Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 49 of 49

Thread: Is Repentance an essential doctrine?

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    11,586

    Re: Is Repentance an essential doctrine?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave G View Post
    Quite the contrary...I gave you the Scriptures that show that Christ's righteousness is imputed to the believer.
    Why you are unable to see and understand them, I'm not sure.

    Our works and faith as believers do not save us ( Titus 3:5 ), because God looks on His Son's righteousness when He looks at the believer.
    Our faith, as believers, carries us through this life, and serves to justify us before God and men.
    You haven't produced one verse, and do not have any evidence to support any of this.

  2. #47

    Re: Is Repentance an essential doctrine?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave G View Post



    Everyone does hate Him, and there are none righteous:

    " as it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:" ( Romans 3:10 )

    " for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;" ( Romans 3:23 )
    So, I'd like to step in here, because this is an oft misguided/misquoted problem, and I thank you for the opportunity to bring this up.

    Romans 3:10 is so often taken out of context in this manner that it cannot be stood anymore. Romans 3: 10-18 is, in it's entirety and in it's context, a quote from the OT Scriptures, specifically Psalms, Ecclesiastes and Isaiah. This is important, as it means it was written UNDER THE LAW. Now, Romans 3:19-22 says THIS:
    19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

    20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

    21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

    22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:


    So yes, taken OUT OF CONTEXT, Romans 3:10 means "There is none righteous, not one."

    However, when properly put IN CONTEXT, Paul is explaining that UNDER THE LAW, there was none righteous, but now we, that is all of us... Jews and Gentiles... are no longer under the dispensation of righteousness by Law (of which there were none righteous, as we read and understand properly put into context... for properly, there were none righteous under the Law).

    However, APART from the Law, there WERE, and now ARE, plenty righteous...

    Noah: Genesis 7:1 And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation.

    Abraham: Genesis 15:6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

    Abel: 1 John 3:12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.

    Lot: 2 Peter:7 And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked:

    8 (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds)

    So this brings us to Romans 3:23... For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. Out of context, yes, one might use this as a supportive verse to Romans 3:10... IF sin=unrighteousness, which it does not, or else Abraham's sin of lying to Pharoah would have disqualified him from righteousness, which it did not... or Noah's sin of drunkenness would disqualify him from righteousness, which it did not... or Lot's sin of incest would have disqualified him from righteousness, which it did not...
    Jesus said, "Out of the hardness of your hearts Moses gave a writ of divorce; but from the beginning it was not so." How many more things do you suppose are, "From the beginning, NOT so?"

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    11,586

    Re: Is Repentance an essential doctrine?

    Quote Originally Posted by Falconcheff View Post
    So, I'd like to step in here, because this is an oft misguided/misquoted problem, and I thank you for the opportunity to bring this up.

    Romans 3:10 is so often taken out of context in this manner that it cannot be stood anymore. Romans 3: 10-18 is, in it's entirety and in it's context, a quote from the OT Scriptures, specifically Psalms, Ecclesiastes and Isaiah. This is important, as it means it was written UNDER THE LAW. Now, Romans 3:19-22 says THIS:
    19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

    20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

    21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

    22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:


    So yes, taken OUT OF CONTEXT, Romans 3:10 means "There is none righteous, not one."

    However, when properly put IN CONTEXT, Paul is explaining that UNDER THE LAW, there was none righteous, but now we, that is all of us... Jews and Gentiles... are no longer under the dispensation of righteousness by Law (of which there were none righteous, as we read and understand properly put into context... for properly, there were none righteous under the Law).

    However, APART from the Law, there WERE, and now ARE, plenty righteous...

    Noah: Genesis 7:1 And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation.

    Abraham: Genesis 15:6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

    Abel: 1 John 3:12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.

    Lot: 2 Peter:7 And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked:

    8 (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds)

    So this brings us to Romans 3:23... For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. Out of context, yes, one might use this as a supportive verse to Romans 3:10... IF sin=unrighteousness, which it does not, or else Abraham's sin of lying to Pharoah would have disqualified him from righteousness, which it did not... or Noah's sin of drunkenness would disqualify him from righteousness, which it did not... or Lot's sin of incest would have disqualified him from righteousness, which it did not...
    I agree this is is a misguided/misquoted problem, but I think you missed the simplicity as well. If you look at the OT passages Paul is quoting they are not pointing to the Jew they are pointing to "the children of men" - Jew and Gentile, which happens to be Paul's point, isn't it? The same point is being made in both the OT and NT passages.

    My question to Dave G would be, why after I asked, "If everyone hated him who was there to bless?" would he answer, "Everyone does hate Him, and there are none righteous:" and give these passages which simply state all have sinned and come short of his glory, that do not state all hate him, and do not address my question; how did so many receive blessings if all hate him? It's difficult to have a conversation with someone that cannot focus because of the lenses they wear and filters they apply.

    So since Dave G is at a loss here and blinded by the doctrine of men I will answer that many did not hate God. They loved him and were blessed. This is an undeniable truth seen throughout scripture. When the passage says none are righteous it means all have sinned just as Paul went on to explain. It does not mean none do righteousness and none are capable of doing righteousness. When it says none understands, it doesn't mean never understands, it means not always understands. When it says none seek God it doesn't mean never seeks God, it means not always. That's the Greek tense and is aligned perfectly with the point that all have sinned and the rest of scripture which tells us about many doing righteousness, understanding, and seeking. That it says 'became unprofitable' should be a clue to the reformed that have fallen for the sin nature/original sin doctrine hook line and sinker, but the lenses they wear and filters they apply overcome the obvious. This is always the case when the response to none are righteous is, all hate God.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    There is no place for me in this world.
    Posts
    130

    Re: Is Repentance an essential doctrine?

    If you say so, Noeb.

    Human reason and the carnal mind are a frighteningly untrustworthy combination.
    Even believers have problems with it.


    Best wishes to both you and yours.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Essential Doctrines?
    By Old man in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: Sep 25th 2018, 02:14 PM
  2. Which part is essential?
    By ChangedByHim in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: Jun 5th 2014, 03:30 AM
  3. Essential oils
    By Kingsdaughter in forum Women at the well
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Mar 29th 2013, 02:52 PM
  4. Replies: 242
    Last Post: Dec 24th 2012, 05:48 PM
  5. Baptism Essential
    By Unorclan in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 151
    Last Post: Feb 17th 2008, 04:36 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •