RELIGION - Salvation from a different angle

BAGTIC · Post by **BAGTIC** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:21 pm

www.heaven123.com

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 3:30 pm

Very interesting.

I never could get into organized "religions or churches".

Joe

Charles · Post by **Charles** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 4:23 pm

Joe.. Churches are like goverments..frustrating, often problematic, but necessary for the common good.

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 5:07 pm

BAGTIC, what do you know about who made the 1-2-3 website? The idea that Paul preached a different Gospel, one that is not the same as the Gospel preached by the Apostles is new to me. In the spirit of I don't actually 'know it all' I am interested in what the concise Gospel is according to that web site.

I excerpted No. 6 from the 'Bible Quiz' and below it added the literal translation. I don't see anything in the text that forces the conclusion that Paul was preaching a "different Gospel" than the Apostles preached. The sense of the text, in its context, is that the Apostles were tasked to deliver the Gospel to the Jewish people and Paul was tasked to deliver the same Gospel to the non-Jews, or Gentiles, of which I am one.

The idea that Paul was in fact preaching a different Gospel is much more difficult to comprehend in the further context of the purpose of the letter to the Galations which was a caution NOT TO believe 'another Gospel'. Ga 1:8

It's a double twist and it's an accusation that Paul was in fact preaching 'another Gospel'. This is perplexing to me. If someone else has better tools, a Greek text say, and can cast light on this I would appreciate it.

From the 1-2-3 web site Bible Quiz
The Twelve Apostles followed the teachings of Paul. True or False?

6. False. In Galatians 2 Paul explains that after he had been preaching for 17 years he returned to Jerusalem, to visit the 12 Apostles...and 'communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles'.

The Apostles didn't say 'Here's a new revelation from Jesus, let's follow it'. Instead, Paul says, they basically told him to go back to those seven nations which Jesus sent him to...and they would go to all the other nations of the world, as Jesus instructed them to.

Paul: "When they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was
committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto
Peter...they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellow-
ship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the
circumcision." Galatians 2:7-9

Please note that Paul speaks of two gospels...the one he preached was not the one Jesus and the Apostles preached! It is not the one Jesus sent to ALL Nations of the world!!!

Galatians 2:5-10 (Young's Literal Translation)
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)

Public Domain
[A Public Domain Bible]

5to whom not even for an hour we gave place by subjection, that the truth of the good news might remain to you.

6And from those who were esteemed to be something -- whatever they were then, it maketh no difference to me -- the face of man God accepteth not, for -- to me those esteemed did add nothing,

7but, on the contrary, having seen that I have been entrusted with the good news of the uncircumcision, as Peter with [that] of the circumcision,

8for He who did work with Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, did work also in me in regard to the nations,

9and having known the grace that was given to me, James, and Cephas, and John, who were esteemed to be pillars, a right hand of fellowship they did give to me, and to Barnabas, that we to the nations, and they to the circumcision [may go],

Perhaps an interesting irony, the site is hosted by Mecca Hosting. Here are the particulars. Does anyone know anything about Frank Armster?

Owner, Administrative Contact, Billing Contact:
Self Employed
Frank A. Armster (ID00062648)
C/O MECCA HOSTING
PO BOX 63156
COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 80962-3156
US

So I guess the question is, is this site wisdom from above, or from Mecca? eh?

Grizz

shooter · Post by **shooter** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:15 pm

My whole problem with the website is that it basically says that everything in the Bible that Jesus didn't say is null and void. That is rediculous. The whole Bible is inspired by God. Every word in it comes straight from God, written through the people he chose to put it on paper. That is my take on it and why I don't agree with this view of the Gospel at all. Paul just reiterates and expands on what Jesus said and taught. Also, to me, the idea that you have to "do something" to be saved is also not right. The most concise scripture I can think of offhand is in John when a guy asked Jesus, "What must I do to be saved?" Jesus replied, "Believe in the one that God sent." That's it, nothing more, nothing less. I agree that if you love Jesus, you will do your best to keep his commandments, but nobody's perfect, and that is what Jesus came for. We all need his grace. If salvation depended on being perfect and keeping all of his commandments, we would all be in for it. Everyone falls now and again, some more than others. Because of the blood of Jesus, our sins are erased and forgotten by God, thus we are blameless before the throne of God. If it was required to keep all the commandments to be saved, this would not be necessary because there would be no sin to forgive. This is just my opinion, and I'm not trying to pick fights. I know religion is a touchy subject and I hope no one takes it personally.

shooter · Post by **shooter** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:22 pm

J Miller wrote:Very interesting and to the point.

I never could get into organized "religions or churches".

