Are the heathen lost?

[Ormly]

If you think so please remember Abraham was one prior to becoming the father of nations. What qualified him?

[Solly]

Nothing qualified him except God's choice and call. Getting saved was a bonus in the purposes of God, something Pharoah and Cyrus didn't share even though they also were called of God to serve his purposes. But then, Abraham was the Ur-believer [pun intended :teeth:].

[GoBahnsen]

If you think so please remember Abraham was one prior to becoming the father of nations. What qualified him? And so we're back to your "righteous men" theory? And good thing Noah was righteous or we all would have been done for?!

What kind of an OP question is this? Anyone who has ever been saved by pure grace (no one deserves it), was once a heathen or separated from God by their sin. Noah included. He found grace in God's eyes. God could have wiped sinful Noah off the map too. But God also had a promise to keep in bringing forth the "seed of the woman", so He graciously saves one man and his house.

In fact the Flood is always a great example of none righteous. A great example of man's free will getting him no where, but dead. Anyway, congratulations for starting your own thread Orm. Maybe it will help to keep you off the streets.:hehe:

[smaller]

Jesus had a mission:

John 3:17
For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

1 John 4:14
And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.

"LOVE NEVER FAILS"

God IS Love.

The world and all that is in it is LOVED by God, The Creator of "all things."

God is not a failure. God is not about to let evil and sin overcome His Creation. He Himself created evil, allows evil to prosper. Even raises evil up in the world to test.

At the conclusion of the events here in the mix of good (not perfection) and evil, the "real" works and workers of iniquity (A Mystery) will be revealed and they will be set aside forever, and...

Jesus Christ will have accomplished His Mission and Jesus will be, even as He is NOW, what He presented Himself to be.

The Saviour of The World.

[Ormly]

Interesting what comes out of the woodwork when one sprays some bug killer around. What else you fellas got besides nothing? -- And to the small-one here I will only speak to his short-sightedness. 4000 yrs was before Christ and the gospel that followed Him. What happened to them that were righteous during that preiod of time?

Oh and GB --- what is it you don't understand about righteousness that you need explaining so you can pass the course?

[smaller]

Interesting what comes out of the woodwork when one sprays some bug killer around. What else you got fellas besides nothing -- And to the small-one here I will only speak to his short-sightedness. 4000 yrs was before Christ and the gospel that followed Him. What happened to them that were righteous?

Perhaps you could actually tell me how it is that God fails so I may worship Him???

Or how it is that men came about to save themselves.

Why does anyone who is a supposed Christian promote that God is a Failure because of man, or that men save themselves???

Guess I just don't get it eh Ormly?

duh. Perhaps you can elaborate on the Glory of the Divine Failure who is usurped by what He created.

When my boys were children they believed that a little plastic GODzilla was going to get them while they slept. Go figure.

[Ormly]

Is there anyone else on this forum besides this cultist who doesn't understand the difference between comic book love and the love of God?

[Berean Todd]

What happened to them that were righteous during that preiod of time?
Simple ... there are none who are righteous, and there never were. The OT says, among other things:

1. The thoughts of mens hearts is only evil always
2. Man's heart is deceitfully wicked.
3. None are righteous.
4. All of man's rigteousness is as filthy rags in the sight of God.
5. All we have gone astray

In the NT we are told that:

1. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
2. If anyone claims to not be a sinner he is a liar and there is no truth in him.


That is just a brief, and very small smattering of things the Bible tells us about man's righteousness. There are none righteous. No not one. The only righteous man to ever live was Jesus Christ.

If there were someone who had ever lived the perfect, righteous life before Jesus then there was no need for Jesus. If Jesus is the only perfect one to ever live, then your argument is basically that man can be good enough to earn heaven which the Bible is clear that can NEVER happen.

Christ is not A way, He is THE Way. That was His claim of Himself, it stands for all times. Stop fighting the clear teaching of Scripture Ormly.

[FreeBrightMind]

Lost?! Hardly! My GPS says I'm at Latitude: 35.576674. Longitude: 97.498858, 1310 feet above sea level and I'm facing north. (good Feng Shui) :wink:

This is a theist only area.

