God's grace to forgive and transform is not conditioned to recognizing Jesus' deity, blood atonement or physical resurrection

[Behold]

I am opening the thread to discuss and refute the commonly held view that God's grace that forgives and changes the life of people is conditioned to their acceptance of doctrines such as Jesus' deity, blood atonement or physical resurrection.

"Jesus came into the world to save sinners"..

Everyone is qualified.

So, the requirement that is required for Jesus to be able to offer Himself as God's Reconciliation back into Himself, is met by everyone who is ever born since Adam........including MARY. MOG.

So, when a sinner comes to faith in Christ.....they dont know any Theology.....they only know that they need to be saved., and that is when they do what God requires of them.....they "repent from unbelief, to FAITH in Christ"

A.) They BELIEVE.....and that is Faith that God accepts that God "counts as (Christ's) Righteousness"""" on their behalf.

 

[Joe]

But that would be impossible.
It is impossible for man to transform himself. Otherwise, people would not need the grace of God.
That's the premise number 1 of soteriology, isn't it?

So we have three options so far:

• OPTION A: Beelzebub made the Sikh and the Catholic honest men: IMPOSSIBLE
• OPTION B: The Sikh and the Catholic made themselves honest men: IMPOSSIBLE
• OPTION C: God made the Sikh and the Catholic honest men: POSSIBLE.

So, you are saying a person cannot better himself? We see it constantly in life and none of it means God did the work.

An atheist glutton who decides to better himself by correcting his eating habits and exercising is a work of God meriting salvation?

Or an atheist drunkard decides to better himself by stop drinking is a work of God meriting salvation?

You are conflating the abilities of man, who can decide to control things in their life to improve it, with the grace of God that sanctifies them after they confess Jesus Christ and believe in their heart that God raised him from the dead.

If the Sikh is no longer a follower of gurus and confesses Jesus Christ as Lord, believing in his heart that He died and resurrected three days later and calls out to Him in faith; then the work of God in His life is called sanctification. The atheist is no longer an atheist, and the Sikh is no longer a Sikh. They are called followers of Jesus Christ, and it is evident by the way they live their life and the testimonies from their mouth.

because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” (Rom 10:9-13)

Friend, you need to repent of unbelief and believe the testimony of God's Spirit, His Son, and His Son's Apostles. As it is, you are advocating the wide road that leads to destruction. My sincere advice is take the narrow road.

I kindly suggest that you read 1 Corinthians 1-18-31.

God Bless

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

So, you are saying a person cannot better himself? We see it constantly in life and none of it means God did the work.

An atheist glutton who decides to better himself by correcting his eating habits and exercising is a work of God meriting salvation?

Or an atheist drunkard decides to better himself by stop drinking is a work of God meriting salvation?

Hi Joe

I think we are not talking here about human "merits" to get salvation. Are we?
We both understand that salvation is an undeserved gift from God, and that there is no "merit points" we can accumulate to "buy" our right to heaven.

So, if two gluttons or drunkards succeed in acquiring new, healthy eating or drinking habits... and one of them is Presbyterian while the other is atheist, we cannot say that God made the work in the Presbyterian but that the atheist managed to succeed by his own merit. In both cases it was God who did the job. God saved them from the slavery of gluttony or alcoholism. Neither the Presbyterian nor the atheist could have achieved that by their own merits.

Calvin would try to explain the difference by saying that, while the Presbyterian got a "salvific grace" from God, the atheist got a "common grace" from God... good, but not good enough.

However, in Scriptures there is no division between two kinds of "graces". There is no an effective and an ineffective type of grace.

For example, the Ninevites who repented from being violent or adulterous after hearing God's call through Jonah didn't get a different kind of grace than the Jews who repented from being violent or adulterous after God's call through, say, prophet Amos. The Ninevites did not share all the beliefs and practices of the Jews. Yet God expected from them repentance and He extended His mercy on them upon the same terms. Jesus confirmed, centuries later, that the Ninevites did repent.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

If the Sikh is no longer a follower of gurus and confesses Jesus Christ as Lord, believing in his heart that He died and resurrected three days later and calls out to Him in faith; then the work of God in His life is called sanctification.

We can’t tell who is saint and who is not based on their creeds.
A person like Cornelius may have never heard or pay attention to the mission of Jesus, and still please God and be granted righteousness.

So, God can work the sanctification of the a Catholic priest, even if he keeps praying to Virgin Mary… or the sanctification of the Sikh, even if he continues to consider the Guru Granth Sahib as sacred text.
Furthermore, in some cases, the devotion to Mary and the Guru Granth Sahib can be instruments in the hands of God to inspire, guide and strengthen these men.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

I kindly suggest that you read 1 Corinthians 1-18-31.

God Bless

Thanks for your suggestion. I read 1 Corinthians 1:18-31
In this passage, The wisdom of God is contrasted with the wisdom of this world.
May I ask you to comment how this contrast applies to the scenario we are discussing?

 

[Joe]

Hi Joe

I think we are not talking here about human "merits" to get salvation. Are we?
We both understand that salvation is an undeserved gift from God, and that there is no "merit points" we can accumulate to "buy" our right to heaven.

Hi Pancho,

I hope not, but at times it seems you lean that way.

The salvation of God that has been revealed to all people for the forgiveness of sin, and God's miraculous transformation of life by His Spirit is contingent upon hearing and believing the Gospel of Jesus Christ; this being, He is God's Son that came into this world to die for our sins and bodily resurrected three days later.

You say "God's grace to forgive and transform is not conditioned to recognizing Jesus' deity, blood atonement or physical resurrection"

But in fact, the Lord's chosen Apostle says the opposite, "that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture says, "WHOEVER BELIEVES ON HIM WILL NOT BE PUT TO SHAME." For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For "WHOEVER CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD SHALL BE SAVED." (Rom 10:9-13)

There is only one way for a sinner to be justified by God and that is believing the Gospel of His Son, which is His deity, His blood shed for the atonement of our sins, and His resurrection. There is no other way, and yet you advocate there is; and this is where you have conflict with God's revealed truth. It is something you don't receive/accept/believe.