Joe

Also, I am of the opinion that organized religion is a lot of what's wrong with Christians today. I attend church every Sunday, and believe one should be part of a body of believers, but not necessarily follow everything the church teaches. Preachers are human, and are not always right. I think people need to question everything they hear from the pulpit. Too many people just sit there and nod there heads, even when nonsense is being preached, because if the preacher said it, it must be true. People need to look at the scripture and study it and see if what is being taught is right. Paul commended the Bereans (sp?) for questioning him and not just going along with what he said.

jeepnik · Post by **jeepnik** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:38 pm

I was raised Episcopalian, married a Catholic, and read my Bible. Can't find a thing in there about either. While an organized religion brings together like minded individuals, sometimes those individuals begin to think that their particular belief is the only one that's right. Can't beleive that only one organized religion is right and all the others is wrong. Me, I'll just worship God in my own way. Don't like it, well, it ain't hurting anybody but you. I'll get along just fine.

Charles · Post by **Charles** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 8:01 pm

A couple of thoughts on the issue at hand.

1) Preachers are nothing more or less than human beings. They have no special connection to God. Hopefully they have the education and integrity to be a good student of scripture and thereby preach Good News and not good views.

But, every person sitting in the pew should no swallow the preaching whole, but be wise enough to seperate the truth from rot.

2) There is no one church that is right. No group holds the sole franchise on Jesus. He is beyond and above them all. I am first and last a Christ One (Christian) and my theological tradition is Wesleyan/Methodist.

Our theological tradtion is the glass through which we see Jesus. When my tradition helps me to see Jesus clearly, I polish the glass. If and when my tradition clouds or obscures the image of Jesus, I pitch it in the trash as fast as I can.

JerryB · Post by **JerryB** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 11:59 pm

If you will get a KJV 1611 bible and pray to God for wisdom and understanding and then read II Timothy 2:15 "study to show thyself approved unto God,a workman that needth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth"you will know that in chapter 3 verse 16 is true,
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine,for reproof,for correction,for instruction in rightousness". Paul wrote this as given to him by the Holy Spirit,does that sound like he would teach a "diferent" gospel?

brucew44guns · Post by **brucew44guns** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 12:34 am

I went to that website to see what it was. Typical of many I've seen all my life, where the insistance that Saved Christians are going up to a Heavenly Reward after they die is taught. But Jesus did say that "No Man has ever ascended up to Heaven, except the Son of Man who came down from heaven" . Acts chapter 2 bears out, that David, a man after Gods own heart, "has not ascended into the heavens",. You'd think David made it if anyone could. I wish someday, that someone could clearly, without any gaps, and directly from the scriptures, show me where heaven is the reward of the saved. Isn't Jesus the young nobleman who went into a far country, (heaven), to recieve a kingdom, and to return? I always read where the Savior would return to this earth, pretty plain stuff about that, but I guess he will be all alone here, everyone will be in heaven.

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 1:03 am

brucew44guns wrote:I went to that website to see what it was. Typical of many I've seen all my life, where the insistance that Saved Christians are going up to a Heavenly Reward after they die is taught. But Jesus did say that "No Man has ever ascended up to Heaven, except the Son of Man who came down from heaven" . Acts chapter 2 bears out, that David, a man after Gods own heart, "has not ascended into the heavens",. You'd think David made it if anyone could. I wish someday, that someone could clearly, without any gaps, and directly from the scriptures, show me where heaven is the reward of the saved. Isn't Jesus the young nobleman who went into a far country, (heaven), to recieve a kingdom, and to return? I always read where the Savior would return to this earth, pretty plain stuff about that, but I guess he will be all alone here, everyone will be in heaven.

Here ya go:

John 14:2-6

2In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

3And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

4And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.

5Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?

6Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Luke 23:42-43 (King James Version)
42And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.

43And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.

2 Corinthians 5:8 (King James Version)

8We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

There's more. It's the clear promise of Scripture.
I hope it helps..,

Grizz

shooter · Post by **shooter** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 1:06 am

Bruce,

I'm sorry I do not have a Bible on hand to give you reference scriptures, but I'll give you the long and short on my understanding of how Heaven is going to play out. In the Old Testament, the reason that David did not go to heaven is that people didn't go straight to Heaven before Christ came. They went to a place called Sheole in the Hebrew, or Hades in the Greek, which translates to "the place of the dead". Jesus was the key to unlock the gates of Heaven and give humans direct access to God. While Jesus was dead, he descended into Sheole and let the righteous people waiting there go on to Heaven. This is the reason for the Bible stating that no man has ascended to Heaven. Jesus made the trip possible. Paul states that "to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord". Every Christian who dies will be present with Christ in Heaven until he returns to Earth and establishes his kingdom here. Hope this kind of clears things up. Wish I could be of more help, but that's the best way I can put it off the top of my head. If you have any questions, you can feel free to pm me and I will do my best to find answers for you.

shooter · Post by **shooter** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 1:09 am

Thanks Grizz. I wanted to post some of those references, but didn't have my Bible on hand (shame on me).