[GoBahnsen]

Interesting what comes out of the woodwork when one sprays some bug killer around. What else you fellas got besides nothing? -- And to the small-one here I will only speak to his short-sightedness. 4000 yrs was before Christ and the gospel that followed Him. What happened to them that were righteous during that preiod of time?

Oh and GB --- what is it you don't understand about righteousness that you need explaining so you can pass the course?Don't worry Orm, all the normal bugs will exit the thread quickly.

[Ormly]

Simple ... there are none who are righteous, and there never were. The OT says, among other things:

1. The thoughts of mens hearts is only evil always
2. Man's heart is deceitfully wicked.
3. None are righteous.
4. All of man's rigteousness is as filthy rags in the sight of God.
5. All we have gone astray

In the NT we are told that:

1. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
2. If anyone claims to not be a sinner he is a liar and there is no truth in him.


That is just a brief, and very small smattering of things the Bible tells us about man's righteousness. There are none righteous. No not one. The only righteous man to ever live was Jesus Christ.

If there were someone who had ever lived the perfect, righteous life before Jesus then there was no need for Jesus. If Jesus is the only perfect one to ever live, then your argument is basically that man can be good enough to earn heaven which the Bible is clear that can NEVER happen.

Christ is not A way, He is THE Way. That was His claim of Himself, it stands for all times. Stop fighting the clear teaching of Scripture Ormly.
Kindly review these verses for starters and you just might want to re-consider your wrong interpretation of righteousness you adhere to. This is but a beginning.
De 4:27

De 6:18

De 6:25

De 12:25

De 13:18

De 24:13

Ps 15:2

Ps 24:4

Ps 106:3

Pr 10:2

Pr 11:4

Pr 15:9

Pr 16:6

Pr 21:3

Pr 21:21

Isa 51:1

Isa 56:2

Je 22:3

Eze 3:21

Eze 18:5

Da 4:27

Ho 10:12

Amos 5:14

Amos 5:24

Zep 2:3

Zec 8:19

[Berean Todd]

Kindly review these verses for starters and you just might want to re-consider your wrong interpretation of righteousness you adhere to. This is but a beginning.
De 4:27

De 6:18

De 6:25


Ok, I'm at work, so I don't have time nor ability to do extensive verse studies, but in just looking at these first 3 there isn't a single one of them that addresses a single point I made. The closest thing was:

Deuteronomy 6
25 "It will be righteousness for us if we are careful to observe all this commandment before the LORD our God, just as He commanded us.

Notice the bold. Will be. If we. The problem is we all slip and no one is able to stand up to God's standard. Sure you might look good compared to other PEOPLE, but that is not our measuring rod, that is pharisaical. We are to compare ourselves to God's standards, and none of us measures up there. No not one.

While you're so fond of lists, mine was rather short, I notice you didn't address a single one of the 6 points I made from statements made in the Scriptures.

[Ormly]

Ok, I'm at work, so I don't have time nor ability to do extensive verse studies, but in just looking at these first 3 there isn't a single one of them that addresses a single point I made. The closest thing was:

[QUOTE] Deuteronomy 6
25 "It will be righteousness for us if we are careful to observe all this commandment before the LORD our God, just as He commanded us.

Notice the bold. Will be. If we. The problem is we all slip and no one is able to stand up to God's standard. Sure you might look good compared to other PEOPLE, but that is not our measuring rod, that is pharisaical. We are to compare ourselves to God's standards, and none of us measures up there. No not one.

I did. You're wrong. Need I name them? Surely you jest.

While you're so fond of lists, mine was rather short, I notice you didn't address a single one of the 6 points I made from statements made in the Scriptures.
Because they are completely out of context. Line them up with they pertain to and perhaps we can review them.

[Tercel]

Berean,

There are an absolutely huge number of verses throughout the bible that speak of people actually being righteous. Many a time in the OT people of God call out to him and say something like "God, I am oppressed by my enemies, please won't you save me from these wicked people! Whereas I am faithful and righteous before you. Won't you save me, your faithful servant? Lord, please come in judgement and declare that I am righteous and they are wicked!" The psalms are full of such thinking. (Ormly has listed numerous such verses) The idea that there is no one at all that is righteous is a pretty unbiblical idea when you reflect on these verses.