So, if two gluttons or drunkards succeed in acquiring new, healthy eating or drinking habits... and one of them is Presbyterian while the other is atheist, we cannot say that God made the work in the Presbyterian but that the atheist managed to succeed by his own merit. In both cases it was God who did the job.

God saved them from the slavery of gluttony or alcoholism. Neither the Presbyterian nor the atheist could have achieved that by their own merits.

Not true. If one is a believer (Presbyterian), we certainly can contribute his repentance to the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit.

The one who is an atheist cannot contribute his change of mind as repentance, for he does not believe in God.

In one case, God contributed to the repentance of the believer. In the atheist's case his drive to live longer and better motivated him, especially so since they do not believe in life after death.

Calvin would try to explain the difference by saying that, while the Presbyterian got a "salvific grace" from God, the atheist got a "common grace" from God... good, but not good enough.

However, in Scriptures there is no division between two kinds of "graces". There is no an effective and an ineffective type of grace.

I'm not a follower of John Calvin. His doctrine is earthly, of uninspired men to say the least.

God has grace upon all in this last day..."For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age, looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works." (Tit 2:11-14)

You will notice these key points in the Apostle Paul's proclamation.

1. the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men​

2. teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age​

3. looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ​

4. who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works​

The grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all people, meaning God publicly displayed His Son on a cross before the whole world as the atoning sacrifice for our sins and He arose from the grave three days later. This Gospel began being proclaimed in the power of the Holy Spirit through believing men fifty days after the death of our Lord. It flourished throughout the known world back then and has spread across the world in the generations of mankind since.

This grace that brings salvation teaches us to repent from a lifestyle of sin and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, as we are looking for the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. Not all men repent and believe. And not all men like yourself believe that Jesus is our Great God and Savior. And of this you need to repent and believe. The witnesses of God, the prophets, His Son, and His Son's Apostle's could not be much clearer.

He gave Himself to purchase us, to redeem us from our lawlessness to purify us for Himself His own people who are zealous to live Godly. The only way for any man to live righteously is by the Spirit of God, of whom only those in faith of Jesus Christ receive.

Rom 8:1-9 "There is therefore now no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to flesh, but according to Spirit. For the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus set me free from the law of sin and of death. For the Law being powerless, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and concerning sin, condemned sin in the flesh, so that the righteous demand of the Law might be fulfilled in us, those not walking according to flesh, but according to Spirit. For the ones that are according to flesh mind the things of the flesh. And the ones according to Spirit mind the things of the Spirit. For the mind of the flesh is death, but the mind of the Spirit is life and peace; because the mind of the flesh is enmity towards God; for it is not being subjected to the Law of God, for neither can it be. And those being in the flesh are not able to please God. But you are not in flesh, but in Spirit, since the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone has not the Spirit of Christ, this one is not His."

For example, the Ninevites who repented from being violent or adulterous after hearing God's call through Jonah didn't get a different kind of grace than the Jews who repented from being violent or adulterous after God's call through, say, prophet Amos. The Ninevites did not share all the beliefs and practices of the Jews. Yet God expected from them repentance and He extended His mercy on them upon the same terms. Jesus confirmed, centuries later, that the Ninevites did repent.

You are conflating the grace of God prior to Jesus Christ with the grace of God that now has appeared (Jesus Christ) bringing salvation to all men.

The Ninevites heard what God said and believed Him. Because of their fearful belief in the true Living God, and not a false god of a false belief system, they repented of their evil ways, "God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it"

The story of Jonah illustrates the grace of God to those who hear and believe Him, regardless if Jew or Gentile. It points to the grace of God that now brings salvation to all men, having already appreared and proclaimed throughout every generation since our Lord's death and resurrection. As Jesus told Nicodemus, "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

* An atheist hears what God said when hearing the message of Jesus Christ. He disbelieves and God's wrath remains upon him.​

* A Sikh hears what God said when hearing the message of Jesus Christ and believes with his heart that Jesus is God's Son who died for his sins and arose three days later from death, confessing with his mouth Jesus is Lord. This person is no longer a follower of gurus but of the Lord Jesus Christ. His life reflects the true glory of God by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit within him. He believed God and is saved from God's wrath.​

* Another Sikh hears the same message at the same time and yet disbelieves God's message through His Son. The wrath of God remains upon Him no matter what "good" he may do to honor the god of his belief, for "he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God". This is similar to the unbelieving Jew. They thought they could merit God's righteousness; therefore, they disbelieved in Jesus Christ.​

​

You disbelieve in the Divinity of His Son that God himself declared beforehand, Heb 1:8,10-12 "But of the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom." and “You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands; they will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment, like a robe you will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will have no end.” ..There are numerous other examples given to us by God of His Son's Divinity. You have rejected them all.​

​

You say that one does not need to recognize that Jesus Christ died for their sin,; and yet this is the very blood of God's atonement for our sins, which is absolutely required for the forgiveness of sin.​

​

And you say one does not need to recognize the physical resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave Himself to "redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works". And yet the message of God is to "believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." The Lord Himself said, "And he began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes and be killed, and after three days rise again."​

​

The reason why it is necessary for one to believe that Jesus is God is because God has revealed Him as such. In no other time has God revealed to mankind His Son and His eternalness, and that His Son created all things and sustains all things by His powerful Word.​

​

The reason why it is necessary for one to believe that Jesus died for their sins is because God revealed it through the Law and the prophets, and finally from the mouth of His Son and His Apostles.​

​

The reason why it is necessary to believe that Jesus physically resurrected is because it is declared by God, the prophets, and He Himself declared it would happen and did. Without His resurrection there is no justification to life for anyone. His resurrection validates His Divinity, His blood that makes atonement for our sins, and our justification to eternal life as promised by God.​

​

Again, I kindly ask for you to repent-have a change of mind and believe God's message concerning His grace that has appeared to all people. You are promoting your beliefs and not God's as revealed by a virgin birth by the Spirit of God, on a cross where sinless blood was shed to bring the complete forgiveness of sin, and in a resurrection that proves Jesus is God's Son who came as foretold and died for our sins and arose to give us eternal life.​

​

God Bless​

​

 

[Studyman]

I have given some thought to your post since yesterday, my friend. I have two comments:

1. I find no evidence in the gospels that Jesus called people to leave "Judaism" or the religious system they had: "their" rituals, organization, leadership, sacred textbook, core beliefs.