Old Shatterhand · Post by **Old Shatterhand** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 4:19 am

Charles wrote:A couple of thoughts on the issue at hand.

1) Preachers are nothing more or less than human beings. They have no special connection to God. Hopefully they have the education and integrity to be a good student of scripture and thereby preach Good News and not good views.

But, every person sitting in the pew should no swallow the preaching whole, but be wise enough to seperate the truth from rot.

2) There is no one church that is right. No group holds the sole franchise on Jesus. He is beyond and above them all. I am first and last a Christ One (Christian) and my theological tradition is Wesleyan/Methodist.

Our theological tradtion is the glass through which we see Jesus. When my tradition helps me to see Jesus clearly, I polish the glass. If and when my tradition clouds or obscures the image of Jesus, I pitch it in the trash as fast as I can.

I share that point of view. I'm lutheran, and our tradition says that "the Church of Crist is everywhere, where the gospel is taught and the sacraments are distributed." That means, the Churc is One, but that there are several christians organsations, which are called "churches". So, lutherans, baptist, catholics, episcopalians or whatever they are called, together make the Church.

Old Sh.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:42 am

Y'all might want to pick up a Book by Clarence Larkin called"Dispensational Truth." Some of the differences are mapped out in his book in the form of diagrams.
Paul preached the Gospel of Grace. The Gospel the Apostles preached was the Gospel to National Israel which they rejected. If you remember the Apostles were also told to go unto all the world, which they didn't. Some what (?) 23 years later they were still in Jerusalem and the churches that were formed under Paul's ministry were sending offerings back to them.

Rusty <><

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 9:01 am

shooter wrote:Thanks Grizz. I wanted to post some of those references, but didn't have my Bible on hand (shame on me).

You're welcome. It's all online, here are the 2 sites I use the most often:

http://www.biblegateway.com/

http://www.blueletterbible.org/

All translations and all study aids are available on the internet. How cool is that?

JerryB · Post by **JerryB** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:02 am

Rusty,praise the Lord for that Larkin book. I read in it last nite while we waited for our grandson to get in from his college classes, my wife said it sounds just like Brother Jim. Any of ya'll want some true bible teaching that is one to get.It is good to see so many men here that do know the real Living Word.

pharmseller · Post by **pharmseller** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:37 am

shooter wrote:My whole problem with the website is that it basically says that everything in the Bible that Jesus didn't say is null and void. That is rediculous. The whole Bible is inspired by God. Every word in it comes straight from God, written through the people he chose to put it on paper. That is my take on it and why I don't agree with this view of the Gospel at all. Paul just reiterates and expands on what Jesus said and taught. Also, to me, the idea that you have to "do something" to be saved is also not right. The most concise scripture I can think of offhand is in John when a guy asked Jesus, "What must I do to be saved?" Jesus replied, "Believe in the one that God sent." That's it, nothing more, nothing less. I agree that if you love Jesus, you will do your best to keep his commandments, but nobody's perfect, and that is what Jesus came for. We all need his grace. If salvation depended on being perfect and keeping all of his commandments, we would all be in for it. Everyone falls now and again, some more than others. Because of the blood of Jesus, our sins are erased and forgotten by God, thus we are blameless before the throne of God. If it was required to keep all the commandments to be saved, this would not be necessary because there would be no sin to forgive. This is just my opinion, and I'm not trying to pick fights. I know religion is a touchy subject and I hope no one takes it personally.

+1
VERY well stated IMO. I got holes in me you could throw a cat through, and God knows it. But I believe, and do my best. I don't deserve His grace, but He gives it to me freely.

Quinn

Quinn

BAGTIC · Post by **BAGTIC** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:50 am

shooter wrote:My whole problem with the website is that it basically says that everything in the Bible that Jesus didn't say is null and void. .

I don't read it that way. I read it that those things that are in conflict with the teachings of Jesus are null and void..

BAGTIC · Post by **BAGTIC** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:57 am

[quote "All scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine,for reproof,for correction,for instruction in rightousness". Paul wrote this as given to him by the Holy Spirit,does that sound like he would teach a "diferent" gospel?[/quote]

If you read the website it explains that is a reference to the Old Testament, there not yet being a New Testament at the time of Paul. It also explains that the Old Testament and the Laws of Moses were given as an interim guide until the coming of the Prophet who spoke God's words.

shooter · Post by **shooter** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 11:00 am

BAGTIC wrote:
shooter wrote:My whole problem with the website is that it basically says that everything in the Bible that Jesus didn't say is null and void. .
I don't read it that way. I read it that those things that are in conflict with the teachings of Jesus are null and void..

