the rules of Heaven, the co-kings of Jesus Christ are introduced. Also introduced is the rigorous training and behavior of these future co-kings. They are those who (1) are sons of God (by rebirth) - those who can call God “Father”, (2) learn to deny themselves and their souls, even unto death, (3) crucify their flesh daily, (4) are obedient to the will of their Head Jesus and their God Jehovah, even to the loss of everything, and (5) form an intimate bonding and relationship with their Coming Bridegroom, Jesus.

In Matthew Chapters 5 to 7 the kind of behavior, NOT of the Jew whose behavior is regulated by Law, and NOT of the Gentile who is without Law, is set forth for the future co-king of Jesus. The seemingly strange set of rules for behavior in these three Chapters are there because the time of the training of these co-kings coincides with the time that God gives men to be reconciled with Him. Turning the other cheek is NOT justice, but God requires it of His future co-kings because God gives man TIME - 2,000 years, to be reconciled to Him. And during this TIME that the future co-kings have the “ministry of reconciliation” (2nd Cor.5:18-19), justice and judgment are delayed, but not forgotten. According to this same Book Matthew’s 25th Chapter, there is a judgment for all those who struck a blow at a Christian at the END of the age (vs.31-46). But in the mean time, the "disciple" of Jesus is to forego justice for the sake of God's plan.

Now the Chapters on the behavior of the Christian during the time of reconciliation end in Matthew 7 with a judgment for the Christian. And the judgment is NOT about who goes to the Lake of Fire or not, IT IS ABOUT WHO GETS TO ENTER THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN when Christ sets it up on earth after His return. That is, WHO WILL BE QUALIFIED TO BE A CO-KING WITH JESUS?

It my considered opinion that the “lawless” who were told to “depart” from the Lord in that day of judgment are Christians. My argument is thus;

The whole discourse of Matthew 5, 6 and 7 is aimed at the Christian. In Matthew 5:1-2 it reads; “And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying”. According to the grammar, although there was a “multitude”, the ones taught where His disciples. He taught “THEM” - the disciples.
Further proof of this is that throughout the discourse our Lord Jesus referred to God as “My Father”, “your Father” and “our Father”. One can only call God “Father” if one is born from Him (Jn.1:12-13). That is, the subjects of this discourse are all born-again disciples.
Concerning our text in Chapter 7, verse 21 starts by those who call, “LORD, LORD!” According to Acts 2:21, Romans 10:9 and 13, they are those “SAVED” who call upon the Lord. They knew Who He was and called Him “Lord”.
The QUALIFICATION here for entering the Kingdom of Heaven on earth when the Lord sets it up is NOT rebirth. That is already taken for granted as in point #2. The qualification for entering the Kingdom is, “… he who does the will of My Father in heaven.” It is OBEDIENCE to God.
These men and women who would enter the Kingdom “prophesied in His Name”. This is a twofold proof of being a Christian. First, prophecy comes from the Holy Spirit as we see in 1st Corinthians 12, and second, these men and women knew the name of Jesus and its power.
These men and women "cast out demons in Jesus’s Name". According to Mark 16:17 one of the signs that shall follow “them that believe” is that they, “… shall they cast out demons”. And it is not possible that Satan could counterfeit this for the Lord assured us in Mark 3:22-26 that Satan would “end” his kingdom and house if he cast out demons.
These men and women “did MANY wonders” in Jesus’ Name. Not only do the attach their miracles to Jesus and His Name, but they did “MANY”. In Egypt, Israel and against the Church Satan did “lying wonders”, but they were FEW compared to those of God. Only Christians could do MANY wonders and do them in Jesus’ Name.
Finally, the devastating judgment of our Lord Jesus says it all. The word is “DEPART!” These were COMPANIONS of Jesus. They were with Him! You cannot “depart” if you were not with a person in the first place. The Jew hates Christ, and the Gentile would never be with Him. Only those who were with Him can be ordered to “depart”.

But the question we must now answer is, “how come these things of God and our Lord Jesus are works of LAWLESSNESS?” The answer lies in the first part of verse 21. Were they done at the command of God? That they were done by His power is not questioned. But did God, and the Head of the Church, Jesus, ask these men and women, at that specific moment, to do these things? We have an example of this in Acts 16:6-10. Paul was forbidden by the Holy Spirit to preach the word in both Asia and Bithynia. How come? Is not the great commission to preach the Word “to the uttermost parts of the earth”? YES! But as the Lord and head of the Church directs! There is no “doing your own thing” in the Church. Just like David in 2nd Samuel Chapter 5 when he repeatedly asks the Lord about battling the Philistines, God has a plan of the day. It is not the Christian who plans for the Lord! It is God Who makes the plans and we OBEY! Should you cast out a demon today? Who knows - ask God. It was not the acts that were Lawless, but the actors! It was not the things that were illegal but the “PRACTICES” of the servants. They did their own thing with their Talents. They did not inquire of the Master! They did NOT do the will of their Father!

And the glaring reason is revealed in verse 23 - “I NEVER KNEW YOU!” The Greek word here for “know” is Strong’s #1097 γινώσκω, transliterated “ginōskō”. It does not mean that our Lord Jesus did not have intellectual knowledge of them. He is God and knows all things. The word means that He did not have an intimate knowledge or recognition or understanding that a man and wife have of each other. It is used for sexual intercourse in Matthew 1:25, for reading the minds of men in Matthew 12:15 and understanding a situation in Matthew 26:10. It denotes an intimate understanding of a person. These Christians had been so busy doing their own thing that they had had no time to get to know Jesus, to be intimate with Him or to develop an intimate relationship. This is the number 1 cause of “lawlessness” among Christians. Not outright evil, but doing their own things in what THEY think pleases the Lord. And we have another hint of how to “know” Jesus that Christians rather shy away from. The same Greek word is used by Paul in Philippians 3:10, “That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death”, to show that getting to know Jesus is to walk His road with Him. That road was fraught with danger, enemies, persecutions, rejections, sufferings, and finally death for taking His position. That is how to intimately know Jesus.

And now, the most sobering of all. Verse 22 starts with the word “MANY”. That is, this phenomenon of Christians failing to enter the Kingdom when our Lord sets it up on earth is for the MANY. That is, MOST of Christianity, or the BULK of Christianity will fail to become co-kings with Jesus in the Millennium. And this comes from no other source THAN JESUS HIMSELF! How is your intimacy with Jesus? Have you walked His road? Have you “known” Him intimately? Have you suffered with Him? Have you been OBEDIENT to Him? THE KINGDOM IS AT STAKE!

P.S. Please excuse the Title. It cannot be edited.

Walls
Apr 8th 2018, 08:21 PM
Walls it is a serious matter for sure. I can tell you from personal experience...that most Christians don't know Jesus or His words...they study and quote Paul. I will say but Jesus said... they will come back with Paul and then usually quote this scripture to me:
2 Tim 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

I then say, Jesus said this:
Mt 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Mt 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

What words are more important? It even says this about the Holy Spirit:
John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

The Holy Spirit has a purpose.... it is for what Jesus said, no one else. Personally I see Christians when face to face with Jesus doing the same thing...quoting something other than what God or Jesus says. Would then Jesus say depart from me? For me that is my fear...so I stay in the gospels, the law, the prophets and the psalms that Jesus mentioned. The other books are history to me. There are probably not many that would feel that way, but that is me.

I think you are on the right path. We have His WRITTEN WORD. We have His spoken word via the Prophets in the Church ( and I don't mean those who predict the future like soothsayers). I mean those of 1st Corinthians 14:3. And we have the INDWELLING Spirit of God in our spirits (Jn.14:20, 23) which we are bound to let LEAD US (Rom.8:14). Woe to the Christian who thinks he/she knows better than God and tries to lead God. Let us be spoken to in that still small voice and obey.

Brother Mark
Apr 8th 2018, 11:12 PM
If they are Christians, how do you deal with the part where Jesus said "... I never knew you..."? Once Jesus knows someone, His seed is in them and He is in them and He knows them and calls them by name. Or do you mean they are cultural Christians who have never been born again?

ewq1938
Apr 9th 2018, 12:12 AM
Walls it is a serious matter for sure. I can tell you from personal experience...that most Christians don't know Jesus or His words...they study and quote Paul. I will say but Jesus said... they will come back with Paul and then usually quote this scripture to me:
2 Tim 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Paul taught what Christ taught to him. Paul is an Apostle of Christ.

DavidC
Apr 9th 2018, 01:36 AM
The text under consideration is Matthew 7:21-23;


21 "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
22 Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?'
23 And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'"

Because of the thousand years that the Roman Church hid the Bible and forbade the Laity of reading, studying and commenting on their studies, we still suffer from some Roman myths. One of the most devastating of these is the commonly taught doctrine that when men die they either land in heaven or in hell, and that the earth will be destroyed at length. Thus, salvation is not connected to God’s original plan with man in Genesis 1:26, “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.” But God’s councils are immutable and the TWO things that man is to be are still the main theme of the Bible;

Which men get to be in the image of God?
Which men get to be rulers of this earth and its environs of sea and sky?

While vitally important, I will, for this treatise, not deal with point #1. What is clear from point #2 is that the Bible starts with God’s plan that man should be the ultimate rulers of the earth, and it ends with a City, New Jerusalem, made of men in resurrection and who rule the earth “forever” (Rev.22:5). In between these two verses lies a primeval battle for this earth. And if so, any man who does not end up ruling on this earth cannot claim to be fully saved. “Salvation” is not only to be saved from the Lake of Fire. It is, who will be in the image of Christ, and who will rule with Him. It includes the rebirth of the human spirit, possessing the divine nature, the salvation of the soul, the resurrection of the body, being conformed to the image of Christ AND being re-instated as ruler who replaces “the prince of this world” - Satan. Besides large portions of the New Testament dealing with this subject, prophets of old like Daniel predicted the great Governmental powers of this earth and their end in an everlasting Kingdom of God to be ruled according to heavenly precepts.

The Book of Matthew introduces the Coming and Everlasting King - Jesus, Son Abraham for ruling the earth (Rom.4:13) and Son of David for ruling Israel. And in this Book, as it unfolds the Coming Kingdom of God that will be ruled according to the rules of Heaven, the co-kings of Jesus Christ are introduced. Also introduced is the rigorous training and behavior of these future co-kings. They are those who (1) are sons of God (by rebirth) - those who can call God “Father”, (2) learn to deny themselves and their souls, even unto death, (3) crucify their flesh daily, (4) are obedient to the will of their Head Jesus and their God Jehovah, even to the loss of everything, and (5) form an intimate bonding and relationship with their Coming Bridegroom, Jesus.

In Matthew Chapters 5 to 7 the kind of behavior, NOT of the Jew whose behavior is regulated by Law, and NOT of the Gentile who is without Law, is set forth for the future co-king of Jesus. The seemingly strange set of rules for behavior in these three Chapters are there because the time of the training of these co-kings coincides with the time that God gives men to be reconciled with Him. Turning the other cheek is NOT justice, but God requires it of His future co-kings because God gives man TIME - 2,000 years, to be reconciled to Him. And during this TIME that the future co-kings have the “ministry of reconciliation” (2nd Cor.5:18-19), justice and judgment are delayed, but not forgotten. According to this same Book Matthew’s 25th Chapter, there is a judgment for all those who struck a blow at a Christian at the END of the age (vs.31-46). But in the mean time, the "disciple" of Jesus is to forego justice for the sake of God's plan.

Now the Chapters on the behavior of the Christian during the time of reconciliation end in Matthew 7 with a judgment for the Christian. And the judgment is NOT about who goes to the Lake of Fire or not, IT IS ABOUT WHO GETS TO ENTER THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN when Christ sets it up on earth after His return. That is, WHO WILL BE QUALIFIED TO BE A CO-KING WITH JESUS?

It my considered opinion that the “lawless” who were told to “depart” from the Lord in that day of judgment are Christians. My argument is thus;

The whole discourse of Matthew 5, 6 and 7 is aimed at the Christian. In Matthew 5:1-2 it reads; “And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying”. According to the grammar, although there was a “multitude”, the ones taught where His disciples. He taught “THEM” - the disciples.
Further proof of this is that throughout the discourse our Lord Jesus referred to God as “My Father”, “your Father” and “our Father”. One can only call God “Father” if one is born from Him (Jn.1:12-13). That is, the subjects of this discourse are all born-again disciples.
Concerning our text in Chapter 7, verse 21 starts by those who call, “LORD, LORD!” According to Acts 2:21, Romans 10:9 and 13, they are those “SAVED” who call upon the Lord. They knew Who He was and called Him “Lord”.
The QUALIFICATION here for entering the Kingdom of Heaven on earth when the Lord sets it up is NOT rebirth. That is already taken for granted as in point #2. The qualification for entering the Kingdom is, “… he who does the will of My Father in heaven.” It is OBEDIENCE to God.
These men and women who would enter the Kingdom “prophesied in His Name”. This is a twofold proof of being a Christian. First, prophecy comes from the Holy Spirit as we see in 1st Corinthians 12, and second, these men and women knew the name of Jesus and its power.
These men and women "cast out demons in Jesus’s Name". According to Mark 16:17 one of the signs that shall follow “them that believe” is that they, “… shall they cast out demons”. And it is not possible that Satan could counterfeit this for the Lord assured us in Mark 3:22-26 that Satan would “end” his kingdom and house if he cast out demons.
These men and women “did MANY wonders” in Jesus’ Name. Not only do the attach their miracles to Jesus and His Name, but they did “MANY”. In Egypt, Israel and against the Church Satan did “lying wonders”, but they were FEW compared to those of God. Only Christians could do MANY wonders and do them in Jesus’ Name.
Finally, the devastating judgment of our Lord Jesus says it all. The word is “DEPART!” These were COMPANIONS of Jesus. They were with Him! You cannot “depart” if you were not with a person in the first place. The Jew hates Christ, and the Gentile would never be with Him. Only those who were with Him can be ordered to “depart”.

But the question we must now answer is, “how come these things of God and our Lord Jesus are works of LAWLESSNESS?” The answer lies in the first part of verse 21. Were they done at the command of God? That they were done by His power is not questioned. But did God, and the Head of the Church, Jesus, ask these men and women, at that specific moment, to do these things? We have an example of this in Acts 16:6-10. Paul was forbidden by the Holy Spirit to preach the word in both Asia and Bithynia. How come? Is not the great commission to preach the Word “to the uttermost parts of the earth”? YES! But as the Lord and head of the Church directs! There is no “doing your own thing” in the Church. Just like David in 2nd Samuel Chapter 5 when he repeatedly asks the Lord about battling the Philistines, God has a plan of the day. It is not the Christian who plans for the Lord! It is God Who makes the plans and we OBEY! Should you cast out a demon today? Who knows - ask God. It was not the acts that were Lawless, but the actors! It was not the things that were illegal but the “PRACTICES” of the servants. They did their own thing with their Talents. They did not inquire of the Master! They did NOT do the will of their Father!

And the glaring reason is revealed in verse 23 - “I NEVER KNEW YOU!” The Greek word here for “know” is Strong’s #1097 γινώσκω, transliterated “ginōskō”. It does not mean that our Lord Jesus did not have intellectual knowledge of them. He is God and knows all things. The word means that He did not have an intimate knowledge or recognition or understanding that a man and wife have of each other. It is used for sexual intercourse in Matthew 1:25, for reading the minds of men in Matthew 12:15 and understanding a situation in Matthew 26:10. It denotes an intimate understanding of a person. These Christians had been so busy doing their own thing that they had had no time to get to know Jesus, to be intimate with Him or to develop an intimate relationship. This is the number 1 cause of “lawlessness” among Christians. Not outright evil, but doing their own things in what THEY think pleases the Lord. And we have another hint of how to “know” Jesus that Christians rather shy away from. The same Greek word is used by Paul in Philippians 3:10, “That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death”, to show that getting to know Jesus is to walk His road with Him. That road was fraught with danger, enemies, persecutions, rejections, sufferings, and finally death for taking His position. That is how to intimately know Jesus.

And now, the most sobering of all. Verse 22 starts with the word “MANY”. That is, this phenomenon of Christians failing to enter the Kingdom when our Lord sets it up on earth is for the MANY. That is, MOST of Christianity, or the BULK of Christianity will fail to become co-kings with Jesus in the Millennium. And this comes from no other source THAN JESUS HIMSELF! How is your intimacy with Jesus? Have you walked His road? Have you “known” Him intimately? Have you suffered with Him? Have you been OBEDIENT to Him? THE KINGDOM IS AT STAKE!

P.S. Please excuse the Title. It cannot be edited.

There are many churches who advertise on their websites and their bulletins that they accept sin. It screams, go ahead and come to our church, we openingly encourage and support your sin. Speaking of all the churches here who support same sex marriages and homosexuality in my area and their parking lots are full.

randyk
Apr 9th 2018, 05:24 AM
I can't say I agree with all that, but certainly some of it is good stuff. For one, it isn't enough to do good. We have to obey God. That's true.

But the material about who gets to be in the Kingdom of Christ is a little difficult for me. For me, it's just a matter of being born again. To rule with Christ means to rule over the earth as God's people. Even the most backslidden, born again Christian can rule in the Kingdom of God. There is no backsliding there!

The "many" who do works for God, including miracles, refer to those, like the Jews, who have claimed to be "God's People," attend church, and profess belief in God's word. And yet, they aren't really born again. They just use God for gain in this world.

Walls
Apr 9th 2018, 09:03 AM
If they are Christians, how do you deal with the part where Jesus said "... I never knew you..."? Once Jesus knows someone, His seed is in them and He is in them and He knows them and calls them by name. Or do you mean they are cultural Christians who have never been born again?

May I refer you to the second last paragraph of the OP. If you still have questions I am happy to answer them.

Walls
Apr 9th 2018, 09:06 AM
There are many churches who advertise on their websites and their bulletins that they accept sin. It screams, go ahead and come to our church, we openingly encourage and support your sin. Speaking of all the churches here who support same sex marriages and homosexuality in my area and their parking lots are full.

Exactly. Do apostate Christians, who have thrown out God's testimony in favor of the flesh and worldly appetites, expect to me named co-kings with Christ in the next age? I think not.

Walls
Apr 9th 2018, 09:42 AM
I can't say I agree with all that, but certainly some of it is good stuff. For one, it isn't enough to do good. We have to obey God. That's true.

But the material about who gets to be in the Kingdom of Christ is a little difficult for me. For me, it's just a matter of being born again. To rule with Christ means to rule over the earth as God's people. Even the most backslidden, born again Christian can rule in the Kingdom of God. There is no backsliding there!

The "many" who do works for God, including miracles, refer to those, like the Jews, who have claimed to be "God's People," attend church, and profess belief in God's word. And yet, they aren't really born again. They just use God for gain in this world.

I can imagine that the thought of being rejected for so high a job is not pleasant. So the immediate human reaction is usually what you have written. But consider this. Even in the world today, when a certain job needs to be filled, there is a selection process. And if it is a job with implications to the state, health and reputation of the company, the boss will look very carefully at the character, qualifications and reputation of the applicant. So too the Lord. Before Pilate, Caesar's representative, He condemned the present world system of rule. The Greek for "world" there is "kosmos" meaning "the adornment" or "the orderly arrangement of things". That is, our Lord's Kingdom is NOT managed like today's system of rule. Do you really think that the Christians around you, who you perceive to be corrupt, liars and servers of self, are qualified to uphold the heavenly rule that MUST take place on earth in the Millennium? Why, king Saul, for the SINGLE DISOBEDIENCE in regard to Agag in 1st Samuel 15, the Lord says this in verse 23; "For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king."

To the rest of your answer, I have carefully laid down the proofs that those who (1) were "workers of iniquity" (KJV), (2) the Lord "did not know" intimately, and (3) who must "depart" from Him, ARE CHRISTIANS. I'm sure you know some of these in your Assembly. Not only do I know many such Christians, but must constantly "watch" that I am not one of them. Even now I find myself in battle between my own will and OBEDIENCE to the Lord's will. Will I be found worthy to be made co-king with Jesus? I think at this point of time it still hangs in the balance. Paul was no different. A mere three years before his martyrdom he writes in Philippians 3:12-14;


12 "Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, IF that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.
13 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,
14 I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus."

Here we find him STRIVING for "that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus". What are we apprehended for? "IMAGE AND DOMINION"! If rebirth was a guarantee for kingship, is Paul MAD to strive so much? Our salvation is not to escape hell and to walk through the Pearly Gates. It is that we may be conformed to the image of Christ (Rom.8:29), and that we gain the REWARD of the Lord's Kingdom on earth. So Paul, after his misgivings three years before his death, can now change his tune in 2nd Timothy 4:6-8, and with FULL ASSURANCE, say;


6 "For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand.
7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:
8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing."

The result of having fought a good fight, having finished his course, and having kept the faith is "A CROWN". A "crown" is for ruling as a king. AND THIS CROWN IS TO EARNED. It is not guaranteed.

shepherdsword
Apr 9th 2018, 10:19 AM
Walls it is a serious matter for sure. I can tell you from personal experience...that most Christians don't know Jesus or His words...they study and quote Paul. I will say but Jesus said... they will come back with Paul and then usually quote this scripture to me:
2 Tim 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:


Please note that posts claiming Paul's writings as uninspired and not on par with the rest of the scripture are not allowed in Bible Chat.

mailmandan
Apr 9th 2018, 11:08 AM
If they are Christians, how do you deal with the part where Jesus said "... I never knew you..."? Once Jesus knows someone, His seed is in them and He is in them and He knows them and calls them by name. Or do you mean they are cultural Christians who have never been born again? In regards to Matthew 7:21-23, I'll never forget, prior to my conversion several years ago, while still attending the Roman Catholic church, I read Matthew 7:22 and thought to myself, wow! These many people accomplished all of that, "prophesied in His name, cast out demons, and did many wonderful works" but that still was not "good enough?" Then I thought to myself at that time, how am I going to "top that" and be "good enough?" Such is the mindset of someone who believes that salvation is by works.

Matthew 7:21 - Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.

John 6:40 - For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in Him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.

These many people (unbelievers) in Matthew 7:22 had the wrong foundation. They were trusting in their works to save them and NOT IN CHRIST ALONE. Jesus NEVER knew them which means they were NEVER saved. Their hearts were not right with God, so their attempted external obedience was stained with sin. *Seeking salvation by works is not the will of the Father.

John 17:3 - And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. The term "know" implies intimate, experiential knowledge, through a relationship with Him, not merely theoretical knowledge. These many people were not true converts.

Slug1
Apr 9th 2018, 11:37 AM
In regards to Matthew 7:21-23, I'll never forget, prior to my conversion several years ago, while still attending the Roman Catholic church, I read Matthew 7:22 and thought to myself, wow! These many people accomplished all of that, "prophesied in His name, cast out demons, and did many wonderful works" but that still was not "good enough?" Then I thought to myself at that time, how am I going to "top that" and be "good enough?" Such is the mindset of someone who believes that salvation is by works.

Matthew 7:21 - Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.

John 6:40 - For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in Him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.

These many people (unbelievers) in Matthew 7:22 had the wrong foundation. They were trusting in their works to save them and NOT IN CHRIST ALONE. Jesus NEVER knew them which means they were NEVER saved. Their hearts were not right with God, so their attempted external obedience was stained with sin. *Seeking salvation by works is not the will of the Father.

John 17:3 - And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. The term "know" implies intimate, experiential knowledge, through a relationship with Him, not merely theoretical knowledge. These many people were not true converts.One of the points in the scriptures from Mt 7 is concerning the work of casting out demons in "your name." Based on other verses, those without the Holy Spirit, but still using Jesus' name (Acts 19:14-16) cannot cast out demons. So, were these people (Mt 7) once at a time actually had cast out demons by the power of the Holy Spirit in using Christ's name, or were they not casting out demons, but are deceived into thinking they were :hmm:

Brother Mark
Apr 9th 2018, 11:40 AM
May I refer you to the second last paragraph of the OP. If you still have questions I am happy to answer them.

IMO, those you describe in that paragraph are not true believers. You call them Christians, but then say that Jesus hasn't known them intimately. Ones Jesus has known intimately, will be like Mary, and have Jesus inside of them. Eventually, in the fullness of time, Jesus will come out of them too.

So... why do you say they are Christians if Jesus hasn't intimately known them? Or are you saying they are cultural Christians with a mental assent of Christ but not a heart change?

mailmandan
Apr 9th 2018, 11:56 AM
One of the points in the scriptures from Mt 7 is concerning the work of casting out demons in "your name." Based on other verses, those without the Holy Spirit, but still using Jesus' name (Acts 19:14-16) cannot cast out demons. So, were these people (Mt 7) once at a time actually had cast out demons by the power of the Holy Spirit in using Christ's name, or were they not casting out demons, but are deceived into thinking they were :hmm: There are false prophets who prophecy in the name of Jesus and even make false prophecies. I've seen of few of those on TBN. Also, Satan may grant the power to one of his agents to cast out demons from another of his agents in order to gain attention and loyalty from an audience for his own evil agenda. False teachers and false prophets have long demonstrated supernatural power granted by Satan, including the power to control the demonic realm. The enemy could easily use this deception to win an audience for his claims.

Also, in Matthew 10:1, we also see that Jesus gave His 12 disciples power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all kinds of sickness and all kinds of disease. This would include Judas Iscariot, yet Jesus referred to Judas Iscariot as an unclean devil who would betray Him! (John 6:71; 13:10-11). Apparently, Judas believed that Jesus' name has the power to cast out demons but did not truly believe in His name (John 1:12) and become a child of God, but instead was the son of perdition (John 17:12).

I personally used to know a woman who is a Mormon that "allegedly" cast a demon out of a teenage boy. She claims the demon came out of the boy, began to attack her, then stopped and with an eerie voice said, "oohhh, you're a child a God" then left. She then boasted about how that demon knew better than to mess with her! Of course, she was a devout Mormon and not a believer, yet the demon convinced her that she was through this experience. This made her all the more convinced that she was perfectly fine right where she was, lost in her Mormon faith. I once tried to share the gospel with her, but she was not interested at all and continued to trust in her works for salvation.

TheDivineWatermark
Apr 9th 2018, 12:13 PM
KyCyd:

What words are more important? It even says this about the Holy Spirit:

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

The Holy Spirit has a purpose.... it is for what Jesus said, no one else. Personally I see Christians when face to face with Jesus doing the same thing...quoting something other than what God or Jesus says.


John 16:

12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.

13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.


[said by Jesus shortly before He would go to the Cross]

I agree also with ewq1938 saying Paul was an apostle of Jesus Christ.


Are we thinking only the things said by Him before, say, 32ad "count"/are legit?? Just remember that He said this ^ ;)



Keep in mind also that which Acts 3:21-26 says [speaking specifically to Israel, per context]:

21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.
22 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up [to a position of prominence, DURING His earthly ministry] unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
23 And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.
24 Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days.
25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.
26 Unto you first God, having raised up [to a position of prominence, DURING His earthly ministry] his Servant Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities. [that is, during His earthly ministry, before the Cross (as Prophet; as Servant)]

Walls
Apr 9th 2018, 12:55 PM
One of the points in the scriptures from Mt 7 is concerning the work of casting out demons in "your name." Based on other verses, those without the Holy Spirit, but still using Jesus' name (Acts 19:14-16) cannot cast out demons. So, were these people (Mt 7) once at a time actually had cast out demons by the power of the Holy Spirit in using Christ's name, or were they not casting out demons, but are deceived into thinking they were :hmm:

The most interesting thing of this short passage is that ALL the claims of those who would enter the Kingdom, are NOT CONTRADICTED by the Lord. He does not answer, "you did NOT do many wonders", or "you did not cast demons out". He does not even question their calls of "Lord, Lord". He sets forth TWO criteria for not entering the Kingdom, and neither of these criteria call the works into question. Rather, they are;

(1) You were NOT OBEDIENT. That is, the works themselves are not called into question, but my ORDERS TO YOU were ignored. Let us say that Jonesy Jones is made US Ambassador to London. He is the representative of the President and his Cabinet of the USA. He has remarkable powers. He can negotiate things in favor of the US, be spokesman for the USA and authorize imediate action by US Forces in favor of the USA. The British Special Services need to extract some hostages from Accra, Ghana. The British authorities approach Jonesy Jones and make a request for US assistance from a US Air Force base in Germany. It is 8 a.m in London and thus 2 a.m in Washington. Jonesy Jones does not like to wake the President for such a small matter of one C-130 aircraft and two helicopters to assist the British operation. After all, they are allies. So Jonesy Jones authorizes the operation. On waking, the President is incensed and recalls Jonesy Jones from his post in London. Why? It NOT because Jonesy Jones did not have the power to authorize this operation. It is because he did not consult with the man who had the whole picture. The authorization is legal, the operation was thus legal, and let us say that it was a success. But Jonesy Jones DID HIS OWN THING WHEN HE WAS SUBJECT TO THE PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS.

Now, the new Ambassador arrives in London, and a few days later a similar request comes in from the British authorities. The new Ambassador calls Washington, explains the situation and receives a green light for the operation. Is this double standards? NO! The Ambassador, who is on the scene and has the power to authorize the operation in Europe DID NOT ACT ON HIS OWN. He asked the boss - the President of the USA. Likewise, if a Christian, who has been given authority over demons, wants to cast one out, he can physically do it. BUT DOES THE BOSS (JEHOVAH) - "the Father in heaven", WANT IT??

(2) I have NO intimate relationship with you. I am a father and husband. I know my wife intimately and she knows me intimately after 40 years of marriage. One thing I do not like is cold coffee like the Europeans drink. For me, coffee must be hot and beer cold. I go to work. I am an airline Captain and the hostess, wanting to do a good job, and wanting to make an impression of the Captain because she has a request for a crew seat for her boyfriend on this trip, decides to make me a coffee. The coffee is lukewarm, and I cannot drink it. The hostess's best intentions WORK AGAINST HER. She has done me a disservice, she has produced that which I don't like and she has put her request into jeopardy. WHY??? Because she did not know me intimately. Her intentions might be good. And her coffee might be good for an Italian who drinks coffee for its taste and effect. But through her lack of "knowing" me, her unilateral efforts worked against me and her.

This is what the Lord accuses those who call, "Lord, Lord". They know Who He is, they thought they served Him well, they thought they were diligent, they thought they made a good impression, and they thought all demons at all times must be cast, BUT THEY INADVERTENTLY MESSED UP MULTIPLE PLANS OF THE LORD IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS. If Paul had no intimate walk with the Lord he would have gone to Asia and Bithynia. Then he would appear at the judgment seat of Christ with the claim - "I have followed your Great Commission". The Lord will answer; "Paul, maybe you did, but, at that very moment, for my Grand Purpose, I DESPERATELY NEED YOU IN MACEDONIA! WHERE WERE YOU?" Paul would say; "I don't 'know', and our Lord Jesus would answer; "IF YOU HAD BEEN INTIMATE WITH ME YOU WOULD HAVE HEARD BY STILL, SMALL VOICE."

The works are legal. The motive might have been upright. But they were LAWLESS because they did their own thing. And the Lord's Name and reputation is at stake when He sets up His Kingdom on earth. He cannot afford REBELS. They will bring disgrace to His well hatched plans.

watchinginawe
Apr 9th 2018, 01:19 PM
The text under consideration is Matthew 7:21-23;


21 "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
22 Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?'
23 And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'"
...
Now the Chapters on the behavior of the Christian during the time of reconciliation end in Matthew 7 with a judgment for the Christian. And the judgment is NOT about who goes to the Lake of Fire or not, IT IS ABOUT WHO GETS TO ENTER THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN when Christ sets it up on earth after His return. That is, WHO WILL BE QUALIFIED TO BE A CO-KING WITH JESUS?

It my considered opinion that the “lawless” who were told to “depart” from the Lord in that day of judgment are Christians. My argument is thus;
...
And now, the most sobering of all. Verse 22 starts with the word “MANY”. That is, this phenomenon of Christians failing to enter the Kingdom when our Lord sets it up on earth is for the MANY. That is, MOST of Christianity, or the BULK of Christianity will fail to become co-kings with Jesus in the Millennium. And this comes from no other source THAN JESUS HIMSELF! How is your intimacy with Jesus? Have you walked His road? Have you “known” Him intimately? Have you suffered with Him? Have you been OBEDIENT to Him? THE KINGDOM IS AT STAKE!

This is a very intricate doctrine which has several premises which aren't disclosed or discussed. I note that your message is to Christians and one of "saving the Christian". I have learned to be put on alert when the evangelism target of a message is the professing Christian. I understand that you believe this is Jesus' intent and not yours, but in delivering the huge and intricate doctrine you have made it your own view of what Jesus' intent was and is, from the beginning unto the end. I think myself a pretty mature Christian but this is just too encompassing of a message, the whole ball of wax is offered up in a single post and to a precise viewpoint. I apologize if you think me too critical.

Walls
Apr 9th 2018, 01:40 PM
IMO, those you describe in that paragraph are not true believers. You call them Christians, but then say that Jesus hasn't known them intimately. Ones Jesus has known intimately, will be like Mary, and have Jesus inside of them. Eventually, in the fullness of time, Jesus will come out of them too.

So... why do you say they are Christians if Jesus hasn't intimately known them? Or are you saying they are cultural Christians with a mental assent of Christ but not a heart change?

Here is the first part of my second to last paragraph of the OP. It reads;


Walls, OP, second last paragraph:
Mostly, it revolves around the meaning of "KNOW". In And the glaring reason is revealed in verse 23 - “I NEVER KNEW YOU!” The Greek word here for “know” is Strong’s #1097 γινώσκω, transliterated “ginōskō”. It does not mean that our Lord Jesus did not have intellectual knowledge of them. He is God and knows all things. The word means that He did not have an intimate knowledge or recognition or understanding that a man and wife have of each other. It is used for sexual intercourse in Matthew 1:25, for reading the minds of men in Matthew 12:15 and understanding a situation in Matthew 26:10. It denotes an intimate understanding of a person.

But this is not the only word "know" in the New Testament. Let us make a comparison. In Matthew 1:25 it reads; "And (Joseph) knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.". Here the word is "ginosko" in the Greek as explained above. It means to have intimate knowledge like sexual intercourse. But in Matthew 6:8 and 32, which read severally:
8 "Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him"
32 "(For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things"

The Greek word here is "eido". This word means; "to consider, have knowledge, look (on), perceive, see, be sure, tell, understand". (Strong's Greek & Hebrew Dictionary.) It denotes intellectual knowledge like knowing that you must eat or die. Since you have never known death, you cannot "know" this "ginosko". You only know it "eido". Now, there are more Greek words that are translated "know" in the English, and each one has another meaning. But this second example is enough to understand my point. When these Christians of Matthew 7:21-23 are gathered for judgment, as I said in my OP above, the Lord KNEW them intellectually. He recognized them and perceived who they were - "EIDO". But over their lifetimes these Christians had not developed an intimate relationship with Jesus. Jesus did not know them intimately like a man and wife - "GINOSKO". Rather, He "knew" them as His crew, His team - EIDO.

One other thing must be considered. I was able to produce EIGHT proofs that these were Christians from the text. Let us just examine ONE. In the SIXTH proof I wrote ...


Walls, OP, proofs:
These men and women "cast out demons in Jesus’s Name". According to Mark 16:17 one of the signs that shall follow “them that believe” is that they, “… shall they cast out demons”. And it is not possible that Satan could counterfeit this for the Lord assured us in Mark 3:22-26 that Satan would “end” his kingdom and house if he cast out demons.

It is NOT I who said this. It is the Holy Spirit. Rebirth is GUARANTEED by FAITH (Jn.1:12-13). Salvation is GUARANTEED by FAITH (Mk.16:16; Rom.10:10; Eph.2:8). By FAITH we have Eternal Life. For a man to be able to cast out demons he MUST be a Christian - "THEM THAT BELIEVE"! This proof alone should settle the issue. They are BELIEVERS. Now consider - I found EIGHT such proofs.

There can be no doubt that these who call "Lord, Lord", ARE CHRISTIANS. Their faith is not called into question by the Lord Jesus. The validity of their works is not called into question by the Lord Jesus. Their STANDING as Christian believers is not called into question by the Lord Jesus. What is called into questions is WHETHER IT WAS GOD'S WILL AT THAT MOMENT TO DO THOSE THINGS.

Walls
Apr 9th 2018, 01:43 PM
This is a very intricate doctrine which has several premises which aren't disclosed or discussed. I note that your message is to Christians and one of "saving the Christian". I have learned to be put on alert when the evangelism target of a message is the professing Christian. I understand that you believe this is Jesus' intent and not yours, but in delivering the huge and intricate doctrine you have made it your own view of what Jesus' intent was and is, from the beginning unto the end. I think myself a pretty mature Christian but this is just too encompassing of a message, the whole ball of wax is offered up in a single post and to a precise viewpoint. I apologize if you think me too critical.

Thank you for your honesty. I appreciate your answer. God bless.

maverick
Apr 9th 2018, 01:49 PM
I have a little different view of this text. In reading the context starting at vs1 through vs14 I see the point being that there are two kinds of signposts. That of a true prophet or mouthpiece of God and false prophets. At vs15 Jesus explains how to recognize false prophets in pretty clear language.

These false prophets will appear in sheeps clothing "PRETENDING" to be true prophets. They are wolves and enemies of the Church. I think the "fruits" here have to do with words, (what they tell you and claim/teach) deeds, (vs22) and life-style. The Apostle Paul backs this up at Acts 20:27-31.

"For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God. vs28, Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. vs29 For I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; vs30, and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. vs31, Therefore be on the alert, remembering that night and day for a period of three years I did not cease to admonish each one with tears."

So, you have the church be attacked not only from "WITHOUT" but from "WITHIN" the church. In both of these text, this one and at Matthew 7 I can think of the word of faith movement that attacks the church from within because of what they teach. It's not hard to see who attacks the church from without. In short, and in my opinion what Jesus said at Matthew 7:23 are the most "lethal" words in the Bible, "I NEVER KNEW YOU." :eek:

IN GOD THE SON,
maverick

Brother Mark
Apr 9th 2018, 01:51 PM
One of the points in the scriptures from Mt 7 is concerning the work of casting out demons in "your name." Based on other verses, those without the Holy Spirit, but still using Jesus' name (Acts 19:14-16) cannot cast out demons. So, were these people (Mt 7) once at a time actually had cast out demons by the power of the Holy Spirit in using Christ's name, or were they not casting out demons, but are deceived into thinking they were :hmm:

Ken, never once did those folks say "Lord, Lord, we trusted in Jesus!" There faith was in their works. As far as I know, there's only one passage that we have about people trying to cast out demons in Jesus name and its in story form. I think we have to be careful saying that is the standard for ALL people who endeaver to cast out demons in the very powerful name of Jesus.

Brother Mark
Apr 9th 2018, 02:00 PM
Here is the first part of my second to last paragraph of the OP. It reads;



But this is not the only word "know" in the New Testament. Let us make a comparison. In Matthew 1:25 it reads; "And (Joseph) knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.". Here the word is "ginosko" in the Greek as explained above. It means to have intimate knowledge like sexual intercourse. But in Matthew 6:8 and 32, which read severally:
8 "Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him"
32 "(For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things"

The Greek word here is "eido". This word means; "to consider, have knowledge, look (on), perceive, see, be sure, tell, understand". (Strong's Greek & Hebrew Dictionary.) It denotes intellectual knowledge like knowing that you must eat or die. Since you have never known death, you cannot "know" this "ginosko". You only know it "eido". Now, there are more Greek words that are translated "know" in the English, and each one has another meaning. But this second example is enough to understand my point. When these Christians of Matthew 7:21-23 are gathered for judgment, as I said in my OP above, the Lord KNEW them intellectually. He recognized them and perceived who they were - "EIDO". But over their lifetimes these Christians had not developed an intimate relationship with Jesus. Jesus did not know them intimately like a man and wife - "GINOSKO". Rather, He "knew" them as His crew, His team - EIDO.

One other thing must be considered. I was able to produce EIGHT proofs that these were Christians from the text. Let us just examine ONE. In the SIXTH proof I wrote ...



It is NOT I who said this. It is the Holy Spirit. Rebirth is GUARANTEED by FAITH (Jn.1:12-13). Salvation is GUARANTEED by FAITH (Mk.16:16; Rom.10:10; Eph.2:8). By FAITH we have Eternal Life. For a man to be able to cast out demons he MUST be a Christian - "THEM THAT BELIEVE"! This proof alone should settle the issue. They are BELIEVERS. Now consider - I found EIGHT such proofs.

There can be no doubt that these who call "Lord, Lord", ARE CHRISTIANS. Their faith is not called into question by the Lord Jesus. The validity of their works is not called into question by the Lord Jesus. Their STANDING as Christian believers is not called into question by the Lord Jesus. What is called into questions is WHETHER IT WAS GOD'S WILL AT THAT MOMENT TO DO THOSE THINGS.

Why did they not defend themselves with their faith rather than their works? And how can Jesus have never known them, and then they have Jesus inside of them?

Sorry. Too many inconsistencies for me to believe this way. When Jesus knows someone, the Holy Spirit is in them. They are then being conformed to His image. If Jesus doesn't "know" you intimately, then you aren't born from above. For one who is born from above, has the Holy Spirit inside of them.

Just because signs follow God's true apostles, doesn't mean signs never follow those that are not his. Moses saw that with Jannes and Jambres. As someone else has pointed out, Judas, a devil, performed signs and miracles but was not a believer.

John 6:70 Jesus answered them, "Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?"
NKJV

and

John 6:64 But there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him.
NKJV

kyCyd
Apr 9th 2018, 02:04 PM
John 16:

12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.

13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.


[said by Jesus shortly before He would go to the Cross]

I agree also with ewq1938 saying Paul was an apostle of Jesus Christ.


Are we thinking only the things said by Him before, say, 32ad "count"/are legit?? Just remember that He said this ^ ;)



Keep in mind also that which Acts 3:21-26 says [speaking specifically to Israel, per context]:

21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.
22 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up [to a position of prominence, DURING His earthly ministry] unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
23 And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.
24 Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days.
25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.
26 Unto you first God, having raised up [to a position of prominence, DURING His earthly ministry] his Servant Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities. [that is, during His earthly ministry, before the Cross (as Prophet; as Servant)]

I agree also with ewq1938 saying Paul was an apostle of Jesus Christ. I never said he wasn't. I believe the full Bible is inspired. To me Jesus placed more authority on specific words, but that is me.

I agree with all you state re John 16, I believe it is for all who have the Holy Spirit not just a select few. He said as you point out “shew it unto you” what does that mean to you?

As far as your quoting Acts 3:21-26, to me, it is speaking about Jesus who was more than a prophet. Mt 11:9.

TheDivineWatermark
Apr 9th 2018, 02:09 PM
Walls, what do you make of Judas?

Mark 3:

14 And he ordained twelve, that they should be with [G3326 - meta] him, and that he might send them forth to preach,

15 And to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils:

16 And Simon he surnamed Peter;

17 And James the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and he surnamed them Boanerges, which is, The sons of thunder:

18 And Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Canaanite,

19 And Judas Iscariot, which also betrayed him: and they went into an house.


John 6:70 -

"70 Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?"