This is why I asked the question, which still remains unanswered on this forum, "what is Judaism?". Paul, as a zealous member of the religious sect of the Pharisees, said that he "Persecuted the Church of God".

Gal. 1: 13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: 14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous "of the" traditions of my fathers.

I am hoping that maybe you and I can have an honest and open discussion about what the Scriptures say about this extremely relevant question. Clearly there was a "Church of God" that Jesus was a member of, actually the head of, and there was the religious sect of the Pharisees, which Paul is calling "the Jews religion".

Jesus, John the Baptist, the Wise men, Zacharias and Elizibeth, Simeon, Anna and others who "Yielded themselves" servants to obey God, made up the "church of God". These men listened to, believed and lived by the Words of God as spoken through Moses and the Prophets. The Early Church of God under His prophesied High Priest Jesus, were also members of "the Church of God".

While the religious masses of Jerusalem, that great religious philosopher Gamaliel, most of the Levite Priests of the Temple, were of the religious sect of the Pharisees, who taught for doctrines the commandments of men, not God. Who went about establishing their own righteousness, refusing to submit to the Righteousness of God. Who, as it is written, "have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it". (Acts 7: 51-53)

So clearly there were TWO ways/paths here. One way/path walked by Jesus and "EVERY" example of faithful men from Abel to Cornelious walked in the "WAY" which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. (Eph. 2:10)

The other way, the more popular way walked by the masses, walked in the doctrines, philosophies and traditions of men, and not God.

So when you say "Judaism", which "WAY" are you speaking to?

Jesus called people to provide spiritual meaning to their religion... to stop being hypocrites, to repent from their sins (their lack of love, their hypocresy). When telling people how their relationship should be with Pharisees, for example, Jesus said people should believe what they taught, but not follow their example on how they practiced what they taught. It was, therefore, more like a profound renovation of the system, that a call to leave the system.

Well my friend, let's read the exchange together and see.

Matt. 23: 1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, (Everyone) 2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

What does it mean, "Sit in Moses seat"? Isn't this the very reason "why" Jesus said to listen to them, "Because" they sat in Moses' seat"? According to Scriptures, what did they do on the Sabbath days?

Acts 15: 21 For Moses of old time hath in every city "them that preach him", being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

So my friend, who "Read" Moses to the People on the Sabbath Days? Are these not those Pharisees who sit in Moses Seat? Who had exclusive access to the "Book of Moses"? Was it not the Scribes and religious sect of the Pharisees?

So then these preachers read the Bible, Yes? But what did their religious sect promote to the people?

Matt. 23: 4 For they (Not God or Moses) bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.

13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

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 child of hell than yourselves.

33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:

35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

Luke 13: 27 But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity. 28 There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.

My friend Pancho, how can you say that Jesus didn't teach His People to repent, leave this religious system, and follow HIM?

2 Cor. 6: 16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,

18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

2. Moses organized the people of God.
Jesus also organized his Church with disciples and the 70s, and his disciples organized it further. So, an organized system is divine in origin.

I would say that, according to Scriptures, Moses described God's Organization to the Children of Israel and showed them that God wanted to give them a chance to adopt HIS Ways, as their own, thus saving them from slavery to Sin (Egypt).

So then, let's be Biblically Honest about Moses organizing the people of God. Of the 600,000 men who left Egypt to follow Moses, how many chose to be a part of God's Organization? Paul said not to be ignorant of this in 1 Cor. 10.

And the Scriptures say it is God who ADDS to His Church, not Moses, Yes? And it is God who gives men to Jesus, Yes? So then, God's organization is divine in origin. Whereas "man's" organization, in every example given to us in the Holy Scriptures, is evil in origin. Moses didn't create a religion apart from the instructions of God. Jesus only spoke those Words given Him by this same God. Paul promoted the Law and Prophets "for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works".

Even if they "Profess to know God", even if they "call Jesus Lord, Lord", if they don't repent from their ways, and adopt God's Way as their own, then this life is their reward.

Buddha, Muhammed, Bahaullah, they all organized people around them and gave them responsibilities.

So did the Pharisees. So did the Catholics and her Protestant Daughters. In every case, every one of these religious businesses and sects, who "professed to know God", create their own righteousness, their own judgments, their own high days, their own images of God.

Does it matter? It sure did to the God of Abraham, and His Son Jesus. And because I am purchased by them, and am not my own, it therefore matters to me.

Indeed, no Cause or Entreprise could prosper without an organization, rules, roles and responsibilities, material resources (including financing) and a core set of shared values and objectives.

What do you think?

I think you are sincere in your belief. And choosing an organized religious sect or business of this world has been a popular tradition of man since long before Jesus was born.

But my commitment is to the God of Abraham, not this world's religious businesses that don't walk in His Way that HE before ordained that men should walk in them. I understand the seduction and pull of these "other voices" in the garden. You once showed me a Scriptures which changed a long-held perception I had, that I didn't even know I still harbored. I would like to return the favor with the same Author concerning this world's seductive religious philosophies and traditions.