You may be right about reading it that way. However, I don't believe that the Bible conflicts Jesus' teachings anywhere. I believe all scripture is divinely inspired, and therefore all comes from God, so no part of the Bible opposes another part. In my belief, if one part of the Bible is wrong, then it's all wrong and we need to throw it out and live how we want to.

shooter · Post by **shooter** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:20 pm

The reason there wasn't a New Testament at the time of Paul is because he was in the process of writing it. Now y'all please don't get me wrong and take the stuff I say personal, I'm just relating it to y'all the way I understand it, and what I think is right. I enjoy these kinds of discussions, as long as they remain discussions and don't get heated.

Gal 1:6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel;
Gal 1:7 which is {really} not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.

Here Paul is stating that there is no other Gospel except the one of Christ, which Paul and the apostles also preached. There are not two different Gospels found in the Bible. After Jesus ascended into Heaven he left the apostles there to continue to spread his message, and also called others such as Paul, Timothy, Titus, Apollos. The Great Comission, "Go therefore and make desciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all I have commanded you, and lo, I am with you, even to the end of the age.", is not necessarily a commandment to go to different nations. The original word in the Greek that got translated into "Go", actually literally means "As you are going". So that means that we are to make desciples while performing our daily duties such as job and activities, as well as those that are called to the mission field.

Gal 1:8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!
Gal 1:9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!
Gal 1:10 For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a bond-servant of Christ.
Gal 1:11 For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man.
Gal 1:12 For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but {I received it} through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

Here Paul reiterates again the importance of there only being ONE Gospel, and that the Gospel he preaches comes straight from Jesus.

JerryB · Post by **JerryB** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 9:22 pm

shooter you are right as we know that there is only one gospel and Paul taught it as it was given him by the Holy Spirit. He just preached to the Gentiles as he was told to do.

gon2shoot · Post by **gon2shoot** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 11:44 pm

I don't normally step into these things but I'm feelin touchy tonight.
If you want to argue, learn Greek and Ariamaic, check as many of the old text as you can.
Jesus did not speak the kings english, every thing we read has been translated and transliterated.
The Bible is the only record of God we have, each person must decide how they will deal with it.
I firmly believe that the theological ideaology most folks embrace is determined by the hermenutic they employ.

sonof40 · Post by **sonof40** » Fri Feb 08, 2008 11:54 pm

Hello everyone. I'm the author of the articles found at www.heaven123.com...I followed the links from my website to this forum...and I've joined the forum temporarily in case anyone wants to question or address me directly...hope you all don't mind.

I welcome all questions and comments, positive or negative, and hope we can do this in an atmosphere of mutual respect.

My real name is Frank, my username is sonof40, I'm 61 years old, and I live in Georgia...

shooter · Post by **shooter** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 12:22 am

Thanks for stopping by Frank. I appreciate your willingness to come and answer questions, and I assure you, at least on my part, it will all be done with respect to your views.

My first question I guess, is where do you get that Jesus preached a different gospel than the apostles? Also, do you believe that all scripture is divinely inspired?

If you will read my earlier post, Paul clearly states in Galatians that there is only one Gospel, and any man that preaches another will be cursed.

gon2shoot · Post by **gon2shoot** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 1:05 am

OK, yall correct me if I'm wrong. went back and read the BOLD print start of the article.
Pretty much says "I'll believe Jesus but not Paul"?

Here's my thoughts, IT"S THE SAME BOOK< IF PART OF IT IS WRONG, IT'S ALL WRONG.
I'm smellin a $3.00 bill.

sonof40 · Post by **sonof40** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 1:07 am

Yes, I strongly believe that all scripture is divinely inspired. I assume you meant, why do I believe Paul preached a different gospel than the 12 Apostles...and part of the answer to that is also found in Galatians...

But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter...And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. Galatians 2:7,9

Clearly Paul mentions two gospels...and those two gospels were sent to two different groups. The circumcised were God's people, and were subject to the Law of God...whereas Paul explains that the uncircumcised had never been God's people, nor under God's Law.

Also, Jesus had stated that He had two folds of sheep...He commanded the 12 apostles not to go unto the Gentiles...and He left without having sent that second fold a message or an apostle. He sent the 12 to all nations...He later returned and sent Paul only to those 7 nations which comprised the second fold...and He sent Paul with a different gospel than the one which He had given the 12 Apostles.

There are also other examples I could give...

Paul knew that there was another gospel which was given to Peter and the 12...therefore his comments in Galatians 2:7,9...because he also knew that the other gospel was not meant for the Galatians...the other gospel was the gospel of 'works' which Jesus taught the 12...but Jesus sent the Gentiles the gospel of 'grace'.