Acts 1:25 also.


And John 17:12 -

"12 While I was with [G3326 - meta] them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled."




[note: [G3326 - meta - "accompanying"] in contrast to [G4862 - syn/sun - denoting "union" and/or "identification"] ]

TheDivineWatermark
Apr 9th 2018, 02:40 PM
One other thought... The way the word is used in Romans 11:2 -

"God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew [ from G4253 pro and G1097 ginosko]. [...]" [here, speaking specifically of "His people," that is, "Israel" (even considering the "blindness... UNTIL")]

Slug1
Apr 9th 2018, 03:05 PM
Ken, never once did those folks say "Lord, Lord, we trusted in Jesus!" There faith was in their works. As far as I know, there's only one passage that we have about people trying to cast out demons in Jesus name and its in story form. I think we have to be careful saying that is the standard for ALL people who endeaver to cast out demons in the very powerful name of Jesus.Hooah, my point is that without the Holy Spirit, people can't "truly" cast out demons. So, did these poeple at one time have the Holy Spirit? As Mailmandan raised, even Judas was empowered by Jesus (I understand Judas didn't have the Holy Spirit inside of him but the Holy Spirit provided empowerment to him or was upon him as it was at that time) but a key is that he didn't continue with the relationship that Jesus and he had at that time. Later, he fell away, chose to not abide and turned away in betrayal.

So the struggle is the "I never knew you" from the Matthew 7 verses. Is it about Jesus never knowing a person? Well, He sure knew Judas and Judas sure knew Him, enough so that Judas was one who went out healing people and casting out demons. Or is the verse (Mt 7 verses) from an eternal perspective where Jesus says what He does in relation to the final product of His relationship with those who in time, chose to stop abiding in Him (and got cut off)? They fell away from an obedient and repentant relationship and thus fell away from Christ. Jesus knowing a person is about (eternally) those who run and endure to the end of the race and those who cross the finish line, He saves. Those who started, but chose to stop abiding, never crossed that line... Christ is very point blank, He never knew them and they don't get saved.

DavidC
Apr 9th 2018, 03:06 PM
Why did they not defend themselves with their faith rather than their works? And how can Jesus have never known them, and then they have Jesus inside of them?

Sorry. Too many inconsistencies for me to believe this way. When Jesus knows someone, the Holy Spirit is in them. They are then being conformed to His image. If Jesus doesn't "know" you intimately, then you aren't born from above. For one who is born from above, has the Holy Spirit inside of them.

Just because signs follow God's true apostles, doesn't mean signs never follow those that are not his. Moses saw that with Jannes and Jambres. As someone else has pointed out, Judas, a devil, performed signs and miracles but was not a believer.

John 6:70 Jesus answered them, "Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?"
NKJV

and

John 6:64 But there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him.
NKJV

Not debating but reading your posts made me recall the sower parable and John 15, those in Christ, not bearing Fruit will be cut off.

What of these words of Christ?

watchinginawe
Apr 9th 2018, 03:13 PM
Hooah, my point is that without the Holy Spirit, people can't "truly" cast out demons. So, did these poeple at one time have the Holy Spirit? As Mailmandan raised, even Judas was empowered by Jesus (I understand Judas didn't have the Holy Spirit inside of him but the Holy Spirit provided empowerment to him or was upon him as it was at that time) but a key is that he didn't continue with the relationship that Jesus and he had at that time. Later, he fell away, chose to not abide and turned away in betrayal.

So the struggle is the "I never knew you" from the Matthew 7 verses. Is it about Jesus never knowing a person? Well, He sure knew Judas and Judas sure knew Him, enough so that Judas was one who went out healing people and casting out demons. Or is the verse (Mt 7 verses) from an eternal perspective where Jesus says what He does in relation to the final product of His relationship with those who in time, chose to stop abiding in Him? They fell away from an obedient and repentant relationship and thus fell away from Christ. Jesus knowing a person is about (eternally) those who run and endure to the end of the race and those who cross the finish line, He saves. Those who started, but chose to stop abiding, never crossed that line... Christ is very point blank, He never knew them.

From Jesus' "Sermon on the plain" in Luke, Jesus says it in much simpler terms:

Luke 6:46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?

There is some form of hypocrisy at the root of Jesus' statement to those who call Him Lord falsely.

Brother Mark
Apr 9th 2018, 03:22 PM
Hooah, my point is that without the Holy Spirit, people can't "truly" cast out demons. So, did these poeple at one time have the Holy Spirit? As Mailmandan raised, even Judas was empowered by Jesus (I understand Judas didn't have the Holy Spirit inside of him but the Holy Spirit provided empowerment to him or was upon him as it was at that time) but a key is that he didn't continue with the relationship that Jesus and he had at that time. Later, he fell away, chose to not abide and turned away in betrayal.

What verses do you use to say that someone has to be indwelt with the HS to cast out a demon? IMO, it would take 2 separate passages (i.e. two witnesses) to establish such a doctrine.


So the struggle is the "I never knew you" from the Matthew 7 verses. Is it about Jesus never knowing a person? Well, He sure knew Judas and Judas sure knew Him, enough so that Judas was one who went out healing people and casting out demons. Or is the verse (Mt 7 verses) from an eternal perspective where Jesus says what He does in relation to the final product of His relationship with those who in time, chose to stop abiding in Him (and got cut off)? They fell away from an obedient and repentant relationship and thus fell away from Christ. Jesus knowing a person is about (eternally) those who run and endure to the end of the race and those who cross the finish line, He saves. Those who started, but chose to stop abiding, never crossed that line... Christ is very point blank, He never knew them and they don't get saved.

Never means never. Not "once I knew you and now I don't". And this "knowing" as Walls pointed out, is to know as Adam knew Eve. It means to plant Himself in us, IMO.

These are not people Jesus knew as Adam knew Eve, then did not know again or divorced himself from.

Brother Mark
Apr 9th 2018, 03:25 PM
Not debating but reading your posts made me recall the sower parable and John 15, those in Christ, not bearing Fruit will be cut off.

What of these words of Christ?

I have no issue with spiritual divorce. But that's not what the '... I never knew you...' is about. Its about people that pretended to be Christians but were not. They were never in the vine to begin with. There was nothing for them to be cut off from.

keck553
Apr 9th 2018, 03:26 PM
If they are Christians, how do you deal with the part where Jesus said "... I never knew you..."? Once Jesus knows someone, His seed is in them and He is in them and He knows them and calls them by name. Or do you mean they are cultural Christians who have never been born again?


"I never knew you" means there never was any relationship. It's as simple as that.

Slug1
Apr 9th 2018, 03:28 PM
From Jesus' "Sermon on the plain" in Luke, Jesus says it in much simpler terms:

Luke 6:46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?

There is some form of hypocrisy at the root of Jesus' statement to those who call Him Lord falsely.Hooah! Doing what He says, all the rest of one's life, is all about abiding. Again, is Jesus speaking from an "eternal perspective" and while a person may start in obedience, but say in 40 years, they will begin to be swayed by a "false prophet" and in time, instead of doing what Jesus says to do, this person is doing what their pastor (the actual false prophet), or church, or denom says to do. So to Jesus... even though this person started in obedience, in time they stop so to Jesus (who DOES have an eternal perspective), this is a person who falls in the LORD LORD group :hmm:

Walls
Apr 9th 2018, 03:30 PM
I have a little different view of this text. In reading the context starting at vs1 through vs14 I see the point being that there are two kinds of signposts. That of a true prophet or mouthpiece of God and false prophets. At vs15 Jesus explains how to recognize false prophets in pretty clear language.

These false prophets will appear in sheeps clothing "PRETENDING" to be true prophets. They are wolves and enemies of the Church. I think the "fruits" here have to do with words, (what they tell you and claim/teach) deeds, (vs22) and life-style. The Apostle Paul backs this up at Acts 20:27-31.

"For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God. vs28, Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. vs29 For I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; vs30, and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. vs31, Therefore be on the alert, remembering that night and day for a period of three years I did not cease to admonish each one with tears."

So, you have the church be attacked not only from "WITHOUT" but from "WITHIN" the church. In both of these text, this one and at Matthew 7 I can think of the word of faith movement that attacks the church from within because of what they teach. It's not hard to see who attacks the church from without. In short, and in my opinion what Jesus said at Matthew 7:23 are the most "lethal" words in the Bible, "I NEVER KNEW YOU." :eek:

IN GOD THE SON,
maverick

Thank you for your input. It is true that the immediate previous context is "false prophets" (Matt.7:15). The question then must be, is it possible for a Christian to seek their own things via illegal means? Or are all Christian perfect and sinless? I think you have answered this question yourself from Acts 20:30 above. It reads "... and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them". It is clear that if these "false prophets" are "FROM AMONG your OWN SELVES", that they must be Christians too for Paul is addressing, "... the elders of the church" (Act.20:17) Not only are they from "among you (Christians) but according to the grammar they must be from among the elders!

May I offer your observation as another proof that those who are refused the Kingdom are Christians.

watchinginawe
Apr 9th 2018, 03:36 PM
Hooah! Doing what He says, all the rest of one's life, is all about abiding. Again, is Jesus speaking from an "eternal perspective" and while a person may start in obedience, but say in 40 years, they will begin to be swayed by a "false prophet" and in time, instead of doing what Jesus says to do, this person is doing what their pastor (the actual false prophet), or church, or denom says to do. So to Jesus... even though this person started in obedience, in time they stop so to Jesus (who DOES have an eternal perspective), this is a person who falls in the LORD LORD group :hmm:

I think in Matthew 7 and Luke 6 Jesus is talking from a practical perspective on what to do with the content of His teachings.

Jesus sums it up in both sessions with basically the same conclusion:

From Luke 6:46-49 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say? Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like: He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock. But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great.

What Jesus said was perfectly appropriate to those in attendance or those reading in the Scripture. The "disciples" who claimed to follow Jesus (they came and they heard) but did not make Him their Lord are those who called Him "Lord, Lord" but did not the things which He said.

Said another way, they heard but they did not heed.

Slug1
Apr 9th 2018, 04:00 PM
What verses do you use to say that someone has to be indwelt with the HS to cast out a demon? IMO, it would take 2 separate passages (i.e. two witnesses) to establish such a doctrine.Well, to start then :)

We have the example I raised in #12 with the Acts 19 verses. We also have Jesus saying what He does in Luke 10:19 (given authority to trample on/over all the power of the enemy...). That "power" involves authority to cast out that power which can be demons. OK, let me think, I don't want to get my notebooks :)

Oh, in Christ's delegation of His authority over demons to, 1st the 12, later the 70... this continues today for the Body as we are informed in Luke 10:19, Eph 1 and 2. The binding on earth/same in heaven verses, Mt 18:18-19. Ummm, we ARE to stand against satan and his forces, Eph 6.

Now... the how, if not for the Holy Spirit enabling us to use the authority that Jesus gives to those who believe in Him?

How does a person do all that over satan, if they are NOT in authority over satan through God's power (the Holy Spirit manifesting)?




Never means never. Not "once I knew you and now I don't". And this "knowing" as Walls pointed out, is to know as Adam knew Eve. It means to plant Himself in us, IMO.

These are not people Jesus knew as Adam knew Eve, then did not know again or divorced himself from.And this is where my struggle is and why I lean toward that eternal perspective in which Jesus is capable in speaking from and teaching about.

Kalahari
Apr 9th 2018, 04:00 PM
Hooah! Doing what He says, all the rest of one's life, is all about abiding. Again, is Jesus speaking from an "eternal perspective" and while a person may start in obedience, but say in 40 years, they will begin to be swayed by a "false prophet" and in time, instead of doing what Jesus says to do, this person is doing what their pastor (the actual false prophet), or church, or denom says to do. So to Jesus... even though this person started in obedience, in time they stop so to Jesus (who DOES have an eternal perspective), this is a person who falls in the LORD LORD group :hmm:

The eternal perspective is given by the Lord, not man.

Joh 6:39 And it is the will of him who sent me that I should not lose any of all those he has given me, but that I should raise them all to life on the last day.

randyk
Apr 9th 2018, 04:01 PM
I can imagine that the thought of being rejected for so high a job is not pleasant. So the immediate human reaction is usually what you have written. But consider this. Even in the world today, when a certain job needs to be filled, there is a selection process. And if it is a job with implications to the state, health and reputation of the company, the boss will look very carefully at the character, qualifications and reputation of the applicant. So too the Lord. Before Pilate, Caesar's representative, He condemned the present world system of rule. The Greek for "world" there is "kosmos" meaning "the adornment" or "the orderly arrangement of things". That is, our Lord's Kingdom is NOT managed like today's system of rule. Do you really think that the Christians around you, who you perceive to be corrupt, liars and servers of self, are qualified to uphold the heavenly rule that MUST take place on earth in the Millennium? Why, king Saul, for the SINGLE DISOBEDIENCE in regard to Agag in 1st Samuel 15, the Lord says this in verse 23; "For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king."

To the rest of your answer, I have carefully laid down the proofs that those who (1) were "workers of iniquity" (KJV), (2) the Lord "did not know" intimately, and (3) who must "depart" from Him, ARE CHRISTIANS. I'm sure you know some of these in your Assembly. Not only do I know many such Christians, but must constantly "watch" that I am not one of them. Even now I find myself in battle between my own will and OBEDIENCE to the Lord's will. Will I be found worthy to be made co-king with Jesus? I think at this point of time it still hangs in the balance. Paul was no different. A mere three years before his martyrdom he writes in Philippians 3:12-14;


12 "Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, IF that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.
13 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,
14 I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus."

Here we find him STRIVING for "that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus". What are we apprehended for? "IMAGE AND DOMINION"! If rebirth was a guarantee for kingship, is Paul MAD to strive so much? Our salvation is not to escape hell and to walk through the Pearly Gates. It is that we may be conformed to the image of Christ (Rom.8:29), and that we gain the REWARD of the Lord's Kingdom on earth. So Paul, after his misgivings three years before his death, can now change his tune in 2nd Timothy 4:6-8, and with FULL ASSURANCE, say;


6 "For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand.
7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:
8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing."

The result of having fought a good fight, having finished his course, and having kept the faith is "A CROWN". A "crown" is for ruling as a king. AND THIS CROWN IS TO EARNED. It is not guaranteed.

What did Christ himself strive for? Was he trying to achieve dominance and authority over all else? No, he already had that status. He was striving to do good against all the forces that wanted him to disobey his Father. Of course I think that was impossible. How can the Son do other than what the Father wanted him to do? And yet he was a man, and was making genuine choices.

Neither did Paul strive to be higher up in the Kingdom of God. He was striving to be noble, to achieve success in being an obedient soldier for God. No doubt we will achieve higher rank or better jobs in the future Kingdom if we are successful here. But we are not seeking some kind of worldly dominance or superiority over others.

I believe that even the least successful Christian has achieved some dominance over his flesh, simply by choosing Christ as his Savior. I've known a lot of Christians who have faltered in their Christianity, or who compromise with their obedience to God. I don't know how we can be happy with that? Many Christians, I think, are disappointed in what they're achieving. But at least they're achieving something. How can we be happy doing just half a job, when the whole job needs to be done?

As for the false Christians within the church, yes, they are there. And I do recognize them. I don't try to discourage anybody from attending church, until they do something despicably unChristian. And that has certainly happened! Some in the church don't even claim to be Christians, and yet want to fellowship with Christians. I'm telling you the truth!

So I think it can indeed be said that there are many nominal Christians who claim to be Christians and are not, or who do not even claim to be orthodox Christians. "I never knew you" is reserved for those who have claimed to be believers, and yet do not really believe.

"Believe" here I define as recognizing God's word, and doing it. To just know what Scriptures say, and to believe part of it, is not necessarily "believing." So, when we say someone is a Christian, that confuses who really believes and who doesn't. There is a nominal Christianity out there that does not consist of true, believing Christians, who obey God's word and practice what they preach. They are not "born again."

I don't think you need to worry, Walls, about whether you've striven hard enough to get saved. You *are* saved. If you worry about whether you truly have faith, Satan is keeping you at the bottom level, worrying about things that merely distract you from the solid ministry you could be doing. It is at the elementary level of Christianity that we worry about things like salvation, whether baptism saved us, and whether we're doing God's will or not.

Mature Christianity *knows* what God's will is, and does it. It isn't difficult. But it does take striving to achieve mastery over the things that deflect us, distract us, and defeat us. It's a good thing to strive to have mastery, because it will indeed be rewarded.

But we shouldn't be in competition with one another. We all need mastery over our own independent will. Doing our own thing will accomplish nothing. Partnering with God will achieve great honor.

Walls
Apr 9th 2018, 04:02 PM
Walls, what do you make of Judas?

Mark 3:

14 And he ordained twelve, that they should be with [G3326 - meta] him, and that he might send them forth to preach,

15 And to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils:

16 And Simon he surnamed Peter;

17 And James the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and he surnamed them Boanerges, which is, The sons of thunder:

18 And Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Canaanite,

19 And Judas Iscariot, which also betrayed him: and they went into an house.


John 6:70 -

"70 Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?"


Acts 1:25 also.


And John 17:12 -

"12 While I was with [G3326 - meta] them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled."




[note: [G3326 - meta - "accompanying"] in contrast to [G4862 - syn/sun - denoting "union" and/or "identification"] ]

Your question pertains is good. There are two observations I would like to make.

(1)
The ability to cast out demons is a POWER that God gives to men, starting with the Man Jesus. This POWER is given to Christians generally by the Holy Spirit after they are baptized (Act.2:38). But the question is, when the Twelve went out to do what our Lord Jesus commanded them and empowered them for, were they believers yet? Consider carefully, because the next questions will be;
At what point did Balaam, a heathen and enemy of Israel, believe before he prophesied?
At what point did Balaam's donkey believe before he could speak in a human tongue?
I ask this because the it is evident from all three cases, Balaam, the donkey and the Twelve, that it is possible, and did occur, that God (or Jesus) gave POWER to men (and a donkey) for His purposes irrespective of their FAITH.

(2)
When did Satan enter Judas? According to Luke 22:1-3 it was at the last Passover, the one that our Lord Jesus was killed on. That is, Judas only became possessed hours before betraying Jesus, and not when he was one of the Twelve ministering and casting out demons.

But I have a question for you too. An easy one. Scripture says that everything must be established by two or three witnesses. Suppose I grant you that that a non-Christian cast out demons, what do you say about the other SEVEN proofs I gave? According to scripture I only had to bring three. If three are correct, my thesis is correct.

But let me also say that I like your inquiring mind. It's what makes great Bible students.

Slug1
Apr 9th 2018, 04:06 PM
Thank you for your input. It is true that the immediate previous context is "false prophets" (Matt.7:15). The question then must be, is it possible for a Christian to seek their own things via illegal means? Or are all Christian perfect and sinless? I think you have answered this question yourself from Acts 20:30 above. It reads "... and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them". It is clear that if these "false prophets" are "FROM AMONG your OWN SELVES", that they must be Christians too for Paul is addressing, "... the elders of the church" (Act.20:17) Not only are they from "among you (Christians) but according to the grammar they must be from among the elders!

May I offer your observation as another proof that those who are refused the Kingdom are Christians.Hooah, I would apply this to my scenario about a Christian being lured away 40 years later. It's too easy to say, he wasn't really Christian (dropping that doctrinal card) when we have Paul warning us, this is exactly what will be happening to Christians in the Body.

Brother Mark
Apr 9th 2018, 04:06 PM
Well, to start then :)

We have the example I raised in #12 with the Acts 19 verses. We also have Jesus saying what He does in Luke 10:19 (given authority to trample on/over all the power of the enemy...). That "power" involves authority to cast out that power which can be demons. OK, let me think, I don't want to get my notebooks :)

Oh, in Christ's delegation of His authority over demons to, 1st the 12, later the 70... this continues today for the Body as we are informed in Luke 10:19, Eph 1 and 2. The binding on earth/same in heaven verses, Mt 18:18-19. Ummm, we ARE to stand against satan and his forces, Eph 6.

Now... the how, if not for the Holy Spirit enabling us to use the authority that Jesus gives to those who believe in Him?

That's all true of believers. But only Acts 19 deals with the unbelievers.


How does a person do all that over satan, if they are NOT in authority over satan through God's power (the Holy Spirit manifesting)?

Because God's word is powerful and will accomplish what it was sent to do. That, and we cannot overlook the faith of the one being delivered, healed, helped, etc. A donkey preached one time. That doesn't mean that donkeys always preach. That's the danger of using one verse to establish a doctrine.


And this is where my struggle is and why I lean toward that eternal perspective in which Jesus is capable in speaking from and teaching about.

But even from an eternal perspective, he still said "never". That's why I can't go to these folks were once saved. That combined with my thoughts above about other passages to verify that no one can cast out demons unless they are believers. I see one passage where that's the case. But I don't see a pattern established where that is always the case. I don't for one minute believe the devil does it.

For instance, a lost preacher can preach the gospel and the hearers can still get saved. Why is that not true for healing, deliverance, etc? When he stands in judgment, don't you think that lost preacher would point back and say "I cast out demons, I preached, etc. etc?" He certainly won't say "But I believed in you Lord!"

Slug1
Apr 9th 2018, 04:09 PM
The eternal perspective is given by the Lord, not man.

Joh 6:39 And it is the will of him who sent me that I should not lose any of all those he has given me, but that I should raise them all to life on the last day.Yeah, I know... Jesus knows who will make it to the end of the race and those who wont... so He can say to those (in real time) He never knew them, to those who will not finish.

Kalahari
Apr 9th 2018, 04:14 PM
Yeah, I know... Jesus knows who will make it to the end of the race and those who wont... so He can say to those (in real time) He never knew them, to those who will not finish.

It does not make sense. Jesus said He will not lose any, not that He knows who will make it or not. He is the active agent, not passive.

Slug1
Apr 9th 2018, 04:34 PM
That's all true of believers. But only Acts 19 deals with the unbelievers. Right. That is my point. If those people in Mt 7 were at one time casting out demons, it can only be because they are believers at that time. So, why doesn't Jesus ultimately know them if at one time, they had His authority over satan?




Because God's word is powerful and will accomplish what it was sent to do. That, and we cannot overlook the faith of the one being delivered, healed, helped, etc. A donkey preached one time. That doesn't mean that donkeys always preach. That's the danger of using one verse to establish a doctrine.That one verse is what makes the 12 and then the 70 and now the Body having authority, all make sense. It is about a progression set by the lessons in the scriptures. Then supported by the Eph, Matt, etc. There are more... I just can't recall them right now.




But even from an eternal perspective, he still said "never". That's why I can't go to these folks were once saved. That combined with my thoughts above about other passages to verify that no one can cast out demons unless they are believers. I see one passage where that's the case. But I don't see a pattern established where that is always the case. I don't for one minute believe the devil does it.NO, Jesus even teaches that a house divided cannot stand thus satan can't cast out of his same house (Mt 12).


For instance, a lost preacher can preach the gospel and the hearers can still get saved. Why is that not true for healing, deliverance, etc? How I would answer this is as such... it is the Holy Spirit working on the listener, not the Holy Spirit working through the speaker. The power is in the MESSAGE of the Gospel, even an obedient pastor, Holy Spirit filled through and through is just as effective as the fallen pastor in saving a person, neither can save the listener. It's the message and the power of the Holy Spirit upon the listener, never the speaker be they filled or not filled by the Holy Spirit.


When he stands in judgment, don't you think that lost preacher would point back and say "I cast out demons, I preached, etc. etc?" He certainly won't say "But I believed in you Lord!"This is such a gray area. Here is an example I raise due to my experience. I have literally watched a group of Christians cast a "demon" out of the church sound system because when it suddenly failed, their first action was to blame satan. I told my pastor that if he's ever invited back to that church, don't ask me again to help him out because the help that church needed, ONLY God Himself could work. Did they actually cast out any demon, absolutely not... but they were so deceived. Now, I will not judge that moment against them because others in that church, some I knew and I have viewed their fruit and I would trust their position in Christ as I would trust yours. But the thing is, they have viewed the fruit of those casting out that "sound" (say it as souWWWNNND - when some get into the emotion of a situation, they say words funny like) demon. So while I'm giving them that look (as if one eyebrow is raised, which I can't physically do) those I know assured me of their emotional brothers/sisters position as well.

A position for now that shows fruit of a lack of maturity (not a lack of position in the Body)... in time if allowed to continue in their shenanigans, all in the name of Christ, and they are never corrected and what they are doing is NOT what God would have them do (lack of obedience), what about that perverbial 40 years from now when they are totally on their own, (not) doing the Lord's work... all in the name of Christ?

Slug1
Apr 9th 2018, 04:40 PM
It does not make sense. Jesus said He will not lose any, not that He knows who will make it or not. He is the active agent, not passive.Hooah, He's is active, but Christian must be active in faith as well. If they stop, they stop abiding.

Kalahari
Apr 9th 2018, 04:42 PM
Hooah, He's is active, but Christian must be active in faith as well. If they stop, they stop abiding.

So if they stop, Jesus stop? :hmm:

Brother Mark
Apr 9th 2018, 04:44 PM
Right. That is my point. If those people in Mt 7 were at one time casting out demons, it can only be because they are believers at that time.

That's a jump IMO. In other words, just because Jesus says those signs will follow His children, doesn't mean they cannot be duplicated by unbelievers.


So, why doesn't Jesus ultimately know them if at one time, they had His authority over satan?

The passage doesn't say they had authority over demons. Just that they claimed to cast out demons. You think that if someone was truly seeking God, had repented, and was coming to God and a lost preacher told them the truth about deliverance, and that person believed, that the demon could stay? That God would not deliever his child of the demon? IOW, it may be the hearer that had the authority and not the speaker.


That one verse is what makes the 12 and then the 70 and now the Body having authority, all make sense. It is about a progression set by the lessons in the scriptures. Then supported by the Eph, Matt, etc. There are more... I just can't recall them right now.

I am not arguing that what you are saying about believers is wrong. I think you are right. What I am saying is that we cannot ignore the authority and power of God's word even when spoken by an unbeliever.


NO, Jesus even teaches that a house divided cannot stand thus satan can't cast out of his same house (Mt 12).

I never said Satan cast out Satan. I said it was the power of God's word that did it, to someone who believed.


How I would answer this is as such... it is the Holy Spirit working on the listener, not the Holy Spirit working through the speaker. The power is in the MESSAGE of the Gospel, even an obedient pastor, Holy Spirit filled through and through is just as effective as the fallen pastor in saving a person, neither can save the listener. It's the message and the power of the Holy Spirit upon the listener, never the speaker be they filled or not filled by the Holy Spirit.

EXACTLY! That's my point. If someone believes, they receive authority regardless of the speaker. That's why Jesus often said "your faith has healed you".


This is such a gray area. Here is an example I raise due to my experience. I have literally watched a group of Christians cast a "demon" out of the church sound system because when it suddenly failed, their first action was to blame satan. I told my pastor that if he's ever invited back to that church, don't ask me again to help him out because the help that church needed, ONLY God Himself could work. Did they actually cast out any demon, absolutely not... but they were so deceived. Now, I will not judge that moment against them because others in that church, some I knew and I have viewed their fruit and I would trust their position in Christ as I would trust yours. But the thing is, they have viewed the fruit of those casting out that "sound" (say it as souWWWNNND - when some get into the emotion of a situation, they say words funny like) demon. So while I'm giving them that look (as if one eyebrow is raised, which I can't physically do) those I know assured me of their emotional brothers/sisters position as well.

A position for now... in time if allowed to continue in their shenanigans, all in the name of Christ, and they are never corrected and what they are doing is NOT what God would have them do (lack of obedience), what about that perverbial 40 years from now when they are totally on their own, (not) doing the Lord's work... all in the name of Christ?

Then He can't say "I never knew you". But He can say "I cut you off."

randyk
Apr 9th 2018, 05:10 PM
My view is skewed by my own spiritual gift, and in this I do not mean to act "weird." I don't have a lot of spiritual gifts, but I do have a gift of discernment. This is a strange gift because by it I seem to know who will be saved in eternity, and who will not. It isn't as though I try to prevent anybody from getting saved, or try to say people can't get saved. Rather, it's like I can see some of their heart, whether they truly love the Christ they've been shown or not. Actually, I can see it even before people become Christians. God is judging everybody, moment by moment, by what they actually know.

So I see Christians in churches who I discern *do not truly love God.* They may love His word, His music, or His fellowship, but they do so for the wrong reasons. They do not love Christ himself. They just love what he gives them in this world!

These people are in the church, and may exercise spiritual gifts. They may not even believe much of what the Bible says, and can still exercise spiritual powers. I've seen it.

When people, however, are completely rejecting the standards of Christianity I think their power is limited. The 7 sons of Sceva found that out!

Acts 19.13 Some Jews who went around driving out evil spirits tried to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those who were demon-possessed. They would say, “In the name of the Jesus whom Paul preaches, I command you to come out.” 14 Seven sons of Sceva, a Jewish chief priest, were doing this. 15 One day the evil spirit answered them, “Jesus I know, and Paul I know about, but who are you?” 16 Then the man who had the evil spirit jumped on them and overpowered them all. He gave them such a beating that they ran out of the house naked and bleeding.

The thing is, we should never drive anybody out of the church--not even if their love for Christ is wanting. As long as they strive to live by Christian standards, we should let God judge them. We should cast them out only if they defile their church by such things as immorality and false teaching or cultic behaviors.

So it boils down to what "Christian" means. I like how Kenneth Latourette, the historian, seemed to define "Christianity." It is *all* Christianity, in all of its shades. Some of it certainly is not genuine. And even the inauthentic God does not prevent from having and exercising spiritual gifts, as long as they hold to some of God's word and Christ's morality.

But over time, it will become apparent who is following Christianity for their own gain, and who is doing is genuinely, out of a love for Christ. My 2 cents.

Slug1
Apr 9th 2018, 05:11 PM
Then He can't say "I never knew you". But He can say "I cut you off."For me, He can say I never knew you because He had cut them off.

Slug1
Apr 9th 2018, 05:14 PM
So if they stop, Jesus stop? :hmm:He says those who stop abiding get cut off.

Kalahari
Apr 9th 2018, 05:37 PM
He says those who stop abiding get cut off.

Those who never had faith, who unbelief was found in them.

Also remember God is faithful.
2Ti 2:13 If we are not faithful, he remains faithful, because he cannot be false to himself."

Slug1
Apr 9th 2018, 07:31 PM
Those who never had faith, who unbelief was found in them.

Also remember God is faithful.
2Ti 2:13 If we are not faithful, he remains faithful, because he cannot be false to himself."Those who never had faith, were never a branch on the vine (that could be cut off due to stopping in abiding). So your verse and the ones dealing with abiding, can't be about unbelievers.

GraceX2
Apr 9th 2018, 07:45 PM
The problem to me seems to be the definition of what the "Kingdom" is. It is not Heaven when we die; that much seems clear from scripture. Jesus told the Pharisees that the Kingdom was within them.

“The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”
"For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit."

DavidC
Apr 9th 2018, 07:52 PM
The problem to me seems to be the definition of what the "Kingdom" is. It is not Heaven when we die; that much seems clear from scripture. Jesus told the Pharisees that the Kingdom was within them.

“The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”
"For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit."

The Kingdom is wherever Christ is the ruler.

Trivalee
Apr 9th 2018, 08:06 PM
I can't say I agree with all that, but certainly some of it is good stuff. For one, it isn't enough to do good. We have to obey God. That's true.

But the material about who gets to be in the Kingdom of Christ is a little difficult for me. For me, it's just a matter of being born again. To rule with Christ means to rule over the earth as God's people. Even the most backslidden, born again Christian can rule in the Kingdom of God. There is no backsliding there!

The "many" who do works for God, including miracles, refer to those, like the Jews, who have claimed to be "God's People," attend church and profess belief in God's word. And yet, they aren't really born again. They just use God for gain in this world.

I can't fault your insight on the topic. I can probably think of one or two passages for support.

2 Tim 3:5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof...

We know that it's not everyone we see in church are truly saved. The passage also refers to false prophets who are able to heal and do miracles. But they will be rejected by Jesus on the day of reckoning.

ewq1938
Apr 9th 2018, 08:09 PM
It does not make sense. Jesus said He will not lose any, not that He knows who will make it or not.


I don't believe he said that especially that he taught Paul that an Apostasy is going to happen and it's actually delusion sent from God that ensures they believe a lie and worship a false god. You can't Apostatize if you weren't a true believer at some point.

Walls
Apr 9th 2018, 08:52 PM
Hooah, I would apply this to my scenario about a Christian being lured away 40 years later. It's too easy to say, he wasn't really Christian (dropping that doctrinal card) when we have Paul warning us, this is exactly what will be happening to Christians in the Body.

I think that you are the closest to the matter of all. You recognize that a once dedicated and effectual Christian can fall away - not to be "unsaved", but to be found unworthy of being a co-king with Christ. Apostasy is predicted for the Church, just like Israel. Did Israel stop being Israel, or were they chastised and then to be restored?

Brother Mark
Apr 9th 2018, 08:55 PM
So if they stop, Jesus stop? :hmm:

No. But eventually, He may divorce them. Then He stops.

Brother Mark
Apr 9th 2018, 08:58 PM
For me, He can say I never knew you because He had cut them off.

Then He did know them at some time. Never means never. There was never a relationship. God can't lie. To say He never knew someone, when He did, is a lie.

Ken, are you sure you aren't trying to fit this passage where it doesn't fit? Sounds to me like you have two doctrines that don't fit with this passage. Maybe one of those is not correct or this verse doesn't address one of them at all.

Walls
Apr 9th 2018, 09:11 PM
What did Christ himself strive for? Was he trying to achieve dominance and authority over all else? No, he already had that status. He was striving to do good against all the forces that wanted him to disobey his Father. Of course I think that was impossible. How can the Son do other than what the Father wanted him to do? And yet he was a man, and was making genuine choices.

Neither did Paul strive to be higher up in the Kingdom of God. He was striving to be noble, to achieve success in being an obedient soldier for God. No doubt we will achieve higher rank or better jobs in the future Kingdom if we are successful here. But we are not seeking some kind of worldly dominance or superiority over others.

I believe that even the least successful Christian has achieved some dominance over his flesh, simply by choosing Christ as his Savior. I've known a lot of Christians who have faltered in their Christianity, or who compromise with their obedience to God. I don't know how we can be happy with that? Many Christians, I think, are disappointed in what they're achieving. But at least they're achieving something. How can we be happy doing just half a job, when the whole job needs to be done?

As for the false Christians within the church, yes, they are there. And I do recognize them. I don't try to discourage anybody from attending church, until they do something despicably unChristian. And that has certainly happened! Some in the church don't even claim to be Christians, and yet want to fellowship with Christians. I'm telling you the truth!

So I think it can indeed be said that there are many nominal Christians who claim to be Christians and are not, or who do not even claim to be orthodox Christians. "I never knew you" is reserved for those who have claimed to be believers, and yet do not really believe.

"Believe" here I define as recognizing God's word, and doing it. To just know what Scriptures say, and to believe part of it, is not necessarily "believing." So, when we say someone is a Christian, that confuses who really believes and who doesn't. There is a nominal Christianity out there that does not consist of true, believing Christians, who obey God's word and practice what they preach. They are not "born again."

I don't think you need to worry, Walls, about whether you've striven hard enough to get saved. You *are* saved. If you worry about whether you truly have faith, Satan is keeping you at the bottom level, worrying about things that merely distract you from the solid ministry you could be doing. It is at the elementary level of Christianity that we worry about things like salvation, whether baptism saved us, and whether we're doing God's will or not.

Mature Christianity *knows* what God's will is, and does it. It isn't difficult. But it does take striving to achieve mastery over the things that deflect us, distract us, and defeat us. It's a good thing to strive to have mastery, because it will indeed be rewarded.

But we shouldn't be in competition with one another. We all need mastery over our own independent will. Doing our own thing will accomplish nothing. Partnering with God will achieve great honor.

I appreciate your thoughtful insight. But have you ever considered taking a text and expounding what God said in that text - without additions and without subtractions? You introduced "saved", but the text under discussion does not. You avoided rebellious Christians, but the text addresses them. You deny that Christ was trying to establish "Dominion" but the text is about Christ's Kingdom on earth and His denying the Kingdoms of this world, "and their glory" at the hand of Satan (Matt.4:8). The text never addresses FAITH. It addresses WORKS. It is "DO the will of my Father". You address "False Christians" but the term never enters the Bible. It only recognizes Christians or non-Christians. The text addresses those who call "Lord, Lord", but you do not any part of mankind that calls upon the Lord, does MANY wonders in Jesus' Name, casts demons out in Jesus' Name, claim the Kingdom form a Lord they knew of, but yet are denied the Kingdom for iniquity.

Have you not considered the simplest form of effective rebuttal to my OP - a solid and precise exegesis of the three verses like I did. This is what Bible Discussion is about. I produce EIGHT reasons why those refused the Kingdom are Christians. Could you not dismantle one? And then, when you have dismantled all eight, you would still have to explain why some of the Lord's Servants and Virgins are barred from the Kingdom in the Parables.

Nevertheless, I appreciate you as a searching brother and hope and pray for God's blessing upon you - richly.

Walls
Apr 9th 2018, 09:30 PM
Hi you ALL esteemed Ones,

In my OP I addressed a problem among us. That is, thinking that entering the Kingdom OF Heaven is entering the Kingdom IN Heaven. It is still prevalent among the Church at large. But if it is matter of being QUALIFIED to rule OBEDIENTLY as co-kings with Christ in CITIES ON EARTH (Lk.19:16-19) then the Rebirth, Justification and Eternal Life we have by FAITH is NOT ADDRESSED! It is imply a matter of "are you Saul who was chosen as king and let God down, or David who was chosen as king and was OBEDIENT"? Look at the wording of these two opposing verses.
To SAUL in 1st Samuel 15:23; "For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king."
To DAVID in 1st Kings 15:5; "Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, and turned not aside from any thing that he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite."

Being a king is not being saved from the Lake of Fire. Being a king is the RESULT, THE GOAL of being saved. Prince Charles of Great Britain is "appointed to be king" - BY BIRTH. But if he is a criminal according to English Law, he will go to jail and NOT BECOME KING. But his birth to the Queen cannot be changed. It is just that he MISSED his CALLING.

Kalahari
Apr 9th 2018, 09:31 PM
Those who never had faith, were never a branch on the vine (that could be cut off due to stopping in abiding). So your verse and the ones dealing with abiding, can't be about unbelievers.

It depends on how you get to be part of the vine. If it is through the covenant God made with man, then you can be cut off for not having faith. :hmm:

Slug1
Apr 9th 2018, 09:33 PM
Then He did know them at some time. Never means never. There was never a relationship. God can't lie. To say He never knew someone, when He did, is a lie.

Ken, are you sure you aren't trying to fit this passage where it doesn't fit? Sounds to me like you have two doctrines that don't fit with this passage. Maybe one of those is not correct or this verse doesn't address one of them at all.The Bible says they cast out demons, this is God's work (or work of the Kingdom) at one time in their lives. The Bible does not say or ID that they were doing false signs/wonders in the form of casting out demons. I don't believe a person without Jesus' authority can cast out demons at all. So if a person is detailed as having cast out demons, they are operating with Jesus' authority. We know that without His authority, the name of Jesus isn't gonna work with demons as we find in the Acts 19 scriptures.

In the Bible, the Lord forgets our sin when we repent, He views us as if we never sinned (which is difficult for us to understand from God, who is all knowing). I believe it is from this perspective (one that we can't understand yet), Jesus is saying He never knew a person who has stopped abiding and turned away.

Kalahari
Apr 9th 2018, 09:35 PM
I don't believe he said that especially that he taught Paul that an Apostasy is going to happen and it's actually delusion sent from God that ensures they believe a lie and worship a false god. You can't Apostatize if you weren't a true believer at some point.

Joh 6:39 And it is the will of him who sent me that I should not lose any of all those he has given me, but that I should raise them all to life on the last day.

If it is the will of the Father, then it is what Jesus will do. Promise.

ewq1938
Apr 9th 2018, 09:37 PM
The Bible says they cast out demons, this is God's work (or work of the Kingdom) at one time in their lives. The Bible does not say or ID that they were doing false signs/wonders in the form of casting out demons. I don't believe a person without Jesus' authority can cast out demons at all. So if a person is detailed as having cast out demons, they are operating with Jesus' authority.

He said he didn't even know them so they did not have Jesus' authority and thus their claims of casting out devils is simple a lie, or a falsehood they believed in such as self deception.

Kalahari
Apr 9th 2018, 09:37 PM
No. But eventually, He may divorce them. Then He stops.

He will cut you off if you are not His. If you are His He will make sure you are raised to life.

ewq1938
Apr 9th 2018, 09:39 PM
Joh 6:39 And it is the will of him who sent me that I should not lose any of all those he has given me, but that I should raise them all to life on the last day.

If it is the will of the Father, then it is what Jesus will do. Promise.

Those given to Him are a special group...not the same as those who came to follow Jesus. The Apostasy will happen and it will be Christians that leave the faith for a false God but won't realize it until the second coming.


Joh 17:12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.
Joh 17:13 And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves.
Joh 17:14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Joh 17:15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.
Joh 17:16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Joh 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
Joh 17:18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
Joh 17:19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
Joh 17:20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

Slug1
Apr 9th 2018, 09:40 PM
He will cut you off if you are not His. If you are His He will make sure you are raised to life.What do you mean in being "cut off" if you are not His? Cut off from what if you are not a part of?

Kalahari
Apr 9th 2018, 09:50 PM
Those given to Him are a special group...not the same as those who came to follow Jesus. The Apostasy will happen and it will be Christians that leave the faith for a false God but won't realize it until the second coming.


Joh 17:12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.
Joh 17:13 And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves.
Joh 17:14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Joh 17:15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.
Joh 17:16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Joh 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
Joh 17:18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
Joh 17:19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
Joh 17:20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

Yes those given are the elect. Others who came did so by their own volition, but without faith.

Luk 8:18 "Be careful, then, how you listen; because those who have something will be given more, but whoever has nothing will have taken away from them even the little they think they have."

Kalahari
Apr 9th 2018, 09:55 PM
What do you mean in being "cut off" if you are not His? Cut off from what if you are not a part of?

To be part of Christ is through the new covenant by faith. You can be part of the covenant, but not having faith and be cut off as in the old covenant you were part of Israel by circumcision, but still could be not saved and cut off.

Slug1
Apr 9th 2018, 10:19 PM
To be part of Christ is through the new covenant by faith. You can be part of the covenant, but not having faith and be cut off as in the old covenant you were part of Israel by circumcision, but still could be not saved and cut off.Can't agree, the old covenant passed away when the new covenant began. So to say what you just did, don't make sense for mankind today and ever since the new covenant began. You are either in, through faith by choosing to believe or you are not, have not chosen to believe. So to be cut off, you have to have believed to be a part. Otherwise, you can't be cut off from something you are not a part of.

Deuteronomy Skaggs
Apr 9th 2018, 11:25 PM
"I never knew you" means there never was any relationship. It's as simple as that.