Read Proverbs 7.

Jesus once said that men love darkness, and HE goes on to describe that there are two kinds of people who love darkness. One, refuses to go to the Light, "lest his deeds" should be shown or reproved. This man works to preserve and protect his darkness (traditions, doctrines, philosophies of man) by ignoring or hiding from the Light that would expose them.

The other man who loves darkness wants truth and comes to the Light for the very purpose of exposing the darkness. At first, he might feel like he suffered loss when the precious darkness (traditions, doctrines, philosophies of man) is exposed, but in time he comes to be grateful for the Light, and realize he didn't lose anything, rather, he gained and grew in the knowledge of God.

Of course, this is simply my, a complete nobody's, understanding gained from many years of study and life's experience outside of this world's religious system. Like you, I am also sincere in my belief. The reasons why I believe this way are founded in my understanding of Every Word of Scripture which I hold as profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. As you can see, this understanding isn't received well from any of the promoters of this world's religious sects and businesses. The Pharisees were not too keen on this understanding either. Thanks for giving me a platform to share what I have learned, and who I learned it from.

May God bring us both to the knowledge of His Truth.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

The reason why it is necessary for one to believe that Jesus is God is because God has revealed Him as such. In no other time has God revealed to mankind His Son and His eternalness, and that His Son created all things and sustains all things by the word of His power.​

​

The reason why it is necessary for one to believe that Jesus died for their sins is because God revealed it through the Law and the prophets, and finally from the mouth of His Son and His Apostles.​

​

The reason why it is necessary to believe that Jesus physically resurrected is because it is declared by God, the prophets, and He Himself declared it would happen and did. Without His resurrection there is no justification to life for anyone. His resurrection validates His Divinity, His blood that makes atonement for our sins, and our justification to eternal life as promised by God.​

One thing is that God reveals the truths A, B, C and D.
A very different thing, though is to say that, as a condition to be forgiven and transformed by God, we must assent to the truths A, B, C and D.

Let me give you an example:
Many Christians believe that God revealed in the Book of Genesis that the creation was made in 6 literal days. Some other Christians do not believe that those days and events are literal. So, Christians debate with other Christians around that.

Well: one thing is to debate whether the doctrine of creation in 6 literal days is true or wrong. A very different thing, though, is for the literalists to say that the non-literalists MUST believe in a creation of 6 days to be saved, because believing otherwise implies disbelief in the authority of the Word of God, and therefore, all what it says in turn of any topic.

Those literalists, in such scenario, are ADDING a requisite for salvation that Jesus never placed. In this Forum, @civic has accused the non-literalists Christian pastors and theologians of "betraying the faith", for not believing in a literallity of the accounts of 6-day creation, the Fall, the Flood, etc. To my understanding, "betraying the faith" is incompatible with being saved. So, @civic is adding a requisite to those men to be saved. I have read other Christians say that praying to Virgin Mary is not compatible with salvation. They are also adding a requisite for salvation. Others have asked me to deny The Quran, the mission of Prophet Muhammad or Bahá'u'lláh. They are adding three requisites for salvation.

So, my question is: who is in possession of the list of theological requisites for salvation?

• Jehovah Witnesses believe in the substitutionary blood atonement of Jesus for our sins. But for many of you, that's not enough.
• Mormons believe in the substitutionary atonement of Jesus for our sins, and in his physical resurrection, and even in his deity, but their weird, unbiblical conception of deity makes their faith "not good enough" for salvation in your view.
• Catholics believe in the three things: substitutionary atonement, Jesus deity, Jesus physical resurrection... but for some of you, that's not "good enough" yet.
• Calvinists believe in the three things, but since in their view the substitutionary atonement is limited to those predestined to believe, some of you think that's not "good enough": it is doctrine of demons, designed to lead people to eternal damnation.

You claim that salvation is not about merits, but in reality you still demand intelectual merits from people to be saved. You want people to answer correctly a quiz of 10, 50 or 100 questions on Theology.
To make things worse, you value intellectual merits over objective proofs of commitment to Christ: acts of genuine love.

In this thread, my intention is not to debate whether Jesus was God or not, whether the penal substitutionary blood atonement is true or false, or whether Jesus has in this moment a physical body or not. There are many other good threads for that.
I am debating whether God demands from the sinner to believe A, B or C as a condition to be forgiven and transformed.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

So when you say "Judaism", which "WAY" are you speaking to?

I am speaking about the spectrum of beliefs and practices derived sincerely from the Torah and the Tanakh.
I am including the term "sincerely" because not all Jews believed exactly the same nor practiced exactly the same things.
I am excluding all beliefs or practices that were created with the purpose to exploit people in the interest of political power, for example.

Now, what did Jesus specifically call people to do with the Pharisees?
"For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven." (Mat 5:20).

When Jesus spoke with the Pharisee Nicodemus, Jesus did not urge him to reject any theological view or to cease practicing any ritual related to the Torah. Jesus said that salvation was about repenting ("being born from the water") and being transformed into a new person ("being born from the spirit").

Even in the question of the Temple, Jesus did not preach against the Temple. He valued the Temple so much, that he threw away the vendors. He wanted to restore the Temple to its original, spiritual meaning of "House of God".

So, to my knowledge, there was no core belief or practice of Judaism (understood as "the spectrum of beliefs and practices derived sincerely from the Torah and the Tanakh") that Jesus was calling people to abandon.

 

[Joe]

One thing is that God reveals the truths A, B, C and D.
A very different thing, though is to say that, as a condition to be forgiven and transformed by God, we must assent to the truths A, B, C and D.

So, my question is: who is in possession of the list of theological requisites for salvation?