So what are we to make of the verses that say "everyone is evil" etc. Well, you'll find that if you look up the context that they are almost always referring to specific groups of people at specific times at specific places. For example, many of the "no one is righteous" quotes that Paul quotes in Romans 3 are taken from the Psalms that have the context I described above:
A man who is convinced of his own righteousness is crying out to God to save him from his wicked enemies none of whom are righteous. Thus he laments such things as "no one is righteous: they have all turned away!" The idea that he's meaning to say "there is no one righteous in the whole world ever" is just silly.

Paul's reason for quoting those verses in Romans 3 incidently, is that he's arguing that the jews as a people as a whole are no better off than the gentiles as a people as a whole in God's sight as both have the problem of sin. His point is that Jews are not inherently special. Thus he quotes numberous scriptures that show individual groups of jews and individual groups of gentiles at specific times and specific places sinning in various ways.

And righteousness in Pauline theology has to do with being part of the community of God. It's relational not judicial, thus one can sin and be righteous at the same time, just as a child can be disobedient to their parents but they are still a child of those parents.

The only righteous man to ever live was Jesus Christ.The bible calls Job blameless, Abraham is accounted righteous, Moses tells people that the law is not too hard to keep, numberous psalms attribute righteousness to their writers etc.

If there were someone who had ever lived the perfect, righteous life before Jesus then there was no need for Jesus. If Jesus is the only perfect one to ever live, then your argument is basically that man can be good enough to earn heaven which the Bible is clear that can NEVER happen.Your entire paradigm is flawed: No one can "earn" their way to heaven. Even were someone to be perfect and live a perfect life absolutely they would not have "earned" anything. That idea is based on an extension of the Roman Catholic merit theology. They thought that if men were good they would merit their way to heaven. Protestants realised that men aren't usually perfect, and thus claimed that though men could in principle merit their way to heaven in practice no one can. But the idea that men can in principle earn their way to heaven is totally wrong.

[Ormly]

Berean,

There are an absolutely huge number of verses throughout the bible that speak of people actually being righteous. Many a time in the OT people of God call out to him and say something like "God, I am oppressed by my enemies, please won't you save me from these wicked people! Whereas I am faithful and righteous before you. Won't you save me, your faithful servant? Lord, please come in judgement and declare that I am righteous and they are wicked!" The psalms are full of such thinking. (Ormly has listed numerous such verses) The idea that there is no one at all that is righteous is a pretty unbiblical idea when you reflect on these verses.

So what are we to make of the verses that say "everyone is evil" etc. Well, you'll find that if you look up the context that they are almost always referring to specific groups of people at specific times at specific places. For example, many of the "no one is righteous" quotes that Paul quotes in Romans 3 are taken from the Psalms that have the context I described above:
A man who is convinced of his own righteousness is crying out to God to save him from his wicked enemies none of whom are righteous. Thus he laments such things as "no one is righteous: they have all turned away!" The idea that he's meaning to say "there is no one righteous in the whole world ever" is just silly.

Paul's reason for quoting those verses in Romans 3 incidently, is that he's arguing that the jews as a people as a whole are no better off than the gentiles as a people as a whole in God's sight as both have the problem of sin. His point is that Jews are not inherently special. Thus he quotes numberous scriptures that show individual groups of jews and individual groups of gentiles at specific times and specific places sinning in various ways.

And righteousness in Pauline theology has to do with being part of the community of God. It's relational not judicial, thus one can sin and be righteous at the same time, just as a child can be disobedient to their parents but they are still a child of those parents.

The bible calls Job blameless, Abraham is accounted righteous, Moses tells people that the law is not too hard to keep, numberous psalms attribute righteousness to their writers etc.

Your entire paradigm is flawed: No one can "earn" their way to heaven. Even were someone to be perfect and live a perfect life absolutely they would not have "earned" anything. That idea is based on an extension of the Roman Catholic merit theology. They thought that if men were good they would merit their way to heaven. Protestants realised that men aren't usually perfect, and thus claimed that though men could in principle merit their way to heaven in practice no one can. But the idea that men can in principle earn their way to heaven is totally wrong.Thanks Tercel.