1. (First) I agree, eternal life is all about "knowing" Him .. John 17:3 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+17%3A3&version=NASB), and those who "never" knew the Lord were never His from the get-go!

The example of those facing eternity apart from God at the Judgment, who will lay claim to the doing of mighty works in Jesus' name while they lived among us (Matthew 7:22 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7%3A22&version=NASB)), are doing nothing more than that, making an empty claim. The Bible records others (including demons) who have done/will be doing such things as well .. e.g. Acts 19:13–16; 2 Thessalonians 2:9–12; Revelation 13:13–14 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+19%3A13%E2%80%9316%3B+2+Thessalonians +2%3A9%E2%80%9312%3B+Revelation+13%3A13%E2%80%9314&version=NASB).

Those who made the empty claim in v22* were (no doubt) part of the visible church during their lifetimes here, and they may have even appeared to be SUPER-Christians to others in the church, but in reality, they were/are the sons of Satan, "tares" planted in the church by him to cause discord, doubt and despair .. Matthew 13:24-20, 36-43 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+13%3A24-30%2C+36-43&version=NASB). And they must have been nearly impossible to distinguish from the "wheat" (the sons of the Kingdom) in many cases .. see Matthew 13:29 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+13%3A27-29&version=NASB) (but they were NEVER Christians).



*Far from being totally devoid of works of any kind, these people were claiming to have done some remarkable signs and wonders. In fact, their whole confidence was in these works—further proof that these works, spectacular as they might have appeared, could not have been authentic. No one so bereft of genuine faith could possibly produce true good works. A bad tree cannot bear good fruit. ~Commentary on Matthew, MacArthur, J., Jr.

2. Second, along with telling them that He "never" knew them, the Lord also described them as ones who "practice lawlessness". While true Christians can and do sin, we do not make a "practice" or a "lifestyle" out of doing so (like we used to do before we were saved). Since we cannot see the heart like God does, the evidence we have that someone is (or is not) the Christian they claim to be, is best seen in how they live their lives, IOW, what they've done and said since making that "claim". As the Apostle John tells us:

1 John 3
9 No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him; and he cannot keep on sinning, because he has been born of God.

3. Finally, if one who is truly a believer can lose, forfeit, or even reject their salvation, then the Lord could not have been telling us the truth when He said this:

John 6:37-40 (excerpt)
ALL that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and ... of ALL that He has given Me I lose NOTHING, but raise it up on the last day.

Or this:

John 5
He who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has** eternal life and does not come into judgment, but has passed*** out of death into life.




**(ἔχω [echo] "has", present, active, indicative, 3rd person, singular, indicating something that is now true at the present time and forevermore)

***(μεταβαίνω [metabaino] "has passed", perfect, active, indicative, 3rd person, singular, indicating an an action which has been completed)



True Christians are the ones who persevere in the faith to the end, because the One who saved us in the first place has also promised to see us safely through this life to Glory .. cf Philippians 1:6, 2:13; Hebrews 7:25; 1 John 5:13 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Philippians+1%3A6%2C+2%3A13%3B+Hebrews+7%3 A25%3B+1+John+5%3A13&version=NASB).

Soli Deo gloria!!

~Deut


John 6
44 No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.

Brother Mark
Apr 10th 2018, 01:52 AM
He will cut you off if you are not His. If you are His He will make sure you are raised to life.

He divorced Israel and Israel was his. Can't be cut off from that which you are not in. If you are "in" the vine, then you can be cut off from the vine.

ProDeo
Apr 10th 2018, 07:13 AM
Hooah, I would apply this to my scenario about a Christian being lured away 40 years later. It's too easy to say, he wasn't really Christian (dropping that doctrinal card) when we have Paul warning us, this is exactly what will be happening to Christians in the Body.
I am inclined to agree. Many examples. Probably started okay, then backslidden.

23 - And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

What happened to this guy?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTsYSR9kEeg

Seldom seen such filth.

ProDeo
Apr 10th 2018, 07:34 AM
The text under consideration is Matthew 7:21-23;


21 "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
22 Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?'
23 And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'"
Whenever I read this passage I can't help my first thoughts go out the the fake preachers, fake healers who have no intention to glorify the Lord other than themselves, for money, power over people, for being in the center of attention, in other words, one big ego trip. They may say anything in the name of Jesus but Jesus was never involved (I never knew you). Plenty examples on youtube, as Jesus calls them - you workers of lawlessness.

Kalahari
Apr 10th 2018, 08:20 AM
Can't agree, the old covenant passed away when the new covenant began. So to say what you just did, don't make sense for mankind today and ever since the new covenant began. You are either in, through faith by choosing to believe or you are not, have not chosen to believe. So to be cut off, you have to have believed to be a part. Otherwise, you can't be cut off from something you are not a part of.

Cant agree.

"There are two sorts of branches in Christ the vine; the one sort are such who have only an historical faith in him, believe but for a time, and are removed; they are such who only profess to believe in him, as Simon Magus did; are in him by profession only; they submit to outward ordinances, become church members, and so are reckoned to be in Christ, being in a church state, as the churches of Judea and Thessalonica, and others, are said, in general, to he in Christ; though it is not to be thought that every individual person in these churches were truly and savingly in him. These branches are unfruitful ones; what fruit they seemed to have, withers away, and proves not to be genuine fruit; what fruit they bring forth is to themselves, and not to the glory of God, being none of the fruits of his Spirit and grace: and such branches the husbandman removes.

These are the other sort of branches, who are truly and savingly in Christ; such as are rooted in him; to whom he is the green fir tree, from whom all their fruit is found; who are filled by him with all the fruits of his Spirit, grace, and righteousness. These are purged or pruned, chiefly by afflictions and temptations, which are as needful for their growth and fruitfulness, as the pruning and cutting of the vines are for theirs; and though these are sometimes sharp, and never joyous, but grievous, yet they are attended with the peaceable fruits of righteousness, and so the end of bringing forth more fruit is answered; for it is not enough that a believer exercise grace, and perform good works for the present, but these must remain; or he must be constant herein, and still bring forth fruit, and add one virtue to another, that it may appear he is not barren and unfruitful in the knowledge of Christ, in whom he is implanted. These different acts of the vinedresser "taking away" some branches, and "purging" others, are expressed by the Misnic doctors (p) by פיסולה, and זירודה. The former, the commentators (q) say, signifies to cut off the branches that are withered and perished, and are good for nothing; and the latter signifies the pruning of the vine when it has a superfluity of branches, or these extend themselves too far; when some are left, and others taken off." John Gill

Kalahari
Apr 10th 2018, 08:30 AM
He divorced Israel and Israel was his. Can't be cut off from that which you are not in. If you are "in" the vine, then you can be cut off from the vine.

Israel was His through covenant and thus can be put to death for breaking of the covenant. The same with the new covenant. The big difference between the two is the old was according to what you did and the new to God's grace. If you received God's grace you are pruned, not cut off. If you do not have faith (which is a fruit of grace) then you are cut off. See my previous reply to Ken on how believers and unbelievers can be part of the vine.

kyCyd
Apr 10th 2018, 09:40 AM
The Bible says they cast out demons, this is God's work (or work of the Kingdom) at one time in their lives. The Bible does not say or ID that they were doing false signs/wonders in the form of casting out demons. I don't believe a person without Jesus' authority can cast out demons at all. So if a person is detailed as having cast out demons, they are operating with Jesus' authority. We know that without His authority, the name of Jesus isn't gonna work with demons as we find in the Acts 19 scriptures.

In the Bible, the Lord forgets our sin when we repent, He views us as if we never sinned (which is difficult for us to understand from God, who is all knowing). I believe it is from this perspective (one that we can't understand yet), Jesus is saying He never knew a person who has stopped abiding and turned away.

I am really trying to follow and understand your perspective. So is this person abiding? Is he not casting out devils. Doesn't this to you mean there is power in the name of Jesus? It does not call this person a believer either. So what about this person....would this person be Christian to you?

Mark 9:38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.
39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.

Kalahari
Apr 10th 2018, 10:59 AM
To answer the OP I believe they are nominal Christians, not born again Spirit filled Christians.

Walls
Apr 10th 2018, 11:35 AM
Whenever I read this passage I can't help my first thoughts go out the the fake preachers, fake healers who have no intention to glorify the Lord other than themselves, for money, power over people, for being in the center of attention, in other words, one big ego trip. They may say anything in the name of Jesus but Jesus was never involved (I never knew you). Plenty examples on youtube, as Jesus calls them - you workers of lawlessness.

I understand your thoughts on it. Certainly there are fake teachers, prophets, healers etc. in the Church - all for varius motives. So you are right. The Lord, in His Word, built in tests for them. So these "false" ones are discoverable and can be dealt with in the Church life.

But this passage addresses "that day" when the Lord Jesus will appoint His co-kings for the Millennium. He has been addressing His disciples. No other group of men and women on earth are eligible for this High Post. The question we have to answer is; "Those (1) who call Jesus Lord, (2) who had power to cast out demons in Jesus' Name, and (3) who had the power to do MANY wonders in Jesus' Name, are they Christians or are they Gentiles or are they Jews. If we take what was written by the greatest Mind of the universe, the Mind that knew what we humans would read and understand, do we find these men to be "Disciples"? The text, as I have pointed out in my OP, shows them to be Christian in EIGHT different ways. Even if doubt can be cast on half of these proofs, that still leaves FOUR that point indisputably to the fact that they were Christians.

If our Lord Jesus counted them IMPOSTERS - men and women who were not Christians, He just had to say one word - LIARS! But He didn't. He acknowledges the works in His Name, but calls the men and women who did them "LAWLESS". The accusation is NOT that they were COUNTERFEIT. The accusation is NOT that the works were false. The accusation is that these works were done OUTSIDE THE WILL OF GOD THE FATHER. The RESULT of these correct works done without the Father's will, is NOT that they go to the Lake of Fire. It is not that they lose what they gained by calling Jesus Lord. IT IS THAT THEY MAY NOT ENTER THE MILLENNIAL KINGDOM ON EARTH. They are sons of the King. They should have been co-kings with Jesus. But they have displayed, over their lifetime, that they DO THEIR OWN THING - THAT THEY ARE DISOBEDIENT. And it is this quality that God needs for His Kingdom. His Name is at stake. He cannot afford to have men and women doing their own thing like Saul. He needs absolutely obedient men and women.

But there is one more thing to consider. "That DAY" is the day of JUDGMENT. It is the day when our Lord Jesus JUDGES men and women who would aspire to enter the Kingdom. Only those who have been born again aspire to "see" the Kingdom (Jn.3:3), and only those who have been born again and Baptized may "enter" the Kingdom (Jn.3:5). The judgement of Israel is different. They can NEVER have the Kingdom because they refused and it was taken from them (Matt.21:43). They refused Jesus and never be born again. They refused to say "Lord, Lord". And they are judged according to the Law (Rom.2:12). So also with the Gentiles. They refuse Christ. They do not believe in Him. They shake their fist at Him. They hate Him. They refuse to call Him "Lord". This all shows ONE THING. AT "THAT DAY" OF JUDGMENT FOR THE KINGDOM - ONLY CHRISTIANS ARE PRESENT.

Hope this adds some light. God bless.

Kalahari
Apr 10th 2018, 11:42 AM
Mat 7:21* Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.*

Why do you say it is the millennium kingdom when Jesus says it is the kingdom of heaven?

Secondly to do the will of God is to have faith in His Son and in what He has done, not in what you have done IMO.

Brother Mark
Apr 10th 2018, 11:44 AM
I understand your thoughts on it. Certainly there are fake teachers, prophets, healers etc. in the Church - all for varius motives. So you are right. The Lord, in His Word, built in tests for them. So these "false" ones are discoverable and can be dealt with in the Church life.

But this passage addresses "that day" when the Lord Jesus will appoint His co-kings for the Millennium. He has been addressing His disciples. No other group of men and women on earth are eligible for this High Post. The question we have to answer is; "Those (1) who call Jesus Lord, (2) who had power to cast out demons in Jesus' Name, and (3) who had the power to do MANY wonders in Jesus' Name, are they Christians or are they Gentiles or are they Jews. If we take what was written by the greatest Mind of the universe, the Mind that knew what we humans would read and understand, do we find these men to be "Disciples"? The text, as I have pointed out in my OP, shows them to be Christian in EIGHT different ways. Even if doubt can be cast on half of these proofs, that still leaves FOUR that point indisputably to the fact that they were Christians.

If our Lord Jesus counted them IMPOSTERS - men and women who were not Christians, He just had to say one word - LIARS! But He didn't. He acknowledges the works in His Name, but calls the men and women who did them "LAWLESS". The accusation is NOT that they were COUNTERFEIT. The accusation is NOT that the works were false. The accusation is that these works were done OUTSIDE THE WILL OF GOD THE FATHER. The RESULT of these correct works done without the Father's will, is NOT that they go to the Lake of Fire. It is not that they lose what they gained by calling Jesus Lord. IT IS THAT THEY MAY NOT ENTER THE MILLENNIAL KINGDOM ON EARTH. They are sons of the King. They should have been co-kings with Jesus. But they have displayed, over their lifetime, that they DO THEIR OWN THING - THAT THEY ARE DISOBEDIENT. And it is this quality that God needs for His Kingdom. His Name is at stake. He cannot afford to have men and women doing their own thing like Saul. He needs absolutely obedient men and women.

But there is one more thing to consider. "That DAY" is the day of JUDGMENT. It is the day when our Lord Jesus JUDGES men and women who would aspire to enter the Kingdom. Only those who have been born again aspire to "see" the Kingdom (Jn.3:3), and only those who have been born again and Baptized may "enter" the Kingdom (Jn.3:5). The judgement of Israel is different. They can NEVER have the Kingdom because they refused and it was taken from them (Matt.21:43). They refused Jesus and never be born again. They refused to say "Lord, Lord". And they are judged according to the Law (Rom.2:12). So also with the Gentiles. They refuse Christ. They do not believe in Him. They shake their fist at Him. They hate Him. They refuse to call Him "Lord". This all shows ONE THING. AT "THAT DAY" OF JUDGMENT FOR THE KINGDOM - ONLY CHRISTIANS ARE PRESENT.

Hope this adds some light. God bless.

You think someone can be saved without actually being intimately known by Jesus? How is this possible? When one gets saved, the Lamb is in them. The Spirit is in them. Thus, His seed is in them, and they have been known by Him. Jesus and the Holy Spirit cannot be inside someone that He has not known intimately... can He?

Also, keep in mind other passages where Jesus says that if anyone comes to Him, he will in no wise cast them out. Yet, these people are "cast out". No where do they say "But God, we trusted in you". They trusted in their own good works and did not come to Him on the basis of faith. For this reason, they are cast out away from Him.

John 6:36 "But I said to you, that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe. 37 "All that the Father gives Me shall come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out.
NASB

Those that Jesus cast out by saying "depart from me" had not come to Him in belief.

Walls
Apr 10th 2018, 11:46 AM
To answer the OP I believe they are nominal Christians, not born again Spirit filled Christians.

The Lord gave us His Word. It reveals God, His Son Jesus, His plan with man and His dealings with man. What you "believe" is based on your appreciation of the words used, the grammar used and the context in which the words are found. The case in the OP was built carefully. If you "believe" that those judged on "that day" are nominal Christians, you should be able to show it from the words, the grammar and the context. I propose that you attempt this. There are only three verses. It should be easy. It will profit the other posters. But if you cannot, you are still entitled to "believe" what you like, but it must be labelled "blind belief".

If Mark 16:17 says that the "sign" of casting out a demon is attached to "them that believe", I cannot see how anybody can suddenly make the opposite assumption to scripture. You are, in effect, saying, the "sign" of casting out a demon will follow the "nominal Christians". See the problem?

Kalahari
Apr 10th 2018, 12:05 PM
The Lord gave us His Word. It reveals God, His Son Jesus, His plan with man and His dealings with man. What you "believe" is based on your appreciation of the words used, the grammar used and the context in which the words are found. The case in the OP was built carefully. If you "believe" that those judged on "that day" are nominal Christians, you should be able to show it from the words, the grammar and the context. I propose that you attempt this. There are only three verses. It should be easy. It will profit the other posters. But if you cannot, you are still entitled to "believe" what you like, but it must be labelled "blind belief".

If Mark 16:17 says that the "sign" of casting out a demon is attached to "them that believe", I cannot see how anybody can suddenly make the opposite assumption to scripture. You are, in effect, saying, the "sign" of casting out a demon will follow the "nominal Christians". See the problem?

People thought Simon in Acts 8 did wonders of God, but he was not a follower of Christ. To do wonders does not mean you are a Christian or believer, because it is not the man that does it. To do wonders is not a sign of being a Christian, but it could be the fruit of one. To be a Christian is to have faith in Jesus, nothing else.

Also when Jesus cast out the demon and was judged to have done it not through God, he asked them then how did they who were not believers, done it. It was also through the power of God although they were not believers in Him. So a nominal Christian can cast out demons in the name of God, for the power comes from Him.

Walls
Apr 10th 2018, 12:05 PM
Mat 7:21* Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.*

Why do you say it is the millennium kingdom when Jesus says it is the kingdom of heaven?

Secondly to do the will of God is to have faith in His Son and in what He has done, not in what you have done IMO.

As I have already posted, the purpose of God with man that he be in the image of God and rule the earth (Gen.1:26-28). This plan has never changed. Israel are promised a piece of this earth. The seed of Abraham are promised the whole earth (Rom.4:13). When our Lord Jesus came He prayed "Thy Kingdom COME, thy WILL be done ON EARTH as it is in heaven". The prophets of Israel predict that Israel will again occupy their Land with Emmanuel dwelling WITH them in Jerusalem. Daniel, and the New Testament prophets, predict the return of Jesus to set up an everlasting Kingdom in the place of the present human government. The parables predict the return of Jesus to set up this heaven rule on earth. The last Chapters of the Bible (Revelation 20, 21 an 22) ALL show a Kingdom ON EARTH. Finally, it is NOT the Kingdom IN Heaven, but the Kingdom (out) OF Heaven. I would politely like to reverse your question and ask; "Why do you assume anything else than that the Kingdom (out) OF Heaven is anything other than this planned and predicted rule of the Man Jesus and His co-kings ON EARTH?"

Certainly, to do the will of God is to believe in Jesus. But so is to be Baptized. So is to turn the other cheek. So is to deny the soul, and crucify the body. So is to forgive your offender. And the list goes on so that in the New Testament we have in the region of 2,400 commands directed at the Christian. And the CONTEXT of Matthew 7:21-23 shows what the WILL of the Father is. It is the DOING WORKS that have God's supernatural power attached to them! Faith is already ASSUMED to have been done because they called Him LORD, and did these WORKS IN HIS NAME!! In every case of ENTERING the Kingdom of Heaven is attached to works, starting with Baptism in John 3:5.

Brother Mark
Apr 10th 2018, 12:07 PM
If Mark 16:17 says that the "sign" of casting out a demon is attached to "them that believe", I cannot see how anybody can suddenly make the opposite assumption to scripture. You are, in effect, saying, the "sign" of casting out a demon will follow the "nominal Christians". See the problem?

There's an assumption there. The assumption is that because the sign follows believers, that it CANNOT be something that unbelievers are a part of. For instance, if a demonized man is running to Jesus (as the man with Legion did), and that demonized man has faith in Jesus, then even if the preacher he is running to for guidance is not valid, God will still honor the faith of the man running to Jesus and help him.

Walls
Apr 10th 2018, 12:10 PM
You think someone can be saved without actually being intimately known by Jesus? How is this possible? When one gets saved, the Lamb is in them. The Spirit is in them. Thus, His seed is in them, and they have been known by Him. Jesus and the Holy Spirit cannot be inside someone that He has not known intimately... can He?

Also, keep in mind other passages where Jesus says that if anyone comes to Him, he will in no wise cast them out. Yet, these people are "cast out". No where do they say "But God, we trusted in you". They trusted in their own good works and did not come to Him on the basis of faith. For this reason, they are cast out away from Him.

John 6:36 "But I said to you, that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe. 37 "All that the Father gives Me shall come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out.
NASB

Those that Jesus cast out by saying "depart from me" had not come to Him in belief.

What do you think of my explanation of the different words rendered as "know"? We do not form our beliefs and doctrine on what is LIKELY. We form it on what is WRITTEN. If Jesus Christ dwells IN a man, He certainly knows that man and recognizes Him. But the question is, have they been INTIMATE? Was there a minute by minute, hour by hour INTERCOURSE between them? Did Mary have the same relationship with Jesus as Martha? Did Martha "know" Jesus and even serve Him diligently? Yes! How then could Mary "have chosen the BETTER part"?

Brother Mark
Apr 10th 2018, 12:11 PM
What do you think of my explanation of the different words rendered as "know"? We do not form our beliefs and doctrine on what is LIKELY. We form it on what is WRITTEN. If Jesus Christ dwells IN a man, He certainly knows that man and recognizes Him. But the question is, have they been INTIMATE? Was there a minute by minute, hour by hour INTERCOURSE between them?

Jesus cannot be in a man without being intimate with him. That is the very definition of intimacy. To be born of the Spirit requires intimacy. That is Jesus putting His seed into a man. Conception and birth does not take place without intercourse.

kyCyd
Apr 10th 2018, 12:12 PM
You think someone can be saved without actually being intimately known by Jesus? How is this possible? When one gets saved, the Lamb is in them. The Spirit is in them. Thus, His seed is in them, and they have been known by Him. Jesus and the Holy Spirit cannot be inside someone that He has not known intimately... can He?

Mark, do you have scripture reference for what I highlighted in bold? I mean is not it possible that people think they have the Holy Spirit but do not? I believe that the Holy Spirit can come on some people without asking the Father...but do most ask Father for the Holy Spirit as this scripture states?

Luke 11:13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

Does this not mean we need to ask Father for the Holy Spirit? Maybe there are many that do not have the Holy Spirit is why I ask. Maybe they have never ask. What are you thoughts on this?

Walls
Apr 10th 2018, 12:26 PM
People thought Simon in Acts 8 did wonders of God, but he was not a follower of Christ. To do wonders does not mean you are a Christian or believer, because it is not the man that does it. To do wonders is not a sign of being a Christian, but it could be the fruit of one. To be a Christian is to have faith in Jesus, nothing else.

Also when Jesus cast out the demon and was judged to have done it not through God, he asked them then how did they who were not believers, done it. It was also through the power of God although they were not believers in Him. So a nominal Christian can cast out demons in the name of God, for the power comes from Him.

In my OP I established that the Lord Himself said that Satan would never cast a out a demon because that would "end" his Kingdom and his House. Our Lord Jesus also said that the casting out of a demon was a "sign" of "them that believe". Don't you believe what the Word of God says, and what Jesus Himself said?

Let us compare Mark 16:17, "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out demons; they shall speak with new tongues", WITH Matthew 7:22, "Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out demons? and in thy name done many wonderful works?" Can these be anybody else than "THEM THAT BELIEVE? If so, show your scriptures.

Brother Mark
Apr 10th 2018, 12:26 PM
Mark, do you have scripture reference for what I highlighted in bold? I mean is not it possible that people think they have the Holy Spirit but do not? I believe that the Holy Spirit can come on some people without asking the Father...but do most ask Father for the Holy Spirit as this scripture states?

Luke 11:13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

Does this not mean we need to ask Father for the Holy Spirit? Maybe there are many that do not have the Holy Spirit is why I ask. Maybe they have never ask. What are you thoughts on this?

I see a difference between the Spirit being "in us" and the Spirit being "upon" us. One is indwelling and the other is baptism/filling.

Being born of the Spirit, as John 3 talks about, suggest to me an indwelt Holy Spirit.

1 Cor 3:16 Do you not know that you are a temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?
NASB

2 Tim 1:14 Guard, through the Holy Spirit who dwells in us, the treasure which has been entrusted to you.
NASB

Rom 8:9 However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. 10 And if Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness.
NASB

There are other passages besides the ones above.

We see the apostle received the indwelling holy Spirit in John, but were baptized in the Holy Spirit in Acts.

John 20:20 And when He had said this, He showed them both His hands and His side. The disciples therefore rejoiced when they saw the Lord. 21 Jesus therefore said to them again, "Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you." 22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.
NASB

Then, they were baptized/filled with the Holy Spirit in Acts.

Acts 1:4-5
4 And gathering them together, He commanded them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait for what the Father had promised, "Which," He said, "you heard of from Me; 5 for John baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now. "
NASB

and

Acts 1:8 but you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth. "
NASB

Acts 2:3 And there appeared to them tongues as of fire distributing themselves, and they rested on each one of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance.
NASB

So we see the Holy Spirit here is using the word "baptized" and "filled" interchangeably. And we also see where it is an ongoing thing throughout acts. Peter wasn't just filled once. He was filled repeatedly. Thus the command in Ephesians to be filled:

Eph 5:18 And do not get drunk with wine, for that is dissipation, but be filled with the Spirit,
NASB

Kalahari
Apr 10th 2018, 12:33 PM
As I have already posted, the purpose of God with man that he be in the image of God and rule the earth (Gen.1:26-28). This plan has never changed. Israel are promised a piece of this earth. The seed of Abraham are promised the whole earth (Rom.4:13). When our Lord Jesus came He prayed "Thy Kingdom COME, thy WILL be done ON EARTH as it is in heaven". The prophets of Israel predict that Israel will again occupy their Land with Emmanuel dwelling WITH them in Jerusalem. Daniel, and the New Testament prophets, predict the return of Jesus to set up an everlasting Kingdom in the place of the present human government. The parables predict the return of Jesus to set up this heaven rule on earth. The last Chapters of the Bible (Revelation 20, 21 an 22) ALL show a Kingdom ON EARTH. Finally, it is NOT the Kingdom IN Heaven, but the Kingdom (out) OF Heaven. I would politely like to reverse your question and ask; "Why do you assume anything else than that the Kingdom (out) OF Heaven is anything other than this planned and predicted rule of the Man Jesus and His co-kings ON EARTH?"

Certainly, to do the will of God is to believe in Jesus. But so is to be Baptized. So is to turn the other cheek. So is to deny the soul, and crucify the body. So is to forgive your offender. And the list goes on so that in the New Testament we have in the region of 2,400 commands directed at the Christian. And the CONTEXT of Matthew 7:21-23 shows what the WILL of the Father is. It is the DOING WORKS that have God's supernatural power attached to them! Faith is already ASSUMED to have been done because they called Him LORD, and did these WORKS IN HIS NAME!! In every case of ENTERING the Kingdom of Heaven is attached to works, starting with Baptism in John 3:5.

For me it is as simple as the following. Man was created as sons of God. To be a son is to rule, because you are the son of the King of creation. This is also why we will rule in eternity as kings, not over subjects for all will be kings. Now when you are reborn you are redeemed as king here and for eternity. If you realize who or what you are, you can act according to the will of God who have made you a king, being a son of Him. If you are not ruling in His kingdom now, then you are not king or son. His kingdom is not the kingdom the Jews expected, even on the day of Ascension.

Joh 18:36 Jesus said, "My kingdom does not belong to this world; if my kingdom belonged to this world, my followers would fight to keep me from being handed over to the Jewish authorities. No, my kingdom does not belong here!"

Our kingdom is the kingdom of heaven, a perfect kingdom with God where there is no sin. Through our life we bring the kingdom to others, but we will reign with Him for eternity on the new earth in the kingdom of heaven.

Kalahari
Apr 10th 2018, 12:39 PM
In my OP I established that the Lord Himself said that Satan would never cast a out a demon because that would "end" his Kingdom and his House. Our Lord Jesus also said that the casting out of a demon was a "sign" of "them that believe". Don't you believe what the Word of God says, and what Jesus Himself said?

Let us compare Mark 16:17, "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out demons; they shall speak with new tongues", WITH Matthew 7:22, "Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out demons? and in thy name done many wonderful works?" Can these be anybody else than "THEM THAT BELIEVE? If so, show your scriptures.

My point is that to cast out demons are done in the name of the Lord. It does not say anything about the state of the doer being a Christian or not, but Christians will be able to do it. I have already shown you that Simon did wonders and was not a believer. Also the Jews cast out demons an they also were not believers. We can also assume the same of Judas. So I do not agree with your point that only believers can cast out demons.

Walls
Apr 10th 2018, 12:40 PM
Jesus cannot be in a man without being intimate with him. That is the very definition of intimacy. To be born of the Spirit requires intimacy. That is Jesus putting His seed into a man. Conception and birth does not take place without intercourse.

I have established my thesis based on verses with their words, context and grammar. Show me yours and I will step back.

Tell me why Paul, after decades of being a diligent serving and suffering servant for Christ, with three years left to martyrdom, has to say in Philippians 3:8-10,


8 "Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge (Gnosos - Gk.) of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,
9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
10 That I may know (Ginosko - Gk.) him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;"

The "knowledge" of verse 18 is from the same root word as "know" in verse 10 - AND BOTH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE INDWELLING SPIRIT NOR WITH FAITH. THEY HAVE TO DO WITH LOSING ALL THINGS, COUNTING THIS LOSS AS DUNG, SUFFERING WITH HIM AND BEING MADE CONFORMABLE WITH HIS DEATH. And then Paul these these ALL are prerequisites for ATTAINING to a special resurrection!

According to the revelation of the Bible, intimacy with Christ is not based on Him dwelling inside the Christian. It has to do with a WALK OVER YEARS.

Walls
Apr 10th 2018, 12:45 PM
My point is that to cast out demons are done in the name of the Lord. It does not say anything about the state of the doer being a Christian or not, but Christians will be able to do it. I have already shown you that Simon did wonders and was not a believer. Also the Jews cast out demons an they also were not believers. We can also assume the same of Judas. So I do not agree with your point that only believers can cast out demons.

But we do not talk of Simon and the Jews. We talk about the group of Matthew 7:21-23. Who do you say they are considering all the proofs? You are the detective now. You have to gather the proof. Let us hear who your "suspects" are. Children of the Jews? Men who defy and hate the name of Jesus? Men who hate God although his power is needed for "ending Satan's house and kingdom"? C'mon bro.

But again, I offer to grant you your doubt on this point. Now, let us turn to the other SEVEN proofs.

Brother Mark
Apr 10th 2018, 12:48 PM
I have established my thesis based on verses with their words, context and grammar. Show me yours and I will step back.

Tell me why Paul, after decades of being a diligent serving and suffering servant for Christ, with three years left to martyrdom, has to say in Philippians 3:8-10,


8 "Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge (Gnosos - Gk.) of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,
9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
10 That I may know (Ginosko - Gk.) him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;"

The "knowledge" of verse 18 is from the same root word as "know" in verse 10 - AND BOTH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE INDWELLING SPIRIT NOR WITH FAITH. THEY HAVE TO DO WITH LOSING ALL THINGS, COUNTING THIS LOSS AS DUNG, SUFFERING WITH HIM AND BEING MADE CONFORMABLE WITH HIS DEATH. And then Paul these these ALL are prerequisites for ATTAINING to a special resurrection!

According to the revelation of the Bible, intimacy with Christ is not based on Him dwelling inside the Christian. It has to do with a WALK OVER YEARS.

Intimacy continues. It is not a one and done. Paul wanted to know more and more and more of Jesus.

Rom 11:33 Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways!
NASB

Eph 1:15 For this reason I too, having heard of the faith in the Lord Jesus which exists among you, and your love for all the saints, 16 do not cease giving thanks for you, while making mention of you in my prayers; 17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of Him. 18 I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, 19 and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward us who believe.
NASB

Eph 3:14-19

14 For this reason, I bow my knees before the Father, 15 from whom every family in heaven and on earth derives its name, 16 that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with power through His Spirit in the inner man; 17 so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; and that you, being rooted and grounded in love, 18 may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, 19 and to know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled up to all the fulness of God.
NASB

There's a filling up of all the fullness of God. God is intimate with us and we have His seed in us at salvation. Jesus being "in man" is the very definition of intercourse. That is what intercourse means.

Conception and birth do not take place without intercourse. That is a very basic concept. We can't move past that brother Walls. Babies are not birthed without intercourse. The are not birthed without the seed of the father being placed within the mother. Intimacy and intercourse are part of the conception and birthing process.

Kalahari
Apr 10th 2018, 12:50 PM
But we do not talk of Simon and the Jews. We talk about the group of Matthew 7:21-23. Who do you say they are considering all the proofs? You are the detective now. You have to gather the proof. Let us hear who your "suspects" are. Children of the Jews? Men who defy and hate the name of Jesus? Men who hate God although his power is needed for "ending Satan's house and kingdom"? C'mon bro.

But again, I offer to grant you your doubt on this point. Now, let us turn to the other SEVEN proofs.

As I have said they are nominal Christians, for nominal Christians can do all the things and still not be born again Spirit filled Christians.

kyCyd
Apr 10th 2018, 01:16 PM
I see a difference between the Spirit being "in us" and the Spirit being "upon" us. One is indwelling and the other is baptism/filling.

Being born of the Spirit, as John 3 talks about, suggest to me an indwelt Holy Spirit.

1 Cor 3:16 Do you not know that you are a temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?
NASB

2 Tim 1:14 Guard, through the Holy Spirit who dwells in us, the treasure which has been entrusted to you.
NASB

Rom 8:9 However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. 10 And if Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness.
NASB

There are other passages besides the ones above.

We see the apostle received the indwelling holy Spirit in John, but were baptized in the Holy Spirit in Acts.

John 20:20 And when He had said this, He showed them both His hands and His side. The disciples therefore rejoiced when they saw the Lord. 21 Jesus therefore said to them again, "Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you." 22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.
NASB

Then, they were baptized/filled with the Holy Spirit in Acts.

Acts 1:4-5
4 And gathering them together, He commanded them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait for what the Father had promised, "Which," He said, "you heard of from Me; 5 for John baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now. "
NASB

and

Acts 1:8 but you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth. "
NASB

Acts 2:3 And there appeared to them tongues as of fire distributing themselves, and they rested on each one of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance.
NASB

So we see the Holy Spirit here is using the word "baptized" and "filled" interchangeably. And we also see where it is an ongoing thing throughout acts. Peter wasn't just filled once. He was filled repeatedly. Thus the command in Ephesians to be filled:

Eph 5:18 And do not get drunk with wine, for that is dissipation, but be filled with the Spirit,
NASB

Thank you for all the scriptures. So to you, you don't need to ask Father for the HS? To you all that make a confession of faith and are baptized automatically have the Holy Spirit? And you are saying as far as the OP...that if you have the HS that Jesus knows you and you know Jesus right? Am I understanding your position?

randyk
Apr 10th 2018, 01:51 PM
I appreciate your thoughtful insight. But have you ever considered taking a text and expounding what God said in that text - without additions and without subtractions? You introduced "saved", but the text under discussion does not. You avoided rebellious Christians, but the text addresses them. You deny that Christ was trying to establish "Dominion" but the text is about Christ's Kingdom on earth and His denying the Kingdoms of this world, "and their glory" at the hand of Satan (Matt.4:8). The text never addresses FAITH. It addresses WORKS. It is "DO the will of my Father". You address "False Christians" but the term never enters the Bible. It only recognizes Christians or non-Christians. The text addresses those who call "Lord, Lord", but you do not any part of mankind that calls upon the Lord, does MANY wonders in Jesus' Name, casts demons out in Jesus' Name, claim the Kingdom form a Lord they knew of, but yet are denied the Kingdom for iniquity.

Have you not considered the simplest form of effective rebuttal to my OP - a solid and precise exegesis of the three verses like I did. This is what Bible Discussion is about. I produce EIGHT reasons why those refused the Kingdom are Christians. Could you not dismantle one? And then, when you have dismantled all eight, you would still have to explain why some of the Lord's Servants and Virgins are barred from the Kingdom in the Parables.

Nevertheless, I appreciate you as a searching brother and hope and pray for God's blessing upon you - richly.

Absolutely I could deal with the text. Sometimes I find it more valuable to give the overall sense of what I think the subject involves, before dealing with the text. So let's get at the text then, from the perspective that I suggested.

Matt 7.15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’ "

This is being directed at Jesus' disciples while they were still as yet under the OT Law. At that time, *all Israel* was viewed as "God's People." Obviously, when you have an entire nation under the Law of God, many of them portray themselves as godly, and yet do not actually love God.

The background of false profession were the False Prophets of the OT. For example, in Ezekiel we read of them proclaiming victory over enemies that Ezekiel said were coming to judge Israel. They were crying, "peace," when there really was no peace, because of all of the sin in Israel.

False Prophets covered up the sins of Israel, and disguised them by covering them up with good works. They "whitewashed" walls that were really destined to be broken down. The true Prophet was ignored, whereas the False Prophets were listened to.

This is what Jesus was concerned with, with respect to acceptance of himself as "Lord." Some would come, like Judas, who would proclaim all is well in Israel. But in reality, Israel was in gross sin, and ripe for judgment. These counterfeit Christians would even preach the word of Christ and do miracles, like Christ. But they would inwardly be as sinful as Israel, and would therefore be guilty of covering up sin, just as the OT False Prophets did.

randyk
Apr 10th 2018, 01:56 PM
Hi you ALL esteemed Ones,

In my OP I addressed a problem among us. That is, thinking that entering the Kingdom OF Heaven is entering the Kingdom IN Heaven. It is still prevalent among the Church at large. But if it is matter of being QUALIFIED to rule OBEDIENTLY as co-kings with Christ in CITIES ON EARTH (Lk.19:16-19) then the Rebirth, Justification and Eternal Life we have by FAITH is NOT ADDRESSED! It is imply a matter of "are you Saul who was chosen as king and let God down, or David who was chosen as king and was OBEDIENT"? Look at the wording of these two opposing verses.
To SAUL in 1st Samuel 15:23; "For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king."
To DAVID in 1st Kings 15:5; "Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, and turned not aside from any thing that he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite."

Being a king is not being saved from the Lake of Fire. Being a king is the RESULT, THE GOAL of being saved. Prince Charles of Great Britain is "appointed to be king" - BY BIRTH. But if he is a criminal according to English Law, he will go to jail and NOT BECOME KING. But his birth to the Queen cannot be changed. It is just that he MISSED his CALLING.

This brings up an issue I've never fully resolved. When the Scriptures speak of us becoming "kings and priests," do they mean that *each of us* as overcomers will become "kings?" Or, does it mean that we belong to a Kingdom that is led by royalty?

I cannot for the life of me understand how we can all be kings, as overcomers, since that would imply a divided government? There can only be one king in a Kingdom, right? Perhaps this deserves its own thread?

Old man
Apr 10th 2018, 02:06 PM
This brings up an issue I've never fully resolved. When the Scriptures speak of us becoming "kings and priests," do they mean that *each of us* as overcomers will become "kings?" Or, does it mean that we belong to a Kingdom that is led by royalty?

I cannot for the life of me understand how we can all be kings, as overcomers, since that would imply a divided government? There can only be one king in a Kingdom, right? Perhaps this deserves its own thread?

We are a kingdom not kings. Though we rule we will rule only as judges, not as actual kings. And to even be a judge one must be an overcomer according to the criteria set in the letter Jesus dictated for the Church in Thyatira.

DavidC
Apr 10th 2018, 02:10 PM
We are a kingdom not kings. Though we rule we will rule only as judges, not as actual kings. And to even be a judge one must be an overcomer according to the criteria set in the letter Jesus dictated for the Church in Thyatira.

I thought we were a Kingdom of Priests.
1 Peter 2:9
1 Peter 2:5
Rev 1:6

ProDeo
Apr 10th 2018, 02:21 PM
I understand your thoughts on it. Certainly there are fake teachers, prophets, healers etc. in the Church - all for varius motives. So you are right. The Lord, in His Word, built in tests for them. So these "false" ones are discoverable and can be dealt with in the Church life.

But this passage addresses "that day" when the Lord Jesus will appoint His co-kings for the Millennium. He has been addressing His disciples. No other group of men and women on earth are eligible for this High Post. The question we have to answer is; "Those (1) who call Jesus Lord, (2) who had power to cast out demons in Jesus' Name, and (3) who had the power to do MANY wonders in Jesus' Name, are they Christians or are they Gentiles or are they Jews. If we take what was written by the greatest Mind of the universe, the Mind that knew what we humans would read and understand, do we find these men to be "Disciples"? The text, as I have pointed out in my OP, shows them to be Christian in EIGHT different ways. Even if doubt can be cast on half of these proofs, that still leaves FOUR that point indisputably to the fact that they were Christians.

If our Lord Jesus counted them IMPOSTERS - men and women who were not Christians, He just had to say one word - LIARS! But He didn't. He acknowledges the works in His Name, but calls the men and women who did them "LAWLESS". The accusation is NOT that they were COUNTERFEIT. The accusation is NOT that the works were false. The accusation is that these works were done OUTSIDE THE WILL OF GOD THE FATHER. The RESULT of these correct works done without the Father's will, is NOT that they go to the Lake of Fire. It is not that they lose what they gained by calling Jesus Lord. IT IS THAT THEY MAY NOT ENTER THE MILLENNIAL KINGDOM ON EARTH. They are sons of the King. They should have been co-kings with Jesus. But they have displayed, over their lifetime, that they DO THEIR OWN THING - THAT THEY ARE DISOBEDIENT. And it is this quality that God needs for His Kingdom. His Name is at stake. He cannot afford to have men and women doing their own thing like Saul. He needs absolutely obedient men and women.

But there is one more thing to consider. "That DAY" is the day of JUDGMENT. It is the day when our Lord Jesus JUDGES men and women who would aspire to enter the Kingdom. Only those who have been born again aspire to "see" the Kingdom (Jn.3:3), and only those who have been born again and Baptized may "enter" the Kingdom (Jn.3:5). The judgement of Israel is different. They can NEVER have the Kingdom because they refused and it was taken from them (Matt.21:43). They refused Jesus and never be born again. They refused to say "Lord, Lord". And they are judged according to the Law (Rom.2:12). So also with the Gentiles. They refuse Christ. They do not believe in Him. They shake their fist at Him. They hate Him. They refuse to call Him "Lord". This all shows ONE THING. AT "THAT DAY" OF JUDGMENT FOR THE KINGDOM - ONLY CHRISTIANS ARE PRESENT.

Hope this adds some light. God bless.

From what you write I get the impression people who Jesus labels as workers of lawlessness can have the gifts anyway. I don't buy that.

Also note the depart from me part, it's the same saying as in Matt 25:41.

Slug1
Apr 10th 2018, 02:42 PM
Cant agree.

"There are two sorts of branches in Christ the vine; the one sort are such who have only an historical faith in him, believe but for a time, and are removed; they are such who only profess to believe in him, as Simon Magus did; are in him by profession only; they submit to outward ordinances, become church members, and so are reckoned to be in Christ, being in a church state, as the churches of Judea and Thessalonica, and others, are said, in general, to he in Christ; though it is not to be thought that every individual person in these churches were truly and savingly in him. These branches are unfruitful ones; what fruit they seemed to have, withers away, and proves not to be genuine fruit; what fruit they bring forth is to themselves, and not to the glory of God, being none of the fruits of his Spirit and grace: and such branches the husbandman removes.