• Jehovah Witnesses believe in the substitutionary blood atonement of Jesus for our sins. But for many of you, that's not enough.
• Mormons believe in the substitutionary atonement of Jesus for our sins, and in his physical resurrection, and even in his deity, but their weird, unbiblical conception of deity makes their faith "not good enough" for salvation in your view.
• Catholics believe in the three things: substitutionary atonement, Jesus deity, Jesus physical resurrection... but for some of you, that's not "good enough" yet.
• Calvinists believe in the three things, but since in their view the substitutionary atonement is limited to those predestined to believe, some of you think that's not "good enough": it is doctrine of demons, designed to lead people to eternal damnation.

Pancho,

I am a non-denominational believer of Jesus Christ, and I have stated repeatedly what God, the prophets of God, God's Son and His chosen Apostles say about salvation and what one must do to be saved.

One must repent and believe that Jesus Christ is Lord. That He died for your sins, which means His blood shed on a cross makes you right with God. And that He bodily resurrected after three days, being made Lord..."you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” (Rom 10:9-13)

You claim that salvation is not about merits, but in reality you still demand intelectual merits from people to be saved. You want people to answer correctly a quiz of 10, 50 or 100 questions on Theology.
To make things worse, you value intellectual merits over objective proofs of commitment to Christ: acts of genuine love.

This sounds just like the Calvinist who argues if we do anything to be saved, then it is not God's grace who saves you it is your works. And my reply is, who believed for you, God or you? Who confessed with your mouth, God, or you? Who repented for you, God or you?

You place yourself into a similar conundrum by skirting around God's salvation as told by God saying I demand intellectual involvement that you call "merits".

* Firstly, one must hear the Gospel message of Christ. That Gospel message in short is, God sent His Son Jesus Christ into our world to die for our sins to make us right with God. He resurrected three days later and is Lord over all.​

* Secondly, Do you think God did not intend for people to use their capacity for understanding, thinking, and reasoning to believe His Gospel message? Isa 1:18, "Come now, let us reason together, says the LORD: though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool." What is repentance but a change of mind based upon hearing God's Word.​

Yes, mankind is supposed to think about what God says and what it means.

What does this mean for the Muslim, or anyone else who disbelieves that Jesus Christ is God's Son who actually died on a cross for them and actually resurrected and ascended to the right hand of God, being made Lord over all? It means they are not saved, but remain under the wrath of God no matter how good of a life they live to a lie of self righteousness.

Will they be judged and good works credited? Perhaps, but by denying the only name under heaven given to man which he can be saved, they have refused God's salvation and are condemned for their sins. Jesus Himself said, "Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God." and the Apostle Peter said of Jesus Christ, "And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

Your appeal for salvation by works instead of faith in God's Son is demonstrably in opposition to the true Living God. And again, with all sincerity, I ask that you repent-have a change of mind based upon what God has shown all men in the New Covenant of His Son's blood. No one will be cleared of sin by disbelieving in the true witness of God's Son, whose death on a cross was for our sins, and His resurrection to life and God making Him Lord and Christ over all.

In this thread, my intention is not to debate whether Jesus was God or not, whether the penal substitutionary blood atonement is true or false, or whether Jesus has in this moment a physical body or not. There are many other good threads for that.
I am debating whether God demands from the sinner to believe A, B or C as a condition to be forgiven and transformed.

I have declared many times in my responses this very simple basic truth of God's salvation, His forgiveness of sin and transformation of life: "that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture says, "WHOEVER BELIEVES ON HIM WILL NOT BE PUT TO SHAME." For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For "WHOEVER CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD SHALL BE SAVED." (Rom 10:9-13)

Jesus Christ Himself has said, "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." (Joh 3:16)

He also immediately said, "For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." (Joh 3:17-18)

Rom 8:1-9 "There is therefore now no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to flesh, but according to Spirit. For the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus set me free from the law of sin and of death. For the Law being powerless, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and concerning sin, condemned sin in the flesh, so that the righteous demand of the Law might be fulfilled in us, those not walking according to flesh, but according to Spirit. For the ones that are according to flesh mind the things of the flesh. And the ones according to Spirit mind the things of the Spirit. For the mind of the flesh is death, but the mind of the Spirit is life and peace; because the mind of the flesh is enmity towards God; for it is not being subjected to the Law of God, for neither can it be. And those being in the flesh are not able to please God. But you are not in flesh, but in Spirit, since the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone has not the Spirit of Christ, this one is not His."

But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. (Tit 3:4-7)

O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified? This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?— Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh? (Gal 3:1-3)

"We who are Jews by birth and not sinful Gentiles know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified. (Gal 2:15-16)

The passages above clearly give us the condition for the forgiveness of sin and transformation of life by the Spirit of God for those in Christ.

Anything else but repentance from sinful living and faith in Jesus Christ is works of righteousness, of which no man will be justified to eternal life. And true spiritual transformation of life only comes after believing in Jesus Christ.

I hold to what God says, especially now that His Son has been revealed for our salvation.

I hope you receive the truth as revealed by God through His Son.

God Bless

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

What does this mean for the Muslim, or anyone else who disbelieves that Jesus Christ is God's Son who actually died on a cross for them and actually resurrected and ascended to the right hand of God, being made Lord over all? It means they are not saved, but remain under the wrath of God no matter how good of a life they live to a lie of self righteousness.

Why do you call self-righteousness a life of submission to God in such a Muslim?
Can't you see the big mistake you are making? Please reflect on that.
You are invalidating a true transformation operated by God and calling it "self-righteousness" because that Muslim does not hold your theological views on crucifixion and resurrection. If that person were a Baptist, would you be calling it "self-righteousness"?

Will they be judged and good works credited? Perhaps, but by denying the only name under heaven given to man which he can be saved, they have refused God's salvation and are condemned for their sins. Jesus Himself said, "Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God." and the Apostle Peter said of Jesus Christ, "And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

Jesus on the cross did not wait for the polytheistic Roman Soldiers to know about Him and make any confession with their mouths about who he was. Jesus acted as a Mediator for the Roman soldiers and asked God to forgive them. Why, then, don't you think that the same Jesus can act as a Mediator for the monotheistic Muslims, who worship the same God that Jesus worshiped and believe Jesus was sent by God as the Messiah?