When Paul tells them that if any man preaches a different gospel to them than he preached to them, then they should not hear that gospel...because it simply does not apply to them.

And, I personally see the two gospels as 'one' in the same sense as Jesus made the two folds one...even after Jesus made the two folds one, they still remained 'different'. In the same way, the two gospels are 'one' but they remain 'different'.

gon2shoot · Post by **gon2shoot** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 1:31 am

Clearly the scriptures speak of two groups, those under the Law (Jews) and those outside of it (Gentiles) but only one gospel.
The blood of Christ ran two directions from the cross ,Old Test.(back) and New Test (forward).
The whole conceptof the sacrifice that God made that day defies the space available here.

I have been many years a servant of God , and a minister of the Church of Christ and am willing to talk with any and all through E-mail or PM, but will not drag this thread out further.
Besides, I don't think Paul had a levergun. (if he did it would have been a 45colt)

shooter · Post by **shooter** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 1:38 am

and what He taught them works, as evidenced by those 120 people in the Bible who heard, believed, and obeyed Him...they went to Heaven when they died!!!

What about the thief on the cross? Did HE have to do any "works" to get to Heaven? That is clearly where he went, JESUS SAID SO!!

I'm going to have to agree with gon2shoot and digress from this thread, as much as I hate to. I just see too many holes in your theology, sir, and if this is debated to it's full extent, this thread will drag on from now until the day the Lord returns.

sonof40 · Post by **sonof40** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 1:53 am

Hello shooter, I respect your beliefs and I have no problem with your and gon2shoot's decision...

As for the thief on the cross...the fact that he went to Heaven without works...doesn't change the fact that the scriptures teach that Jesus sent the gospel of 'works' to all nations of this world, except the Gentiles.

Perhaps the thief on the cross was a Gentile...can you say for sure that he wasn't? The Gentiles went to heaven without works...at least, those whom God had pre-ordained...

Hagler · Post by **Hagler** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:06 am

Gentlemen,

The Bible clearly speaks of works, but it also very clearly tells us that faith is what saves. I believe that Romans tells us that, and so does Hebrews. The message of "salvation by faith" is peppered throughout the Word of GOD. Faith, and faith alone, is what saves. Works are a sign of our faith.

The message of the "Gospel of Circumcision" versus the "Gospel of Uncircumcision" appears to be just a difference in who spreads the One True Gospel to which group of people: Jews versus Gentiles.

Galatians Chapter2 speaks of both of these issues:

Galatians 2
1Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also.

2And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.

3But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised:

4And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:

5To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.

6But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person:) for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me:

7But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

8(For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)

9And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

10Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do.

11But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.

12For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.

13And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.

14But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

15We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,

16Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

17But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.

18For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.

19For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.

20I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

21I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

Shawn

gon2shoot · Post by **gon2shoot** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:08 am

Give an accruate definition of "GRACE"

sonof40 · Post by **sonof40** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:51 am

I don't know an accurate definition for the word grace...but here's what I do know. I know that the scriptures teach that God Almighty ordained that ALL men must be saved by FAITH in Jesus...

But there were 7 nations whose god was not God...plus Jesus was NOT sent to those 7 nations, and Jesus commanded the 12 Apostles NOT to go to those 7 nations...and if that's the case, then I know that there was but only one way for those 7 nations to be 'saved'...

How can a people have faith in Jesus, which God has ordained; when God is not their God, plus Jesus never went to them while on earth, and told the Apostles not to go unto them...if they never met Jesus or heard of Jesus how could they possibly have FAITH in Jesus...

There was only ONE way those people could have been 'saved'...and that's if God Almighty 'gave' them FAITH in Jesus...and according to Paul, that's exactly what God did...He GAVE the Gentiles faith in Jesus...

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God... Eph. 2:8

Read that verse carefully and you'll see Paul is saying that they are saved 'through faith' which God GAVE them...

Paul further clarified this when he said: And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith...

And Paul says it perfectly here: Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.

Paul is again speaking of two groups...one group who would be saved BY faith in Jesus...and the other group who would be saved THROUGH faith in Jesus...which God gave them.

I guess my personal definition of Grace would be this: when you say, by Grace...it's the same as saying, by God.

Hagler · Post by **Hagler** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:51 am

gon2shoot,

Here is something that may help with defining "grace":

http://www.bible-researcher.com/grace.html

I usually think of "grace" as unmerrited favor. It is undeserved, but GOD gives it to us, because HE wants to.

Shawn

Hagler · Post by **Hagler** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 3:03 am

sonof40,

Grace is definitinately a gift. The Bible is clear on that. I am not certain that faith is a gift. The structure of some sentences in the Bible are difficult for some to follow.