These are the other sort of branches, who are truly and savingly in Christ; such as are rooted in him; to whom he is the green fir tree, from whom all their fruit is found; who are filled by him with all the fruits of his Spirit, grace, and righteousness. These are purged or pruned, chiefly by afflictions and temptations, which are as needful for their growth and fruitfulness, as the pruning and cutting of the vines are for theirs; and though these are sometimes sharp, and never joyous, but grievous, yet they are attended with the peaceable fruits of righteousness, and so the end of bringing forth more fruit is answered; for it is not enough that a believer exercise grace, and perform good works for the present, but these must remain; or he must be constant herein, and still bring forth fruit, and add one virtue to another, that it may appear he is not barren and unfruitful in the knowledge of Christ, in whom he is implanted. These different acts of the vinedresser "taking away" some branches, and "purging" others, are expressed by the Misnic doctors (p) by פיסולה, and זירודה. The former, the commentators (q) say, signifies to cut off the branches that are withered and perished, and are good for nothing; and the latter signifies the pruning of the vine when it has a superfluity of branches, or these extend themselves too far; when some are left, and others taken off." John GillCan't forget that those on the vine are producing fruit and then stop. No one can produce any fruit unless they are abiding as PART of the Body. A person who is not a part of the Body, cannot produce any fruit, cannot be a branch. Jesus teaches us both through this lesson (John 15) and the Parable of the Sower that some do produce fruit but become fruitless and thus, are cut off.

Old man
Apr 10th 2018, 02:50 PM
The book of Matthew was written to Jewish believers who werehaving to confront the claims made by the Pharisees that Jesus did not risefrom the grave but that the disciples stole his body while the guards weresleeping.

The book is primarily a comparison between Jesus and the Pharisees.Matthew is writing to give evidence proving that Jesus was indeed the Messiah(as the Pharisees were denying and teaching) to those believers who were beingchallenged by their claims. And to establish their credibility (or lack of it) pertainingto the legitimacy of their knowledge of Jesus their Messiah.

The sermon on the mount (where the OP gets the foundationalBible text for this thread) includes in the early parts the passage that verse whereJesus says if your righteousness does not surpass that of the scribes andPharisees you will not get into the kingdom of God. Matthew then continues toinclude examples of the difference in the level righteousness. The SOTM endswith Matthew saying, “When Jesus had finished these words, the crowds wereamazed at His teaching; for He was teaching them as one having authority, andnot as their scribes.” Matthew is deliberately creating a comparison here.

(Though it only mentions the scribes the scribes andPharisees were often lumped together since the teaching of the scribes weresupported and endorsed by the Pharisees.)
Given that background, looking at the passage in question inthe OP I go back a little further to get the full context. Actually back to 7:15where Jesus warns about false prophets (i.e. those who teach incorrectly theword of God – Pharisees) whose fruit does not match what they teach i.e. thatrighteousness at the level of the Pharisees that Jesus already warned about(the way they prayed to be noticed, gave alms to be noticed, fasted to benoticed, etc.)

He warns His listeners that these false prophets will beknown by their fruit and that not everyone who says Lord Lord will enter thekingdom of heaven. This is because though they may have good works such asthose mentioned in the example given by Jesus (i.e. casting out demons, prophesy,perform miracles) those works were not done with Christ being given the Glory(Jesus did not know them). Those works were done to exalt themselves … to beseen of men. Any good work done much be done with Christ being the recipient ofall glory or that work is dead and worthless.

Rev 3:1 starts the letter to the angle of Sardis. Jesus mentionsthat He has not found the angles works to be complete. They were not completebecause they were not being done to give Christ the glory but himself. He wasdoing the works to maintain his reputation that he (the angle) was alive. Notthat Jesus was alive. All works done must be done to proclaim that Jesus isalive not ourselves.

Now the warning for the angle is that if he did not stoptaking the glory and exalting himself (i.e. having a name that he was alive)his name would be erased from the book of life. If he did overcome his namewould not be erased. It is very possible that those prophets mentioned in Matt7 being the ones saying Lord Lord were Christians. Just as the angle (overseer)in Rev was, even though he is being told that if he did not overcome and stoptaking the glory for the works he did, his name would be erased from the bookof life.

Just my thoughts.

Old man
Apr 10th 2018, 02:52 PM
I thought we were a Kingdom of Priests.
1 Peter 2:9
1 Peter 2:5
Rev 1:6

Priests ... yes.
Kings ... No.

Brother Mark
Apr 10th 2018, 04:23 PM
Priests ... yes.
Kings ... No.

Royal priests...........

Old man
Apr 10th 2018, 04:30 PM
Royal priests...........

Sons of the king are royalty but they are still not kings.

Brother Mark
Apr 10th 2018, 04:38 PM
Sons of the king are royalty but they are still not kings.

Neither are they "just" priests. ;)

Old man
Apr 10th 2018, 04:54 PM
Neither are they "just" priests. ;)

Not sure if you are thinking that I am saying they are "just" priests.

Because I'm not and never have.

randyk
Apr 10th 2018, 05:15 PM
We are a kingdom not kings. Though we rule we will rule only as judges, not as actual kings. And to even be a judge one must be an overcomer according to the criteria set in the letter Jesus dictated for the Church in Thyatira.

That would make more sense to me. Thanks.

randyk
Apr 10th 2018, 05:27 PM
I would reassert my position that followers of the Christian Covenant can sincerely join themselves to the requirements of that Covenant and still lack saving faith. God has always meant for our participation in His covenants to involve saving faith. However, we know that people can join the Covenant, and later be cut off. They can begin with spiritual life under that Covenant, and later be cut off from the "book of life."

I don't think being cut off means that one who is genuinely saved can be cut off from eternal salvation. But I do think it means that all men are invited to participate in the Christian Covenant, regardless of their level or kind of faith.

So I'm here distinguishing between "saving faith" and "transient faith." Faith does not always save. I can believe that Jesus was the Son of God, and I can believe in his laws, such that I follow them externally. But saving faith requires an inward change, when we are "born again." That is exclusively saving faith. We may begin with transient faith, and progress into saving faith. That is the object, but that is not always the reality.

The simplest example of this is Israel under the Law. They *all* began with transient faith. They *all* proclaimed service and subservience to the Almighty God of Israel. And so they all had transient faith to begin with. They all followed the Law of Moses, and were blessed by it, enjoyed the spiritual life associated with it, and yet did not necessarily obtain "saving faith."

Saving faith was observable in men like Moses and Joshua and Caleb, and in many other men who were intimate with God, and clearly loved God! Other men it was not quite so clear! Others rebelled, and were cut off, due to their sins. Their eternal judgment we don't always know!

I would never say that those who begin as Christians and fall away have necessarily lost their soul. They are just cut off, as an Israelite who was under the Law may have been put to death for his sin.

But the object is to make our transient Christian faith a true intimate knowledge of God such that we honestly love Him! Then we will have been born again, and will have obtained eternal life. Nobody can cut you off at that point! My 2 cents.

DavidC
Apr 10th 2018, 07:26 PM
Can't forget that those on the vine are producing fruit and then stop. No one can produce any fruit unless they are abiding as PART of the Body. A person who is not a part of the Body, cannot produce any fruit, cannot be a branch. Jesus teaches us both through this lesson (John 15) and the Parable of the Sower that some do produce fruit but become fruitless and thus, are cut off.

Jesus also taught that some would produce 30, 60 or 100, not all would produce complete Fruit.

Slug1
Apr 10th 2018, 07:29 PM
Jesus also taught that some would produce 30, 60 or 100, not all would produce complete Fruit.Hooah... but I fail to understand a point.

DavidC
Apr 10th 2018, 08:22 PM
Hooah... but I fail to understand a point.
I guess I am saying there will be some that will be mostly fruitless even though abiding, and Jesus will know them regardless.

Walls
Apr 10th 2018, 09:11 PM
For me it is as simple as the following. Man was created as sons of God. To be a son is to rule, because you are the son of the King of creation. This is also why we will rule in eternity as kings, not over subjects for all will be kings. Now when you are reborn you are redeemed as king here and for eternity. If you realize who or what you are, you can act according to the will of God who have made you a king, being a son of Him. If you are not ruling in His kingdom now, then you are not king or son. His kingdom is not the kingdom the Jews expected, even on the day of Ascension.

Joh 18:36 Jesus said, "My kingdom does not belong to this world; if my kingdom belonged to this world, my followers would fight to keep me from being handed over to the Jewish authorities. No, my kingdom does not belong here!"

Our kingdom is the kingdom of heaven, a perfect kingdom with God where there is no sin. Through our life we bring the kingdom to others, but we will reign with Him for eternity on the new earth in the kingdom of heaven.

But the text we discuss unequivocally shows that MANY, who served the Lord, cast out demons in His Name, and did miracles in His name ARE REFUSED THE KINGDOM. The only argument you, and others are bringing is that they somehow they are Gentiles or Jews. But you bring no scriptural proof. It is an opinion you hold because you are perturbed. If you were a man serving the Lord IN OBEDIENCE, you would have no problem with the text. I too am perturbed because, like Paul in Philippians, I see my shortcoming and cannot be SURE of the Kingdom. But of my rebirth, having eternal life and being a son of God I am VERY SURE for scripture GUARANTEES these things BY FAITH. But OBEDIENCE is a matter of WORKS. And if you study every passage in the New Testament about the Kingdom you will come to only ONE CONCLUSION. It is a REWARD for WORKS. I will take one to show you. In 2nd Peter 1:1-11, it reads;


1 "Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:
2 Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord,
3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.
5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;
6 And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness;
7 And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.
8 For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.
9 But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins.
10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:
11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ."

verse 1 says we have received faith
verse 3 says that through the "grace and peace of verse 2 we are given ALL things "that pertain to LIFE and GODLINESS". The word "Life" os "zoe" in the Greek and is always used in the matter of Eternal Life.
verse 4 says that by this we have the "Divine Nature" and that this Divine Nature will lead us out of all corruption
verse 5 SUDDENLY CHANGES TACK! Whereas verses 1 - 4 are all about what is GIVEN TO US, from verse 5 we are advised and admonished to "GIVE ALL DILIGENCE TO ADD" to this faith that we were given in verse 1. Now, the EFFORT BECOMES OURS!
verses 5 to 8 are a set of VIRTUES that must be added BY THE CHRISTIAN'S DILIGENCE
verse 10 says that we MUST ADD these things to make our CALLING AND ELECTION SURE! That is, the Divine Life by FAITH in the first verses DOES NOT MAKE OUR CALLING AND ELECTION SURE. ONLY OUR DILIGENCE TO ADD VIRTUES MAKES IT SURE!
verse 10 also says that if we don't add these virtues to our FAITH we will FAIL
verse 11 shows THREE THINGS. (1) Our "Calling and Election" is NOT BY FAITH BUT BY WORKS. (2) That to enter the Kingdom of God must be MINISTERED TO US. That is, somebody else allows us in and can refuse. (3) "TO FAIL" in verse 10 is to NOT ENTER THE KINGDOM though we have faith and its resultant "Divine Life".

And so it is in multiple Parables. The slothful Servant of the Lord is REFUSED ENTRY INTO THE KINGDOM! He is still a Servant. He still is a son of God. He still has divine life, BUT HE MAY NOT BE CO-KING in the Millennium! Both Saul and David are Israelites - seed of Abraham via Isaac. Both their ancestors were saved by the Lamb of Egypt. And none of this changed when Saul was DISOBEDIENT. But Saul MAY NOT BE KING WHILE DAVID AND HIS HOUSE MAY! Saul's birth is not changed. Saul is not suddenly NOT seed of Isaac. Saul is NOT suddenly a Gentile. But the Kingship is ripped away from him.

mailmandan
Apr 10th 2018, 09:28 PM
The slothful Servant of the Lord is REFUSED ENTRY INTO THE KINGDOM! He is still a Servant. He still is a son of God. He still has divine life, BUT HE MAY NOT BE CO-KING in the Millennium! Both Saul and David are Israelites - seed of Abraham via Isaac. The problem that I have with the slothful servant being a son of God is found in verse 30 - And cast the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. That is a description of hell. The fact that this man is called a servant does not necessarily mean that he was saved. The Jews are called the Lord’s servants, but they were not all saved (Isaiah 43:10).

The talents represent monetary value and are distibuted according to ability (Matthew 25:15). The requirement is to invest in Christ.
The first two servants deposited their money with the bankers (verse 27) but the third servant buried his money in the ground (vs. 25).

Walls
Apr 10th 2018, 09:43 PM
As I have said they are nominal Christians, for nominal Christians can do all the things and still not be born again Spirit filled Christians.

Show me verses please. Thanks. Our Lord Jesus cast them out by the POWER of God, and by the "FINGER" of God. Where do we find (1) the term "Nominal Christian" in the Bible, and (2) were do we find them casting out demons by their own power? And if Satan's house and kingdom is destroyed if he casts out his own soldiers, why would he allow it? Let's get down to the scriptures that directly say this.

And while we are at scriptures, let us examine the example of Simon in Acts 8. In Acts 8:9-24 it clearly says that Simon used "sorcery". The meaning of "sorcery" in Strong' s and Vine's is "MAGIC". And "magic" is defined as, "the power of apparently influencing events by using mysterious or supernatural forces." That is, it is the ability, not to influence events, but to APPARENTLY influence events. This is confirmed in the text by the word "bewitched". The word "bewitched" in the Greek means "from <G1537> (ek) and <G2476> (histemi) meaning, 'to put, or stand, out of wits, to amaze, be (make) astonished, be beside self (selves)'" (Strong's). Simon did not do MANY WONDERS like those of Matthew 7:22. He literally "confused the people to make them amazed". Or, as the Beast will do - "LYING WONDERS".

Let us not attribute;

casting out of demons other than by the power of God
casting out of demons as a "sign" of anyone except "them that believe" for Satan is not stupid enough to destroy his own kingdom like Christians do
MANY miracles to anyone but Christians.

Walls
Apr 10th 2018, 10:12 PM
The problem that I have with the slothful servant being a son of God is found in verse 30 - And cast the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. That is a description of hell. The fact that this man is called a servant does not necessarily mean that he was saved. The Jews are called the Lord’s servants, but they were not all saved (Isaiah 43:10).

The talents represent monetary value and are distibuted according to ability (Matthew 25:15). The requirement is to invest in Christ.
The first two servants deposited their money with the bankers (verse 27) but the third servant buried his money in the ground (vs. 25).

The word "hell" never appears in the Bible. There are three words that the King James translators render as "hell";
Gehenna - the Valley of Hinnom on the south side of Jerusalem in which the trash and cadavers of the city was burned day and night. It speaks of the Lake of Fire
Hades - the place under the earth where the souls of dead men go to wait for resurrection
Tartaroo - used once only to show the place under the earth where the angels who mated with women in Noah's time are imprisoned (2nd Pet.2:4).

The "outer darkness" is ONLY reserved for God's people. It appears three times and is NEVER CONNECTED TO "HELL" It appears concerning (1) the Jews or "children of the kingdom" (Matt.8:12) or (2) Christians (Matthew 22:13 25:30)

In Matthew 22 it is those who ACCEPT the invitation but their WORKS (their garment - Rev.19:8) are wrong. Only Christians accept the call to the Wedding Feast of Jesus. The Jew and the Gentile HATE Him.
In Matthew 24 the servant that was chastised is the same as the other servants. Only his WORKS were wrong, and even after he is judged he is still called a servant. He is exactly the same as the other servants, received exactly the same Talent but failed because of what he DID, not because he had no FAITH
The servants of the New Testament Parables were the SERVANTS, not of God as both the Jew and Nebuchadnezzar was (Jer.27:6), BUT OF JESUS

"Outer Darkness" is simple a place OUTSIDE which is DARK. Since it is used ONLY in connection with the Kingdom, is must mean a place OUTSIDE the Kingdom, and a place AWAY from Christ - the light of the world and SUN of righteousness (Jn.8:12; Mal.4:2). It is Typified by the "Gizrah" of Ezekiel's Temple in Ezekiel Chapters 41 and 42. It was a room without windows attached to the Temple where are the implements of the Temple that became useless were stored to be ground or sandpapered. That is, it is so close to God's House, but a place of disgrace, pain and darkness.

The faithful servants of Matthew 25 did not deal with the bankers. The word used in the Greek means, "to toil (as a task, occupation, etc.), be engaged in or with, do, labor for, minister about, trade, work" (Strong's Greek & Hebrew Dictionary). The faithful servants used their Talents to build the Church (Eph.4:8-12).

Walls
Apr 10th 2018, 10:32 PM
I would reassert my position that followers of the Christian Covenant can sincerely join themselves to the requirements of that Covenant and still lack saving faith. God has always meant for our participation in His covenants to involve saving faith. However, we know that people can join the Covenant, and later be cut off. They can begin with spiritual life under that Covenant, and later be cut off from the "book of life."

I don't think being cut off means that one who is genuinely saved can be cut off from eternal salvation. But I do think it means that all men are invited to participate in the Christian Covenant, regardless of their level or kind of faith.

So I'm here distinguishing between "saving faith" and "transient faith." Faith does not always save. I can believe that Jesus was the Son of God, and I can believe in his laws, such that I follow them externally. But saving faith requires an inward change, when we are "born again." That is exclusively saving faith. We may begin with transient faith, and progress into saving faith. That is the object, but that is not always the reality.

The simplest example of this is Israel under the Law. They *all* began with transient faith. They *all* proclaimed service and subservience to the Almighty God of Israel. And so they all had transient faith to begin with. They all followed the Law of Moses, and were blessed by it, enjoyed the spiritual life associated with it, and yet did not necessarily obtain "saving faith."

Saving faith was observable in men like Moses and Joshua and Caleb, and in many other men who were intimate with God, and clearly loved God! Other men it was not quite so clear! Others rebelled, and were cut off, due to their sins. Their eternal judgment we don't always know!

I would never say that those who begin as Christians and fall away have necessarily lost their soul. They are just cut off, as an Israelite who was under the Law may have been put to death for his sin.

But the object is to make our transient Christian faith a true intimate knowledge of God such that we honestly love Him! Then we will have been born again, and will have obtained eternal life. Nobody can cut you off at that point! My 2 cents.

Would it not be easier to use the Bible's words.

The Christian is under only TWO Covenants. (1) that of the Rainbow made with Noah, and (2) that of PROMISE made with Abraham (Gal.3:29)
There is no mention, EVER, of a "Christian Covenant". The two Covenants that the Christian are under are the Noahican and the Abrahamic
Neither of these Covenants depend on faith. They are CONTRACTS ratified in blood.
The Abrahamic Covenant is one of PROMISE. It does not hang on man's effort. Man's side is only to be circumcised or Baptized
The unfaithful and slothful servants of Christ are refused entry to the Kingdom of Heaven
The Kingdom of Heaven is set up on earth when Christ comes and institutes God's rules on earth administered under the rod of iron for 1,000 years
The first 1,000 years of this everlasting Kingdom is set aside as a reward for those who are faithful, diligent self-denying and intimate with Christ
The Servants and Virgins who are refused entry to this Kingdom as co-kings with Christ is because of their works NOT their faith
The Servants and Virgins who are refused entry into this Kingdom are restored by Revelation 21:4 - after the 1,000 years are over
The Servants and Virgins who are refused entry into this 1,000 year Kingdom are chastised and trained during this time, just as Israel was chastised for 2,500 years but then restored
The Servant and Virgins are still called Servants and Virgins AFTER their judgment. That is, their stazus BY FAITH is unchanged, but their status as co-kings in the kingdom is changed for 1,000 years.
There is NO TALK WHATSOEVER of the effects of faith being undone. Rebirth is by faith and cannot be un-birthed. Eternal Life is by faith and, being "Eternal", cannot be terminated. Salvation from the Lake of Fire is by faith and there is no mention, EVER, of any Christian going to the Lake of Fire. If he/she did, then Christ's substitutionary death was in vain (perish the thought).
The Bible NEVER mixes the effects of FAITH in Jesus with the result of a Christians WORKS. Faith cause rebirth, sonship to God, sins put away and having eternal life. Works decide if the Christian is fit to be a co-king in the Millennium or not.

mailmandan
Apr 10th 2018, 10:46 PM
The word "hell" never appears in the Bible. There are three words that the King James translators render as "hell";
Gehenna - the Valley of Hinnom on the south side of Jerusalem in which the trash and cadavers of the city was burned day and night. It speaks of the Lake of Fire
Hades - the place under the earth where the souls of dead men go to wait for resurrection
Tartaroo - used once only to show the place under the earth where the angels who mated with women in Noah's time are imprisoned (2nd Pet.2:4). Matthew 10:28 - "Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. (NASB)


The "outer darkness" is ONLY reserved for God's people. It appears three times and is NEVER CONNECTED TO "HELL" It appears concerning (1) the Jews or "children of the kingdom" (Matt.8:12) or (2) Christians (Matthew 22:13 25:30) Matthew 13:42 - and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. (NKJV)


"Outer Darkness" is simple a place OUTSIDE which is DARK. Since it is used ONLY in connection with the Kingdom, is must mean a place OUTSIDE the Kingdom, and a place AWAY from Christ - the light of the world and SUN of righteousness (Jn.8:12; Mal.4:2). Heaven's suburb? :hmm:


The faithful servants of Matthew 25 did not deal with the bankers. The word used in the Greek means, "to toil (as a task, occupation, etc.), be engaged in or with, do, labor for, minister about, trade, work" (Strong's Greek & Hebrew Dictionary). The faithful servants used their Talents to build the Church (Eph.4:8-12). Matthew 25:27 - So you ought to have deposited my money with the bankers, and at my coming I would have received back my own with interest. (NKJV)

Matthew 25:27 - Then you ought to have put my money in the bank, and on my arrival I would have received my money back with interest. (NASB)

dan
Apr 10th 2018, 11:38 PM
The text under consideration is Matthew 7:21-23;


21 "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
22 Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?'
23 And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'"

Because of the thousand years that the Roman Church hid the Bible and forbade the Laity of reading, studying and commenting on their studies, we still suffer from some Roman myths. One of the most devastating of these is the commonly taught doctrine that when men die they either land in heaven or in hell, and that the earth will be destroyed at length. Thus, salvation is not connected to God’s original plan with man in Genesis 1:26, “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.” But God’s councils are immutable and the TWO things that man is to be are still the main theme of the Bible;

Which men get to be in the image of God?
Which men get to be rulers of this earth and its environs of sea and sky?

While vitally important, I will, for this treatise, not deal with point #1. What is clear from point #2 is that the Bible starts with God’s plan that man should be the ultimate rulers of the earth, and it ends with a City, New Jerusalem, made of men in resurrection and who rule the earth “forever” (Rev.22:5). In between these two verses lies a primeval battle for this earth. And if so, any man who does not end up ruling on this earth cannot claim to be fully saved. “Salvation” is not only to be saved from the Lake of Fire. It is, who will be in the image of Christ, and who will rule with Him. It includes the rebirth of the human spirit, possessing the divine nature, the salvation of the soul, the resurrection of the body, being conformed to the image of Christ AND being re-instated as ruler who replaces “the prince of this world” - Satan. Besides large portions of the New Testament dealing with this subject, prophets of old like Daniel predicted the great Governmental powers of this earth and their end in an everlasting Kingdom of God to be ruled according to heavenly precepts.

The Book of Matthew introduces the Coming and Everlasting King - Jesus, Son Abraham for ruling the earth (Rom.4:13) and Son of David for ruling Israel. And in this Book, as it unfolds the Coming Kingdom of God that will be ruled according to the rules of Heaven, the co-kings of Jesus Christ are introduced. Also introduced is the rigorous training and behavior of these future co-kings. They are those who (1) are sons of God (by rebirth) - those who can call God “Father”, (2) learn to deny themselves and their souls, even unto death, (3) crucify their flesh daily, (4) are obedient to the will of their Head Jesus and their God Jehovah, even to the loss of everything, and (5) form an intimate bonding and relationship with their Coming Bridegroom, Jesus.

In Matthew Chapters 5 to 7 the kind of behavior, NOT of the Jew whose behavior is regulated by Law, and NOT of the Gentile who is without Law, is set forth for the future co-king of Jesus. The seemingly strange set of rules for behavior in these three Chapters are there because the time of the training of these co-kings coincides with the time that God gives men to be reconciled with Him. Turning the other cheek is NOT justice, but God requires it of His future co-kings because God gives man TIME - 2,000 years, to be reconciled to Him. And during this TIME that the future co-kings have the “ministry of reconciliation” (2nd Cor.5:18-19), justice and judgment are delayed, but not forgotten. According to this same Book Matthew’s 25th Chapter, there is a judgment for all those who struck a blow at a Christian at the END of the age (vs.31-46). But in the mean time, the "disciple" of Jesus is to forego justice for the sake of God's plan.

Now the Chapters on the behavior of the Christian during the time of reconciliation end in Matthew 7 with a judgment for the Christian. And the judgment is NOT about who goes to the Lake of Fire or not, IT IS ABOUT WHO GETS TO ENTER THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN when Christ sets it up on earth after His return. That is, WHO WILL BE QUALIFIED TO BE A CO-KING WITH JESUS?

It my considered opinion that the “lawless” who were told to “depart” from the Lord in that day of judgment are Christians. My argument is thus;

The whole discourse of Matthew 5, 6 and 7 is aimed at the Christian. In Matthew 5:1-2 it reads; “And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying”. According to the grammar, although there was a “multitude”, the ones taught where His disciples. He taught “THEM” - the disciples.
Further proof of this is that throughout the discourse our Lord Jesus referred to God as “My Father”, “your Father” and “our Father”. One can only call God “Father” if one is born from Him (Jn.1:12-13). That is, the subjects of this discourse are all born-again disciples.
Concerning our text in Chapter 7, verse 21 starts by those who call, “LORD, LORD!” According to Acts 2:21, Romans 10:9 and 13, they are those “SAVED” who call upon the Lord. They knew Who He was and called Him “Lord”.
The QUALIFICATION here for entering the Kingdom of Heaven on earth when the Lord sets it up is NOT rebirth. That is already taken for granted as in point #2. The qualification for entering the Kingdom is, “… he who does the will of My Father in heaven.” It is OBEDIENCE to God.
These men and women who would enter the Kingdom “prophesied in His Name”. This is a twofold proof of being a Christian. First, prophecy comes from the Holy Spirit as we see in 1st Corinthians 12, and second, these men and women knew the name of Jesus and its power.
These men and women "cast out demons in Jesus’s Name". According to Mark 16:17 one of the signs that shall follow “them that believe” is that they, “… shall they cast out demons”. And it is not possible that Satan could counterfeit this for the Lord assured us in Mark 3:22-26 that Satan would “end” his kingdom and house if he cast out demons.
These men and women “did MANY wonders” in Jesus’ Name. Not only do the attach their miracles to Jesus and His Name, but they did “MANY”. In Egypt, Israel and against the Church Satan did “lying wonders”, but they were FEW compared to those of God. Only Christians could do MANY wonders and do them in Jesus’ Name.
Finally, the devastating judgment of our Lord Jesus says it all. The word is “DEPART!” These were COMPANIONS of Jesus. They were with Him! You cannot “depart” if you were not with a person in the first place. The Jew hates Christ, and the Gentile would never be with Him. Only those who were with Him can be ordered to “depart”.

But the question we must now answer is, “how come these things of God and our Lord Jesus are works of LAWLESSNESS?” The answer lies in the first part of verse 21. Were they done at the command of God? That they were done by His power is not questioned. But did God, and the Head of the Church, Jesus, ask these men and women, at that specific moment, to do these things? We have an example of this in Acts 16:6-10. Paul was forbidden by the Holy Spirit to preach the word in both Asia and Bithynia. How come? Is not the great commission to preach the Word “to the uttermost parts of the earth”? YES! But as the Lord and head of the Church directs! There is no “doing your own thing” in the Church. Just like David in 2nd Samuel Chapter 5 when he repeatedly asks the Lord about battling the Philistines, God has a plan of the day. It is not the Christian who plans for the Lord! It is God Who makes the plans and we OBEY! Should you cast out a demon today? Who knows - ask God. It was not the acts that were Lawless, but the actors! It was not the things that were illegal but the “PRACTICES” of the servants. They did their own thing with their Talents. They did not inquire of the Master! They did NOT do the will of their Father!

And the glaring reason is revealed in verse 23 - “I NEVER KNEW YOU!” The Greek word here for “know” is Strong’s #1097 γινώσκω, transliterated “ginōskō”. It does not mean that our Lord Jesus did not have intellectual knowledge of them. He is God and knows all things. The word means that He did not have an intimate knowledge or recognition or understanding that a man and wife have of each other. It is used for sexual intercourse in Matthew 1:25, for reading the minds of men in Matthew 12:15 and understanding a situation in Matthew 26:10. It denotes an intimate understanding of a person. These Christians had been so busy doing their own thing that they had had no time to get to know Jesus, to be intimate with Him or to develop an intimate relationship. This is the number 1 cause of “lawlessness” among Christians. Not outright evil, but doing their own things in what THEY think pleases the Lord. And we have another hint of how to “know” Jesus that Christians rather shy away from. The same Greek word is used by Paul in Philippians 3:10, “That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death”, to show that getting to know Jesus is to walk His road with Him. That road was fraught with danger, enemies, persecutions, rejections, sufferings, and finally death for taking His position. That is how to intimately know Jesus.

And now, the most sobering of all. Verse 22 starts with the word “MANY”. That is, this phenomenon of Christians failing to enter the Kingdom when our Lord sets it up on earth is for the MANY. That is, MOST of Christianity, or the BULK of Christianity will fail to become co-kings with Jesus in the Millennium. And this comes from no other source THAN JESUS HIMSELF! How is your intimacy with Jesus? Have you walked His road? Have you “known” Him intimately? Have you suffered with Him? Have you been OBEDIENT to Him? THE KINGDOM IS AT STAKE!

P.S. Please excuse the Title. It cannot be edited.

I disagree.

One of the definitions of "iniquity," which is the original word in the KJV, is "gross injustice."

I believe that those that believe in Jesus, but allow gross injustice to occur around them without doing something about it are the subject of this verse.

Refer to: laying down our lives for the brethren.

ewq1938
Apr 11th 2018, 12:29 AM
This brings up an issue I've never fully resolved. When the Scriptures speak of us becoming "kings and priests," do they mean that *each of us* as overcomers will become "kings?" Or, does it mean that we belong to a Kingdom that is led by royalty?

I cannot for the life of me understand how we can all be kings, as overcomers, since that would imply a divided government? There can only be one king in a Kingdom, right?

There is no such rule. There will be ten kings/kingdoms within the larger beast kingdom plus in the eternity there are kings mentioned and we will also have the King of kings, Jesus.

Kalahari
Apr 11th 2018, 07:23 AM
Show me verses please. Thanks. Our Lord Jesus cast them out by the POWER of God, and by the "FINGER" of God. Where do we find (1) the term "Nominal Christian" in the Bible, and (2) were do we find them casting out demons by their own power? And if Satan's house and kingdom is destroyed if he casts out his own soldiers, why would he allow it? Let's get down to the scriptures that directly say this.

And while we are at scriptures, let us examine the example of Simon in Acts 8. In Acts 8:9-24 it clearly says that Simon used "sorcery". The meaning of "sorcery" in Strong' s and Vine's is "MAGIC". And "magic" is defined as, "the power of apparently influencing events by using mysterious or supernatural forces." That is, it is the ability, not to influence events, but to APPARENTLY influence events. This is confirmed in the text by the word "bewitched". The word "bewitched" in the Greek means "from <G1537> (ek) and <G2476> (histemi) meaning, 'to put, or stand, out of wits, to amaze, be (make) astonished, be beside self (selves)'" (Strong's). Simon did not do MANY WONDERS like those of Matthew 7:22. He literally "confused the people to make them amazed". Or, as the Beast will do - "LYING WONDERS".

Let us not attribute;

casting out of demons other than by the power of God
casting out of demons as a "sign" of anyone except "them that believe" for Satan is not stupid enough to destroy his own kingdom like Christians do
MANY miracles to anyone but Christians.


It seems you are misunderstanding what I am saying. The casting out of devils can only be done by the power of God. Nominal Christians can surely cast out devils in the name of God. Why would you think it is not possible?

Kalahari
Apr 11th 2018, 07:36 AM
But the text we discuss unequivocally shows that MANY, who served the Lord, cast out demons in His Name, and did miracles in His name ARE REFUSED THE KINGDOM. The only argument you, and others are bringing is that they somehow they are Gentiles or Jews. But you bring no scriptural proof. It is an opinion you hold because you are perturbed. If you were a man serving the Lord IN OBEDIENCE, you would have no problem with the text. I too am perturbed because, like Paul in Philippians, I see my shortcoming and cannot be SURE of the Kingdom. But of my rebirth, having eternal life and being a son of God I am VERY SURE for scripture GUARANTEES these things BY FAITH. But OBEDIENCE is a matter of WORKS. And if you study every passage in the New Testament about the Kingdom you will come to only ONE CONCLUSION. It is a REWARD for WORKS. I will take one to show you. In 2nd Peter 1:1-11, it reads;


1 "Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:
2 Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord,
3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.
5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;
6 And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness;
7 And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.
8 For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.
9 But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins.
10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:
11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ."

verse 1 says we have received faith
verse 3 says that through the "grace and peace of verse 2 we are given ALL things "that pertain to LIFE and GODLINESS". The word "Life" os "zoe" in the Greek and is always used in the matter of Eternal Life.
verse 4 says that by this we have the "Divine Nature" and that this Divine Nature will lead us out of all corruption
verse 5 SUDDENLY CHANGES TACK! Whereas verses 1 - 4 are all about what is GIVEN TO US, from verse 5 we are advised and admonished to "GIVE ALL DILIGENCE TO ADD" to this faith that we were given in verse 1. Now, the EFFORT BECOMES OURS!
verses 5 to 8 are a set of VIRTUES that must be added BY THE CHRISTIAN'S DILIGENCE
verse 10 says that we MUST ADD these things to make our CALLING AND ELECTION SURE! That is, the Divine Life by FAITH in the first verses DOES NOT MAKE OUR CALLING AND ELECTION SURE. ONLY OUR DILIGENCE TO ADD VIRTUES MAKES IT SURE!
verse 10 also says that if we don't add these virtues to our FAITH we will FAIL
verse 11 shows THREE THINGS. (1) Our "Calling and Election" is NOT BY FAITH BUT BY WORKS. (2) That to enter the Kingdom of God must be MINISTERED TO US. That is, somebody else allows us in and can refuse. (3) "TO FAIL" in verse 10 is to NOT ENTER THE KINGDOM though we have faith and its resultant "Divine Life".

And so it is in multiple Parables. The slothful Servant of the Lord is REFUSED ENTRY INTO THE KINGDOM! He is still a Servant. He still is a son of God. He still has divine life, BUT HE MAY NOT BE CO-KING in the Millennium! Both Saul and David are Israelites - seed of Abraham via Isaac. Both their ancestors were saved by the Lamb of Egypt. And none of this changed when Saul was DISOBEDIENT. But Saul MAY NOT BE KING WHILE DAVID AND HIS HOUSE MAY! Saul's birth is not changed. Saul is not suddenly NOT seed of Isaac. Saul is NOT suddenly a Gentile. But the Kingship is ripped away from him.

Sorry I can't agree. Our calling and election are not by works, but by grace. If you do not agree with it, your understanding of many Scriptures will be at fault.

ProDeo
Apr 11th 2018, 08:02 AM
It seems you are misunderstanding what I am saying. The casting out of devils can only be done by the power of God. Nominal Christians can surely cast out devils in the name of God. Why would you think it is not possible?
The question is if the persons Jesus speaks about in Matt 7:21-23 are really Christians since Jesus calls them - you workers of lawlessness.

Kalahari
Apr 11th 2018, 08:39 AM
The question is if the persons Jesus speaks about in Matt 7:21-23 are really Christians since Jesus calls them - you workers of lawlessness.

If your definition of Christian is a Spirit filled born again believer, then no. If it includes people saying they are Christians or church goers, then it can include Christians.

Walls
Apr 11th 2018, 02:00 PM
Matthew 10:28 - "Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. (NASB)



Not quite. The Greek is rendered literally as; Matthew 10:28; "And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in GEHENNA - as I said in my post. All you needed to do was check what I said.


Matthew 13:42 - and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. (NKJV)

And where is the "outer darkness" in this verse?


Heaven's suburb? :hmm:

Who is talking of heaven? The "outer darkness" is on earth. That is where the Lord returns to and where His Kingdom is set up. Do I detect that you did not read the OP. I addressed heaven there already.


Matthew 25:27 - So you ought to have deposited my money with the bankers, and at my coming I would have received back my own with interest. (NKJV)

Matthew 25:27 - Then you ought to have put my money in the bank, and on my arrival I would have received my money back with interest. (NASB)

Yes. This is the lord's accusation. But the faithful servants did not use bankers. They "traded" or "worked" the Talent, as the Greek word shows.

Walls
Apr 11th 2018, 02:10 PM
I disagree.

One of the definitions of "iniquity," which is the original word in the KJV, is "gross injustice."

I believe that those that believe in Jesus, but allow gross injustice to occur around them without doing something about it are the subject of this verse.

Refer to: laying down our lives for the brethren.

I can live with that. The main thing is that you agree that they are "believers in Jesus". That was the point of my OP.

Strong gives the following definition of Greek Word "anomia" as, "illegality, i.e. violation of law or wickedness, iniquity, transgress (-ion of) the law, unrighteousness."English Words used in KJV are "iniquity X 12, "unrighteousness" X 1, "transgress (the law)" X 1 and "transgression (of the law)" X 1. [Total Count: 15]. The translators of the King James, the 49 best Hebrew and Greek scholars of their day in England, divided into 7 autonomous groups of 7, can be trusted. Peer pressure kept them honest.

Walls
Apr 11th 2018, 03:08 PM
It seems you are misunderstanding what I am saying. The casting out of devils can only be done by the power of God. Nominal Christians can surely cast out devils in the name of God. Why would you think it is not possible?

Because none other than our Lord Jesus said;

He cast out demons by the SPIRIT of God (Matt.12:28)
He casts out demons with the FINGER of God (Lk.11:20)
Casting out demons by "them that believe" is a "sign" that they are "them that believe" (Mk.16:17)

A NOMINAL Christian is a COUNTERFEIT. He/she claims to believe but does not. That is, a HYPOCRITE. And not being a believer makes them an INFIDEL. In Matthew 13 the COUNTERFEITS are called (1) "seed of the enemy", and (2) to have poisonous fruit (Darnell), and (3) to be plucked up and burned. Why would God give His POWER, His SPIRIT and His FINGER to the COUNTERFEITS? He would then trash His own words that the "sign" showed a believer!

Added to this, there is not a single verse to show that an INFIDEL can cast out demons.

Your last objection from Matthew 12:27 does prove your point. It reads; "And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children ("SONS" - lit. Gk.) cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges." Who did our Lord Jesus mean here? Can you show me the occasions where these "sons" cast out demons? I am interested to hear your thesis on who these "sons" were, and when, in scripture, they actually did this.

This is my thesis on the matter. The Pharisees had disciples. Mark 2:18 reads, "And the disciples of John and of the Pharisees used to fast: and they come and say unto him, Why do the disciples of John and of the Pharisees fast, but thy disciples fast not?" But of these disciples our Lord Jesus says in Matthew 23:15; "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the SON (lit. Gk.) of hell than yourselves." The word for "sons" in 12:27 is the same in 23:15. That is, the disciples of the Pharisees are the "sons". And we see from Acts 19:13 that "vagabond Jews" were also "exorcists". That is, they CLAIMED to have power over spirits. This phenomenon continues to this day, with both Catholics and Fundamentals making this claim. But besides much shouting, slapping and kicking up dust, there is no clear evidence that they actually exorcise any demon. So when our Lord Jesus addressed the Pharisees, He, in effect, said; "You guys accuse me of exorcising by the power of Beelzebub. So if this be true, by whose power then do your disciples exorcise?" Of course, this puts them in a fix, because they claimed to do it by power from Jehovah. The Pharisees would either have to declare their disciples agents of Beelzebub, or if the did it by God's power, then Jesus was from God. Classic Jesus!

But actually the contrary is true. Our Lord confirmed it in Mark 9:38 (see also Luke 9:49) which read; "And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us." In verses 39-40 our Lord Jesus said; "Don't stop him! He is one of us". His actual words were, "... for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. For he (that does a miracle in my Name) that is not against us is on our part." That is, (1) whether a man walks with Jesus, or is in another town, he can only cast out demons if he "is on our part", and (2) casting our demons is a "miracle done in Jesus' Name). Only those who are "on our part" can use this Name effectively.

Walls
Apr 11th 2018, 03:17 PM
Sorry I can't agree. Our calling and election are not by works, but by grace. If you do not agree with it, your understanding of many Scriptures will be at fault.

Then you have denied the grammar and the context. Remember, I did not write this section of scripture. Just stop and read the sentence again for yourself. It reads; "Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall" (2nd Peter 1:10).

Now, it is;

YOU have to ADD to your faith (v.5). That is, the faith is already there. But it must have additional things added by YOUR diligence
YOU have to be diligent
YOU have to make your calling and election sure
YOU have to "do" - that is, it is your WORK. What I "do" is my WORK in any language
YOU can FAIL if you DO NOT these works, or you can SUCCEED if you "DO"
YOU will enter the Kingdom IF your "DO" these works.

My brother, there is no other way to read it in the Greek or English. That is just how it is.

Kalahari
Apr 11th 2018, 03:44 PM
Then you have denied the grammar and the context. Remember, I did not write this section of scripture. Just stop and read the sentence again for yourself. It reads; "Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall" (2nd Peter 1:10).

Now, it is;

YOU have to ADD to your faith (v.5). That is, the faith is already there. But it must have additional things added by YOUR diligence
YOU have to be diligent
YOU have to make your calling and election sure
YOU have to "do" - that is, it is your WORK. What I "do" is my WORK in any language
YOU can FAIL if you DO NOT these works, or you can SUCCEED if you "DO"
YOU will enter the Kingdom IF your "DO" these works.

My brother, there is no other way to read it in the Greek or English. That is just how it is.

Your election and calling is by grace. Eph 2:8 For it is by God's grace that you have been saved through faith. It is not the result of your own efforts, but God's gift, so that no one can boast about it.
Our election cannot be made void. Rom 8:30 And so those whom God set apart, he called; and those he called, he put right with himself, and he shared his glory with them.
We as Christians must act in brotherly love towards our fellow men. If you do this you will deepen your calling and make your election more assure, for to love another is to do the will of God. If you do this you will not fall. It is not that you have to work to enter the kingdom, but by doing this you will give effect to your election and calling.

You really must ask God to deliver you from this works religion. It can become a stumbling block to one's salvation.

randyk
Apr 11th 2018, 03:45 PM
There is no such rule. There will be ten kings/kingdoms within the larger beast kingdom plus in the eternity there are kings mentioned and we will also have the King of kings, Jesus.