If you want to know who believes in Jesus and who disbeliefs, what is the test you apply? What is the test that Jesus Himself applies?

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

One must repent and believe that Jesus Christ is Lord.

Dear Joe and @Dizerner

Who believes that Jesus Christ is Lord?

​

He who submits his will to the will of The Father, just as Christ did.​

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." (Matthew 7:21)​

​

He who does not practice evil​

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!’ (Matthew 7:22,23)​

Who has been born again?

​

He who does not live a life of sin anymore.​

Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God. (1 John 3:9)​

Who abides in Christ?

​

He who follows his commandments.​

Now he who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. (1 John 3:24)​

If the Sikh or the Catholic priest of our scenario start living a life in which they do not practice evil, but follow God's commandments, all we can say is that THEY BELIEVE IN CHRIST (independently of how accurate or wrong are they in regard to their specific Christology), and they are living such a holy life BECAUSE God's grace is changing them. Not because they are changing themselves!
They are among those sheep on the right that will go to paradise in the Final Judgement (Matthew 25:31-46).

 

[DavidTree]

Hello Pancho,

There's only one true, real living God and that is the God of the Jewish people. The rest of mankind served false gods, and most certainly the demon possessed Muhammed that brought forth the devil's counter lie to the true God that He revealed through Jesus Christ.

God did not reveal Himself through the Gentiles. He revealed Himself through His chosen people the blood line of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob to the world.

There is only one way to God and that is through Jesus Christ. There is only one faith, one Lord, and one baptism not many faiths, many Lords, and many baptisms.

To judge the one true God and His ways through His chosen people is not up to man, but what is up to man is to repent-have a change of mind and stop worshiping false gods and the doctrines of demons and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.

The Apostle Paul warns the Corinthian Gentile believers to stay true to God and not worship false gods and indulge in pagan revelry. Incorporating false faiths with the one true faith is akin to drinking from the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. We cannot mix the faiths of Gentiles with the faith given to us through Jesus Christ by God Himself.


God Bless

In appreciation of @Pancho Frijoles, who, like yourself, was created in the image of God.

We MUST back up to the Beginning = Genesis

God revealed Himself to all of mankind, in the Beginning and on thru to Noah.
There were no Jews and no Israel up to the Flood and shortly after.

However, SIN passed from Adam to ALL of MANKIND and God had already Prophesied to Satan on how HE was going to SAVE mankind.

This is where @Pancho Frijoles must begin his seeking, along with the Gospel, which BEGINS in Genesis.

SHALOM

 

[Studyman]

I am speaking about the spectrum of beliefs and practices derived sincerely from the Torah and the Tanakh.
I am including the term "sincerely" because not all Jews believed exactly the same nor practiced exactly the same things.
I am excluding all beliefs or practices that were created with the purpose to exploit people in the interest of political power, for example.

Now, what did Jesus specifically call people to do with the Pharisees?
"For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven." (Mat 5:20).

I can see the point you are trying to make. But you are implying that there was no difference between the philosophies, rituals and traditions lived by and promoted by Jesus and the Church of God, and the philosophies, rituals and traditions lived by and promoted by the religious sect of the Pharisees.

What was a Pharisee my friend? Are you saying Jesus was just a Righteous Pharisee? Do you not believe that a "Pharisee" was a Specific Religious Sect of that time, "who professed to know God"?

John 7: 47 Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived? 48 Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him?
The Bible says that the religious sect of the "Pharisees", who sat in Moses seat at that time, "taught for doctrines the commandments of men", not God or Moses in the Torah that they read from, and that their religious traditions caused those who adopted them, to transgress God's commandments as promoted by God and Moses in the Torah.
So what made a person a Pharisee? Was it not adopting their religious philosophies and Traditions? What makes a person a Baha 'i, or a Catholic? Is it not to adopt the specific religious philosophy and traditions of the Baha'i or the Catholic?

You once said you use to be SDA, and Catholic in your past life (I thought I read this, if I am mistaken, please forgive me), just as I was raised a Methodist and Paul was a Pharisee. But you left the traditions, rituals and teaching of the religious sect of the Catholic, therefore, you are no longer a Catholic, just as Paul was no longer a "Pharisee", just as I am no longer a Methodist.

If a "Pharisee" rejected the doctrines and traditions taught and lived in by the Pharisees religion, he is no longer a "Pharisee", Yes? Paul, you and I have all left the philosophies, traditions and rituals of one or more of this world's religious sects. Is this not truth?

If I continued to live "as a Pharisee", I "will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven".

Matt. 5: 17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

If the "Old Man" was a member and promoter of the religious sect of the Pharisee, then "New Man" could no longer be a Pharisee.

When Jesus spoke with the Pharisee Nicodemus, Jesus did not urge him to reject any theological view or to cease practicing any ritual related to the Torah.

I believe you feel this way because you have been convinced that the Torah and the "WORDS" therein that Jesus lived by, and said to "live by", are simply another "theological view" of many to choose from. One no different than the other. Whereas I hold this God and His Instruction in Righteousness as revealed in the Law and Prophets, AKA, "The Gospel of Christ", as more than just another "theological view", rather, a "Way of Life" before ordained by God that I should walk in them.

As a result, we see Scriptures through a different prism.

Jesus said that salvation was about repenting ("being born from the water") and being transformed into a new person ("being born from the spirit").

Yes, Nicodemus could no longer live as a Pharisee. No longer transgress God's Commandments by his own religious traditions. No longer engage, participate, defend, promote or live by the religious philosophies, doctrines and traditions of the Pharisees religion.