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God...

I suppose that faith could be a gift, but grace is always a gift. Salavation is always of GOD, lest men should boast. Therefore, I believe, the above-quoted passage does not nescesarrily mean that faith is the gift in question.

Shawn

Swampman · Post by **Swampman** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 7:17 am

Predestination is the bottom line. You are either saved, our you aren't. If you have to do anything for salvation then it isn't a gift. Pretty simple really.

It's "not of works, lest any man should boast."

Charles · Post by **Charles** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 8:23 am

Ho boy.. this makes the Border Fence issue seem very simple

. I stay away from relgious threads as I found there is not much to be gained by such threads. Most often, they just display the lack of unity and often times the lack of love between Christians of different stripes. This just adds fuel to the non-believers feeling of hostility toward Christianity. More often than not, we are out own worse enemy by our endless bickering over theology.

I will just make one simple contribution and then bow out and let you boys have at it. Before I do, I will just say that I hold several Seminary Degrees from recognized graduate schools of theology and I can read the New Testament in the original Greek. I have been in full time Christian Ministry for 37 years and am recognized as a high grade Bible teacher.

There is no significant contridiction between the Gospel present in the Pauline letter and the Gospel presented in the other New Testament material. What some might consider contraditions are due to the context of the material. The various New Testament documents were written by different authors, at different times, to different readers with different cultures, to address different issues and aspects of the Christian faith.

When we understand the importance of the historical and cultural context of the various New Testament documents, we will find there is remarkable unity of the Gospel presented. The core of the Gospel message (kerugma) is the same through the entire New Testament.

Ok boys have it, but remember that non-believers are watching you and making decisions about Christ from your words and attitudes.

"See how they love one another"

C. Cash · Post by **C. Cash** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 11:22 am

Charles wrote:Ho boy.. this makes the Border Fence issue seem very simple . I stay away from relgious threads as I found there is not much to be gained by such threads. Most often, they just display the lack of unity and often times the lack of love between Christians of different stripes. This just adds fuel to the non-believers feeling of hostility toward Christianity. More often than not, we are out own worse enemy by our endless bickering over theology.

I will just make one simple contribution and then bow out and let you boys have at it. Before I do, I will just say that I hold several Seminary Degrees from recognized graduate schools of theology and I can read the New Testament in the original Greek. I have been in full time Christian Ministry for 37 years and am recognized as a high grade Bible teacher.

There is no significant contridiction between the Gospel present in the Pauline letter and the Gospel presented in the other New Testament material. What some might consider contraditions are due to the context of the material. The various New Testament documents were written by different authors, at different times, to different readers with different cultures, to address different issues and aspects of the Christian faith.

When we understand the importance of the historical and cultural context of the various New Testament documents, we will find there is remarkable unity of the Gospel presented. The core of the Gospel message (kerugma) is the same through the entire New Testament.

Ok boys have it, but remember that non-believers are watching you and making decisions about Christ from your words and attitudes.

"See how they love one another"

+1 to Charles above, and Grizz below!

Grizz · Post by **Grizz** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 11:38 am

Here's the simple version about works. The Bible explicitly states that no man is saved by his works so he cannot boast of his salvation.

Here's the dots. If my works could save me from God's judgement it would mean [a] that Christ's Work was insufficient to save me, and that He needs my assistance to cover my guilt, and [c] that his sacrifice was actually in vain because he stated with his dying breath that he paid the full price: tetelesti, the Aramaic commercial word for 'paid in full', which [d] makes Christ a liar if my own works are necessary to effect my salvation.

None of those things can be true, or else there is no truth.

shooter · Post by **shooter** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 4:25 pm

Grizz wrote:Here's the simple version about works. The Bible explicitly states that no man is saved by his works so he cannot boast of his salvation.

Here's the dots. If my works could save me from God's judgement it would mean [a] that Christ's Work was insufficient to save me, and that He needs my assistance to cover my guilt, and [c] that his sacrifice was actually in vain because he stated with his dying breath that he paid the full price: tetelesti, the Aramaic commercial word for 'paid in full', which [d] makes Christ a liar if my own works are necessary to effect my salvation.

None of those things can be true, or else there is no truth.