True, but that sounds more like Mormonism than orthodox Christianity. Are we *each* to have a kingdom within the larger Kingdom of Christ? There is a difference between 10 kings within the Antichrist Kingdom and a billion kingdoms within the Kingdom of Christ! If there are a billion, or even a million, overcomers, are you really going to suggest that there will be a *million* kingdoms within the Kingdom of Christ?

randyk
Apr 11th 2018, 03:51 PM
Would it not be easier to use the Bible's words.
[LIST]
The Christian is under only TWO Covenants. (1) that of the Rainbow made with Noah, and (2) that of PROMISE made with Abraham (Gal.3:29)
There is no mention, EVER, of a "Christian Covenant". The two Covenants that the Christian are under are the Noahican and the Abrahamic


Huh? You've never heard of the New Covenant?

1 Cor 11.25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.”

Heb 8.6 But in fact the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since the new covenant is established on better promises.

Trivalee
Apr 11th 2018, 04:53 PM
I disagree.

One of the definitions of "iniquity," which is the original word in the KJV, is "gross injustice."

I believe that those that believe in Jesus, but allow gross injustice to occur around them without doing something about it are the subject of this verse.

Refer to: laying down our lives for the brethren.

By definition, "injustice" is the lack of justice. I don't think this definition covers the scope in which iniquity is scripturally used. I think it refers mostly to sin.

Trivalee
Apr 11th 2018, 04:56 PM
Huh? You've never heard of the New Covenant?

1 Cor 11.25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.”

Heb 8.6 But in fact the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since the new covenant is established on better promises.

I agree. Walls is rather out on a limb with his interpretation of the covenants. As far as I know, the two are (a) covenant at Mt Sinai (b) the covenant made with the Blood of Jesus at Calvary.

ldcumbie
Apr 11th 2018, 05:10 PM
If they are Christians, how do you deal with the part where Jesus said "... I never knew you..."? Once Jesus knows someone, His seed is in them and He is in them and He knows them and calls them by name. Or do you mean they are cultural Christians who have never been born again?

I have looked to two parables: The parable of the ten virgins and the lamps, (Matthew 25:1–13), and the parable of sowing the seed, (Matthew 13:3-9). The combination show that there will be those who seem to be and probably fervently believe they have become Christians but they were never really born again. I liken it to gravity and your belief in it. If we believed in Jesus and the Father in the same way we believe in gravity, we would no more violate scripture than step off of a roof expecting to fly.

The biggest problem for me today is discerning what scripture is. With the arguments between whether Jesus' 'not one jot nor tittle' or the modern interpretation that Paul saw living by the Law as incompatible with living by faith, it is difficult to figure out HOW to live by faith if the laws set out to demonstrate it are no longer valid. It has led us to direct contradictions of the gospel in both testaments by major Christian faiths. I'm not certain Paul would be best pleased with this modern interpretation.

It would be equally valid to say that Paul meant for us to try and follow the scripture and commandments but not to allow the level of your compliance to determine the quality of your faith. The food thing could have simply been a one-off as determined by Peter's dream and not meant to be extrapolated across the entire scripture. Only you know how hard you strive against the temptations particular to yourself and how deeply you acknowledge and repent for the lapses. That seems to me to be a better indicator of your faith. If I believe in Jesus and God then I should try to live by how they told me to live. Jesus said the scripture and commandments 'hung' on the two major commandments, i.e. they were a natural outgrowth of them. It is really easy to 'have faith' in something that requires nothing of you so obviously something is expected if faith is so difficult that 'many' will be turned away. I pray about this all the time.

randyk
Apr 11th 2018, 07:02 PM
I agree. Walls is rather out on a limb with his interpretation of the covenants. As far as I know, the two are (a) covenant at Mt Sinai (b) the covenant made with the Blood of Jesus at Calvary.

Yes, the only thing I think he could be thinking is that Christianity falls under the Abrahamic Covenant, which of course it does??

Walls
Apr 11th 2018, 08:23 PM
Your election and calling is by grace. Eph 2:8 For it is by God's grace that you have been saved through faith. It is not the result of your own efforts, but God's gift, so that no one can boast about it.
Our election cannot be made void. Rom 8:30 And so those whom God set apart, he called; and those he called, he put right with himself, and he shared his glory with them.
We as Christians must act in brotherly love towards our fellow men. If you do this you will deepen your calling and make your election more assure, for to love another is to do the will of God. If you do this you will not fall. It is not that you have to work to enter the kingdom, but by doing this you will give effect to your election and calling.

You really must ask God to deliver you from this works religion. It can become a stumbling block to one's salvation.

That's just it. You always turn AWAY from the issue. We do NOT discuss "Salvation". We discuss the qualifications that the Bible shows a man needs to ENTER the Kingdom when Christ sets it up on earth. The "Many" of Matthew 7:21 are not discussing "salvation". They are judged whether they , "... shall enter into the kingdom of heaven"! AND THEY PRODUCE THEIR WORKS! But our Lord Jesus says that THEY, not the works themselves, were INIQUITOUS because they were, at that moment, NOT DOING THEM ACCORDING TO THE WILL OF GOD. I gave the example of Paul wanting to go to Asia and Bithynia. Why not finish the narrative for us. What if Paul said to the Lord (the Holy Spirit); "Holy Spirit, your command is go to all nations and to the uttermost parts of the earth. I'm on my way to Asia". Though the work of preaching the Word is good and legal, Paul would be termed "a worker of iniquity".

Think about it bro.

Trivalee
Apr 11th 2018, 08:43 PM
Yes, the only thing I think he could be thinking is that Christianity falls under the Abrahamic Covenant, which of course it does??

In that sense, it does because God promised Abraham that through his blessing, the Gentiles through faith would be saved.

Walls
Apr 11th 2018, 09:02 PM
Huh? You've never heard of the New Covenant?

1 Cor 11.25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.”

Heb 8.6 But in fact the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since the new covenant is established on better promises.

I have. And the Bible says that it is made with the House of Israel and the House of Judah. Do you propose that you are this combined House? And if so, is your "father" one of them that came out of Egypt (Jer.31:31-33)? Or is your Father Jehovah (Jn.1:12-13)? You have had this pointed out to you multiple times. But don't take it from me. Read Jeremiah 31:31-33 and Hebrews 8:8-10 for yourself and be a Berean. Acts 17:11 commends the Bereans. "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."

You seem to want to OVERTHROW the plain language of Jeremiah 31:31-33 and make it for the Church. It is not. Read the wording of 1st Corinthians 11:25 precisely. Does it say that the Church is "under the New Covenant", or does it say; "the New Covenant IN my blood", showing that that New Covenant with the combined Israel is RATIFIED in His blood - a far superior ratification to that of Moses (Ex.24:8)?

And then read Hebrews 8:6 accurately. Does it say anything about the Church being under the New Covenant? No! You, and others have inserted it. The first part of Hebrews 6 CONTRASTS the MEDIATORIAL MINISTRY OF MOSES in a Tabernacle made by hands as Compared to the MEDIATORIAL ministry of Jesus in a Tabernacle in heaven, made by God, and which Moses had to copy. The Author of Hebrews does not speak of the CHURCH - the House of God that CHRIST BUILDS (Matt.16:18). He even says in Hebrews 8:4, "For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law." Why? Because under Law the Tribe of Levi are the Priests and our Lord Jesus is from the Tribe of JUDAH! And the New Covenant is one of LAW!

Thus, by your inserting the Church as partner to the New Covenant, you annul the High Priesthood of Jesus. The Church has NITHINg to do with Levi and the Law. It has to to do with Jesus, High Priest according to the order, not of Aaron, but MELCHISEDEC, who UNLIKE Aaron, is; "Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually" (Heb.7:3). The Covenant of Law stipulates the Priesthood and its lineage. But these Priests DIED and DID NOT "abide a priest continually". And they HAD father and mother, and they HAD "descent" form Levi, and they HAD beginning of days and end of life. And UNLIKE the "Son of God" they failed and Eli's line is changed to Zadok's for the Millennium.

Zadok is High Priest according the the Covenant of Law in a Tabernacle (and later a Temple) made with hands in Jerusalem.
Jesus is High Priest according to "an endless life as Son of God" in a Tabernacle made by God in the Heavens

Read scripture and be faithful to it. If the Church is not mentioned, don't mention it yourself. If the House of Israel and the House of Judah, whose "fathers" came out of Egypt are spoken of, then that is who is spoken of. Don't add what is not there. It causes all manner of mischief.

Walls
Apr 11th 2018, 09:05 PM
I agree. Walls is rather out on a limb with his interpretation of the covenants. As far as I know, the two are (a) covenant at Mt Sinai (b) the covenant made with the Blood of Jesus at Calvary.

Yes my esteemed friend, and who were they made with? I will leave you to answer this.

Trivalee
Apr 11th 2018, 09:12 PM
Yes my esteemed friend, and who were they made with? I will leave you to answer this.

Brother, the first was made at Mt Sinai and the second, at Calvary, i.e on the cross. Remember there was no Israel in the time of Abraham...

Benji
Apr 11th 2018, 10:39 PM
See my better response below.

Benji
Apr 11th 2018, 10:54 PM
I agree, the bulk of "Christianity" (actually Churchianity) will hear Jesus say "Depart from me you doers of iniquity, I never knew you. Why did they not know Him? Because they were not chosen by God "from the foundation of the world to be in Christ and are holy and blameless in His sight." Born from above Christians, (born again Christians) were chosen by God and He adopted them as His children. They can't be un-adopted, they can't ever be lost, they can't be snatched from either Christ's hand or God's hand, they are sealed by the Holy Spirit for the day of redemption. There is therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. How long have born again Christians been "in Christ?' From before the foundation of the world. They were conformed to the image of His son, they were predestined, they were called, they were justified and they are glorified. Praise God.

Benji

Old man
Apr 11th 2018, 10:56 PM
Time to get some popcorn ....... now where did I put the Orvile ......

ewq1938
Apr 11th 2018, 11:05 PM
True, but that sounds more like Mormonism than orthodox Christianity.

Correction, it sounds like orthodox Christianity because it comes from the Christian bible. Mormons teach people become Gods and have their own planets or some similar nonsense. Stop accusing people of Mormonism when what is presented is directly from the Christian bible and has no relation to any false religion.


Rev 21:24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.

If you think this is Mormonism then you are badly confusing Christian scripture with what is written in the book of Mormon.

Old man
Apr 11th 2018, 11:37 PM
Correction, it sounds like orthodox Christianity because it comes from the Christian bible. Mormons teach people become Gods and have their own planets or some similar nonsense. Stop accusing people of Mormonism when what is presented is directly from the Christian bible and has no relation to any false religion.


Rev 21:24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.

If you think this is Mormonism then you are badly confusing Christian scripture with what is written in the book of Mormon.

This is getting further from the OP than it should. Though it is an excellent topic. I would suggest that a new thread be started for it.

randyk
Apr 12th 2018, 03:52 AM
I have. And the Bible says that it is made with the House of Israel and the House of Judah. Do you propose that you are this combined House? And if so, is your "father" one of them that came out of Egypt (Jer.31:31-33)? Or is your Father Jehovah (Jn.1:12-13)? You have had this pointed out to you multiple times. But don't take it from me. Read Jeremiah 31:31-33 and Hebrews 8:8-10 for yourself and be a Berean. Acts 17:11 commends the Bereans. "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."


Seems like a massive diversion to me. You said there is no such thing as a "Christian Covenant." Now you're talking about something else.



You seem to want to OVERTHROW the plain language of Jeremiah 31:31-33 and make it for the Church. It is not. Read the wording of 1st Corinthians 11:25 precisely. Does it say that the Church is "under the New Covenant", or does it say; "the New Covenant IN my blood", showing that that New Covenant with the combined Israel is RATIFIED in His blood - a far superior ratification to that of Moses (Ex.24:8)?


First you say there is no "Christian Covenant." I showed you the error in that. And now you say the Church is not under the New Covenant. Why don't we just throw out the New Testament Bible, if it's no good for anybody but Israel?



And then read Hebrews 8:6 accurately. Does it say anything about the Church being under the New Covenant? No! You, and others have inserted it. The first part of Hebrews 6 CONTRASTS the MEDIATORIAL MINISTRY OF MOSES in a Tabernacle made by hands as Compared to the MEDIATORIAL ministry of Jesus in a Tabernacle in heaven, made by God, and which Moses had to copy. The Author of Hebrews does not speak of the CHURCH - the House of God that CHRIST BUILDS (Matt.16:18). He even says in Hebrews 8:4, "For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law." Why? Because under Law the Tribe of Levi are the Priests and our Lord Jesus is from the Tribe of JUDAH! And the New Covenant is one of LAW!


Trivalee is right. You're so far out on a limb that you have nowhere else to go! I had no idea you were this unorthodox in Christian doctrine! Actually, I consider this heretical.



Thus, by your inserting the Church as partner to the New Covenant, you annul the High Priesthood of Jesus. The Church has NITHINg to do with Levi and the Law. It has to to do with Jesus, High Priest according to the order, not of Aaron, but MELCHISEDEC, who UNLIKE Aaron, is; "Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually" (Heb.7:3). The Covenant of Law stipulates the Priesthood and its lineage. But these Priests DIED and DID NOT "abide a priest continually". And they HAD father and mother, and they HAD "descent" form Levi, and they HAD beginning of days and end of life. And UNLIKE the "Son of God" they failed and Eli's line is changed to Zadok's for the Millennium.

Zadok is High Priest according the the Covenant of Law in a Tabernacle (and later a Temple) made with hands in Jerusalem.
Jesus is High Priest according to "an endless life as Son of God" in a Tabernacle made by God in the Heavens

Read scripture and be faithful to it. If the Church is not mentioned, don't mention it yourself. If the House of Israel and the House of Judah, whose "fathers" came out of Egypt are spoken of, then that is who is spoken of. Don't add what is not there. It causes all manner of mischief.

I didn't add anything. You said there was no such thing as a "Christian Covenant." I showed you in Scriptures where that was wrong. Period.

ProDeo
Apr 12th 2018, 06:26 AM
The question is if the persons Jesus speaks about in Matt 7:21-23 are really Christians since Jesus calls them - you workers of lawlessness.

If your definition of Christian is a Spirit filled born again believer, then no. If it includes people saying they are Christians or church goers, then it can include Christians.
I understand that as we are in agreement but for clearness sake allow me to rephrase -

If your definition of Christian is a Spirit filled born again believer, then no, else yes.

Walls
Apr 12th 2018, 09:34 AM
Brother, the first was made at Mt Sinai and the second, at Calvary, i.e on the cross. Remember there was no Israel in the time of Abraham...

You duck the question. I repeat it, but without much hope of an answer from scripture. These TWO Covenants you mention, WHO WERE THEY MADE WITH? Please supply the verses for we discuss the Bible, not personal opinion.

Walls
Apr 12th 2018, 09:47 AM
I agree, the bulk of "Christianity" (actually Churchianity) will hear Jesus say "Depart from me you doers of iniquity, I never knew you. Why did they not know Him? Because they were not chosen by God "from the foundation of the world to be in Christ and are holy and blameless in His sight." Born from above Christians, (born again Christians) were chosen by God and He adopted them as His children. They can't be un-adopted, they can't ever be lost, they can't be snatched from either Christ's hand or God's hand, they are sealed by the Holy Spirit for the day of redemption. There is therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. How long have born again Christians been "in Christ?' From before the foundation of the world. They were conformed to the image of His son, they were predestined, they were called, they were justified and they are glorified. Praise God.

Benji

Hi Benji and welcome to the Forum. Thanks for your opinion.

Just some questions, which of course, I do not expect you to answer in public. "Have you ever found yourself disobedient to God's requests? Have you never told a lie, even a little one? If you drive, have you every gone over the speed limit, even by 1 mph? After all, the Lord has commanded that we obey the government. Have you never been jealous and coveted, even a tiny bit. Have you never murmured when things got tough, even a thought of murmuring?" You see, it is possible, and even likely, that the best of us Christians are disobedient. And that is the reason that the "Many" of Matthew 7:21 are refused the Kingdom. These "Many" (1) knew the Lord enough to call upon His name, (2) knew the Lord so that they were endowed with the power to do "many wonders", IN HIS NAME, (3) knew the Lord enough to oppose demons, (4) knew the Lord enough to use God's Spirit to cast out demons, IN HIS NAME. So then; "Have you called upon the Lord? Have you done many wonders in His Name? Have you cast out demons IN HIS NAME? How do you measure your "calling" compared to these MANY who are refused entry into the Kingdom?

Kalahari
Apr 12th 2018, 09:48 AM
You duck the question. I repeat it, but without much hope of an answer from scripture. These TWO Covenants you mention, WHO WERE THEY MADE WITH? Please supply the verses for we discuss the Bible, not personal opinion.

What you fail to see is that the new covenant is made with the elect, as it was always made. The house of Israel and Judah were the elect as they were the descendants of Abraham and the receivers of the covenant of Sinai. We are also the descendants of Abraham according to Gal 3:29. The curtain which separated us were torn and there is no more Jews and Gentiles, only believers or non believers. It is therefore clear that the covenant as prophesied by Jeremiah is the new covenant of grace which was set in motion by the blood of Christ. We see it is God who would put His laws into our minds and hearts. It is not because of the work of man, but the grace of God. The covenant of law or works are now dead and the only covenant is the new covenant of grace for all nations. God always worked with His elect through covenant since the fall and the new covenant is the last (actually the same covenant but with different workings) and perfect covenant ratified by the blood of Christ.

kyCyd
Apr 12th 2018, 10:29 AM
I have. And the Bible says that it is made with the House of Israel and the House of Judah. Do you propose that you are this combined House? And if so, is your "father" one of them that came out of Egypt (Jer.31:31-33)? Or is your Father Jehovah (Jn.1:12-13)? You have had this pointed out to you multiple times. But don't take it from me. Read Jeremiah 31:31-33 and Hebrews 8:8-10 for yourself and be a Berean. Acts 17:11 commends the Bereans. "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."

You seem to want to OVERTHROW the plain language of Jeremiah 31:31-33 and make it for the Church. It is not. Read the wording of 1st Corinthians 11:25 precisely. Does it say that the Church is "under the New Covenant", or does it say; "the New Covenant IN my blood", showing that that New Covenant with the combined Israel is RATIFIED in His blood - a far superior ratification to that of Moses (Ex.24:8)?

And then read Hebrews 8:6 accurately. Does it say anything about the Church being under the New Covenant? No! You, and others have inserted it. The first part of Hebrews 6 CONTRASTS the MEDIATORIAL MINISTRY OF MOSES in a Tabernacle made by hands as Compared to the MEDIATORIAL ministry of Jesus in a Tabernacle in heaven, made by God, and which Moses had to copy. The Author of Hebrews does not speak of the CHURCH - the House of God that CHRIST BUILDS (Matt.16:18). He even says in Hebrews 8:4, "For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law." Why? Because under Law the Tribe of Levi are the Priests and our Lord Jesus is from the Tribe of JUDAH! And the New Covenant is one of LAW!

Thus, by your inserting the Church as partner to the New Covenant, you annul the High Priesthood of Jesus. The Church has NITHINg to do with Levi and the Law. It has to to do with Jesus, High Priest according to the order, not of Aaron, but MELCHISEDEC, who UNLIKE Aaron, is; "Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually" (Heb.7:3). The Covenant of Law stipulates the Priesthood and its lineage. But these Priests DIED and DID NOT "abide a priest continually". And they HAD father and mother, and they HAD "descent" form Levi, and they HAD beginning of days and end of life. And UNLIKE the "Son of God" they failed and Eli's line is changed to Zadok's for the Millennium.

Zadok is High Priest according the the Covenant of Law in a Tabernacle (and later a Temple) made with hands in Jerusalem.
Jesus is High Priest according to "an endless life as Son of God" in a Tabernacle made by God in the Heavens

Read scripture and be faithful to it. If the Church is not mentioned, don't mention it yourself. If the House of Israel and the House of Judah, whose "fathers" came out of Egypt are spoken of, then that is who is spoken of. Don't add what is not there. It causes all manner of mischief.

Walls, doesn't this show that Gods covenants are also for the stranger that joins themselves to the Lord?

Isaiah 56:6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;

And didn't Jesus then lay out what covers the law and the prophets with this?

Matthew 22:37-40 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

To me this means it also applies to strangers therefore would apply to Christians. Aren't Christians joining themselves to the Lord? ...you can take hold of Gods covenants.

Walls
Apr 12th 2018, 11:30 AM
Seems like a massive diversion to me. You said there is no such thing as a "Christian Covenant." Now you're talking about something else.



First you say there is no "Christian Covenant." I showed you the error in that. And now you say the Church is not under the New Covenant. Why don't we just throw out the New Testament Bible, if it's no good for anybody but Israel?



Trivalee is right. You're so far out on a limb that you have nowhere else to go! I had no idea you were this unorthodox in Christian doctrine! Actually, I consider this heretical.



I didn't add anything. You said there was no such thing as a "Christian Covenant." I showed you in Scriptures where that was wrong. Period.

I seriously doubt that you are unable to comprehend that Jeremiah 31 and Hebrews 8 say clearly and unequivocally that the New Covenant is made with the combined Tribes of Israel whose fathers came out of Egypt. In all this, if you want to prove that it is ALSO made with the Church, all you had to do was produce two scriptures that;

Show a "Christian Covenant"
Show that the New Covenant is made with the Christians

Bringing our Lord's words at the so-called Last Supper will not help, for in NONE of the verses is the New Covenant made with Christians. The blood of Jesus is presented symbolically in a cup for:

the remission of sin (Jn.1:29)
the remission of sins (1st Jn.2:2)
to speak better things than Abel's blood for the recovery of the cursed earth (Heb.12:24; Rom.8:19-23)
the RATIFICATION of the New Covenant with Israel when they are again united and restored to their Land (Heb.9:16-22)

But we have discussed this before. Let me grant you a good intellect, but one that refuses to accept what God has said. The New Covenant, though RATIFIED in His blood at Golgotha,

IS PRESENTED TO ISRAEL "THAT DAY" WHEN THEY ONE AGAIN AND IN THEIR LAND
IS A COVENANT OF LAW, and the Church is exempt from the Law

The term "Christian Covenant" neither appears in the whole Bible, nor is it intimated obscurely. The Covenants that the Christian is SUBJECT TO are two of the oldest Covenant ever given to men.

The Christian is subject to the Covenant of the RAINBOW made with Noah and all men who will ever live (Gen.9:17, Act.15:20, 29, 21:25)
The Covenant of PROMISE made to Abraham (Gal.3:29)

The Christian is NOT SUBJECT to the Covenant of:

The Law of Sinai
The Covenant of the Passover
The Covenant of the Sabbath (Ex.31:16)
The Covenant of the Levitic Priesthood (Nu.25:12-13)
The Covenant made with David (2nd Sam.7)
The New Covenant of Law (Jer.3:31-33, Heb.8:8-10)

If you insist on overturning Jeremiah 31:31-33, be my guest. But please excuse me from further vain discussion about a "Christian Covenant".

Walls
Apr 12th 2018, 11:58 AM
What you fail to see is that the new covenant is made with the elect, as it was always made. The house of Israel and Judah were the elect as they were the descendants of Abraham and the receivers of the covenant of Sinai. We are also the descendants of Abraham according to Gal 3:29. The curtain which separated us were torn and there is no more Jews and Gentiles, only believers or non believers. It is therefore clear that the covenant as prophesied by Jeremiah is the new covenant of grace which was set in motion by the blood of Christ. We see it is God who would put His laws into our minds and hearts. It is not because of the work of man, but the grace of God. The covenant of law or works are now dead and the only covenant is the new covenant of grace for all nations. God always worked with His elect through covenant since the fall and the new covenant is the last (actually the same covenant but with different workings) and perfect covenant ratified by the blood of Christ.

I will, this time, not answer point for point since you brought but ONE verse. I ask you read my last posting to randyk to save me duplicating. I will summarize for you - with scriptures.

The New Covenant is made with "the House of Israel" and "the House of Judah". These are two real and historical parts of the "whole House of Israel" (Jer.31:31-33; Heb.8:8-10).
The "Whole House of Israel" is seed of Abraham via Isaac (Rom.9:7, Heb.11:18)
The Church is seed of Abraham NOT via Isaac but because they are IN Christ, Who is a seed of Abraham (Gal.3:29). This is to establish a legal right to the Covenant of PROMISE.
In the world there are (1) Israelites, seed of Isaac, which Romans says are in UNBELIEF but nevertheless present in the world. (2) The nations, all those born of Adam via Noah but NOT Isaac. (3) The Church of Christ - all those born from above with incorruptible seed. The Church is a NEW and SEPARATE entity in which ALL past things, including ethnicity, are wiped out. 2nd Corinthians 5:17 is emphatic and unequivocal. "Therefore if any man be IN Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new." For those IN Christ, there is no Adam, no Abraham, no Isaac, no Law and no heritage of the flesh.
The New Covenant is NOT a Covenant of grace! Scripture says it is a Covenant of Law (Jer.31:33; Ezek.36:25-27, 44:24)
The New Covenant is NOT "for all nations". Jeremiah 31:31-33 says it is for "the House of Israel" (ten northern Tribes) and "the House of Judah" (two southern Tribes). There is not a single verse in the whole Bible that says that the New Covenant is made with the nations.
The New Covenant is NOT YET instituted because "the House of Israel" and "the House of Judah" are still divided and mainly dispersed among the nations. The New Covenant is only made IN THAT DAY that Israel are united and recovered to their Land (Ezek.39:25)

Read these scripture carefully and see if I am correct.

Walls
Apr 12th 2018, 12:34 PM
Walls, doesn't this show that Gods covenants are also for the stranger that joins themselves to the Lord?

Isaiah 56:6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;

And didn't Jesus then lay out what covers the law and the prophets with this?

Matthew 22:37-40 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

To me this means it also applies to strangers therefore would apply to Christians. Aren't Christians joining themselves to the Lord? ...you can take hold of Gods covenants.

The Covenant of Promise given to Abraham foresaw that one needed to be born to Abraham via Isaac. The Law of Sinai provided for one WHO WAS NOT SEED of Isaac, to join him/herself to Israel (as Ruth did). But if you read Leviticus, which regulates the "stranger" in Israel, you will see that it concerns his/her BEHAVIOR. That is, there is to be ONE LAW FOR ALL IN ISRAEL (Lev.24:22). That is, the "stranger" in Israel, one who came in like Ruth, or one who was born there of Gentile parents, is to be partaker of the same rules as any Israelite, and partaker of the same blessings. All this is moot now because Israel, starting from about 700 BC, were defeated and deported to other nations. Their restoration has not yet begun. You might say that it has begun because Israel is a nation again. BUT .., you must realize that the State of Israel we see to day, although it is there because of God's providence, is the nation that will embrace the Beast and allow him to sit in the Holy of Holies and be worshiped - what the Bible calls "the Abomination of Desolation".

The real restoration of Israel starts AFTER Christ returns according to Matthew 24:30-31. In the restored Israel the "stranger" is treated not much differently.

He must, if he lives in another nation, go up once a year to worship Christ in Jerusalem (Zech.14:16)
He, if he dwells in Israel, must be treated the same as an Israelite again (Ezek.47:22-23)
He may NEVER go into the new Temple unless he is ritually clean and circumcised (Ezek.44:9)

Now, the Church is a TOTALLY NEW PEOPLE made (out) OF Israel and (out) OF the nations (Eph.2:15). It is a THIRD PEOPLE made out of the "TWAIN". The BIRTH that is required for the Church is the NEW BIRTH FROM ABOVE (Jn.3:3-5). It is a TOTALLY NEW entity, and all the past of its members is obliterated (2nd Cor.5:17). It's only connection to Abraham is that because Christ was the Seed of Abraham, we who are IN Christ, are made eligible for the Promises made to Abraham. It is a legal issue not an ethnic issue*. Ethnicity is moot in the Church because the Old Creation is put to death with Christ, and the Church is is a NEW CREATION (Rom.6:6; Gal.3:28; Col.3:11).

* If a boy, born to servants, lives in the house of a man who is wealthy, is he eligible to partake of the man's inheritance? The answer is NO. He is not BORN to the man and thus the Law will not respect any claims, no matter how long he lived there or how diligently he served the wealthy man. But if the wealthy man ADOPTS the boy, the boy is then entitled to an equal portion with the ethnic offspring of the wealthy man. It is a matter of legality in his case. So, we Christians have NO BLOODLINE to Isaac. But by virtue of our position IN Christ, Who IS BLOODLINE to Isaac, we are eligible for the Promises to Abraham. But we NEVER become Israel and therefore NEVER are partakers of the other Covenants of Israel.

Kalahari
Apr 12th 2018, 01:02 PM
I do not think you are correct.


I will, this time, not answer point for point since you brought but ONE verse. I ask you read my last posting to randyk to save me duplicating. I will summarize for you - with scriptures.

The New Covenant is made with "the House of Israel" and "the House of Judah". These are two real and historical parts of the "whole House of Israel" (Jer.31:31-33; Heb.8:8-10).


They are made with the house of Israel and Judah for those were the only God elected to make a covenant with among the nations. God will continue to make a covenant with His elect, not with all. The difference is now that His elect is from all nations and not only of Israel. (Deut 7:7, Joh 15:16, Eph 1:3-14)


The "Whole House of Israel" is seed of Abraham via Isaac (Rom.9:7, Heb.11:18)

Those who are the whole house of Israel are the elect. (Rom 9:6-16, 2 Cor 5:16, Gal 3:29)


The Church is seed of Abraham NOT via Isaac but because they are IN Christ, Who is a seed of Abraham (Gal.3:29). This is to establish a legal right to the Covenant of PROMISE.

Christ is the only way to the Father, there is no other way. If you are not in Him, you are not in covenant with Him. (Joh 10:9, Eph 2:11-22)


In the world there are (1) Israelites, seed of Isaac, which Romans says are in UNBELIEF but nevertheless present in the world. (2) The nations, all those born of Adam via Noah but NOT Isaac. (3) The Church of Christ - all those born from above with incorruptible seed. The Church is a NEW and SEPARATE entity in which ALL past things, including ethnicity, are wiped out. 2nd Corinthians 5:17 is emphatic and unequivocal. "Therefore if any man be IN Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new." For those IN Christ, there is no Adam, no Abraham, no Isaac, no Law and no heritage of the flesh.

In the world there are only believers in Christ or non believers in the world. You are either in Him and saved or not and lost. There is no two paths to the Father, only one. It is the same for all if you are Jew or Gentile. Jesus is also the way for those of the old covenant, they looked forward to the cross in belief and we back. The difference now is since the coming of the Lord the old covenant is dead and not of any use. There is only the new covenant. (Heb 8:13, Heb 10:20)


The New Covenant is NOT a Covenant of grace! Scripture says it is a Covenant of Law (Jer.31:33; Ezek.36:25-27, 44:24)

A covenant of what law? The law of faith. (Rom 3:27) Faith which is a gift of God by grace. (Eph 2:8)


The New Covenant is NOT "for all nations". Jeremiah 31:31-33 says it is for "the House of Israel" (ten northern Tribes) and "the House of Judah" (two southern Tribes). There is not a single verse in the whole Bible that says that the New Covenant is made with the nations.

Context and the Gospel make it clear it is. The new covenant is made in Christ and Christ is for all nations. Can you really not see it?


The New Covenant is NOT YET instituted because "the House of Israel" and "the House of Judah" are still divided and mainly dispersed among the nations. The New Covenant is only made IN THAT DAY that Israel are united and recovered to their Land (Ezek.39:25)


The covenant was instituted with the blood of Christ. In Him all that were divided are now one. (Heb 9:17, 1 Cor 11:25-26)


Read these scripture carefully and see if I am correct.

IMO not.

Jason0047
Apr 12th 2018, 03:00 PM
In regards to Matthew 7:21-23, I'll never forget, prior to my conversion several years ago, while still attending the Roman Catholic church, I read Matthew 7:22 and thought to myself, wow! These many people accomplished all of that, "prophesied in His name, cast out demons, and did many wonderful works" but that still was not "good enough?" Then I thought to myself at that time, how am I going to "top that" and be "good enough?" Such is the mindset of someone who believes that salvation is by works.

Matthew 7:21 - Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.

John 6:40 - For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in Him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.

These many people (unbelievers) in Matthew 7:22 had the wrong foundation. They were trusting in their works to save them and NOT IN CHRIST ALONE. Jesus NEVER knew them which means they were NEVER saved. Their hearts were not right with God, so their attempted external obedience was stained with sin. *Seeking salvation by works is not the will of the Father.

John 17:3 - And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. The term "know" implies intimate, experiential knowledge, through a relationship with Him, not merely theoretical knowledge. These many people were not true converts.

Hello again Dan.

Good day to you in the Lord.

It is true that the will of God is to look to the Son and believe on Him (John 6:40). But the Bible also says that the will of God is for us to be holy, too.

“God's will is for you to be holy, so stay away from all sexual sin.” (1 Thessalonians 4:3 NLT).
For without holiness, no man shall see the Lord (Hebrews 12:14).

Jesus said to those believers who did many wonderful works to depart from Him, not because they did many wonderful works but because they worked iniquity or sin. For Jesus said, “depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” (Matthew 7:23). Jesus also said, “I never knew you.” (Matthew 7:23).

Scripture says that to know the Lord is to keep His commandments.

3 “And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.”
(1 John 2:3-4).

The above passage also says that he that says he knows the Lord and does not keep His commandments is a liar and the truth is not in him.

Matthew 7:26-27 drives home the point that we must obey as a part of our acceptance with the Lord, as well.

“And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.” (Matthew 7:26-27).

The above passage here is saying that if we do not do what Jesus says, we are like a fool who has built his house upon the sand, whereby when a storm came, great was the fall of their house.

If that is still not enough, Matthew 7 says that we will know false prophets by their fruit. So the whole chapter is focused on obedience or action. It is not taking about having a belief alone.

But what about the statement that says, “I never knew you”? Does this disprove that a believer can fall away from the faith? No. First, Matthew 7:23 is not the only verse that talks about falling away (See Hebrews 3:12-13) (Hebrews 10:26) (Hebrews 10:38). Second, Ezekiel 18:24 says,

“But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.” (Ezekiel 18:24).

In other words, just like God remembers are past sins no more from as far as unto the east unto the West, the door swings both ways. If we sin again, none of our previous righteousness will be remembered. Seeing God associates with righteousness and not wickedness, He will no longer remember a righteous believer who turns back to doing evil again.

As for John 17:3:

Again to have an assurance in knowing God (who is the source of our eternal life), we have to keep His commandments (1 John 2:3).

Jason0047
Apr 12th 2018, 03:16 PM
The covenant was instituted with the blood of Christ.

Speaking of the blood of Christ:

1 John 1:7 says,

“But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.” (1 John 1:7).

Waking in the light is keeping His commandments.

Compare 1 John 1:6-7 with 1 John 2:3-4. They are almost saying the same thing. Also, 1 John 2 continues to say about how if we do not love our brother, we are in darkness (See 1 John 2:9, 1 John 211). Paul says to love one’s neighbor (which would include our brother) is the same equivalent of keeping the moral law (like: “Do not murder,” “Do not steal,” “Do not covet,” etc.) (See Romans 13:8-10).

Light is keeping God’s commands.

“Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.” (Psalms 119:105).

Slug1
Apr 12th 2018, 03:19 PM
In the Bible, the Lord forgets our sin when we repent, He views us as if we never sinned (which is difficult for us to understand from God, who is all knowing). I believe it is from this perspective (one that we can't understand yet), Jesus is saying He never knew a person who has stopped abiding and turned away.


Hello again Dan.

Good day to you in the Lord.

It is true that the will of God is to look to the Son and believe on Him (John 6:40). But the Bible also says that the will of God is for us to be holy, too.

“God's will is for you to be holy, so stay away from all sexual sin.” (1 Thessalonians 4:3 NLT).
For without holiness, no man shall see the Lord (Hebrews 12:14).

Jesus said to those believers who did many wonderful works to depart from Him, not because they did many wonderful works but because they worked iniquity or sin. For Jesus said, “depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” (Matthew 7:23). Jesus also said, “I never knew you.” (Matthew 7:23).

Scripture says that to know the Lord is to keep His commandments.

3 “And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.”
(1 John 2:3-4).

The above passage also says that he that says he knows the Lord and does not keep His commandments is a liar and the truth is not in him.

Matthew 7:26-27 drives home the point that we must obey as a part of our acceptance with the Lord, as well.

“And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.” (Matthew 7:26-27).

The above passage here is saying that if we do not do what Jesus says, we are like a fool who has built his house upon the sand, whereby when a storm came, great was the fall of their house.

If that is still not enough, Matthew 7 says that we will know false prophets by their fruit. So the whole chapter is focused on obedience or action. It is not taking about having a belief alone.

But what about the statement that says, “I never knew you”? Does this disprove that a believer can fall away from the faith? No. First, Matthew 7:23 is not the only verse that talks about falling away (See Hebrews 3:12-13) (Hebrews 10:26) (Hebrews 10:38). Second, Ezekiel 18:24 says,

“But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.” (Ezekiel 18:24).

In other words, just like God remembers are past sins no more from as far as unto the east unto the West, the door swings both ways. If we sin again, none of our previous righteousness will be remembered. Seeing God associates with righteousness and not wickedness, He will no longer remember a righteous believer who turns back to doing evil again.

As for John 17:3:

Again to have an assurance in knowing God (who is the source of our eternal life), we have to keep His commandments (1 John 2:3).I will be adding some of your post to my notes :)

Jason0047
Apr 12th 2018, 03:33 PM
I will be adding some of your post to my notes :)

Thank you, brother.

May God bless you greatly today.

Benji
Apr 12th 2018, 03:58 PM
Hi Benji and welcome to the Forum. Thanks for your opinion.

Just some questions, which of course, I do not expect you to answer in public. "Have you ever found yourself disobedient to God's requests? Have you never told a lie, even a little one? If you drive, have you every gone over the speed limit, even by 1 mph? After all, the Lord has commanded that we obey the government. Have you never been jealous and coveted, even a tiny bit. Have you never murmured when things got tough, even a thought of murmuring?" You see, it is possible, and even likely, that the best of us Christians are disobedient. And that is the reason that the "Many" of Matthew 7:21 are refused the Kingdom. These "Many" (1) knew the Lord enough to call upon His name, (2) knew the Lord so that they were endowed with the power to do "many wonders", IN HIS NAME, (3) knew the Lord enough to oppose demons, (4) knew the Lord enough to use God's Spirit to cast out demons, IN HIS NAME. So then; "Have you called upon the Lord? Have you done many wonders in His Name? Have you cast out demons IN HIS NAME? How do you measure your "calling" compared to these MANY who are refused entry into the Kingdom?

I read about 6 commentaries on the passage in question in Matthew and NONE of these great men of God agreed with your interpretation, sorry. I received Christ as Lord and Saviour, and was baptised by immersion, and have walked with Him for over 43 years yet I am still lost and on my way to Hell according to you, but I will have lots of company because "...all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." (Romans 3:23) "There are none that are righteous not even one....no one seeks for God....all have turned away...no one does good, not a single one. (Romans 3:10-12 see also Psalm 14: 2&3.) That means absolutely NO ONE will be in heaven including the Apostle Paul who claimed to be chief among sinners! (1 Tim 1:15) 1 John 2:19, "They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us." This passage shows that these men had even the apostle John fooled about the sincerity of their profession of faith

My theology is somewhat different from yours. Mine states that "there is therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus' "the blood of Christ cleanses us of all sin" "I will never leave you nor forsake you" "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand" "My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." "...you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot." "He [God] chose us in Him [Christ] before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love."

It appears to me that since we both claim to serve the same God one of us must have a wrong interpretation of the passage in question.

Benji

Brother Mark
Apr 12th 2018, 05:23 PM
In other words, just like God remembers are past sins no more from as far as unto the east unto the West, the door swings both ways. If we sin again, none of our previous righteousness will be remembered. Seeing God associates with righteousness and not wickedness, He will no longer remember a righteous believer who turns back to doing evil again.

That seems a jump in theology to me and also, it may make God into a liar. If God says He never knew someone, then it doesn't mean that He knew them at one time, then no longer remembers knowing them. It means He never, not one time, not even for an instant, knew them.

Just because we have a passage in the New Covenant that says God won't remember our sin, we cannot say the opposite is true, i.e. that He won't remember our righteousness.

You quoted part of the following passage:


Ezek 18:21-24

21 "But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die. 22 "All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live. 23 "Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord God, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?


24 "But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.
NASB

Three things:

1. This is the old covenant and we are not at Mount Sinai.
2. Always, always, always we must keep in mind that righteousness and faith cannot be separated any more than faith and works can be separated. One will do what one believes. Thus, it is not just our sin that causes us to fall away, but our unbelief. They are synonyms. Hebrews 3 shows this:

Heb 3:18 And to whom did He swear that they should not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient? 19 And so we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief.
NASB

Israel got divorced by God, not because of 1 sin or many, but because she refused to return. God is very, very patient.

3. In this situation, not remembering the righteousness is not the equivalent of "i never knew you". Never does not mean "I knew you once, but I don't remember knowing you". God is not a liar. And to say "I never knew you" to someone He once knew, would be a lie.

Jason0047
Apr 12th 2018, 05:43 PM
That seems a jump in theology to me and also, it may make God into a liar. If God says He never knew someone, then it doesn't mean that He knew them at one time, then no longer remembers knowing them. It means He never, not one time, not even for an instant, knew them.

Just because we have a passage in the New Covenant that says God won't remember our sin, we cannot say the opposite is true, i.e. that He won't remember our righteousness.

You quoted part of the following passage:



Three things:

1. This is the old covenant and we are not at Mount Sinai.
2. Always, always, always we must keep in mind that righteousness and faith cannot be separated any more than faith and works can be separated. One will do what one believes. Thus, it is not just our sin that causes us to fall away, but our unbelief. They are synonyms. Hebrews 3 shows this:

Heb 3:18 And to whom did He swear that they should not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient? 19 And so we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief.
NASB

Israel got divorced by God, not because of 1 sin or many, but because she refused to return. God is very, very patient.

3. In this situation, not remembering the righteousness is not the equivalent of "i never knew you". Never does not mean "I knew you once, but I don't remember knowing you". God is not a liar. And to say "I never knew you" to someone He once knew, would be a lie.

If God associates with the righteous then.... “yes.” He will not remember a person anymore (and act like He never knew them) because He is not remembering their previous righteousness because of their recent sin. It is also not a lie because God will forget them.

It is the same when we are forgiven of sin. God will not recall our past sin if we truly repented and He will act like you never sinned before. For although one’s sins may be as scarlet, they will be as white as snow. A person’s past record will be wiped clean. The past person of sin (your old life) will be a person that God will not recognize anymore (because they are forgiven of past sin).

The problem is that people are quick to take hold of the good benefits of God, but when they do something wrong, they are not willing to own up to anything.

Old man
Apr 12th 2018, 06:03 PM
Perhaps it is not as straight forward as we would like to believe. Context has a lot to do with how far we can take things as strictly literal as we choose to.

It is apparent that Christ does remember the sins we do while here in this body. Since 2 Cor. 5-10 says we will all stand before the judgment seat of Christ and be recompensed for the things we have done in while in the body both the good and “the bad”. If Christ is going to recompense us (whatever form that will take) for the bad things we have done … He has to remember them first. So the idea that our sins are all forgotten needs a bit more clarification before we can take that as a blanket statement.