Remember, the "New Man" wasn't to be patterned after just another religious sect, or voice in the garden. But as Paul taught us, the New Man, "which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.

I would therefore, repent, "Turn to God" (for instruction in HIS righteousness, and HIS definition of true holiness) and bring forth "works" worthy of true repentance. Nicodemus could no longer live as a Pharisee, because "that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven."

Even in the question of the Temple, Jesus did not preach against the Temple. He valued the Temple so much, that he threw away the vendors. He wanted to restore the Temple to its original, spiritual meaning of "House of God".

So then, if this is true, Jesus failed in His Mission, yes? Because in less than 100 years, this Temple was a pile of rubble. I agree with you, there is certainly a Spiritual meaning behind these Words. Let's hear what God said to the builder of this temple.

1 Kings 9: 4 And "if" thou wilt walk before me, as David thy father walked, in integrity of heart, and in uprightness, to do according to all that I have commanded thee, and wilt keep my statutes and my judgments:

5 Then I will establish the throne of thy kingdom upon Israel for ever, as I promised to David thy father, saying, There shall not fail thee a man upon the throne of Israel.

6 But if ye shall at all turn from following me, ye or your children, and will not keep my commandments and my statutes which I have set before you, but go and serve other gods, and worship them:

7 Then will I cut off Israel out of the land which I have given them; and this house, which I have hallowed for my name, "will I cast out of my sight"; and Israel shall be a proverb and a byword among all people:

8 And at this house, which is high, every one that passeth by it shall be astonished, and shall hiss; and they shall say, Why hath the LORD done thus unto this land, and to this house?

9 And they shall answer, Because they forsook the LORD their God, who brought forth their fathers out of the land of Egypt, and have taken hold upon other gods, and have worshipped them, and served them: therefore hath the LORD brought upon them all this evil.

It is true that the Pharisees had turned God's Word, and His House, into a religious business, selling Salvation, and promoting the imagination of their own minds, not the Word of God. And this God is true to His Word, as we all can see.

So, to my knowledge, there was no core belief or practice of Judaism (understood as "the spectrum of beliefs and practices derived sincerely from the Torah and the Tanakh") that Jesus was calling people to abandon.

This is why the answer to my question is so important.

Luke 1: 5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

Is this the Core belief and practice of "Judaism"? And would or did Jesus call on men to abandon this way of life?

Mark 7: 6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. 8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. 9 And he said unto them, Full well "ye reject" the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

Or is this the core believe and practice of Judaism? And would or did Jesus call men to abandon this way of life?

Judaism can't be both.

 

[Dizerner]

Why do you call self-righteousness a life of submission to God in such a Muslim?
Can't you see the big mistake you are making? Please reflect on that.
You are invalidating a true transformation operated by God and calling it "self-righteousness" because that Muslim does not hold your theological views on crucifixion and resurrection. If that person were a Baptist, would you be calling it "self-righteousness"?

The reason here, is because Christian Theology teaches the sin nature.

The idea being, that when Adam rebelled and spiritually died, everyone that comes from Adam is then born spiritually dead.

That being the case, we are born incapable of purely loving and honoring God in all we do—both Baptists and Muslims and anyone.

So Christians are not going to heaven because they "out performed" Muslims, but because they are trusting in the grace of God—

and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law,
but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith; (Phil. 3:9 NKJ)

Jesus on the cross did not wait for the polytheistic Roman Soldiers to know about Him and make any confession with their mouths about who he was. Jesus acted as a Mediator for the Roman soldiers and asked God to forgive them. Why, then, don't you think that the same Jesus can act as a Mediator for the monotheistic Muslims, who worship the same God that Jesus worshiped and believe Jesus was sent by God as the Messiah?

Jesus did indeed speak forgiveness to those soldiers, but people read too much theology into that. Jesus asked God to forgive them of one specific crime, because they were ignorant—Jesus was not granting them complete forgiveness of all sins by that prayer.

Jesus told us to find forgiveness of our sins, there is only one way to do it—to trust in him completely as our ransom, to believe he is the Messiah that came to suffer for our sins, to pass from death to life by accepting his claim to authority to die on our behalf, to shed his Blood for the remission of our sins. And unless we drink his Blood we have no life in us, we have not passed from death to life. We have to believe.

If you want to know who believes in Jesus and who disbeliefs, what is the test you apply? What is the test that Jesus Himself applies?

The test Jesus applies is to believe that he is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world by a simple trust in the sufficiency of his suffering on the Cross for the remission of our sins.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

This is why the answer to my question is so important.

Luke 1: 5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

Is this the Core belief and practice of "Judaism"? And would or did Jesus call on men to abandon this way of life?

Mark 7: 6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. 8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. 9 And he said unto them, Full well "ye reject" the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

Or is this the core believe and practice of Judaism? And would or did Jesus call men to abandon this way of life?

Judaism can't be both.

Judaism can't be both and it was definitely the first example you gave, that of Zacharias and Elisabeth.
Additional norms or requirements imposed by the Pharisees were an obstacle for true religion, and not part of Judaism.

Inasmuch as supporting or participating in a religious community/church/sect lead us away from God, we should come out of it.
I would like to explain why I say "inasmuch"...
I say "inasmuch" because people commit to different levels of participation in such community or sect, and have different levels of awareness of the impact of their participation.

For example, a Catholic priest who is actively covering up sexual abuse inflicted on children by another priest is in one situation.
A Catholic priest who is risking his life to help and defend vulnerable villages in Africa, and has little knowledge of the problem of sexual abuse in his church, or no power to act on it, is in a totally different situation.

I'm not sure if the call of Christ to the second priest, the one in Africa, will ever imply leaving the Catholic Church. It may include that call. It may not. That priest may find that remaining in his church is indeed providing him the means to accomplish a very important salvific mission... or he may find that remaining in the church is actually an obstacle...