+1 Grizz, very well put. God would not have sent His son to die unnecessarily. If our works could get us into Heaven, Jesus' sacrifice would not have been needed, therefore it would not have happened. OK, that's really my last post on this thread.

mklwhite · Post by **mklwhite** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 7:12 pm

Before Jesus (Wasn't his name you know, but I won't nit-pick here on that.) came around everybody had to jump through the hoops the priests set up for them. In some cases, if not all, before you went to Temple you had to be clean. I mean ultra clean. Had to get clean in approved places for such. You may not have the right type of money to pay up at the temple so you have to go to the money changers, who were doing a brisk business. Anyhow long story short Jesus said "This is dumb". OK maybe not a direct quote, but you know what I mean. God is there for everyone. Your relationship is with him directly. Some had a problem with this. Having been being told they weren't worthy for a long enough time that they started believing it. So Jesus said "Well, ok then, through me you get to God." Again, not a direct quote. What did Jesus do? He went around and included the outcasts. Spread love and kindness to all. He expected those who follow(ed) him to do the same. Live as an example. Well someone thought it would be better to write it all down and then things went sideways. People got hung up on the words not the message. If the words were so important that you had to get them right, why didn't Jesus write them down himself. Why didn't he say something like "Peter, write this down". Why? Because it is the message, not the words that hold the power. (Not to mention that the books of the Bible were seldom, if ever, written by those they were named after. I mean Peter wasn't hanging there on a cross writing about his own death, now was he. So it is second hand info at best. And we wont even jump into the whole translations or "versions" thing.)

One of my favorite movie lines/scenes comes from "Kingdom of Heaven"

I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of God. I have seen too much religion in the eyes of too many murderers. Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves, and goodness. What God desires is here [points to head] and here [points to heart] and what you decide to do every day, you will be a good man - or not.

ursavus.elemensis · Post by **ursavus.elemensis** » Sat Feb 09, 2008 8:14 pm

His job is to shed light, not to master.

BAGTIC · Post by **BAGTIC** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:02 am

JerryB wrote:shooter you are right as we know that there is only one gospel and Paul taught it as it was given him by the Holy Spirit. He just preached to the Gentiles as he was told to do.

There is only one gospel and it is the one taught by Jesus Christ. Christ trumps Paul every time. Scripture says Jesus was 'the last' to be sent by God, not Paul. Or are we to believe as do the Mormons that there will be an ongoing succession of 'prophets' dribbling on and on and on.

BAGTIC · Post by **BAGTIC** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:34 am

Grizz wrote:Here's the simple version about works. The Bible explicitly states that no man is saved by his works so he cannot boast of his salvation.

Here's the dots. If my works could save me from God's judgement it would mean [a] that Christ's Work was insufficient to save me, and that He needs my assistance to cover my guilt, and [c] that his sacrifice was actually in vain because he stated with his dying breath that he paid the full price: tetelesti, the Aramaic commercial word for 'paid in full', which [d] makes Christ a liar if my own works are necessary to effect my salvation.

None of those things can be true, or else there is no truth.

To the contrary. God'a grace was extended to man by the removal of guilt from original sin inherited from the transgressions of Adam and Eve. It was not forgiveness for all our personal sins. God grace made each of us responsible for our own sins and our own salvation.

Jesus made it quite clear that neither he or God would judge us but that we would be judged according to our works (what we do in fulfillment of God's commandments) by whether we kept the commandments brought to earth by Jesus. One must hear the commandments which Jesus brought and obey them.

Many become confused by the distinction between 'acts' and 'works'. Acts refers to ritualized behavior, the traditions of men. There is a reason actors are called 'actors'.

Jesus says we we be judged by our works alone. I, personally, don't care what Paul says. Jesus warned of those like Paul who preach in his (Jesus') name but teach not his teachings.

BAGTIC · Post by **BAGTIC** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 10:30 am

brucew44guns wrote:I went to that website to see what it was. Typical of many I've seen all my life, where the insistance that Saved Christians are going up to a Heavenly Reward after they die is taught. But Jesus did say that "No Man has ever ascended up to Heaven, except the Son of Man who came down from heaven" . Acts chapter 2 bears out, that David, a man after Gods own heart, "has not ascended into the heavens",. You'd think David made it if anyone could. I wish someday, that someone could clearly, without any gaps, and directly from the scriptures, show me where heaven is the reward of the saved. Isn't Jesus the young nobleman who went into a far country, (heaven), to recieve a kingdom, and to return? I always read where the Savior would return to this earth, pretty plain stuff about that, but I guess he will be all alone here, everyone will be in heaven.

"ascended", past tense (not yet... at that time) , not shall never 'ascend'.