It also means if we are recompensed for the bad things we have done which Christ remembers, it follows then we have not been forgiven them (the bad things we’ve done). Depending on what forgiveness all entails. Does it entail God forgetting them? Does it entail having them cast as far as the east is from the west? How can it be forgiveness if we will stand before Christ after this life is over being held accountable and recompensed for them? When are we forgiven for our sins? Does God forget all of our sins or just the ones we actually repent of. And the ones we don’t repent of?

Trivalee
Apr 12th 2018, 07:26 PM
You duck the question. I repeat it, but without much hope of an answer from scripture. These TWO Covenants you mention, WHO WERE THEY MADE WITH? Please supply the verses for we discuss the Bible, not personal opinion.

The First Covenant:

Although God made a covenant with Abraham, what the Bible refers to as the "first or OT Covenant" is that which God made with Israel at Mt Sinai.

Jeremiah 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:

Verse 32 above proves that the Old Covenant refers to the giving of the Law at Sinai, not the promises to Abraham or the Patriarchs.

Ex 19:1 In the third month, when the children of Israel were gone forth out of the land of Egypt, the same day came they into the wilderness of Sinai.

2 For they were departed from Rephidim, and were come to the desert of Sinai, and had pitched in the wilderness; and there Israel camped before the mount.

3 And Moses went up unto God, and the Lord called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel;

4 Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself.

5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:

6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.

7 And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the Lord commanded him.

8 And all the people answered together, and said, All that the Lord hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the Lord.

The consequences for breaking the covenant is stated in Leviticus 26:14-18

Further, Paul referring to the first covenant, said: “And the commandment (covenant), which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death” (Romans 7:10). With the advent of the law 3,000 people died (Exodus 32:28).

The Second:

The second was sealed on the cross. Gal 3:24 The Law was our tutor/schoolmaster until Christ. So we are justified by faith.
Jesus went to the cross to fulfill the covenant 1 Peter 3:18.
This is embodied in forgiveness to ALL who believe in Jesus (John 1:12, Romans 4:4-5, Romans 5:1, Romans 10:13).

ProDeo
Apr 12th 2018, 07:33 PM
But the text we discuss unequivocally shows that MANY, who served the Lord, cast out demons in His Name, and did miracles in His name ARE REFUSED THE KINGDOM.

A Tree and Its Fruit
15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. 18 A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.

I Never Knew You
21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

----

Isn't the context not the parts I bolded?

There is a difference between Christians who genuinely think they received certain gifts of the Holy Spirit but are (sadly) mistaken and real false prophets who - who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.

I think v21-23 speaks about the latter group.

Trivalee
Apr 12th 2018, 07:37 PM
What you fail to see is that the new covenant is made with the elect, as it was always made. The house of Israel and Judah were the elect as they were the descendants of Abraham and the receivers of the covenant of Sinai. We are also the descendants of Abraham according to Gal 3:29. The curtain which separated us were torn and there is no more Jews and Gentiles, only believers or non believers. It is therefore clear that the covenant as prophesied by Jeremiah is the new covenant of grace which was set in motion by the blood of Christ. We see it is God who would put His laws into our minds and hearts. It is not because of the work of man, but the grace of God. The covenant of law or works are now dead and the only covenant is the new covenant of grace for all nations. God always worked with His elect through covenant since the fall and the new covenant is the last (actually the same covenant but with different workings) and perfect covenant ratified by the blood of Christ.

Couldn't have put it any better. Excellent.

Trivalee
Apr 12th 2018, 08:00 PM
I will, this time, not answer point for point since you brought but ONE verse. I ask you read my last posting to randyk to save me duplicating. I will summarize for you - with scriptures.

The New Covenant is made with "the House of Israel" and "the House of Judah". These are two real and historical parts of the "whole House of Israel" (Jer.31:31-33; Heb.8:8-10).
The "Whole House of Israel" is seed of Abraham via Isaac (Rom.9:7, Heb.11:18)
The Church is seed of Abraham NOT via Isaac but because they are IN Christ, Who is a seed of Abraham (Gal.3:29). This is to establish a legal right to the Covenant of PROMISE.
In the world there are (1) Israelites, seed of Isaac, which Romans says are in UNBELIEF but nevertheless present in the world. (2) The nations, all those born of Adam via Noah but NOT Isaac. (3) The Church of Christ - all those born from above with incorruptible seed. The Church is a NEW and SEPARATE entity in which ALL past things, including ethnicity, are wiped out. 2nd Corinthians 5:17 is emphatic and unequivocal. "Therefore if any man be IN Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new." For those IN Christ, there is no Adam, no Abraham, no Isaac, no Law and no heritage of the flesh.



I quite agree.





The New Covenant is NOT a Covenant of grace! Scripture says it is a Covenant of Law (Jer.31:33; Ezek.36:25-27, 44:24)
The New Covenant is NOT "for all nations". Jeremiah 31:31-33 says it is for "the House of Israel" (ten northern Tribes) and "the House of Judah" (two southern Tribes). There is not a single verse in the whole Bible that says that the New Covenant is made with the nations.
The New Covenant is NOT YET instituted because "the House of Israel" and "the House of Judah" are still divided and mainly dispersed among the nations. The New Covenant is only made IN THAT DAY that Israel are united and recovered to their Land (Ezek.39:25)


* How did you make the leap from the covenant of blood (New Covenant) to that of the Law? There's nothing in Jer 31:33 that suggests the new covenant is that of the Law!
* On the contrary, even though Heb 8:8-10 says the new is between God and Israel, it is not limited to the Jews according to Gal 3:14.
* Your claim that the New Covenant is still waiting for the unification of the Houses of Israel and Judah before ratification is egregiously shocking and underpins how far off your interpretation is.
* If the NC is still in limbo and without access to Gentiles, then Gentiles will be no better today than they were in the OT Covenant when they were excluded.

Glorious
Apr 12th 2018, 08:12 PM
Matthew 7:21-23 KJV

[21] Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Anyone who can twice call Him Lord (Lord Jesus Christ and Lord God Almighty) has the eternal Spirit and knows the Lord.

However, having the eternal Spirit is not enough qualification for entrance into the kingdom of God. The kingdom is the next level up from having the eternal Spiri

Such one who has the eternal Spirit must also do the will of the Father before s/he is raised up into the kingdom of heaven. The will of the Father is done when the Father is brought into the Spirit.

So, not all who call Him Lord, Lord will enter the kingdom of heaven. Only those who call Him Lord, Lord and do the will of the Father will enter into the kingdom.


[22] Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

In the day that He is twice called the Lord (Lord Jesus Christ and Lord God Almighty), saints will be able to prophecy, cast out unciean spirits and do wonderful works by the eternal Spirit.

Many saints, despite being having and using the name of the Lord and Lord, will also indulge iniquities. Iniquities are works of disobedience, unrighteousness, unholiness and curses which are against commandments of life.


[23] And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Whosoever indulges iniquity neither knows or is known by the Lord and Lord. He will declare to saints who do work's of iniquity that He never knew them: and that they should depart from Him.

God knows all things perfectly. He either knows perfectly or never knows at all. He does not know in part. We know in part until when made perfect by the righteousness of God.


To Be Known By God Is To Be Made Perfect

Saints who know in part are "never known" by the Lord until they are made perfect. To be known by God, therefore, is to be made perfect. Ephesians 4:13 KJV declares:


Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

Saints who indulge iniquities have never been made perfect. Although they have the name of the Lord by whom they prophesy, cast out demons and do wonderful works, even that name by whom they do these things will be taken away from them.


To Depart From The Lord Takes Away The Lord

The Lord's commandment "depart from me" takes away His name from saints who indulge iniquities.

Walls
Apr 13th 2018, 01:15 PM
I read about 6 commentaries on the passage in question in Matthew and NONE of these great men of God agreed with your interpretation, sorry. I received Christ as Lord and Saviour, and was baptised by immersion, and have walked with Him for over 43 years yet I am still lost and on my way to Hell according to you, but I will have lots of company because "...all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." (Romans 3:23) "There are none that are righteous not even one....no one seeks for God....all have turned away...no one does good, not a single one. (Romans 3:10-12 see also Psalm 14: 2&3.) That means absolutely NO ONE will be in heaven including the Apostle Paul who claimed to be chief among sinners! (1 Tim 1:15) 1 John 2:19, "They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us." This passage shows that these men had even the apostle John fooled about the sincerity of their profession of faith

My theology is somewhat different from yours. Mine states that "there is therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus' "the blood of Christ cleanses us of all sin" "I will never leave you nor forsake you" "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand" "My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." "...you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot." "He [God] chose us in Him [Christ] before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love."

It appears to me that since we both claim to serve the same God one of us must have a wrong interpretation of the passage in question.

Benji

I have made red your main objections - one in each paragraph.

In paragraph one above, you have missed the point completely. I assumed that you were a good Christian but I wanted to point out that even the best of us can be disobedient. I expected you to agree that you slip up now and again. If you claim perfection and sinlessness, don't read further. What I meant is that it is possible for a Christian to slip up. Let us take the chiefest Apostle - Peter. In Galatians 2:11-14 Paul has to rebuke Peter because he, Paul, "... saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel." This is decades after Peter became a Christian, and he is the chief Apostle in Jerusalem.

So, if it is possible for a Christian to fail, and still be a Christian, then those who fail often, or mostly all the time, are STILL CHRISTIANS, but "workers of iniquity". As you pointed out in your second paragraph, no one can pluck them out of the Father's Hand". But nevertheless, they can fail. That was the first paragraph.

In your second paragraph you do what many of my opposers do. You changed the subject. The subject of my OP, and further posts, was ENTERING THE MILLENNIAL Kingdom as co-king with Jesus - NOT REDEMPTION! Redemption is an act by Christ by paying for us, and we are redeemed by FAITH in that work of Christ. Being selected, or found worthy of being a co-king WITH Jesus in the Millennium is a REWARD for diligence, faithfulness, intimacy with the Lord Jesus AND OBEDIENCE. If you now agree with my paragraph one, then we agree that a Christian is a Christian no matter what - REDEEMED by FAITH. This cannot change. But whether he is OBEDIENT to the Father is another matter totally. One is an act of FAITH and the other is a WORK - the denial of the self, the denial of our wills.

Walls
Apr 13th 2018, 01:24 PM
Perhaps it is not as straight forward as we would like to believe. Context has a lot to do with how far we can take things as strictly literal as we choose to.

It is apparent that Christ does remember the sins we do while here in this body. Since 2 Cor. 5-10 says we will all stand before the judgment seat of Christ and be recompensed for the things we have done in while in the body both the good and “the bad”. If Christ is going to recompense us (whatever form that will take) for the bad things we have done … He has to remember them first. So the idea that our sins are all forgotten needs a bit more clarification before we can take that as a blanket statement.

It also means if we are recompensed for the bad things we have done which Christ remembers, it follows then we have not been forgiven them (the bad things we’ve done). Depending on what forgiveness all entails. Does it entail God forgetting them? Does it entail having them cast as far as the east is from the west? How can it be forgiveness if we will stand before Christ after this life is over being held accountable and recompensed for them? When are we forgiven for our sins? Does God forget all of our sins or just the ones we actually repent of. And the ones we don’t repent of?

Nicely put. But few see it this way. They duck their heads when you speak of the Bema in Romans 14:10 and 2nd Corinthians 5:10. Over and over in the New Testament there are WARNINGS to the Christian and even to whole Churches. Many ignore this. And the point of my OP was to show that the Christian, to enter the Kingdom as co-kings with Christ, must prove over his/her lifetime that they can carry out orders. Saul LOSES the Kingdom for DISOBEDIENCE. But with David is the Covenant made that his seed would always and ever be on the throne. Of David, the lord says in 1 Kings 15:5; "Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, and turned not aside from any thing that he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite"

Many, even on this Forum, think that they can do what they like and still be chosen co-kings. The "workers of iniquity" in Matthew 7:23 did huge works - works that few of us will ever do. The works are not judged. THE WORKERS are judged. And the judgment? You did great works, but did you do them under orders, or did you do your own thing?

Go well brother.

Walls
Apr 13th 2018, 01:46 PM
The First Covenant:

Although God made a covenant with Abraham, what the Bible refers to as the "first or OT Covenant" is that which God made with Israel at Mt Sinai.

Jeremiah 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:

Verse 32 above proves that the Old Covenant refers to the giving of the Law at Sinai, not the promises to Abraham or the Patriarchs.

Ex 19:1 In the third month, when the children of Israel were gone forth out of the land of Egypt, the same day came they into the wilderness of Sinai.

2 For they were departed from Rephidim, and were come to the desert of Sinai, and had pitched in the wilderness; and there Israel camped before the mount.

3 And Moses went up unto God, and the Lord called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel;

4 Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself.

5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:

6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.

7 And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the Lord commanded him.

8 And all the people answered together, and said, All that the Lord hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the Lord.

The consequences for breaking the covenant is stated in Leviticus 26:14-18

Further, Paul referring to the first covenant, said: “And the commandment (covenant), which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death” (Romans 7:10). With the advent of the law 3,000 people died (Exodus 32:28).

The Second:

The second was sealed on the cross. Gal 3:24 The Law was our tutor/schoolmaster until Christ. So we are justified by faith.
Jesus went to the cross to fulfill the covenant 1 Peter 3:18.
This is embodied in forgiveness to ALL who believe in Jesus (John 1:12, Romans 4:4-5, Romans 5:1, Romans 10:13).

No! Let scripture answer:

Galatians 3:17; "And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect."

Covenant NUMBER ONE; That of PROMISE made with Abraham AND HIS SEED
Covenant NUMBER TWO, made 430 years AFTER, The Covenant of LAW made with ISRAEL who came out of Egypt
Then follow various Covenants like that of Passover, Davidic, Levitical Priesthood, and Sabbath - ALL MADE WITH ISRAEL
Then lastly, the New Covenant OF LAW - MADE WITH ISRAEL (Jer.31:31-33) "in that day" when they are united again.

That, my friend, is the answer. ALL Covenants were made with Israel. That which was made with Abraham is STILL MADE WITH ISRAEL for Israel is the seed of Isaac from Abraham. But, because Christ is seed of Isaac from Abraham, and HEIR, and the Church is IN Christ, we, the CHURCH become eligible to partake of this Covenant of PROMISE (Gal.3:29; Rom.4:13) - AND ONLY THIS ONE! The Church though IS NEVER ATTACHED TO ANY OTHER COVENANT (except that one made with Noah). The Church HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE NEW COVENANT OF LAW (which, in any case is still future). It is only RATIFIED NOW as it was ratified in the blood of Christ on Golgotha. But the new Covenant is still to INSTITUTED WITH UNITED AND RESTORED ISRAEL - still future!

Walls
Apr 13th 2018, 02:15 PM
A Tree and Its Fruit
15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. 18 A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.

I Never Knew You
21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

----

Isn't the context not the parts I bolded?

There is a difference between Christians who genuinely think they received certain gifts of the Holy Spirit but are (sadly) mistaken and real false prophets who - who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.

I think v21-23 speaks about the latter group.

The WORKS are never called into question by the Lord in the context. It is the WORKERS who did them THAT ARE QUESTIONED. The immediate context is; "were you OBEDIENT OR NOT?" In my OP I listed eight proofs that these WORKERS were Christians. Their WORKS were By God's POWER, and "in the Name of Jesus". Our Lord Jesus does not question them. He questions the OBEDIENCE of the workers. That is, did they do all these marvelous works UNDER ORDER FROM GOD, or did they do them out of their own volition. The thing being decided is NOT if the works are true. What is being decided is; "HAVE YOU WORKERS OF THE LORD PROVED THAT YOU ARE OBEDIENT, OR, HAVE YOU USED GOD'S POWER WITHOUT HIS GO-AHEAD?"

And this question faces every Christian today? Did you give money to that cause BY ORDER OF GOD, or did you do it out of your own goodness? Did you give a Tithe to the Church because God SAID SO, or because YOU felt it was the right thing to do? Let me give you an example.

When man fell, God cursed him to work for his bread until he dies (Gen.3:19). Now, this curse, just like that of pain in childbearing for women, is still valid. So God REGULATES this in the Church. In 2nd Thessalonians 3:6-14 Paul establishes this curse as valid, even in the Church. He says that, "... that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread". In verses 6 and 14 he says that a brother who does not work must be ostracized. And then in verse 10 he is very strong and says; "... if any would not work, neither should he eat". The reason for this is that the Church is taught to be generous in giving, especially to the poor and those who go through a bad time. But some of the "brothers" will ABUSE this. They will give up work and then claim poverty. So here is the scenario;

Jake stops working. He and his wife and children, in a short time, have no food. You hear about it and "feel" sorry for them. You give them of your food. The question now is; "WERE YOU OBEDIENT?" Well - NO! You had two considerations. (1) Help those in need as a general command, or (2) ostracize and withhold help so that the brother is not rewarded for thumbing his nose at God AS PER SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR BUSYBODIES!

I think you know the answer. So also the "Many" of Matthew 7:21. The question was, were they obedient when they exercised their good works? Did they do it by their own volition, or, did they ASK THEIR FATHER IN HEAVEN FIRST?

Saved7
Apr 13th 2018, 02:28 PM
I don't have time to read through this whole thread, so I'm posting thisassuming it hasn't been addressed.
While I agree obedience is vital and I believe the Lord is speaking "obey Me in all things" at this late hour, I have to challenge your supposition based solely on this one verse.
Revelation 20:4
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. -

Walls
Apr 13th 2018, 02:35 PM
I quite agree.






* How did you make the leap from the covenant of blood (New Covenant) to that of the Law? There's nothing in Jer 31:33 that suggests the new covenant is that of the Law!
* On the contrary, even though Heb 8:8-10 says the new is between God and Israel, it is not limited to the Jews according to Gal 3:14.
* Your claim that the New Covenant is still waiting for the unification of the Houses of Israel and Judah before ratification is egregiously shocking and underpins how far off your interpretation is.
* If the NC is still in limbo and without access to Gentiles, then Gentiles will be no better today than they were in the OT Covenant when they were excluded.

Let scripture answer; Jeremiah 31:31-33;

31 "Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people."

It is "egregiously shocking" to you because you have assumed that the New Covenant was made with the Church. But you not only cannot show this, but scripture unequivocally says it is made with the COMBINATION of the ten northern Tribes of Israel and the two southern Tribes of Judah - leaving no option for understanding it any other way as just that. The blood of Jesus;

was for the sin (singular) of the world (Jn.1:29). This is to allow resurrection of ALL men for the wages of "sin" (singular) is death. To overcome death, men must be resurrected. This is still future. Any problem with that?
was for sins (plural) or trespasses of the world (1st Jn.2:2). This is applied to the Apostles three days later in John 20:22. To Wycliff, Luther and Calvin, it is applied 1,500 years later. To you and I, it is applied 2,000 years later. To Israel it is applied when the Lord comes back - that is, future. Any problem with that?
was to restore the earth that is cursed by Abel's blood (Heb.12:24). When will that restoration be? Romans 8 says that it occurs when the creature is handed over to the sons of God in resurrection (vs.19-23). That is, FUTURE! Any problem with that?
was to RATIFY a New Covenant of Law WITH ISRAEL when they are united and restored to their Land. That is, the RATIFICATION was on GOLGOTHA but the INSTITUTION of the New Covenant is FUTURE. SO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT AND ACCORD THIS COVENANT TO THE CHURCH NOW - STRANGE!

Walls
Apr 13th 2018, 02:46 PM
I don't have time to read through this whole thread, so I'm posting thisassuming it hasn't been addressed.
While I agree obedience is vital and I believe the Lord is speaking "obey Me in all things" at this late hour, I have to challenge your supposition based solely on this one verse.
Revelation 20:4
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. -

The question then is, "did ALL Christians, who were TOLD by the Lord to go into a dangerous situation for the gospel, go?" These did. "Many" don't*. I am guilty of this myself to my regret. But the Lord is gracious and gives me time to be trained in obedience. In Matthew 7 the judgment on the "workers of iniquity" is because they never built an intimate relationship with Jesus - one that allows us to know what His will is.


* I refer you to Revelation 13:7. "And it was given unto him (the Beast) to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations." For every one who resists the Beast and will be beheaded there are a thousand "saints" who will succumb to him. Shocking, isn't it.

Jason0047
Apr 13th 2018, 04:20 PM
Iniquity is sin. These believers who were told to depart from Jesus did wonderful works AND they worked sin, too.

Glorious
Apr 13th 2018, 05:43 PM
No! Let scripture answer:

Galatians 3:17; "And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect."

Covenant NUMBER ONE; That of PROMISE made with Abraham AND HIS SEED
Covenant NUMBER TWO, made 430 years AFTER, The Covenant of LAW made with ISRAEL who came out of Egypt
Then follow various Covenants like that of Passover, Davidic, Levitical Priesthood, and Sabbath - ALL MADE WITH ISRAEL
Then lastly, the New Covenant OF LAW - MADE WITH ISRAEL (Jer.31:31-33) "in that day" when they are united again.

That, my friend, is the answer. ALL Covenants were made with Israel. That which was made with Abraham is STILL MADE WITH ISRAEL for Israel is the seed of Isaac from Abraham. But, because Christ is seed of Isaac from Abraham, and HEIR, and the Church is IN Christ, we, the CHURCH become eligible to partake of this Covenant of PROMISE (Gal.3:29; Rom.4:13) - AND ONLY THIS ONE! The Church though IS NEVER ATTACHED TO ANY OTHER COVENANT (except that one made with Noah). The Church HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE NEW COVENANT OF LAW (which, in any case is still future). It is only RATIFIED NOW as it was ratified in the blood of Christ on Golgotha. But the new Covenant is still to INSTITUTED WITH UNITED AND RESTORED ISRAEL - still future!

There are no such things as covenant of the law and covenant of grace. The reason is that the law and grace each lead to love by which covenants are made.

The covenant with Abraham is neither an old nor a new covenant. It is an everlasting covenant.

Below are the types of covenant listed from the first to the highest:


old covenant .An example is the covenant confirmed of God in Christ.
new covenant. An example is the blood of the covenant by which we are sanctified.
covenant of salt or covenant of the Lord. An example is the covenant made with Levi and his sons.
everlasting covenant. An example is the covenant made with Abraham.

Aithough we desire the greatest, which is the everlasting covenant, let us be content with whichever we have received, knowing that each covenant is confirmed by an oath and does manifests our fellowship with the Father.

Walls
Apr 14th 2018, 12:20 AM
Iniquity is sin. These believers who were told to depart from Jesus did wonderful works AND they worked sin, too.

Exactly my point, and is shown in the OP. Believers can, and do, sin. The devastating circumstances of this event in Matthew 7 are that;

the works themselves were not evil
the Believers who did them THOUGHT that they had done a good job
the Believers who did them THOUGHT that they were entitled to enter the Kingdom as co-kings with Christ

The "iniquity" is shown by Christ, the Judge, to be;

that they did these works WITHOUT ORDERS. The "Will of the Father in heaven" was not carried out
that they acted independently of Him (Jesus) Who is the Head of the Believers and should be "known" intimately

Jason0047
Apr 14th 2018, 12:37 AM
Exactly my point, and is shown in the OP. Believers can, and do, sin. The devastating circumstances of this event in Matthew 7 are that;

the works themselves were not evil
the Believers who did them THOUGHT that they had done a good job
the Believers who did them THOUGHT that they were entitled to enter the Kingdom as co-kings with Christ

The "iniquity" is shown by Christ, the Judge, to be;

that they did these works WITHOUT ORDERS. The "Will of the Father in heaven" was not carried out
that they acted independently of Him (Jesus) Who is the Head of the Believers and should be "known" intimately



While we do need to follow God's will, I pretty much disagree with everything you said here. Works themselves are evil. Jesus said right in Matthew 7 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7&version=KJV) about good fruit and bad fruit. If you were to skip back, you would see the kind of bad fruit Jesus was talking about. He says in Matthew 6:15 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+6%3A15&version=KJV), if you do not forgive, you will not be forgiven. In Matthew 5:28-31 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5%3A28-30&version=KJV), Jesus says if you look upon a woman in lust, your whole body could potentially be cast into hell fire. Matthew 5:22 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5%3A22&version=KJV) says if we call our brother a fool, we are in danger of hell fire.

As for the wonderful works these believers had done:
Nothing is said about whether or not these wonderful works were done according to God's will or not. The Bible tells us what we are to do. So if they were following the Bible, and doing good by the Bible, then God could not fault them UNLESS they were also do evil things or sinful things. Do you remember the warning in Revelation to a certain church?

2 (http://biblehub.com/revelation/2-2.htm) "I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:
3 (http://biblehub.com/revelation/2-3.htm) And hast borne, and hast patience, and for my name's sake hast laboured, and hast not fainted.
4 (http://biblehub.com/revelation/2-4.htm) Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.
5 (http://biblehub.com/revelation/2-5.htm) Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works;"
(Revelation 2:2-5 (http://biblehub.com/kjv/revelation/2.htm)).


God knew the labor and patience of a particular church and how they could not bear them that are evil, and tried out others who say they are apostles and are not, but God had a few things against even this church. They lost their first love. So on one hand, they were doing good, and yet on the other hand, they fell short and were doing bad.

Walls
Apr 14th 2018, 12:37 AM
There are no such things as covenant of the law and covenant of grace. The reason is that the law and grace each lead to love by which covenants are made.

The covenant with Abraham is neither an old nor a new covenant. It is an everlasting covenant.

Below are the types of covenant listed from the first to the highest:


old covenant .An example is the covenant confirmed of God in Christ.
new covenant. An example is the blood of the covenant by which we are sanctified.
covenant of salt or covenant of the Lord. An example is the covenant made with Levi and his sons.
everlasting covenant. An example is the covenant made with Abraham.

Aithough we desire the greatest, which is the everlasting covenant, let us be content with whichever we have received, knowing that each covenant is confirmed by an oath and does manifests our fellowship with the Father.

I am a bit perplexed. You have answered a quote of mine, but but you did not address one point of it. Just to clarify, in my posting #155 and the FIFTH point, I stated that the New Covenant was NOT of grace, but Law. My brother Trivalee answered it in posting #169 but had some trouble with the format. But the posting you address here was an answer to brother Kalahari. Also, you did not give any verses to back your statements. So, please forgive me if I do not comment on the above. I'm really not in the picture and will surely say something wrong. God bless :)

Walls
Apr 14th 2018, 01:06 AM
While we do need to follow God's will, I pretty much disagree with everything you said here. Works themselves are evil. Jesus said right in Matthew 7 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7&version=KJV) about good fruit and bad fruit. If you were to skip back, you would see the kind of bad fruit Jesus was talking about. He says in Matthew 6:15 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+6%3A15&version=KJV), if you do not forgive, you will not be forgiven. In Matthew 5:28-31 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5%3A28-30&version=KJV), Jesus says if you look upon a woman in lust, your whole body could potentially be cast into hell fire. Matthew 5:22 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5%3A22&version=KJV) says if we call our brother a fool, we are in danger of hell fire.

As for the wonderful works these believers had done:
Nothing is said about whether or not these wonderful works were done according to God's will or not. The Bible tells us what we are to do. So if they were following the Bible, and doing good by the Bible, then God could not fault them UNLESS they were also do evil things or sinful things. Do you remember the warning in Revelation to a certain church?

2 (http://biblehub.com/revelation/2-2.htm) "I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:
3 (http://biblehub.com/revelation/2-3.htm) And hast borne, and hast patience, and for my name's sake hast laboured, and hast not fainted.
4 (http://biblehub.com/revelation/2-4.htm) Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.
5 (http://biblehub.com/revelation/2-5.htm) Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works;"
(Revelation 2:2-5 (http://biblehub.com/kjv/revelation/2.htm)).


God knew the labor and patience of a particular church and how they could not bear them that are evil, and tried out others who say they are apostles and are not, but God had a few things against even this church. They lost their first love. So on one hand, they were doing good, and yet on the other hand, they fell short and were doing bad.

I do believe you have entered this thread at a late stage. May I ask you to review all my postings. This issue of works was addressed by me in the early stages already. I gave the example of Paul, though he had the "Great Commission", which is anchored in the Bible, not going to Asia and Bithynia "to preach the word" because the "Spirit FORBADE him". In light of this your posting is somewhat perplexing, for you write in your second sentence that "Works themselves are evil". Then you contradict this by saying, in the first sentence of your second paragraph, "... these wonderful works". Which is it?

Then you say, in the second sentence of your second paragraph ...


Nothing is said about whether or not these wonderful works were done according to God's will or not.

But the whole issue of the words of Jesus, when these works were produced, is that the DOERS must "depart" because they had not DONE the will of His Father in heaven. The whole matter rests on wonderful works done by God's power and "in the name of Jesus", but which our Lord terms NOT THE WILL OF THE FATHER. This leaves only one conclusion. The works themselves are not called into question. The Apostles did exactly these things in Acts of the Apostles. They are the works of believers. But if they were not ordered AT THAT TIME by the Father in heaven, then the WORKERS are "WORKERS of iniquity". I gave the example of Paul not going to Asia and the USA Ambassador Jonesy Jones. These you have not addressed.

Of course, I don't expect you to plow through all my postings. I just want to point out that I have addressed certain things which you are not taking into consideration.

Go well brother.

Glorious
Apr 14th 2018, 06:35 AM
I am a bit perplexed. You have answered a quote of mine, but but you did not address one point of it. Just to clarify, in my posting #155 and the FIFTH point, I stated that the New Covenant was NOT of grace, but Law. My brother Trivalee answered it in posting #169 but had some trouble with the format. But the posting you address here was an answer to brother Kalahari. Also, you did not give any verses to back your statements. So, please forgive me if I do not comment on the above. I'm really not in the picture and will surely say something wrong. God bless :)


Walls, you wrote earlier:


The Church HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE NEW COVENANT OF LAW (which, in any case is still future). It is only RATIFIED NOW as it was ratified in the blood of Christ on Golgotha. But the new Covenant is still to INSTITUTED WITH UNITED AND RESTORED ISRAEL - still future!

Early on in the thread, you also mentioned covenant of grace. My response, as you can see in my first statement, was to say that there are no such things as covenant of law and/or covenant of grace.

I went further to list the four types of covenant that the Father makes. He decides which type of covenant to give a person or group of persons. He gave Abraham an everlasting covenant instead of an old or a new covenant. The everlasting covenant is the highest and greatest type of covenant there can ever be, and that the Father can ever make with a person or group of persons.

I deliberately decided not to emphasize on the metaphorical use of keywords such as "old" and "new" in order not to digress much from OP. But, from the list I provided, a careful reader may have caught the drift, which is that "new" does not necessarily translate as a brand new creation or the latest version from an "old" version. All things in the realm of the spirit are "new" things on the earth. All things in the realm of the flesh are "old" things in the earth.

So, do not be perplexed any longer. I responded specifically to what you wrote about the number of covenants.

God bless!

Walls
Apr 14th 2018, 09:24 AM
Walls, you wrote earlier:



Early on in the thread, you also mentioned covenant of grace. My response, as you can see in my first statement, was to say that there are no such things as covenant of law and/or covenant of grace.

I went further to list the four types of covenant that the Father makes. He decides which type of covenant to give a person or group of persons. He gave Abraham an everlasting covenant instead of an old or a new covenant. The everlasting covenant is the highest and greatest type of covenant there can ever be, and that the Father can ever make with a person or group of persons.

I deliberately decided not to emphasize on the metaphorical use of keywords such as "old" and "new" in order not to digress much from OP. But, from the list I provided, a careful reader may have caught the drift, which is that "new" does not necessarily translate as a brand new creation or the latest version from an "old" version. All things in the realm of the spirit are "new" things on the earth. All things in the realm of the flesh are "old" things in the earth.

So, do not be perplexed any longer. I responded specifically to what you wrote about the number of covenants.

God bless!

OK: Thanks for your answer. Could you just write down the posting #, and the exact quote where I "mentioned" a Covenant of grace. Then we can discuss. This what I ACTUALLY wrote in posting #155:


Walls, posting #155
I will, this time, not answer point for point since you brought but ONE verse. I ask you read my last posting to randyk to save me duplicating. I will summarize for you - with scriptures.


The New Covenant is made with "the House of Israel" and "the House of Judah". These are two real and historical parts of the "whole House of Israel" (Jer.31:31-33; Heb.8:8-10).
The "Whole House of Israel" is seed of Abraham via Isaac (Rom.9:7, Heb.11:18)
The Church is seed of Abraham NOT via Isaac but because they are IN Christ, Who is a seed of Abraham (Gal.3:29). This is to establish a legal right to the Covenant of PROMISE.
In the world there are (1) Israelites, seed of Isaac, which Romans says are in UNBELIEF but nevertheless present in the world. (2) The nations, all those born of Adam via Noah but NOT Isaac. (3) The Church of Christ - all those born from above with incorruptible seed. The Church is a NEW and SEPARATE entity in which ALL past things, including ethnicity, are wiped out. 2nd Corinthians 5:17 is emphatic and unequivocal. "Therefore if any man be IN Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new." For those IN Christ, there is no Adam, no Abraham, no Isaac, no Law and no heritage of the flesh.
The New Covenant is NOT a Covenant of grace! Scripture says it is a Covenant of Law (Jer.31:33; Ezek.36:25-27, 44:24)
The New Covenant is NOT "for all nations". Jeremiah 31:31-33 says it is for "the House of Israel" (ten northern Tribes) and "the House of Judah" (two southern Tribes). There is not a single verse in the whole Bible that says that the New Covenant is made with the nations.
The New Covenant is NOT YET instituted because "the House of Israel" and "the House of Judah" are still divided and mainly dispersed among the nations. The New Covenant is only made IN THAT DAY that Israel are united and recovered to their Land (Ezek.39:25)


Read these scripture carefully and see if I am correct.

So when you quote me and says that there is no such thing as a Covenant of grace, I am perplexed "at your response" in that I have already said that. Go back and check.

But I have now something to say to that which I have made red above. You wrote:


My response, as you can see in my first statement, was to say that there are no such things as covenant of law and/or covenant of grace.

What say you then of,

Exodus 34:28; "And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments."
Deuteronomy 4:13; "And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone."

Do we not have here a Covenant of Law?

And when predicting the New Covenant we read in Jeremiah 31:31-33;


31 "Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people."

Seems to me to be quite clear. The Covenant of Sinai was a Covenant of Law, and the New Covenant, when it is instituted with combine Israel "in that day", will be a Covenant of Law.

kyCyd
Apr 14th 2018, 11:42 AM
Exodus 34:28; "And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments."
Deuteronomy 4:13; "And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone."

Do we not have here a Covenant of Law?

Yes we do. And they were written by the finger of God Ex 31:18. The question then might be: Are the ten commandments doing the will of the Father? I mean we are talking about doing the will of the Father...and lawlessness in Mt 7. Lawlessness does mean: a state of disorder due to a disregard of the law. Do Christians have a disregard for the law? Therefore sin not repented for? Are they teaching disregard for the law? What are your thoughts on this?

Jason0047
Apr 14th 2018, 01:09 PM
I do believe you have entered this thread at a late stage. May I ask you to review all my postings. This issue of works was addressed by me in the early stages already. I gave the example of Paul, though he had the "Great Commission", which is anchored in the Bible, not going to Asia and Bithynia "to preach the word" because the "Spirit FORBADE him". In light of this your posting is somewhat perplexing, for you write in your second sentence that "Works themselves are evil". Then you contradict this by saying, in the first sentence of your second paragraph, "... these wonderful works". Which is it?

Then you say, in the second sentence of your second paragraph ...



But the whole issue of the words of Jesus, when these works were produced, is that the DOERS must "depart" because they had not DONE the will of His Father in heaven. The whole matter rests on wonderful works done by God's power and "in the name of Jesus", but which our Lord terms NOT THE WILL OF THE FATHER. This leaves only one conclusion. The works themselves are not called into question. The Apostles did exactly these things in Acts of the Apostles. They are the works of believers. But if they were not ordered AT THAT TIME by the Father in heaven, then the WORKERS are "WORKERS of iniquity". I gave the example of Paul not going to Asia and the USA Ambassador Jonesy Jones. These you have not addressed.

Of course, I don't expect you to plow through all my postings. I just want to point out that I have addressed certain things which you are not taking into consideration.

Go well brother.

Nobody can obey the many commands in the New Testament without having been born again. There are always going to be good works that every believer is supposed to always do in this life. They are to always keep the Moral Law (like "Do not murder," "Do not steal," "Do not lie," and "Do not covet," etc.). They are always to forgive. If not, then they wil not be forgiven. We are all called to preach the gospel and teach others. It is a part of the great commission. We are all called to help the poor. We are all called to love and pray for our enemies. We are all called to read Scripture. We are called to pray. You are suggesting that if we do these things (after accepting Jesus) without getting God's approval we are working iniquity. This is not true. God's will is defined for us in the Holy Bible. Also, do you think Paul was spiritually condemned because he desired to not heed the Spirit's warnings about returning to Jerusalem (Whereby he was then thrown in prison)? Do you think that if I were to help a child who is suffering on the road and I did not pray to ask to do so.... I am working iniquity? Is it not God's will to do good? Yes, there are times God wants us to follow His direction in regards to the commands within His Word, but nowhere does God say we are condemned spiritually if we do not do it exactly at the time He says to do it. Nowhere does Jesus say to go out and preach the gospel and make disciples of all nations, BUT.... ONLY in my direct specific orders to do so.... otherwise you will be condemned.

Jason0047
Apr 14th 2018, 01:26 PM
The problem I have with saying we cannot obey all of God's commands in the New Testament without getting God's approval, is that it would make us question in taking action on the good things God has already established for us all believers to do.

God's will is for you to be holy (or our Sanctification) (1 Thessalonians 4:3).

25 "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish."
(Ephesians 5:25-27).

The Word is the Holy Bible.

Please show me where doing good in the New Testament (not under God's specific instructions) is cause for a loss of salvation. I just do not see such a teaching in Scripture. It needs to be clear. I cannot preach the Word to someone today if I did not first pray really hard about? If I do so, I may be condemned by God? Granted, it is always good to seek God's will in every good action we take. We should follow God's direction in all things, but to say that we cannot obey God's New Testament commands without praying to HIm first or we will be condemned by God is just silly. If we are to love God with all our heart, mind, soul, and strength, we will want to be please Him in everything we do. But to say we will be condemned for doing good, is just non-sensical. A person is condemned because of sin.

What is sin?

Sin is the breaking of the Law or the Commandment (See 1 John 3:4).

Trivalee
Apr 14th 2018, 03:14 PM
No! Let scripture answer:

Galatians 3:17; "And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect."

Covenant NUMBER ONE; That of PROMISE made with Abraham AND HIS SEED
Covenant NUMBER TWO, made 430 years AFTER, The Covenant of LAW made with ISRAEL who came out of Egypt
Then follow various Covenants like that of Passover, Davidic, Levitical Priesthood, and Sabbath - ALL MADE WITH ISRAEL
Then lastly, the New Covenant OF LAW - MADE WITH ISRAEL (Jer.31:31-33) "in that day" when they are united again.

That, my friend, is the answer. ALL Covenants were made with Israel. That which was made with Abraham is STILL MADE WITH ISRAEL for Israel is the seed of Isaac from Abraham. But, because Christ is seed of Isaac from Abraham, and HEIR, and the Church is IN Christ, we, the CHURCH become eligible to partake of this Covenant of PROMISE (Gal.3:29; Rom.4:13) - AND ONLY THIS ONE! The Church though IS NEVER ATTACHED TO ANY OTHER COVENANT (except that one made with Noah). The Church HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE NEW COVENANT OF LAW (which, in any case is still future). It is only RATIFIED NOW as it was ratified in the blood of Christ on Golgotha. But the new Covenant is still to INSTITUTED WITH UNITED AND RESTORED ISRAEL - still future!

Everything you stated numerically (1-4) is correct, however, your denial that the church is not attached to any covenant than Noah's is incorrect. The CHURCH is also "attached" to the New Covenant made with the blood of Jesus at Calvary (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor 11:24-25). Secondly, there is NO FUTURE COVENANT OF THE LAW with Israel or anyone else! Jer 31:31-33 was fulfilled on the cross and ratified at Pentecost.

Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

The law of God in our inward parts was fulfilled by the God's Spirit (at Pentecost) in our hearts teaching us of the things of God. Today, the Spirit of God dwells in heart of ALL God's people (John 14:16). You are completely wrong in the notion that there is a future covenant of law between God and Israel.

Trivalee
Apr 14th 2018, 03:36 PM
Let scripture answer; Jeremiah 31:31-33;

31 "Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people."

It is "egregiously shocking" to you because you have assumed that the New Covenant was made with the Church. But you not only cannot show this, but scripture unequivocally says it is made with the COMBINATION of the ten northern Tribes of Israel and the two southern Tribes of Judah - leaving no option for understanding it any other way as just that. The blood of Jesus;

was for the sin (singular) of the world (Jn.1:29). This is to allow resurrection of ALL men for the wages of "sin" (singular) is death. To overcome death, men must be resurrected. This is still future. Any problem with that?
was for sins (plural) or trespasses of the world (1st Jn.2:2). This is applied to the Apostles three days later in John 20:22. To Wycliff, Luther and Calvin, it is applied 1,500 years later. To you and I, it is applied 2,000 years later. To Israel it is applied when the Lord comes back - that is, future. Any problem with that?
was to restore the earth that is cursed by Abel's blood (Heb.12:24). When will that restoration be? Romans 8 says that it occurs when the creature is handed over to the sons of God in resurrection (vs.19-23). That is, FUTURE! Any problem with that?
was to RATIFY a New Covenant of Law WITH ISRAEL when they are united and restored to their Land. That is, the RATIFICATION was on GOLGOTHA but the INSTITUTION of the New Covenant is FUTURE. SO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT AND ACCORD THIS COVENANT TO THE CHURCH NOW - STRANGE!



I have pointed out in post #189 that Jeremiah's prophecy of a new covenant of the law of God our inward parts actually denotes the indwelling of God's Spirit in the hearts of believers. It is, therefore, NOT future. I can only repeat that Jer 31:31-33 has been fulfilled. There is NOTHING future about it. I will hope that the merciful Lord will give you discernment to understand this in due course.

With all respect https://bibleforums.org/images/aux-s/16Bible.gif

Glorious
Apr 14th 2018, 03:47 PM
OK: Thanks for your answer. Could you just write down the posting #, and the exact quote where I "mentioned" a Covenant of grace. Then we can discuss. This what I ACTUALLY wrote in posting #155:



So when you quote me and says that there is no such thing as a Covenant of grace, I am perplexed "at your response" in that I have already said that. Go back and check.


| sincerely apologize for ascribing that assertion to you. I am glad we agree that there is no such thing as the covenant of grace.

Glorious
Apr 14th 2018, 04:04 PM
What say you then of,

Exodus 34:28; "And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments."
Deuteronomy 4:13; "And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone."

Do we not have here a Covenant of Law?.

Nope, we don't! There is no such thing as the covenant of law.

Let's have a verse-by-verse understand of Exodus 34:27-35. Read very carefully and then study further.