Let me ask you a question: If you were to make several trips in a "time machine" to the first three centuries of Christianity, when would you think that leaving the church would be the most sensible thing to do? What would be the factors that would drive you to such decision?
I make the same question to me. It is not to trick you, my brother. It is a sincere question to trigger reflection on how at a given time, an organization which is divine in origin can cease to be divine in practice.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

I believe you feel this way because you have been convinced that the Torah and the "WORDS" therein that Jesus lived by, and said to "live by", are simply another "theological view" of many to choose from. One no different than the other. Whereas I hold this God and His Instruction in Righteousness as revealed in the Law and Prophets, AKA, "The Gospel of Christ", as more than just another "theological view", rather, a "Way of Life" before ordained by God that I should walk in them.

Inasmuch as being a Pharisee implied to follow a wicked "Way of Life", the Pharisee who wanted to convert to Christ's Gospel had to stop being a Pharisee. If this change of "Way of Life" implied that such convert would be expulsed from the community of Pharisees, that "loss" was indeed a gain (Philippians 3:5-8)

I have given you (and perhaps many others) the impression that I don't care about theological views. Well, I give less emphasis to theological views as a deliberate reaction to the huge, insane emphasis on theological views shown by some Evangelical fundamentalists.
I do accept that some theological views can lead to evil thinking, evil doing. But only a very small proportion of them.
I believe that 95% of evil in the world does not come not from mistaken theological views, but from a sick spiritual condition.

I think my belief is supported by the fact that 95% or more of the Bible does not engage in theological debates, but with calls to action, to repentance, to obedience to straightforward, clear commandments from God.

 

[mikesw]

Inasmuch as being a Pharisee implied to follow a wicked "Way of Life", the Pharisee who wanted to convert to Christ's Gospel had to stop being a Pharisee. If this change of "Way of Life" implied that such convert would be expulsed from the community of Pharisees, that "loss" was indeed a gain (Philippians 3:5-8)

I have given you (and perhaps many others) the impression that I don't care about theological views. Well, I give less emphasis to theological views as a deliberate reaction to the huge, insane emphasis on theological views shown by some Evangelical fundamentalists.
I do accept that some theological views can lead to evil thinking, evil doing. But only a very small proportion of them.
I believe that 95% of evil in the world does not come not from mistaken theological views, but from a sick spiritual condition.

I think my belief is supported by the fact that 95% or more of the Bible does not engage in theological debates, but with calls to action, to repentance, to obedience to straightforward, clear commandments from God.

Pancho Frijoles rejects theological views that accept the message of scripture intact. If you try to defend scripture intact, some people will call this an insane emphasis on what scripture says. Though, it can be recognized that even someone who holds scripture intact can still make some errors of interpretation, but not as many as someone who is just trying to tear apart the passages of the deity of Christ in order to destroy the faith and ruin the way to Christ for those misled by such person.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Jesus did indeed speak forgiveness to those soldiers, but people read too much theology into that. Jesus asked God to forgive them of one specific crime, because they were ignorant—Jesus was not granting them complete forgiveness of all sins by that prayer.

Why would Jesus do it for that specific sin and not for other acts performed out of ignorance?
The meaning of "ignorance" is a very interesting one... and exciting one I would say, since we are all ignorant to some extent... and have no excuse for ignorance to some other extent.

Regardless of what "ignorance" means, my point here is that Jesus is willing to intercede for the sins committed in ignorance. Why? Out of love.

So, what an Evangelical Christian could claim, in the worst scenario, is that believing in a penal substitutionary atonement performed by Christ is needed inasmuch as the sinner has understood the meaning of this and deliberately rejected it in order to keep with their evil life, or with the approval of men, or with political or economic power, or any other reason that has nothing to do with repentance and change of life.

Take my case:

I don't believe in a penal substitutionary atonement (PSA) because I honestly don't think it has biblical, rational or ethical basis.
But in saying "I don't believe in PSA", I'm not seeking any worldy gain for myself. I still need to repent from my daily sins. I still need to allow the grace of God change my life.

By saying "I don't believe in PSA", I am not gaining a higher social position, or getting more money. I'm not getting immunity to a sinful life... and certainly, I'm not gaining a ticket for paradise or the like.

So, if Jesus actually performed PSA and I am wrong, I know Jesus will intercede for me, as He did for the Roman soldiers.

 

[mikesw]

Why would Jesus do it for that specific sin and not for other acts performed out of ignorance?
The meaning of "ignorance" is a very interesting one... and exciting one I would say, since we are all ignorant to some extent... and have no excuse for ignorance to some other extent.

Regardless of what "ignorance" means, my point here is that Jesus is willing to intercede for the sins committed in ignorance. Why? Out of love.

So, what an Evangelical Christian could claim, in the worst scenario, is that believing in a penal substitutionary atonement performed by Christ is needed inasmuch as the sinner has understood the meaning of this and deliberately rejected it in order to keep with their evil life, or with the approval of men, or with political or economic power, or any other reason that has nothing to do with repentance and change of life.

Take my case:

I don't believe in a penal substitutionary atonement (PSA) because I honestly don't think it has biblical, rational or ethical basis.
But in saying "I don't believe in PSA", I'm not seeking any worldy gain for myself. I still need to repent from my daily sins. I still need to allow the grace of God change my life.

By saying "I don't believe in PSA", I am not gaining a higher social position, or getting more money. I'm not getting immunity to a sinful life... and certainly, I'm not gaining a ticket for paradise or the like.

So, if Jesus actually performed PSA and I am wrong, I know Jesus will intercede for me, as He did for the Roman soldiers.

the problem with Pancho Frijoles is he will not accept the basic way of eternal life that Jesus had shared with people. Jesus did intercede for Pancho Frijoles but Panho Frijoles has not sought Christ to enjoy that.