BAGTIC · Post by **BAGTIC** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 10:38 am

shooter wrote:My whole problem with the website is that it basically says that everything in the Bible that Jesus didn't say is null and void. That is rediculous. The whole Bible is inspired by God. Every word in it comes straight from God, written through the people he chose to put it on paper. That is my take on it and why I don't agree with this view of the Gospel at all. Paul just reiterates and expands on what Jesus said and taught. Also, to me, the idea that you have to "do something" to be saved is also not right. The most concise scripture I can think of offhand is in John when a guy asked Jesus, "What must I do to be saved?" Jesus replied, "Believe in the one that God sent." That's it, nothing more, nothing less. I agree that if you love Jesus, you will do your best to keep his commandments, but nobody's perfect, and that is what Jesus came for. We all need his grace. If salvation depended on being perfect and keeping all of his commandments, we would all be in for it. Everyone falls now and again, some more than others. Because of the blood of Jesus, our sins are erased and forgotten by God, thus we are blameless before the throne of God. If it was required to keep all the commandments to be saved, this would not be necessary because there would be no sin to forgive. This is just my opinion, and I'm not trying to pick fights. I know religion is a touchy subject and I hope no one takes it personally.

Jesus did not think so. Jesus personally contravened many of the teachings in the Old Testament and encouraged his followers to do likewise. Jesus have done that if he believed that EVERYTHING in the Old Testament was commanded by God? Jesus rcognized that some of the teachings in the O.T. were "the traditions of men", not the word of God. Of course some of the humans who wrote those traditions would have CLAIMED they were the word of God in order to add auithority to the commandments of mere men.

Post by **AmBraCol** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 11:00 am

BAGTIC wrote:Jesus did not think so. Jesus personally contravened many of the teachings in the Old Testament and encouraged his followers to do likewise. Jesus have done that if he believed that EVERYTHING in the Old Testament was commanded by God? Jesus rcognized that some of the teachings in the O.T. were "the traditions of men", not the word of God. Of course some of the humans who wrote those traditions would have CLAIMED they were the word of God in order to add auithority to the commandments of mere men.

In that, sir, you're incorrect. Jesus came to fulfill the Old Testament, not to contradict it or contravene it. What He DID do was go against what the "religious authorities" of His day TAUGHT IT SAID - much to their ire, anger and disgust. The purpose of the Old Testament was to prepare a people for the coming of the promised One - Jesus the Christ. And that it did well. Jesus even went so far as to say "Nothing will pass from the Old Testament Law until it has all been finished". Then on the cross He said "It is finished." The New Testament is just that, a new pact between God and those who wish to follow Him. Starting in Acts and reading through Revelation you can come to see that the New Testament is both broader and stricter than the Old Testament. The law of love taught in the New Testament is much stricter because it affects us at a deeper level than the old "thou shalts" and "thou shalt nots" ever could. We are now responsible not only for WHAT we do, but for WHY we do it, something that is not easily judged except by God Himself and the individual who is brutally honest with himself.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 11:06 am

mklwhite wrote:...Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves, and goodness. What God desires is here [points to head] and here [points to heart] and what you decide to do every day, you will be a good man - or not. [/b]

Good point. All of us as humans may (if we work at it) come to understand a 'slice of the pie' of Truth. Most churches/religions have a fairly large slice to offer. Some members may be 'crumbs' and fall off the plate and do evil things, but for most the church becomes a guiding light to understanding their place in the slice of the big pie. Personally, I don't think anyone ever has a chance to fully grasp the whole pie until they die, and maybe not then. Anyway, whatever percent of the Truth each of us understands, it is more important to run our lives in an honest and spiritual and honorable manner, than to quibble with folks whose lives put them in a different slice of the pie, over doctrinal specifics, etc.

Sorry if my 'pie theory' offends anyone, but I think we all seek basically the same Truth and the same God; our limitations as human beings mean the understanding will always be incomplete and sometimes flawed, so we should accept that, do our best, and not quibble so much among ourselves about the big picture.

BAGTIC · Post by **BAGTIC** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 11:10 am

gon2shoot wrote:OK, yall correct me if I'm wrong. went back and read the BOLD print start of the article.
Pretty much says "I'll believe Jesus but not Paul"?

Here's my thoughts, IT"S THE SAME BOOK< IF PART OF IT IS WRONG, IT'S ALL WRONG.
I'm smellin a $3.00 bill.

IT IS NOT THE SAME BOOK.

THE BIBLE IS NOT 'A BOOK'. It is an anthology of many writings by many authors witten over a span of at least 1600 years. Would one say that if some articles in an encyclopedia are erroneous the entire encyclopedia is thereby false.

Jesus says we will be judged by how well we keep his commandments. He does NOT say that a passing score is 100%. Jesus was raised a jew and even the jews do not believe that. Effort and intentions count for something.

"The grace" was that God sent Jesus to show us the way to effect our own salvation, not that we were being given a free pass like the mythical C.I.A. 'Get Out of Jail' card. Jesus brought the recipe, we must still bake our own pie even if it does not turn out exactly 100% perfect.

RELIGION - Salvation from a different angle

RELIGION - Salvation from a different angle

heaven

Re: heaven

Re: heaven