Exodus 34:27-35 KJV


And the Lord said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel.

Notice the pattern of the hand of God that is arranged as follows:

the word
the tenor of the word
the covenant (of love)

In every realm/level, starting from that of the flesh to that of the Father and of God, there are always the word, tenor of the word before the covenant. These are placed side-by-side to constitute one hand.



[28] And he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

Moses was with the Lord, fasting for forty days and forty nights. He was strictly in the Spirit with the Lord God Almighty.

Notice that Moses wrote upon two tablets:

the words of ten commandments
the words of covenant.

That is how come Moses had two tablets. He did not write down tenor of words on a tablet. But, the tenor was put on his face.

Depending on the level attained, tenor of word can either be the substance (riches) of faith, or the riches of grace, or the riches of glory. Riches of faith, grace or glory cannot be written on a stone; they are unsearchable.



[29] And it came to pass, when Moses came down from mount Sinai with the two tables of testimony in Moses' hand, when he came down from the mount, that Moses wist not that the skin of his face shone while he talked with him.

Moses came down from Mt. Sinai with a talent of ten commandments, a face shing with tenor (glory) of the ten commandments, and a second tablet of words of covenant.



[30] And when Aaron and all the children of Israel saw Moses, behold, the skin of his face shone; and they were afraid to come nigh him.

Aaron and all the children of Israel could not stand to behold the tenor (glory on his face) of the word of commandments.



[31] And Moses called unto them; and Aaron and all the rulers of the congregation returned unto him: and Moses talked with them.]

Moses covered his face with a vail. He called all their congregation of Israel and talked with them.



[32] And afterward all the children of Israel came nigh: and he gave them in commandment all that the Lord had spoken with him in mount Sinai.
[33] And till Moses had done speaking with them, he put a vail on his face.[/B]

Moses, covering his face with a Vail, gave the children of Israel the tablet of commandments of the Lord God Almighty.

Notice that Moses did not give them the tablet of the word of covenant.



[34] But when Moses went in before the Lord to speak with him, he took the vail off, until he came out. And he came out, and spake unto the children of Israel that which he was commanded.
[35] And the children of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses' face shone: and Moses put the vail upon his face again, until he went in to speak with him.

Every time Moses went to the Lord, he removed the vail. Every time he returned to the children, he removed the Vail.

Glorious
Apr 14th 2018, 09:08 PM
Deuteronomy 4:13 KJV


And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.

Above scripture means that the Lord declared His covenants to Moses. The Lord also commanded Moses to perform the ten commandments.

Moses wrote the words of the covenants on one stone and the ten commandments on another stone.

I do not see any covenant of law in the above scripture.

Walls
Apr 14th 2018, 09:28 PM
Yes we do. And they were written by the finger of God Ex 31:18. The question then might be: Are the ten commandments doing the will of the Father? I mean we are talking about doing the will of the Father...and lawlessness in Mt 7. Lawlessness does mean: a state of disorder due to a disregard of the law. Do Christians have a disregard for the law? Therefore sin not repented for? Are they teaching disregard for the law? What are your thoughts on this?

OK. This matter of Covenants and Law is not really the theme of the Thread, even though I am guilty of diverging into it. It was just that I wanted to, as initiator of the thread, to honor all answers. The rendering of the word "anomia" is used by our translators as "iniquity" X 12, "unrighteousness" X 1 and "transgress the law" X 2 when used together with <G4160>, for a total count of 15. It can mean "transgression of the Law", but its general meaning is "unrighteousness", "illegality", "wickedness" and/or "iniquity". Since the Disciple of Jesus is NOT bound by the Law as unrepentant and unbelieving Israel is, the rendering in Matthew 7:23 is rather "iniquity" (as our eminent translators decided).

The point being in Matthew 7:23 that these wondrous works were done without orders from the Father in heaven. In another tie and place they would have fine. But these Christians did their own thing with the things of God. Have you ever wondered why Paul waited "many days" in Acts.16:18? Why, if he possessed the power to cast out demons, did he wait "many days". No doubt, he waited for the "Holy Spirit to lead him" (Rom.8:14). The casting out of a demon is part of God's plan as a "sign" of "them that believe", but the Christian, bond-servant to God, must wait for orders. Otherwise it is "not the will of the Father in heaven" and thus "iniquity".

Walls
Apr 14th 2018, 09:40 PM
Nobody can obey the many commands in the New Testament without having been born again. There are always going to be good works that every believer is supposed to always do in this life. They are to always keep the Moral Law (like "Do not murder," "Do not steal," "Do not lie," and "Do not covet," etc.). They are always to forgive. If not, then they wil not be forgiven. We are all called to preach the gospel and teach others. It is a part of the great commission. We are all called to help the poor. We are all called to love and pray for our enemies. We are all called to read Scripture. We are called to pray. You are suggesting that if we do these things (after accepting Jesus) without getting God's approval we are working iniquity. This is not true. God's will is defined for us in the Holy Bible. Also, do you think Paul was spiritually condemned because he desired to not heed the Spirit's warnings about returning to Jerusalem (Whereby he was then thrown in prison)? Do you think that if I were to help a child who is suffering on the road and I did not pray to ask to do so.... I am working iniquity? Is it not God's will to do good? Yes, there are times God wants us to follow His direction in regards to the commands within His Word, but nowhere does God say we are condemned spiritually if we do not do it exactly at the time He says to do it. Nowhere does Jesus say to go out and preach the gospel and make disciples of all nations, BUT.... ONLY in my direct specific orders to do so.... otherwise you will be condemned.

To the red. I think you have answered my OP. The only difference between you and I is that EVERY decision depends, not on "praying", but of me "knowing" (ginosko - Gk.) Jesus, and Him "knowing" me (see my posting on the Greek and its meaning). THAT was the accusation against these Christians! These "workers of wonders" did not "know", and were not "known" by Jesus. We should not necessarily have to ask God about everything, but if I have an intimate walk with Jesus I will automatically "know" what He wants. In my daily life, because I "know" (ginosko) my wife of 40 years, I do not have to ask her what she wants in a given situation. But my neighbor, whom I "know" ("eido" - Gk.) since 30 years, I ask every time.

Walls
Apr 14th 2018, 09:42 PM
The problem I have with saying we cannot obey all of God's commands in the New Testament without getting God's approval, is that it would make us question in taking action on the good things God has already established for us all believers to do.

God's will is for you to be holy (or our Sanctification) (1 Thessalonians 4:3).

25 "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish."
(Ephesians 5:25-27).

The Word is the Holy Bible.

Please show me where doing good in the New Testament (not under God's specific instructions) is cause for a loss of salvation. I just do not see such a teaching in Scripture. It needs to be clear. I cannot preach the Word to someone today if I did not first pray really hard about? If I do so, I may be condemned by God? Granted, it is always good to seek God's will in every good action we take. We should follow God's direction in all things, but to say that we cannot obey God's New Testament commands without praying to HIm first or we will be condemned by God is just silly. If we are to love God with all our heart, mind, soul, and strength, we will want to be please Him in everything we do. But to say we will be condemned for doing good, is just non-sensical. A person is condemned because of sin.

What is sin?

Sin is the breaking of the Law or the Commandment (See 1 John 3:4).

I hear you and agree. See my posting 195 if you need more.

Walls
Apr 14th 2018, 10:05 PM
Everything you stated numerically (1-4) is correct, however, your denial that the church is not attached to any covenant than Noah's is incorrect. The CHURCH is also "attached" to the New Covenant made with the blood of Jesus at Calvary (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor 11:24-25). Secondly, there is NO FUTURE COVENANT OF THE LAW with Israel or anyone else! Jer 31:31-33 was fulfilled on the cross and ratified at Pentecost.

Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

The law of God in our inward parts was fulfilled by the God's Spirit (at Pentecost) in our hearts teaching us of the things of God. Today, the Spirit of God dwells in heart of ALL God's people (John 14:16). You are completely wrong in the notion that there is a future covenant of law between God and Israel.

We'll have to walk away in disagreement then. May I observe that you bring NO scripture that says the Church is under the new Covenant. Your scriptures in this posting ONLY show that the new Covenant is RATIFIED in Christ's blood. When a man wants to build a doctrine in the Bible, he must take at least two (or three) scriptures with DIRECT statements. Types, Shadows and Parables ALONE are not enough as thy they only show a PICTURE of a reality and these pictures are limited.

So here are your proffered verses. See if there is ONE single DIRECT statement that the Church is under the New Covenant, ESPECIALLY in the light of Jeremeiah 31 and Hebrews 8 WHICH SPECIFICALLY STATE THAT THAT IT IS MADE WITH THE UNITED 12 TRIBES OF ISRAEL WHOSE FATHER'S CAME OUT OF EGYPT.
Luke 22:19; "And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me."
1 Corinthians 11:23-26. I will add verse 26 for it EXPLAINS WHAT IT MEANS TO THE CHURCH.

23 "For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come."


Some additional observations:

Christ's blood, for its multiple purposes, was shed on Golgotha. At Pentecost no blood was shed and nothing was ratified
That our Lord mentions the New Covenant TOGETHER with the remission of sins is VITALLY important because the implication WITHOUT IT is that that Israel have no hope of restoration - for they shed it. This is expanded in Romans where Paul CONCLUDES both Jew and Gentile under sin and sins. The logical question is then, "what hope has Israel if they (1) murdered their Messiah, (2) broke the Law, and (3) are concluded under sin together with the Gentile?" The answer is; "God sets His PROMISE as IMMUTABLE and Israel's hope is NOT IN LAW GIVEN TO MOSES BUT IN the Covenant of Promise to Abraham. PAUL DEDICATES THREE WHOLE CHAPTERS IN ROMANS TO THIS.
The prophets are unanimous in that Israel's sins will be forgiven. But on what basis? The BASIS that the Old Covenant of LAW id to be replaced by a New, but the Covenant of PROMISE IS IMMUTABLE. Thus, the "CUP" (the which is worth a study) is the whole process and effects of Christ's sufferings (see Matt.20:22-23 and Mk.10:38-39), NOT JUST THE REMISSION OF THE CHUCH'S SIN AND SINS.

Walls
Apr 14th 2018, 10:08 PM
I have pointed out in post #189 that Jeremiah's prophecy of a new covenant of the law of God our inward parts actually denotes the indwelling of God's Spirit in the hearts of believers. It is, therefore, NOT future. I can only repeat that Jer 31:31-33 has been fulfilled. There is NOTHING future about it. I will hope that the merciful Lord will give you discernment to understand this in due course.

With all respect https://bibleforums.org/images/aux-s/16Bible.gif

The indwelling Holy Spirit is NOT future for the CHURCH. But the new spirit and new heart is future for Israel. It is, "in that day" and that day is the third day of Hoses 6:2 - the Millennial Kingdom.

Walls
Apr 14th 2018, 10:09 PM
| sincerely apologize for ascribing that assertion to you. I am glad we agree that there is no such thing as the covenant of grace.

No problem. I thought all along it was a misunderstanding. God bless and go well.

Walls
Apr 14th 2018, 10:15 PM
Nope, we don't! There is no such thing as the covenant of law.

Let's have a verse-by-verse understand of Exodus 34:27-35. Read very carefully and then study further.


Exodus 34:27-35 KJV


And the Lord said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel.

Notice the pattern of the hand of God that is arranged as follows:

the word
the tenor of the word
the covenant (of love)

In every realm/level, starting from that of the flesh to that of the Father and of God, there are always the word, tenor of the word before the covenant. These are placed side-by-side to constitute one hand.



[28] And he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

Moses was with the Lord, fasting for forty days and forty nights. He was strictly in the Spirit with the Lord God Almighty.

Notice that Moses wrote upon two tablets:

the words of ten commandments
the words of covenant.

That is how come Moses had two tablets. He did not write down tenor of words on a tablet. But, the tenor was put on his face.

Depending on the level attained, tenor of word can either be the substance (riches) of faith, or the riches of grace, or the riches of glory. Riches of faith, grace or glory cannot be written on a stone; they are unsearchable.



[29] And it came to pass, when Moses came down from mount Sinai with the two tables of testimony in Moses' hand, when he came down from the mount, that Moses wist not that the skin of his face shone while he talked with him.

Moses came down from Mt. Sinai with a talent of ten commandments, a face shing with tenor (glory) of the ten commandments, and a second tablet of words of covenant.



[30] And when Aaron and all the children of Israel saw Moses, behold, the skin of his face shone; and they were afraid to come nigh him.

Aaron and all the children of Israel could not stand to behold the tenor (glory on his face) of the word of commandments.



[31] And Moses called unto them; and Aaron and all the rulers of the congregation returned unto him: and Moses talked with them.]

Moses covered his face with a vail. He called all their congregation of Israel and talked with them.



[32] And afterward all the children of Israel came nigh: and he gave them in commandment all that the Lord had spoken with him in mount Sinai.
[33] And till Moses had done speaking with them, he put a vail on his face.[/B]

Moses, covering his face with a Vail, gave the children of Israel the tablet of commandments of the Lord God Almighty.

Notice that Moses did not give them the tablet of the word of covenant.



[34] But when Moses went in before the Lord to speak with him, he took the vail off, until he came out. And he came out, and spake unto the children of Israel that which he was commanded.
[35] And the children of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses' face shone: and Moses put the vail upon his face again, until he went in to speak with him.

Every time Moses went to the Lord, he removed the vail. Every time he returned to the children, he removed the Vail.

Thank you for taking the time to show your understanding of the matter. I will stay with the grammar of;

Exodus 34:28; "And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments."
Deuteronomy 4:13; "And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone."

If you like, I'll add Galatians 3:17 . Note the grammar; "And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect."

Walls
Apr 14th 2018, 10:18 PM
Deuteronomy 4:13 KJV


And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.

Above scripture means that the Lord declared His covenants to Moses. The Lord also commanded Moses to perform the ten commandments.

Moses wrote the words of the covenants on one stone and the ten commandments on another stone.

I do not see any covenant of law in the above scripture.

The word "even" explains what the Covenant was. There is no escape from the grammar.

Glorious
Apr 15th 2018, 05:48 AM
The word "even" explains what the Covenant was. There is no escape from the grammar.

Note that the word "even" is italicized. It is okay to rely on grammar and language dictionaries for interpretation of scriptures. However, there is what is called the divine pattern that is the blueprint of all things. It cones by revelation.

All thing's of God (and scriptures about them)) fit into the divine pattern. That insightful pattern is more than perfect and best to use.

Thanks for your responses.

Glorious
Apr 15th 2018, 06:10 AM
Thank you for taking the time to show your understanding of the matter. I will stay with the grammar of;

Exodus 34:28; "And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments."
Deuteronomy 4:13; "And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone."

If you like, I'll add Galatians 3:17 . Note the grammar; "And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect."

Galatians 3:17 KJV


And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

Here we have a confirmed covenant in Christ made four hundred and thirty years before the law came. The confirmed covenant is neither the law nor of the law. It was made well before the law was given.

randyk
Apr 15th 2018, 11:16 AM
I seriously doubt that you are unable to comprehend that Jeremiah 31 and Hebrews 8 say clearly and unequivocally that the New Covenant is made with the combined Tribes of Israel whose fathers came out of Egypt. In all this, if you want to prove that it is ALSO made with the Church, all you had to do was produce two scriptures that;

Show a "Christian Covenant"
Show that the New Covenant is made with the Christians

Bringing our Lord's words at the so-called Last Supper will not help, for in NONE of the verses is the New Covenant made with Christians. The blood of Jesus is presented symbolically in a cup for:

the remission of sin (Jn.1:29)
the remission of sins (1st Jn.2:2)
to speak better things than Abel's blood for the recovery of the cursed earth (Heb.12:24; Rom.8:19-23)
the RATIFICATION of the New Covenant with Israel when they are again united and restored to their Land (Heb.9:16-22)

But we have discussed this before. Let me grant you a good intellect, but one that refuses to accept what God has said. The New Covenant, though RATIFIED in His blood at Golgotha,

IS PRESENTED TO ISRAEL "THAT DAY" WHEN THEY ONE AGAIN AND IN THEIR LAND
IS A COVENANT OF LAW, and the Church is exempt from the Law

The term "Christian Covenant" neither appears in the whole Bible, nor is it intimated obscurely. The Covenants that the Christian is SUBJECT TO are two of the oldest Covenant ever given to men.

The Christian is subject to the Covenant of the RAINBOW made with Noah and all men who will ever live (Gen.9:17, Act.15:20, 29, 21:25)
The Covenant of PROMISE made to Abraham (Gal.3:29)

The Christian is NOT SUBJECT to the Covenant of:

The Law of Sinai
The Covenant of the Passover
The Covenant of the Sabbath (Ex.31:16)
The Covenant of the Levitic Priesthood (Nu.25:12-13)
The Covenant made with David (2nd Sam.7)
The New Covenant of Law (Jer.3:31-33, Heb.8:8-10)

If you insist on overturning Jeremiah 31:31-33, be my guest. But please excuse me from further vain discussion about a "Christian Covenant".

Why would you avoid discussion about a "Christian Covenant?" And why would you think it is vain? I hope you don't mean you've lost all openness to all other positions?

To be honest, I'm just recovering from a 4 day flu--one of the worst I've ever had. So I've sort of lost track of how we got into the "covenants" issue. But we've probably had these discussions before. And if so, it seems you've forgotten what my position is on the New Covenant prophecy of Jeremiah?

You seem disinterested, but for the record I'll state it briefly. The New Covenant was established by Jesus through his death and resurrection. Everything preceding his death ended, including the OT regulations of the Law. His death meant the death of all things Jewish under the Law. This liberated the Jew to receive eternal salvation. The Law would never have allowed that, since it stood as a constant reminder of Israel's illegitimacy for eternal salvation.

So the beginning of the New Covenant was not at the time specified by Jeremiah's prophecy of when this New Covenant would take place *for Israel.* Jeremiah was speaking of a time when the New Covenant would effect the restoration of the entire nation, which in our sense would mean a fully Christian nation. Obviously, that has not taken place yet.

Rather, the New Covenant was initiated by Jesus without regard for Israel's national salvation. Jesus knew Israel's national salvation was still a long ways off. His death for their sin simply prepared the way for their salvation at the close of the age.

Walls
Apr 15th 2018, 02:33 PM
Galatians 3:17 KJV


And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

Here we have a confirmed covenant in Christ made four hundred and thirty years before the law came. The confirmed covenant is neither the law nor of the law. It was made well before the law was given.

But I dealt with this already in posting #173. I guess you missed that too. ;)

Walls
Apr 15th 2018, 03:15 PM
Why would you avoid discussion about a "Christian Covenant?" And why would you think it is vain? I hope you don't mean you've lost all openness to all other positions?

To be honest, I'm just recovering from a 4 day flu--one of the worst I've ever had. So I've sort of lost track of how we got into the "covenants" issue. But we've probably had these discussions before. And if so, it seems you've forgotten what my position is on the New Covenant prophecy of Jeremiah?

You seem disinterested, but for the record I'll state it briefly. The New Covenant was established by Jesus through his death and resurrection. Everything preceding his death ended, including the OT regulations of the Law. His death meant the death of all things Jewish under the Law. This liberated the Jew to receive eternal salvation. The Law would never have allowed that, since it stood as a constant reminder of Israel's illegitimacy for eternal salvation.

So the beginning of the New Covenant was not at the time specified by Jeremiah's prophecy of when this New Covenant would take place *for Israel.* Jeremiah was speaking of a time when the New Covenant would effect the restoration of the entire nation, which in our sense would mean a fully Christian nation. Obviously, that has not take place yet.

Rather, the New Covenant was initiated by Jesus without regard for Israel's national salvation. Jesus knew Israel's national salvation was still a long ways off. His death for their sin simply prepared the way for their salvation at the close of the age.

I'm sorry to hear of your flu. Here in Europe they are saying the virus was one of the worst for years. Hope your recovery is quick.

In your posting above, you have stated an overall view of the matter. I have noted it, as I have noted the same thing, with a little variation over the months. I have only one ambition on this Forum, and that is to discuss the Bible. If you state a position, but give NO reason FROM SCRIPTURE for it, I am inclined to note it but not discuss it further. Whatever your, or others, think of this, bad or good, I will just quietly bow out.

If you introduce a "Christian Covenant" by all means have your opinion. But if you want my input you must quote the verses (with the context and your exegesis, or - your reasoning from the words and grammar of the Bible). Christianity, and this Forum, is full of people who have opinions, and that is their right. But I would like to exercise my right to ONLY discuss scripture. I am not nearly as clever as the Lord Jesus. When He met the Samaritan woman at the well in John Chapter 4, he steered the discussion. When one subject became uncomfortable for the woman, she diverted to something else. Our Lord, with that grand intellect of His, could easily meet her and steer the conversation from there. I am not so good. If a contender diverts, I get caught in it, like this thread was about the Kingdom, but we now discuss Covenants. So if we discuss who was refused entry into the Kingdom in Matthew 7:21-23, and you introduce a "Christian Covenant", the which appears nowhere in scripture, or you speak of "Christian nations" which contradict the bible, for the Church is taken OUT OF the nations, I am inclined, after pointing this out once, or twice, to remain silent.

As to the Covenants, scriptures say the following; Romans 9:3-5.


3 "For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:
4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen."

So in my previous posting, the one you address, I outlined, with scriptures which Covenants the Church became subject to. I suggest you take it, or leave it, especially if you are not going to document your opinion with scripture.

As to "Christian nations" scriptures says the following;Acts 15:14: "Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name." See also Ephesians 2:15. He (the Lord) takes "OUT OF" the TWAIN (the nations and the nation of Israel) a New Man. A Christian is not a Christian because he/she follows the Biblical Principles. A Christian is ONE SEPARATED FROM THE NATIONS BY A NEW BIRTH. And this NEW BIRTH is by FAITH in Jesus (Jn.1:12-13). The nations REJECT Jesus and cannot experience this BIRTH. The nation of Israel, according to the "will of the flesh", CANNOT experience this rebirth because they are in UNBELIEF. When our Lord returns and they SEE HIM, it will be TOO LATE for FAITH, as Hebrews 11:1 says, "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."


The Covenants belong to Israel. In Galatians 3:29 ONE Covenant, that of Promise, is applied to Christians because the are IN Christ and he is a seed of Abraham.
There is no such thing as a "Christian Covenant". They are FORBIDDEN (Matt.5:33-37)
There is no such thing as a "Christian nation". Christians are TAKEN OUT OF THE NATIONS

Shall we leave it at that?

randyk
Apr 15th 2018, 05:10 PM
I'm sorry to hear of your flu. Here in Europe they are saying the virus was one of the worst for years. Hope your recovery is quick.

In your posting above, you have stated an overall view of the matter. I have noted it, as I have noted the same thing, with a little variation over the months. I have only one ambition on this Forum, and that is to discuss the Bible. If you state a position, but give NO reason FROM SCRIPTURE for it, I am inclined to note it but not discuss it further. Whatever your, or others, think of this, bad or good, I will just quietly bow out.

If you introduce a "Christian Covenant" by all means have your opinion. But if you want my input you must quote the verses (with the context and your exegesis, or - your reasoning from the words and grammar of the Bible). Christianity, and this Forum, is full of people who have opinions, and that is their right. But I would like to exercise my right to ONLY discuss scripture. I am not nearly as clever as the Lord Jesus. When He met the Samaritan woman at the well in John Chapter 4, he steered the discussion. When one subject became uncomfortable for the woman, she diverted to something else. Our Lord, with that grand intellect of His, could easily meet her and steer the conversation from there. I am not so good. If a contender diverts, I get caught in it, like this thread was about the Kingdom, but we now discuss Covenants. So if we discuss who was refused entry into the Kingdom in Matthew 7:21-23, and you introduce a "Christian Covenant", the which appears nowhere in scripture, or you speak of "Christian nations" which contradict the bible, for the Church is taken OUT OF the nations, I am inclined, after pointing this out once, or twice, to remain silent.

As to the Covenants, scriptures say the following; Romans 9:3-5.


3 "For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:
4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen."


So in my previous posting, the one you address, I outlined, with scriptures which Covenants the Church became subject to. I suggest you take it, or leave it, especially if you are not going to document your opinion with scripture.

As to "Christian nations" scriptures says the following;Acts 15:14: "Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name." See also Ephesians 2:15. He (the Lord) takes "OUT OF" the TWAIN (the nations and the nation of Israel) a New Man. A Christian is not a Christian because he/she follows the Biblical Principles. A Christian is ONE SEPARATED FROM THE NATIONS BY A NEW BIRTH. And this NEW BIRTH is by FAITH in Jesus (Jn.1:12-13). The nations REJECT Jesus and cannot experience this BIRTH. The nation of Israel, according to the "will of the flesh", CANNOT experience this rebirth because they are in UNBELIEF. When our Lord returns and they SEE HIM, it will be TOO LATE for FAITH, as Hebrews 11:1 says, "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."


The Covenants belong to Israel. In Galatians 3:29 ONE Covenant, that of Promise, is applied to Christians because the are IN Christ and he is a seed of Abraham.
There is no such thing as a "Christian Covenant". They are FORBIDDEN (Matt.5:33-37)
There is no such thing as a "Christian nation". Christians are TAKEN OUT OF THE NATIONS

Shall we leave it at that?

Sure, we can leave it at that. I have no interest in beating a dead dog. However, the implication that I am arguing outside of Scriptures and you are not is purely biased. What you mean is that what *you* consider to be Scriptural proof only counts insofar as *you* cite Scriptures. When *I* cite Scriptures it does not constitute "Scriptural proof?"

I've argued these points numerous times, citing lots of Scriptures. I have no wish to dredge up the same old passages and restate my interpretations when your mind is made up. You've left me and perhaps others confused about whether you consider the New Covenant, symbolized at Communion, as a "Christian Covenant" or not? But if the case is closed as far as you're concerned, fine.

I do, however, appreciate your concern about my health. My wife and I are still suffering from this flu, and it is indeed a monster. I really don't know what viruses are, but they behave very much like demons. ;)

Glorious
Apr 15th 2018, 06:14 PM
No! Let scripture answer:

Galatians 3:17; "And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect."

Covenant NUMBER ONE; That of PROMISE made with Abraham AND HIS SEED
Covenant NUMBER TWO, made 430 years AFTER, The Covenant of LAW made with ISRAEL who came out of Egypt
Then follow various Covenants like that of Passover, Davidic, Levitical Priesthood, and Sabbath - ALL MADE WITH ISRAEL
Then lastly, the New Covenant OF LAW - MADE WITH ISRAEL (Jer.31:31-33) "in that day" when they are united again.

That, my friend, is the answer. ALL Covenants were made with Israel. That which was made with Abraham is STILL MADE WITH ISRAEL for Israel is the seed of Isaac from Abraham. But, because Christ is seed of Isaac from Abraham, and HEIR, and the Church is IN Christ, we, the CHURCH become eligible to partake of this Covenant of PROMISE (Gal.3:29; Rom.4:13) - AND ONLY THIS ONE! The Church though IS NEVER ATTACHED TO ANY OTHER COVENANT (except that one made with Noah). The Church HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE NEW COVENANT OF LAW (which, in any case is still future). It is only RATIFIED NOW as it was ratified in the blood of Christ on Golgotha. But the new Covenant is still to INSTITUTED WITH UNITED AND RESTORED ISRAEL - still future!

Nope! Above is your submission that does not explain Galatians 3:17.

A covenant of God confirmed in Christ came four hundred and thirty years (meaning by spiritual truth of the Lord Jesuc Christ and by love of the Son of man) before the Law was given to Moses. You can't have a covenant of the Law without the Law. But here we read about a covenant with the Christ, not with Moses, existing before the Law was given to Moses.

Every covenant is confirmed by an oath. If there was any covenant of Law existing and sworn to on oath, it will be impossible for the Law to pass away or be replaced. The law is a thing that passes away (ceases to exist), but the most a covenant can do is vanish away (be taken out of hearing, sight air handling).

Once a saint has a loving fellowship with the Father, a covenant must be given him or her That covenant, whether old, new, eternal or everlasting, can never pass away (cease). For instance, words of a new (spiritual) I received may not be the same exact words of a new covenant that you have received. Nevertheless, by both new covenants worded differently, we share in common all spititual elements written about in Hebrews 8: 19-12:

whether great or least, we know the Father
not the Laws of Moses, but words of faith, truth and life will be put and written in our hearts.
the Father becomes our God and we become His people.
the Father becomes merciful with regards to our transgressions (unfaithfulness) and no longer remembers (stirs up) our sins and iniquities.

Walls
Apr 15th 2018, 07:37 PM
Nope! Above is your submission that does not explain Galatians 3:17.

A covenant of God confirmed in Christ came four hundred and thirty years (meaning by spiritual truth of the Lord Jesuc Christ and by love of the Son of man) before the Law was given to Moses. You can't have a covenant of the Law without the Law. But here we read about a covenant with the Christ, not with Moses, existing before the Law was given to Moses.

Every covenant is confirmed by an oath. If there was any covenant of Law existing and sworn to on oath, it will be impossible for the Law to pass away or be replaced. The law is a thing that passes away (ceases to exist), but the most a covenant can do is vanish away (be taken out of hearing, sight air handling).

Once a saint has a loving fellowship with the Father, a covenant must be given him or her That covenant, whether old, new, eternal or everlasting, can never pass away (cease). For instance, words of a new (spiritual) I received may not be the same exact words of a new covenant that you have received. Nevertheless, by both new covenants worded differently, we share in common all spititual elements written about in Hebrews 8: 19-12:


whether great or least, we know the Father
not the Laws of Moses, but words of faith, truth and life will be put and written in our hearts.
the Father becomes our God and we become His people.
the Father becomes merciful with regards to our transgressions (unfaithfulness) and no longer remembers (stirs up) our sins and iniquities.


May I suggest that, as the matter of Covenants is not really part of the title of this thread, you open a new thread, like I did in this one, and lay forth your understanding of Galatians 3:17 with scriptures to back your thesis.

Trivalee
Apr 16th 2018, 07:36 PM
The indwelling Holy Spirit is NOT future for the CHURCH. But the new spirit and new heart is future for Israel. It is, "in that day" and that day is the third day of Hoses 6:2 - the Millennial Kingdom.

I never said the indwelling Holy Spirit is future for the church, so why say it like you're debunking a false statement? There is NO FUTURE NEW SPIRIT AND HEART for Israel! Jesus is not going into any future "new covenant" with Israel. This doctrine is as false as can be.

If Israel should wait until the Millennium for another covenant when Jesus Christ will give them a new spirit and a new heart, how do you explain the thousands of Jews that came to Christ since the 1st advent?

Kalahari
Apr 16th 2018, 07:40 PM
I never said the indwelling Holy Spirit is future for the church, so why say it like you're debunking a false statement? There is NO FUTURE NEW SPIRIT AND HEART for Israel! Jesus is not going into any future "new covenant" with Israel. This doctrine is as false as can be.

If Israel should wait until the Millennium for another covenant when Jesus Christ will give them a new spirit and a new heart, how do you explain the thousands of Jews that came to Christ since the 1st advent?

Can't agree more. This is when you do eisegesis because of your imo wrong end times understanding.

ewq1938
Apr 16th 2018, 07:56 PM
There is NO FUTURE NEW SPIRIT AND HEART for Israel! Jesus is not going into any future "new covenant" with Israel.

That isn't true but if it were then Israel would be doomed to the LOF. Luckily it is written that the unfaithful branches of Israel can be re-grafted if they come to faith in Christ which would be to be born again Christians and includes a new heart and spirit like it does for anyone who is truly born again.

Joh 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Trivalee
Apr 16th 2018, 08:23 PM
We'll have to walk away in disagreement then. May I observe that you bring NO scripture that says the Church is under the new Covenant. Your scriptures in this posting ONLY show that the new Covenant is RATIFIED in Christ's blood. When a man wants to build a doctrine in the Bible, he must take at least two (or three) scriptures with DIRECT statements. Types, Shadows and Parables ALONE are not enough as thy they only show a PICTURE of a reality and these pictures are limited.

So here are your proffered verses. See if there is ONE single DIRECT statement that the Church is under the New Covenant, ESPECIALLY in the light of Jeremeiah 31 and Hebrews 8 WHICH SPECIFICALLY STATE THAT THAT IT IS MADE WITH THE UNITED 12 TRIBES OF ISRAEL WHOSE FATHER'S CAME OUT OF EGYPT.
Luke 22:19; "And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me."
1 Corinthians 11:23-26. I will add verse 26 for it EXPLAINS WHAT IT MEANS TO THE CHURCH.

23 "For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come."



1. The passages you quoted (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor 11:23-26) show that the Last Supper brought the church under the New Covenant, yet you deny that the church is under the New Covenant? After Jesus, the 12 disciples were next in line or pioneers of the church. In Matt 16:18 Jesus told Peter that he will build his church "upon this rock" .i.e. starting with Peter. Peter and the other 11 were partakers of the Last Supper, yet you refuse to accept that the church is under the New Covenant?

1 Cor 11:26 means the church should continue to celebrate and observe the Last Supper until His Glorious return as confirmed by Paul:

1 Cor 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.


Some addtional observations:

Christ's blood, for its multiple purposes, was shed on Golgotha. At Pentecost no blood was shed and nothing was ratified
That our Lord mentions the New Covenant TOGETHER with the remission of sins is VITALLY important because the implication WITHOUT IT is that that Israel have no hope of restoration - for they shed it. This is expanded in Romans where Paul CONCLUDES both Jew and Gentile under sin and sins. The logical question is then, "what hope has Israel if they (1) murdered their Messiah, (2) broke the Law, and (3) are concluded under sin together with the Gentile?" The answer is; "God sets His PROMISE as IMMUTABLE and Israel's hope is NOT IN LAW GIVEN TO MOSES BUT IN the Covenant of Promise to Abraham. PAUL DEDICATES THREE WHOLE CHAPTERS IN ROMANS TO THIS.
The prophets are unanimous in that Israel's sins will be forgiven. But on what basis? The BASIS that the Old Covenant of LAW id to be replaced by a New, but the Covenant of PROMISE IS IMMUTABLE. Thus, the "CUP" (the which is worth a study) is the whole process and effects of Christ's sufferings (see Matt.20:22-23 and Mk.10:38-39), NOT JUST THE REMISSION OF THE CHUCH'S SIN AND SINS.



Sigh https://bibleforums.org/images/smilies/scratch_chin.gif For a teacher of the Bible, I am at a loss how you got this so wrong?

1. As prophesied, Jesus came and died for the remission of sin for ALL, now, today. Not Gentiles now and Israel in the future.
2. The law of God now written in our hearts according to Jeremiah 31:33 is now fulfilled with the indwelling Spirit of God in the hearts of God's people teaching/reminding us of the law of Christ.
3. Jesus told the disciple/church "that the Holy Ghost will teach you all things and bring ALL things to your rememberance" (John 14:26). If you can't see the connection between this statement and Jeremiah 31:33 then I'm really sorry because I can't do better than this.
4. Your understanding of Paul's argument in Romans chpt 3 is wrong; your argument contradictory. (a) You acknowledged that Christ died for the remission of sin for both Jew and Gentile (b) You concur that without Christ' sacrifice, Israel has NO HOPE of redemption (c) Yet, inexplicably, you managed to infer that Israel's redemption is deferred until Jesus returns and initiates a new covenant with them????
5. Your preaching about the Mosaic Law, the Covenant of Promise to Abraham is rather misplaced - more like preaching to the converted.
6. The Old Covenant Law has indeed been replaced by the death Christ! We are now in the New Covenant. It is NOT in the future.

Trivalee
Apr 16th 2018, 08:35 PM
That isn't true but if it were then Israel would be doomed to the LOF. Luckily it is written that the unfaithful branches of Israel can be re-grafted if they come to faith in Christ which would be to be born again Christians and includes a new heart and spirit like it does for anyone who is truly born again.

Joh 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

I do not deny that Israel will experience a revival and mass conversion to Christ near the end i.e. when Jesus returns. But I reject Walls argument that this will come about by Jesus establishing a new covenant with them to fulfill Jer 31:31-33. My view is that Jeremiah's prophecy of a new covenant was fulfiled on the cross and ratified at Pentecost.

ewq1938
Apr 16th 2018, 08:42 PM
I do not deny that Israel will experience a revival and mass conversion to Christ near the end i.e. when Jesus returns. But I reject Walls argument that this will come about by Jesus establishing a new covenant with them to fulfill Jer 31:31-33. My view is that Jeremiah's prophecy of a new covenant was fulfiled on the cross and ratified at Pentecost.

Ok, it sounded like you didn't think they have to accept the current new covenant. I agree there aren't any more covenants for anyone. The current covenant is the only one that will exist.

Walls
Apr 16th 2018, 08:59 PM
I never said the indwelling Holy Spirit is future for the church, so why say it like you're debunking a false statement? There is NO FUTURE NEW SPIRIT AND HEART for Israel! Jesus is not going into any future "new covenant" with Israel. This doctrine is as false as can be.

If Israel should wait until the Millennium for another covenant when Jesus Christ will give them a new spirit and a new heart, how do you explain the thousands of Jews that came to Christ since the 1st advent?

Those who convert of Jesus are NOT Israel any more. They are the New Man, and ethnicity falls away. We've been through this before. In the "New Man" there is NEITHER Jew NOR Greek. To keep a Jew's ethnicity in the New Man is put old wine in New Wineskins.

Kalahari
Apr 16th 2018, 09:15 PM
Those who convert of Jesus are NOT Israel any more. They are the New Man, and ethnicity falls away. We've been through this before. In the "New Man" there is NEITHER Jew NOR Greek. To keep a Jew's ethnicity in the New Man is put old wine in New Wineskins.

I do not agree. A man does not lose its ethnicity, although ethnicity is not important in Christ. To put the Law into the new covenant is to put old wine in new wine skins.

Walls
Apr 16th 2018, 09:29 PM
1. The passages you quoted (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor 11:23-26) show that the Last Supper brought the church under the New Covenant, yet you deny that the church is under the New Covenant? After Jesus, the 12 disciples were next in line or pioneers of the church. In Matt 16:18 Jesus told Peter that he will build his church "upon this rock" .i.e. starting with Peter. Peter and the other 11 were partakers of the Last Supper, yet you refuse to accept that the church is under the New Covenant?

...

Yes. Show me the wording that the Church is under the new Covenant. I have shown you the clear wording of Jeremiah 31:31-33 that the New Covenant of LAW is made with the "house of Israel" AND "the House of Judah". Show me, and the other interested readers, the clear wording that the Church is under the New Covenant. You can't, or you would have by now. It does not help to accuse me of blindness or error. That is not an argument. It is an opinion and can equally apply to a man faced with a new thing who does not comprehend it. To use that as an argument just shows impotence. What we do on this Forum is discuss scripture. Now, show me a single statement in scripture that the Church is under a Covenant of God's Law. It is not enough to show me that we drink OF a cup that our Lord Jesus drank of. The "Cup" is the whole package that Christ achieved on Golgotha. Ratification of the New Covenant WITH UNITED ISRAEL was just one. The judicial right for God to resurrect all men is another. The restoration of the creature from curse is another. The remission of sins was another - and so on. Some apply to the Church, some to the creature, some to Israel and some to the nations.

But CERTAINLY, any man who uses Jeremiah 31:31-33 FOR THE CHURCH is not only implying an impossible "REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY", but is in CONTRADICTION of Matthew 13:17, Romans 16:25 and Ephesians 3:5 and 9 WHICH SAY THAT THE CHURCH WAS NOT REVEALED TO THE PROPHETS OF OLD! So now, with Jeremiah 31:31-33 CLEARLY POINTING TO ISRAEL, what verses do you bring that show the Church under the new Covenant of God's Law?


1. The passages you quoted (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor 11:23-26) show that the Last Supper brought the church under the New Covenant, yet you deny that the church is under the New Covenant?

Go back and see if I quoted these scriptures, or not. This is YOUR QUOTE IN POSTING #189. C'mon bro.

ewq1938
Apr 16th 2018, 09:30 PM
You guys are not using the analogy properly. Old wine into new wineskins doesn't present a problem. New wine into old skins does because the new wine will expand and break the wineskin but old wine isn't going to expand because it's already turned into wine.

Walls
Apr 16th 2018, 09:38 PM
I do not agree. A man does not lose its ethnicity, although ethnicity is not important in Christ. To put the Law into the new covenant is to put old wine in new wine skins.

Then you have a problem with English. Jeremiah 31:33 states clearly; "But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people."

Kalahari
Apr 16th 2018, 09:42 PM
You guys are not using the analogy properly. Old wine into new wineskins doesn't present a problem. New wine into old skins does because the new wine will expand and break the wineskin but old wine isn't going to expand because it's already turned into wine.

Oh yes. Thanks for correcting me. Therefore you cannot let the workings of the new covenant be the same as the old. The Gospel is now grace through Christ and not doing the Law.

Kalahari
Apr 16th 2018, 09:45 PM
Then you have a problem with English. Jeremiah 31:33 states clearly; "But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people."

His law is the Gospel, grace by believing in Christ. It is not doing the law. The problem is not English but understanding it correctly.

Joh 16:7 But I am telling you the truth: it is better for you that I go away, because if I do not go, the Helper will not come to you. But if I do go away, then I will send him to you.
Joh 16:8 And when he comes, he will prove to the people of the world that they are wrong about sin and about what is right and about God's judgment.
Joh 16:9 They are wrong about sin, because they do not believe in me;
Joh 16:10 they are wrong about what is right, because I am going to the Father and you will not see me any more;
Joh 16:11 and they are wrong about judgment, because the ruler of this world has already been judged.

This is what God puts into our hearts.

ewq1938
Apr 16th 2018, 09:56 PM
Oh yes. Thanks for correcting me. Therefore you cannot let the workings of the new covenant be the same as the old. The Gospel is now grace through Christ and not doing the Law.

Right. Some will claim the new covenant is just the old covenant revised or updated but that goes against what Christ said. Naturally the new covenant is NEW and includes some of the OLD, but you can't put a whole new covenant into an old covenant skin! It would burst and fail!

ewq1938
Apr 16th 2018, 09:58 PM
His law is the Gospel, grace by believing in Christ. It is not doing the law. The problem is not English but understanding it correctly.

Right. The mistake is assuming God is talking about the same exact set of laws from the first covenant. Obviously the NT revealed that there is a law of liberty, also called the law of Christ which is far different than the old law of Moses.

Walls
Apr 16th 2018, 10:33 PM
His law is the Gospel, grace by believing in Christ. It is not doing the law. The problem is not English but understanding it correctly.

Joh 16:7 But I am telling you the truth: it is better for you that I go away, because if I do not go, the Helper will not come to you. But if I do go away, then I will send him to you.
Joh 16:8 And when he comes, he will prove to the people of the world that they are wrong about sin and about what is right and about God's judgment.
Joh 16:9 They are wrong about sin, because they do not believe in me;
Joh 16:10 they are wrong about what is right, because I am going to the Father and you will not see me any more;
Joh 16:11 and they are wrong about judgment, because the ruler of this world has already been judged.

This is what God puts into our hearts.

No. God's Law is not mentioned at all in John 16. Nor is it EVER mentioned in conjunction with the Church. This is PURE ASSUMPTION and PRIVATE INTERPRETATION. But SEVENTEEN TIMES, ALL IN THE OLD TESTAMENT, is the phrase "MY LAW". And in EVERY CASE it means the Law of Moses. Added to this, the Law of Moses will not pass until heaven and earth pass. And this is at the end of the Millennium. "MY LAW" of Jeremiah 31:33 can be none other than the Law that exists till today (IF ONE INTERPRETS SCRIPTURE WITH SCRIPTURE).

Kalahari
Apr 16th 2018, 10:42 PM
No. God's Law is not mentioned at all in John 16. Nor is it EVER mentioned in conjunction with the Church. This is PURE ASSUMPTION and PRIVATE INTERPRETATION. But SEVENTEEN TIMES, ALL IN THE OLD TESTAMENT, is the phrase "MY LAW". And in EVERY CASE it means the Law of Moses. Added to this, the Law of Moses will not pass until heaven and earth pass. And this is at the end of the Millennium. "MY LAW" of Jeremiah 31:33 can be none other than the Law that exists till today (IF ONE INTERPRETS SCRIPTURE WITH SCRIPTURE).

The Law was given so man could know sin. Rom 3:20 For no one is put right in God's sight by doing what the Law requires; what the Law does is to make us know that we have sinned.
What sin do man do today? What is the law he is breaking and on what is he being judged? The law of believing in the Son. Joh 16:9 They are wrong about sin, because they do not believe in me;

As I have said, wrong understanding.

Trivalee
Apr 17th 2018, 02:33 PM
Ok, it sounded like you didn't think they have to accept the current new covenant. I agree there aren't any more covenants for anyone. The current covenant is the only one that will exist.

My apologies if my position was not cogent enough. To recap, I believe that the NT Covenant covers both Jew and Gentile.

Trivalee
Apr 17th 2018, 02:39 PM
Those who convert of Jesus are NOT Israel any more. They are the New Man, and ethnicity falls away. We've been through this before. In the "New Man" there is NEITHER Jew NOR Greek. To keep a Jew's ethnicity in the New Man is put old wine in New Wineskins.

Your point here refers to Gal 3:27-28 which describes the spiritual makeup of the church. But how does this relate to your claim that Israel is still awaiting a *future covenant* from the Lord?

Trivalee
Apr 17th 2018, 02:41 PM
I do not agree. A man does not lose its ethnicity, although ethnicity is not important in Christ. To put the Law into the new covenant is to put old wine in new wine skins.

Thanks, Kalahari, for a better-articulated response than I did.

Trivalee
Apr 17th 2018, 03:23 PM
Yes. Show me the wording that the Church is under the new Covenant. I have shown you the clear wording of Jeremiah 31:31-33 that the New Covenant of LAW is made with the "house of Israel" AND "the House of Judah". Show me, and the other interested readers, the clear wording that the Church is under the New Covenant. You can't, or you would have by now. It does not help to accuse me of blindness or error. That is not an argument. It is an opinion and can equally apply to a man faced with a new thing who does not comprehend it. To use that as an argument just shows impotence. What we do on this Forum is discuss scripture. Now, show me a single statement in scripture that the Church is under a Covenant of God's Law. It is not enough to show me that we drink OF a cup that our Lord Jesus drank of. The "Cup" is the whole package that Christ achieved on Golgotha. Ratification of the New Covenant WITH UNITED ISRAEL was just one. The judicial right for God to resurrect all men is another. The restoration of the creature from curse is another. The remission of sins was another - and so on. Some apply to the Church, some to the creature, some to Israel and some to the nations.

But CERTAINLY, any man who uses Jeremiah 31:31-33 FOR THE CHURCH is not only implying an impossible "REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY", but is in CONTRADICTION of Matthew 13:17, Romans 16:25 and Ephesians 3:5 and 9 WHICH SAY THAT THE CHURCH WAS NOT REVEALED TO THE PROPHETS OF OLD! So now, with Jeremiah 31:31-33 CLEARLY POINTING TO ISRAEL, what verses do you bring that show the Church under the new Covenant of God's Law?

Brother, are we genuinely seeking the truth here or just out to score points? I provided passages showing Jesus sharing the Last Supper with the 12 disciples who later formed the church. Furthermore, Jesus himself told Peter in Matt 16:18 that he will build his church, starting with him (Peter). Inexplicably, you ignore this and still ask me to show "wording that the Church is under the New Covenant"?

I have also explained to you how wrong your interpretation of Jer 31:31-33 is; I pointed out the corroboration between Jer 31:33 and John 14:26 and how both were fulfilled at Pentecost. If you are going to willfully ignore the passages that support my case and rather chose to come back again and again with inane demands that I repeat myself, I regret that I'll be unable to indulge you https://bibleforums.org/images/smilies/smile.gif

God's law in the new covenant is not the same as Moses Law, so when scripture says "I will put my law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts" this is fulfilled by the indwelling Spirit of God in the hearts of believers reminding us of God's plans for us. If you can't comprehend this, then I can't help you further.

The prophets did not always understand every "prophecy" they spoke. Remember that God gave them utterance to speak his (God's) word, it was not theirs? The meaning of many of their prophecies, especially those that relate to the NT was indeed hidden from their knowledge. For example, Daniel was described as a man full of wisdom and knowledge in the court of Nebuchadnezzar, yet we see him struggle to grasp the meaning of the visions he saw. My point is that many of the prophets, Jeremiah (31:31-33) included, spoke about God's plans for the church which includes Gentiles without themselves fully understanding it. This is what Paul meant when he said that God has revealed what has been hidden (Matt 13:17; Rom 16:25) etc. So when you claim that associating Jer 31:31-33 to the church is an "impossibility", it sadly, highlights your poor understanding of the passage.

Also, as you insist that Jer 31:31-33 is exclusively for Israel, under which covenant is the Church attached?


Go back and see if I quoted these scriptures, or not. This is YOUR QUOTE IN POSTING #189. C'mon bro.

Indeed they are and consistent with my argument.

Walls
Apr 17th 2018, 03:29 PM
Your point here refers to Gal 3:27-28 which describes the spiritual makeup of the church. But how does this relate to your claim that Israel is still awaiting a *future covenant* from the Lord?

I'm sorry. I cannot follow you. I have just made a difference - a world of difference. One is Paul's brethren according to the flesh and is subject to the Covenants and the Promises. If he believes in Jesus he experiences a New and Heavenly birth, he becomes one of the LOrd's brethren according to the Spirit and becomes part of the Church. Which would you like to belong to, and which does the Lord require you belong to? If you say, "the Church of course", you would be correct, BUT THEN YOUR ETHINICITY DOES NOT COUNT. You are a New Man and instead of being restored to your Land you will "inherit the earth", be made "ruler over all the Lord has", posses eternal life and the nature of God, be the Bride of Christ, be a son of God - not son of Jacob, and be "of the heavenly calling" who have "celestial glory in resurrection" You can't have both because BIRTH decides it. Ethnicity is your birth to a human of a certain standing. This is annulled when you are born again by the Holy Spirit. 2 Corinthians 5:17; "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he (1) is a new creature: (2) old things are passed away; behold, (3) all things are become new."

Trivalee
Apr 17th 2018, 03:32 PM
His law is the Gospel, grace by believing in Christ. It is not doing the law. The problem is not English but understanding it correctly.

Joh 16:7 But I am telling you the truth: it is better for you that I go away, because if I do not go, the Helper will not come to you. But if I do go away, then I will send him to you.
Joh 16:8 And when he comes, he will prove to the people of the world that they are wrong about sin and about what is right and about God's judgment.
Joh 16:9 They are wrong about sin, because they do not believe in me;
Joh 16:10 they are wrong about what is right, because I am going to the Father and you will not see me any more;
Joh 16:11 and they are wrong about judgment, because the ruler of this world has already been judged.

This is what God puts into our hearts.

And the Holy Spirit (John 14:26) brought the above to mind in hearts of God's people in fulfilment of Jer 31:33. Unfortunately, our brother Walls, don't see it that way

Trivalee
Apr 17th 2018, 03:35 PM
No. God's Law is not mentioned at all in John 16. Nor is it EVER mentioned in conjunction with the Church. This is PURE ASSUMPTION and PRIVATE INTERPRETATION. But SEVENTEEN TIMES, ALL IN THE OLD TESTAMENT, is the phrase "MY LAW". And in EVERY CASE it means the Law of Moses. Added to this, the Law of Moses will not pass until heaven and earth pass. And this is at the end of the Millennium. "MY LAW" of Jeremiah 31:33 can be none other than the Law that exists till today (IF ONE INTERPRETS SCRIPTURE WITH SCRIPTURE).

God has already given the Law through Moses, why would he need to put it into the hearts of Israel in the Millennium?

Trivalee
Apr 17th 2018, 03:47 PM
I'm sorry. I cannot follow you. I have just made a difference - a world of difference. One is Paul's brethren according to the flesh and is subject to the Covenants and the Promises. If he believes in Jesus he experiences a New and Heavenly birth, he becomes one of the LOrd's brethren according to the Spirit and becomes part of the Church. Which would you like to belong to, and which does the Lord require you belong to? If you say, "the Church of course", you would be correct, BUT THEN YOUR ETHINICITY DOES NOT COUNT. You are a New Man and instead of being restored to your Land you will "inherit the earth", be made "ruler over all the Lord has", posses eternal life and the nature of God, be the Bride of Christ, be a son of God - not son of Jacob, and be "of the heavenly calling" who have "celestial glory in resurrection" You can't have both because BIRTH decides it. Ethnicity is your birth to a human of a certain standing. This is annulled when you are born again by the Holy Spirit. 2 Corinthians 5:17; "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he (1) is a new creature: (2) old things are passed away; behold, (3) all things are become new."

I'm sorry too because you seem to contradict himself without knowing it. I have no problem with your views above as they are on point. But this is not the bone of our contention, is it? You can't backtrack from your erroneous claim without the magnanimity of acknowledging your error. So I'll repeat again, (a) you deny that the Church is under the new covenant (b) you claim that unbelieving Israel is still awaiting a future covenant according to Jer 31:31-33. How so?

Your exegesis on Gal 3:27-28 are on point, but removed from your false argument about a future covenant. I hope am clear enough this time?

randyk
Apr 17th 2018, 03:48 PM
1. The passages you quoted (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor 11:23-26) show that the Last Supper brought the church under the New Covenant, yet you deny that the church is under the New Covenant? After Jesus, the 12 disciples were next in line or pioneers of the church. In Matt 16:18 Jesus told Peter that he will build his church "upon this rock" .i.e. starting with Peter. Peter and the other 11 were partakers of the Last Supper, yet you refuse to accept that the church is under the New Covenant?

1 Cor 11:26 means the church should continue to celebrate and observe the Last Supper until His Glorious return as confirmed by Paul:

1 Cor 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.



Sigh https://bibleforums.org/images/smilies/scratch_chin.gif For a teacher of the Bible, I am at a loss how you got this so wrong?

1. As prophesied, Jesus came and died for the remission of sin for ALL, now, today. Not Gentiles now and Israel in the future.
2. The law of God now written in our hearts according to Jeremiah 31:33 is now fulfilled with the indwelling Spirit of God in the hearts of God's people teaching/reminding us of the law of Christ.
3. Jesus told the disciple/church "that the Holy Ghost will teach you all things and bring ALL things to your rememberance" (John 14:26). If you can't see the connection between this statement and Jeremiah 31:33 then I'm really sorry because I can't do better than this.
4. Your understanding of Paul's argument in Romans chpt 3 is wrong; your argument contradictory. (a) You acknowledged that Christ died for the remission of sin for both Jew and Gentile (b) You concur that without Christ' sacrifice, Israel has NO HOPE of redemption (c) Yet, inexplicably, you managed to infer that Israel's redemption is deferred until Jesus returns and initiates a new covenant with them????
5. Your preaching about the Mosaic Law, the Covenant of Promise to Abraham is rather misplaced - more like preaching to the converted.
6. The Old Covenant Law has indeed been replaced by the death Christ! We are now in the New Covenant. It is NOT in the future.

I absolutely agree with your condemnation of Walls' position, that a new and *different* covenant--other than the New Covenant of Christ--will be made with Israel at the end of the age. And I agree with you that Walls is dead wrong in assuming Christ's Covenant is not a "Christian Covenant" at all--whatever that means?

That being said, Walls is a fairly decent fellow who writes very well. I don't dismiss him as a heretic as much as I do have to admit his views sound very heretical! Some day I will work out the difference! ;)

Let me just say to you what I told him--he doesn't want to discuss it anymore with me on this thread. The way the prophecy is worded in Jer 31.31 it does sound very much as if an entirely new and different covenant is to be made with Israel at the end of the age, when Christ returns.

However, the prophecy is not detailing when this New Covenant will actually be *initiated,* which we know took place at Christ's 1st Coming. Christ made it abundantly clear that he, at his 1st Coming, established the New Covenant "in his blood."

So Jeremiah's prophecy is speaking of a new covenant, beyond the Law, that in Jeremiah's time had not yet been initiated. What Jeremiah does is imply that at some point this New Covenant will be initiated, and will *take effect* with national Israel at the end of the age. Jeremiah does not explain that national Israel will fail to embrace the New Covenant when it is first initiated, and will take the entire NT period to finally receive that New Covenant as a nation!

In short, Jeremiah only expresses when the New Covenant will be accepted by national Israel, and does not actually address when the New Covenant is initiated and offered. Again, we know the New Covenant was initiated *by Christ's blood" at his 1st Coming. At that time it became effective for both Jew and Gentile.

However, the purpose has always been to reach not just individual Jews or individual Gentiles. Rather, the gospel has been to reach and convert entire societies so that men can live in fellowship and in peace--not as islands or fortresses, but better, as cities and communities. God has always wished to reach entire nations, along with their legal structures, so that God can be fully present in the social fabric, and not just in the individual. God doesn't want just prophets--He wants whole communities. I can never say this enough!

Israel will finally, as a nation, accept the New Covenant offer when their period of national judgment is over. Today, that judgment continues, not because the New Covenant is not available for them, but rather, because their ancestors led them in the wrong direction so that they have been steered into ignorance. One day the blinders will come off.

Kalahari
Apr 17th 2018, 04:00 PM
I absolutely agree with your condemnation of Walls' position, that a new and *different* covenant--other than the New Covenant of Christ--will be made with Israel at the end of the age. And I agree with you that Walls is dead wrong in assuming Christ's Covenant is not a "Christian Covenant" at all--whatever that means?

That being said, Walls is a fairly decent fellow who writes very well. I don't dismiss him as a heretic as much as I do have to admit his views sound very heretical! Some day I will work out the difference! ;)

Let me just say to you what I told him--he doesn't want to discuss it anymore with me on this thread. The way the prophecy is worded in Jer 31.31 it does sound very much as if an entirely new and different covenant is to be made with Israel at the end of the age, when Christ returns.

However, the prophecy is not detailing when this New Covenant will actually be *initiated,* which we know took place at Christ's 1st Coming. Christ made it abundantly clear that he, at his 1st Coming, established the New Covenant "in his blood."

So Jeremiah's prophecy is speaking of a new covenant, beyond the Law, that in Jeremiah's time had not yet been initiated. What Jeremiah does is imply that at some point this New Covenant will be initiated, and will *take effect* with national Israel at the end of the age. Jeremiah does not explain that national Israel will fail to embrace the New Covenant when it is first initiated, and will take the entire NT period to finally receive that New Covenant as a nation!

In short, Jeremiah only expresses when the New Covenant will be accepted by national Israel, and does not actually address when the New Covenant is initiated and offered. Again, we know the New Covenant was initiated *by Christ's blood" at his 1st Coming. At that time it became effective for both Jew and Gentile.

However, the purpose has always been to reach not just individual Jews or individual Gentiles. Rather, the gospel has been to reach and convert entire societies so that men can live in fellowship and in peace--not as islands or fortresses, but better, as cities and communities. God has always wished to reach entire nations, along with their legal structures, so that God can be fully present in the social fabric, and not just in the individual. God doesn't want just prophets--He wants whole communities. I can never say this enough!

Israel will finally, as a nation, accept the New Covenant offer when their period of national judgment is over. Today, that judgment continues, not because the New Covenant is not available for them, but rather, because their ancestors led them in the wrong direction so that they have been steered into ignorance. One day the blinders will come off.

But still the new covenant is in effect for them today.

Walls
Apr 17th 2018, 04:05 PM
Brother, are we genuinely seeking the truth here or just out to score points? I provided passages showing Jesus sharing the Last Supper with the 12 disciples who later formed the church. Furthermore, Jesus himself told Peter in Matt 16:18 that he will build his church, starting with him (Peter). Inexplicably, you ignore this and still ask me to show "wording that the Church is under the New Covenant"?

I have also explained to you how wrong your interpretation of Jer 31:31-33 is; I pointed out the corroboration between Jer 31:33 and John 14:26 and how both were fulfilled at Pentecost. If you are going to willfully ignore the passages that support my case and rather chose to come back again and again with inane demands that I repeat myself, I regret that I'll be unable to indulge you https://bibleforums.org/images/smilies/smile.gif

God's law in the new covenant is not the same as Moses Law, so when scripture says "I will put my law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts" this is fulfilled by the indwelling Spirit of God in the hearts of believers reminding us of God's plans for us. If you can't comprehend this, then I can't help you further.

The prophets did not always understand every "prophecy" they spoke. Remember that God gave them utterance to speak his (God's) word, it was not theirs? The meaning of many of their prophecies, especially those that relate to the NT was indeed hidden from their knowledge. For example, Daniel was described as a man full of wisdom and knowledge in the court of Nebuchadnezzar, yet we see him struggle to grasp the meaning of the visions he saw. My point is that many of the prophets, Jeremiah (31:31-33) included, spoke about God's plans for the church which includes Gentiles without themselves fully understanding it. This is what Paul meant when he said that God has revealed what has been hidden (Matt 13:17; Rom 16:25) etc. So when you claim that associating Jer 31:31-33 to the church is an "impossibility", it sadly, highlights your poor understanding of the passage.

Also, as you insist that Jer 31:31-33 is exclusively for Israel, under which covenant is the Church attached?



Indeed they are and consistent with my argument.

You have written a lot. Thank you. But all I asked was for you to show me the wording in ANY verse that says that the New Covenant is made with Christians or with the Church. It is no good to refer to Us drinking of the cup which contains Christ's blood. Let me show these verses and see what they propose. In ...

Luke 22:20; "Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament IN my blood, which is shed for you", THERE ARE TWO THINGS MENTIONED HERE.
(1) The "cup" - has in it a "New Covenant IN my blood". "IN my blood" refers to its ratification, a requirement of God when He makes Covenants with fallen man. Jeremiah, a prophet to Israel, clearly states that this Covenant is to be made with Israel. Jeremiah has NO INKLING of the Church because it was not revealed to him. Jeremiah further says that this New Covenant is a Covenant of Law. Jeremiah further says that this New Covenant of Law will only take effect "in the day" when the ten northern Tribes are united with the two southern Tribes. The resurrection and uniting of Israel will only happen AFTER Christ returns. The "gathering of Israel from dispersion will only happen when our Lord comes. THUS, THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS COVENANT IS STILL FUTURE. How could it possibly apply to the Church, and what has the Church to do with Israel and what has the Church to do with LAW? Any return to God's Law is FORBIDDEN TO THE CHURCH.
(2) Christ's blood is shed for you. It is NOT the Covenant that is shed for you. It is Christ's blood. It is a SECOND and SEPARATE PURPOSE for Christ's blood. It is shed for the remission of sins. The WORDING HERE AT NO TIME INDICATES THAT JEREMIAH MEANT THE CHURCH. In a modern jet airliner the engine has two stages of rotating blades. They compress the air that is to be burned with fuel for more effect than ambient air. In the casing of these Compressors are bleed valves. High pressure air can be bled off for (1) cabin pressurization, and (2) for deicing the front of the wings and the inlets of the engines. It is the SAME COMPRESSED AIR, but it has different PURPOSES! So also Christ's blood. It is the same blood but it achieves MULTIPLE TASKS. To say that just because the air is compressed, everything it achieves is the same, would be foolish. So also Christ's wonderful blood. It achieves MULTIPLE TASKS and ONE is the ratification of the New Covenant with restored and united Israel, and ANOTHER is the remission of sins. Is this so difficult?

1st Corinthians 11:2; "After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament IN my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me." THE SAME TWO THINGS ARE MENTIONED HERE! But what is NOT here is any indication, by direct statement, OR implied, that (1) the New Covenant and the Remission of sins ARE THE SAME THING, or (2) that God has corrected Jeremiah and now made the New Covenant of Law with the Church. The wording just is not there.

John 14:26; "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." THERE IS NO THOUGHT, NOR WORD, IN THIS VERSE THAT ALLUDES TO THE NEW COVENANT, let alone that Jeremiah was wrong and it is made with the Church.

If we are to build a doctrine, we do it by Gods WORDS. If the words are not there we either (1) don't build anything, or (2) we build a House on Sand.

randyk
Apr 17th 2018, 04:06 PM
I'm sorry. I cannot follow you. I have just made a difference - a world of difference. One is Paul's brethren according to the flesh and is subject to the Covenants and the Promises. If he believes in Jesus he experiences a New and Heavenly birth, he becomes one of the LOrd's brethren according to the Spirit and becomes part of the Church. Which would you like to belong to, and which does the Lord require you belong to? If you say, "the Church of course", you would be correct, BUT THEN YOUR ETHINICITY DOES NOT COUNT. You are a New Man and instead of being restored to your Land you will "inherit the earth", be made "ruler over all the Lord has", posses eternal life and the nature of God, be the Bride of Christ, be a son of God - not son of Jacob, and be "of the heavenly calling" who have "celestial glory in resurrection" You can't have both because BIRTH decides it. Ethnicity is your birth to a human of a certain standing. This is annulled when you are born again by the Holy Spirit. 2 Corinthians 5:17; "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he (1) is a new creature: (2) old things are passed away; behold, (3) all things are become new."

I wish I had a quarter for every time I'm been offered this false dichotomy! The difference between God's heavenly people and God's earthly people does not discard the earthly distinction between nations! Nor does is render all physical distinctions neutralized with respect to accessing God's Kingdom. It only delegitimizes any earthly basis or national distinction apart from *Christ himself* for access into God's Kingdom. Let me explain.

Earthly Israel was different from other nations on a physical basis. As such, they had an earthly, physical basis for access to God's Kingdom that other nations, with their individual characteristics, did not have. Only the Hebrew people, with their DNA and legal system, could get into God's Kingdom, which in the OT was simply living in relationship to God through the Law.

Foreigners could get in, but only through marriage and by adoption of the Hebrew society. Only Israel, as defined by their physical constitution and legal constitution, could be considered "God's People."

Paul argues that this physical difference is now broken down in Christ *with respect to access to God's Kingdom.* God's Kingdom was removed from exclusive Israel, and now has been disassociated from the temple, Jerusalem, and earthly Israel. As Jesus said to the Woman at the Well, "those who worship God will worship in spirit." See John 4.23-24.

God has certainly not thrown away distinctives like national differences, the existence of Israel, the importance of Jerusalem, etc. These distinctives have only be rendered obsolete with respect to access to God's Kingdom since all nations, including Israel, were found to be unworthy of holding onto God's Kingdom--even by the Law.

The only way to access God's Kingdom for all eternity is by the exclusive basis of *Christ's own righteousness.* And this has nothing to do with the Law anymore, since that righteousness was fulfilled in Christ, who had no need of redemption ceremonies or rituals of purification.

Paul therefore is arguing that Israel's *national exclusivity* is no longer relevant with respect to *access to God's Kingdom.* Certainly national distinctions remain, since God still wishes to reach entire societies with His laws and spirit. This *only* has to do with eligibility for entry into God's Kingdom, and *not* with the removal of all national/international distinctions in God's prophetic program.

Walls
Apr 17th 2018, 04:09 PM
God has already given the Law through Moses, why would he need to put it into the hearts of Israel in the Millennium?

He doesn't give the Law again in the Millennium. He WRITES IT ON THE HEARTS AND MINDS INSTEAD OF STONE TABLES!

Walls
Apr 17th 2018, 04:13 PM
I'm sorry too because you seem to contradict himself without knowing it. I have no problem with your views above as they are on point. But this is not the bone of our contention, is it? You can't backtrack from your erroneous claim without the magnanimity of acknowledging your error. So I'll repeat again, (a) you deny that the Church is under the new covenant (b) you claim that unbelieving Israel is still awaiting a future covenant according to Jer 31:31-33. How so?

Your exegesis on Gal 3:27-28 are on point, but removed from your false argument about a future covenant. I hope am clear enough this time?

I do. Now let me ask you a question which you can answer just as directly and briefly. Do do DENY that Jeremiah, under inspiration, predicted that God would make a NEW COVENANT with the TWO HOUSES of Israel, which are well documented in the Old Testament, and that it would be a Covenant that has His Law written on their hearts and minds?

Walls
Apr 17th 2018, 04:37 PM
I absolutely agree with your condemnation of Walls' position, that a new and *different* covenant--other than the New Covenant of Christ--will be made with Israel at the end of the age. And I agree with you that Walls is dead wrong in assuming Christ's Covenant is not a "Christian Covenant" at all--whatever that means?

To save a long drawn out exchange let me just say that;

The term "New Covenant of Christ" does not appear in the whole Bible*. It is a figment of your imagination
The term "Christian Covenant" was YOUR TERM - whatever that meant. It also does not appear in the whole Bible

So, from my point of view, and I never deny it can be wrong, you have INVENTED TWO THINGS, and then propose that those who oppose them are wrong. C'mon my esteemed brother.

* If you read my postings accurately you would find I said that;

The New Covenant is one of YAHWEH (Jer.31:27)
The New Covenant is one of "My Law" - YAHWEH's Law, which EXCLUSIVELY in the Old Testament means, The Law given at Sinai
The New Covenant is made with a combination of the Ten northern Tribes who were deported by Assyria, and the Two southern Tribes who were deported by Babylon, both well documented in the Old Testament
The Church is not revealed in the Old Testament, so Jeremiah's prediction could not include the Church
There is NO VERSE that joins the Church with the New Covenant. It is the "cup" that Christ drank that encompassesh both the TWO SEPARATE ISSUES of (1) Ratification of this Covenant IN His blood, AND (2) the remission of sins
The Cup that contains both elements of Christ's blood is to be drunk by the Church, NOT for the New Covenant, but to commemorate Jesus' death (1st Cor.11:25), not to partake of the New Covenant.
This drinking of the cup can, by no means, mean partaking of the New Covenant because the New Covenant is everlasting (Jer. 32:40) but the Cup drinking by the Church will cease when Christ comes (1st Cor.11:26).
The only TWO Covenants that the Church is subject to are (1) that of the Rainbow, and (2) the Covenant of Promise made to Abraham 430 years before the Covenant of Sinai (Rom.4:13; Gal.3:29)

Walls
Apr 17th 2018, 04:42 PM
I wish I had a quarter for every time I'm been offered this false dichotomy! The difference between God's heavenly people and God's earthly people does not discard the earthly distinction between nations! Nor does is render all physical distinctions neutralized with respect to accessing God's Kingdom. It only delegitimizes any earthly basis or national distinction apart from *Christ himself* for access into God's Kingdom. Let me explain.

Earthly Israel was different from other nations on a physical basis. As such, they had an earthly, physical basis for access to God's Kingdom that other nations, with their individual characteristics, did not have. Only the Hebrew people, with their DNA and legal system, could get into God's Kingdom, which in the OT was simply living in relationship to God through the Law.

Foreigners could get in, but only through marriage and by adoption of the Hebrew society. Only Israel, as defined by their physical constitution and legal constitution, could be considered "God's People."

Paul argues that this physical difference is now broken down in Christ *with respect to access to God's Kingdom.* God's Kingdom was removed from exclusive Israel, and now has been disassociated from the temple, Jerusalem, and earthly Israel. As Jesus said to the Woman at the Well, "those who worship God will worship in spirit." See John 4.23-24.

God has certainly not thrown away distinctives like national differences, the existence of Israel, the importance of Jerusalem, etc. These distinctives have only be rendered obsolete with respect to access to God's Kingdom since all nations, including Israel, were found to be unworthy of holding onto God's Kingdom--even by the Law.

The only way to access God's Kingdom for all eternity is by the exclusive basis of *Christ's own righteousness.* And this has nothing to do with the Law anymore, since that righteousness was fulfilled in Christ, who had no need of redemption ceremonies or rituals of purification.

Paul therefore is arguing that Israel's *national exclusivity* is no longer relevant with respect to *access to God's Kingdom.* Certainly national distinctions remain, since God still wishes to reach entire societies with His laws and spirit. This *only* has to do with eligibility for entry into God's Kingdom, and *not* with the removal of all national/international distinctions in God's prophetic program.

If scripture says that IN CHRIST, (1) ALL the old has passed away, and (2) ALL things are new, that is what is meant. If scripture says that in the New Man, which is a New Creation, there is "neither Jew nor Greek. That is what it said. We discuss what scripture has said.

Trivalee
Apr 17th 2018, 06:50 PM
I absolutely agree with your condemnation of Walls' position, that a new and *different* covenant--other than the New Covenant of Christ--will be made with Israel at the end of the age. And I agree with you that Walls is dead wrong in assuming Christ's Covenant is not a "Christian Covenant" at all--whatever that means?

That being said, Walls is a fairly decent fellow who writes very well. I don't dismiss him as a heretic as much as I do have to admit his views sound very heretical! Some day I will work out the difference! ;)

Let me just say to you what I told him--he doesn't want to discuss it anymore with me on this thread. The way the prophecy is worded in Jer 31.31 it does sound very much as if an entirely new and different covenant is to be made with Israel at the end of the age, when Christ returns.

However, the prophecy is not detailing when this New Covenant will actually be *initiated,* which we know took place at Christ's 1st Coming. Christ made it abundantly clear that he, at his 1st Coming, established the New Covenant "in his blood."

So Jeremiah's prophecy is speaking of a new covenant, beyond the Law, that in Jeremiah's time had not yet been initiated. What Jeremiah does is imply that at some point this New Covenant will be initiated, and will *take effect* with national Israel at the end of the age. Jeremiah does not explain that national Israel will fail to embrace the New Covenant when it is first initiated, and will take the entire NT period to finally receive that New Covenant as a nation!

In short, Jeremiah only expresses when the New Covenant will be accepted by national Israel, and does not actually address when the New Covenant is initiated and offered. Again, we know the New Covenant was initiated *by Christ's blood" at his 1st Coming. At that time it became effective for both Jew and Gentile.

However, the purpose has always been to reach not just individual Jews or individual Gentiles. Rather, the gospel has been to reach and convert entire societies so that men can live in fellowship and in peace--not as islands or fortresses, but better, as cities and communities. God has always wished to reach entire nations, along with their legal structures, so that God can be fully present in the social fabric, and not just in the individual. God doesn't want just prophets--He wants whole communities. I can never say this enough!

Israel will finally, as a nation, accept the New Covenant offer when their period of national judgment is over. Today, that judgment continues, not because the New Covenant is not available for them, but rather, because their ancestors led them in the wrong direction so that they have been steered into ignorance. One day the blinders will come off.

Thanks for your wonderful contribution. I realize that Walls misunderstanding came from Jeremiah's statement that the new covenant will be with Israel. But for me, the key is the contrast highlighted by Jeremiah between the Mosaic and the new covenant. God said regarding the new "I will put my law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts" which is fulfilled by the Spirit of God in our hearts. This was lacking in the old covenant.

Trivalee
Apr 17th 2018, 07:15 PM
You have written a lot. Thank you. But all I asked was for you to show me the wording in ANY verse that says that the New Covenant is made with Christians or with the Church. It is no good to refer to Us drinking of the cup which contains Christ's blood. Let me show these verses and see what they propose. In ...

Luke 22:20; "Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament IN my blood, which is shed for you", THERE ARE TWO THINGS MENTIONED HERE.
(1) The "cup" - has in it a "New Covenant IN my blood". "IN my blood" refers to its ratification, a requirement of God when He makes Covenants with fallen man. Jeremiah, a prophet to Israel, clearly states that this Covenant is to be made with Israel. Jeremiah has NO INKLING of the Church because it was not revealed to him. Jeremiah further says that this New Covenant is a Covenant of Law. Jeremiah further says that this New Covenant of Law will only take effect "in the day" when the ten northern Tribes are united with the two southern Tribes. The resurrection and uniting of Israel will only happen AFTER Christ returns. The "gathering of Israel from dispersion will only happen when our Lord comes. THUS, THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS COVENANT IS STILL FUTURE. How could it possibly apply to the Church, and what has the Church to do with Israel and what has the Church to do with LAW? Any return to God's Law is FORBIDDEN TO THE CHURCH.

* The cup (blood) represents the new covenant.
* The disciples who were the frontline of the church were also Israelites.
* I do not believe that the 12 were all from the House of Israel or Judah. I believe they were both.
* The 12 being the pioneers of the church, irrefutably means the new covenant was made with the church.
* The NT covenant of law is Christ' Gospel, not the Mosaic Law. Paul said in Gal 3:24 that the Law was our schoolmaster until Christ that we might be justified by faith.


(2) Christ's blood is shed for you. It is NOT the Covenant that is shed for you. It is Christ's blood. It is a SECOND and SEPARATE PURPOSE for Christ's blood. It is shed for the remission of sins. The WORDING HERE AT NO TIME INDICATES THAT JEREMIAH MEANT THE CHURCH. In a modern jet airliner the engine has two stages of rotating blades. They compress the air that is to be burned with fuel for more effect than ambient air. In the casing of these Compressors are bleed valves. High pressure air can be bled off for (1) cabin pressurization, and (2) for deicing the front of the wings and the inlets of the engines. It is the SAME COMPRESSED AIR, but it has different PURPOSES! So also Christ's blood. It is the same blood but it achieves MULTIPLE TASKS. To say that just because the air is compressed, everything it achieves is the same, would be foolish. So also Christ's wonderful blood. It achieves MULTIPLE TASKS and ONE is the ratification of the New Covenant with restored and united Israel, and ANOTHER is the remission of sins. Is this so difficult?

1st Corinthians 11:2; "After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament IN my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me." THE SAME TWO THINGS ARE MENTIONED HERE! But what is NOT here is any indication, by direct statement, OR implied, that (1) the New Covenant and the Remission of sins ARE THE SAME THING, or (2) that God has corrected Jeremiah and now made the New Covenant of Law with the Church. The wording just is not there.

John 14:26; "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." THERE IS NO THOUGHT, NOR WORD, IN THIS VERSE THAT ALLUDES TO THE NEW COVENANT, let alone that Jeremiah was wrong and it is made with the Church.

If we are to build a doctrine, we do it by Gods WORDS. If the words are not there we either (1) don't build anything, or (2) we build a House on Sand.

Jesus Christ' blood is at the heart of the new covenant. I have no problem with the multiple roles the blood of Jesus plays. But that has never been the contention, has it?

Trivalee
Apr 17th 2018, 07:18 PM
He doesn't give the Law again in the Millennium. He WRITES IT ON THE HEARTS AND MINDS INSTEAD OF STONE TABLES!

But why the millennium and not now?

Trivalee
Apr 17th 2018, 07:29 PM
I do. Now let me ask you a question which you can answer just as directly and briefly. Do do DENY that Jeremiah, under inspiration, predicted that God would make a NEW COVENANT with the TWO HOUSES of Israel, which are well documented in the Old Testament, and that it would be a Covenant that has His Law written on their hearts and minds?

No, I do not deny it. The difference between you and I is our understanding of when this "new covenant" will come into force. Secondly, none of the OT prophets understood God's plans for Gentiles in the NT. Prophet Daniel also misunderstood the visions that impacted on the Gentiles and the church, but their ignorance didn't negate the rolling out of God's plans.

randyk
Apr 17th 2018, 11:03 PM
But still the new covenant is in effect for them today.

Absolutely. I'm sorry if that didn't come across too well. Again, Jesus came the 1st time to initiate the New Covenant *on behalf of Israel.* However, he knew only a relative few would receive that Covenant, and that the nation, as a whole, would enter into an age-long judgment. Many reject this, but I call this the Great Tribulation period of the Jewish People, spoken of by Jesus in his Olivet Discourse. Jesus said that the nation would fall under judgment *in his generation,* and that they would be taken away in captivity until the end of the age, when the "times of the Gentiles" would come to an end.

This does not mean that the age of the Gentiles will end when Christ returns, and return will be made to a strictly "Jewish Age," as an exclusive Israeli Kingdom of God, such as existed under the Law of Moses. No, it means that the age of pagan Gentilism will end at the end of the age, and Israel will be recomposed as a godly nation when Christ returns. I have to assume there will be many godly Gentile nations as well, since the New Covenant has been initiated not just for Israel, but for many nations.

I don't like to use the distinction "Jew/Gentile" anymore, because it isn't valid under the New Covenant. What we have are many nations, including Israel, who will belong under the New Covenant. Some nations may never achieve this, but may only have a remnant of Christians within non-Christian nations. But obviously, God's initial desire was to have an entire nation dedicated to His laws, since that is what the Law of Moses was all about. And the New Covenant will not want anything less for the many nations to be included in that covenant!

randyk
Apr 17th 2018, 11:15 PM
Thanks for your wonderful contribution. I realize that Walls misunderstanding came from Jeremiah's statement that the new covenant will be with Israel. But for me, the key is the contrast highlighted by Jeremiah between the Mosaic and the new covenant. God said regarding the new "I will put my law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts" which is fulfilled by the Spirit of God in our hearts. This was lacking in the old covenant.

Oh absolutely. This is the other issue that greatly concerns me about it--the fact that the New Covenant stands in contrast to the Law of Moses. It is not some extension of the Law, or some reform of the Law, or some reconstitution of the Law. Rather, it is a different law entirely! All of it is God's Law, but the difference between the New Covenant Law and the Mosaic Law cannot be stated enough!

Everybody makes such a big deal about the need to retain morality and lawfulness in the New Covenant, and that apart from reference to the Law of Moses it is difficult to determine morality and lawfulness in the New Covenant. And I would agree with that.

But again, unless we make a cold distinction between the two covenants we get into territory absolutely prohibited by the Apostle Paul. In history, Luther raised the same "red line," and said that transgressing this line of demarcation puts us into heretical territory. Luther warned that the Catholic Church was being hurt by the integration of human law into God's Covenant of grace.

Nothing can be added, either from human tradition or from Mosaic Law, to the New Covenant of Christ because *only Christ's righteousness* forms the basis of the New Covenant. Sacrifices for sins have no value with respect to Christ's righteousness because Christ required no sacrifice for sin. Human traditions have no value because only what Christ did has value in the New Covenant with respect to winning our eternal salvation.

So you are *completely right* to separate the New Covenant from the Law. And yes, the New Covenant was established *in Jesus' blood* at his 1st Coming, and not at the 2nd Coming. Only at the 2nd Coming will this New Covenant take effect for Israel *as a nation.* But that was not when it was ratified on behalf of Israel and the world. That took place at the cross!

Walls
Apr 18th 2018, 01:55 PM
Thanks for your wonderful contribution. I realize that Walls misunderstanding came from Jeremiah's statement that the new covenant will be with Israel. But for me, the key is the contrast highlighted by Jeremiah between the Mosaic and the new covenant. God said regarding the new "I will put my law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts" which is fulfilled by the Spirit of God in our hearts. This was lacking in the old covenant.

What was the misunderstanding? Is the New Covenant with Israel or not?

I'll allow "Mosaic Covenant" as I know what you're trying to get at. But (1) the Covenant is ONE thing, and (2) the CONDITIONS are another. The Covenant, or Contract, is that of Horeb (Deut.5:2), and the Conditions are the Laws given to Moses. But if you accuse me of nit-picking, I'll agree. It is just that you invent terms and then defend them as if they were in the Bible.

So now you have become an Israelite. You now agree that the Covenant is made with Israel, but "My (God's) Law" is written on your heart. So, let me ask, have you, in accordance with God's Law, been to Jerusalem for the Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread this year. The Feast of Weeks is soon. Have you made preparations for your visit to Jerusalem? Deuteronomy 12:11, part of God's Law, now written on your heart, commands;


"Then there shall be a place which the LORD your God shall choose to cause his name to dwell there; thither shall ye bring all that I command you; your burnt offerings, and your sacrifices, your tithes, and the heave offering of your hand, and all your choice vows which ye vow unto the LORD:"

Now remember - it includes your choice vows. But our Lord Jesus commands His disciples in Matthew 5:33-37;


33 "Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:
34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:
35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.
36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.
37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil."

If it was not so tragic, it would be a picture to see you keeping "My Law" of Jeremiah 31:33, AND the Commands of your Head - Jesus. You see my esteemed brother, the confusion is not with me. For me the New Covenant OF LAW replaces the FIRST Covenant OF LAW - WITH ISRAEL IN BOTH CASES. The New Covenant of "My Law" is instituted when Israel are restored and united. And the Law is "My Law", which is rendered 17 times in the Old Testament, and in EVERY CASE means the Law given by Moses. But for me, Christ is my fulfillment of the Law of Moses. It's righteousness is imputed to me. I have nothing more to do with it. Romans 10:4 says, "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth." I live with the Triune God dwelling in my spirit, and I am called a "son of God" if I follow the dictates of that Holy Spirit in my spirit.

You have unwittingly placed yourself under Israel's Covenant of Law with God, one that will only be INSTITUTED when Christ returns. So you not only conform yourself to the Law of Moses, but you haven't even got your Covenant yet. How sad. But be of good cheer, GOD DOES NOT RECOGNIZE YOUR MISTAKE. You are a Christian and NOT of Israel. So with a wry smile, God, in His infinite goodness, just ignores you trying to butt in on the matters of the nation that rejected Christ. Why not join me? I am under TWO Covenants ONLY;

The Covenant of the Rainbow, "... which I have established between me and all flesh that is upon the earth" (Gen.9:17). This Covenant requires of me TWO things. (1) I must uphold the death penalty for manslaughter, and (2) I must not drink blood.
The Covenant of Promise made with Abraham 430 years earlier than that of Horeb and Law (Gal.3:29). This Covenant requires only ONE thing - Full Immersion Baptism (which has replaced circumcision - Col.2:11-12)

Walls
Apr 18th 2018, 02:03 PM
Originally Posted by Walls
I do. Now let me ask you a question which you can answer just as directly and briefly. Do do DENY that Jeremiah, under inspiration, predicted that God would make a NEW COVENANT with the TWO HOUSES of Israel, which are well documented in the Old Testament, and that it would be a Covenant that has His Law written on their hearts and minds?


No, I do not deny it.

Then let us be reconciled, for it does not matter one wit WHEN the New Covenant "will come into force". It is for Israel! Let them be. You and I are the New Man, the New Creation! Israel will have a Covenant of "My (God's) Law", you and I are NOT PART OF IT. We are part of the, "... law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus ...", WHICH HAS MADE YOU AND I, "... free from the law of sin and death" (Rom.8:2)