I wish people here on this forum would begin to see what you have written and begin to build on it as a truth. There is no error in it. It is a way to realising more corrective truth to their way of thinking. Thanks :smile: :smile:

[Berean Todd]

Berean,

There are an absolutely huge number of verses throughout the bible that speak of people actually being righteous. Many a time in the OT people of God call out to him and say something like "...Whereas I am faithful and righteous before you" ... The psalms are full of such thinking.
Notice the bold there - yes there are places where PEOPLE tell God they are righteous. Find me one where God says that anyone is righteous before Him. Job was an amazing example of an upstanding, godly man ... and yet God had to put him in his place pretty well.

The bible calls Job blameless,
As I said, and God had to put him in his place ...

Abraham is accounted righteous,
On what basis? Abraham many times disobeyed God. The Bible does say he was ACCOUNTED righteous, but on what grounds? On the grounds of his faith, not his righteousness!

Moses tells people that the law is not too hard to keep,
And yet he was not allowed to enter the promised land because he didn't follow God's commands himself ...

numberous psalms attribute righteousness to their writers etc.
As I've covered, someone calling himself righteous isn't exactly coming from the right source.

Next.

[Ormly]

Notice the bold there - yes there are places where PEOPLE tell God they are righteous. Find me one where God says that anyone is righteous before Him. Job was an amazing example of an upstanding, godly man ... and yet God had to put him in his place pretty well.


As I said, and God had to put him in his place ...


On what basis? Abraham many times disobeyed God. The Bible does say he was ACCOUNTED righteous, but on what grounds? On the grounds of his faith, not his righteousness!


And yet he was not allowed to enter the promised land because he didn't follow God's commands himself ...


As I've covered, someone calling himself righteous isn't exactly coming from the right source.

Next.
<Oh what twisting of the account of things>

You know Jesus never said go to heathen and get them saved. He said: "Go and tell them about me". Why do you think that was so?

[Tercel]

Notice the bold there - yes there are places where PEOPLE tell God they are righteous. Find me one where God says that anyone is righteous before Him.The passages that say "no one is righteous" are PEOPLE telling God that, not God saying that. Do you consider them equally irrelevant?

Job was an amazing example of an upstanding, godly man...Yes, God specifically says Job is "blameless" before Him.

On what basis? Abraham many times disobeyed God. The Bible does say he was ACCOUNTED righteous, but on what grounds? On the grounds of his faith, not his righteousness!I'm not saying he was! Sinlessness is not the same thing as righteousness. No one can "merit" righteousness by being sinless. Abraham couldn't, Job couldn't, Jesus couldn't, no one can. God accounts as his people ("reckons righteous") those who are devoted to Him (who are "faithful"). Jesus was devoted to God, obeying him even to death on the cross, so God powerfully vindicated him as the core of God's covenant people. Abraham was devoted to God so God account him one of God's people. Those who are God's people can still sin, but God overlooks and forgives sin by his grace.

The NT is all about being God's people ("the righteousness of God"), which is acheived by devotion to him ("faith"). Until you get that basic concept you're going to completely miss almost all of Pauline theology.

As I've covered, someone calling himself righteous isn't exactly coming from the right source.1. It's coming from the Bible, maybe you think those bits of the bible should be removed for being theologically unsound according to you?
2. The bits you are quoting saying "no one is righteous" come from the exact same place - the mouths of the people you're claiming don't count, and furthermore you're even ignoring the context of their statements because they're saying the opposite of what your out-of-context quotations make them sound like they're saying.

[Berean Todd]

You know Jesus never said go to heathen and get them saved. He said: "Go and tell them about me". Why do you think that was so?
The Bible also says:

1. The one who believes in Him is not condemend. The one who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God. (Jn 3:18)

2. I am the door, if anyone comes in through me he will be saved

3. I am the Way the Truth and the Life, no one comes to the Father but through me.

4. For there is no other name under heaven given among people by which we must be saved.

Just a small sampling once again.

[Berean Todd]

Sinlessness is not the same thing as righteousness.
Yes it is. Righteousness is right-actions, it is a lack of wrong doing, it has to do with being right in all things, in all relationships, of a lack of wrong-doing, and ONLY God is righteous!

No one can "merit" righteousness by being sinless. Abraham couldn't, Job couldn't, Jesus couldn't, no one can.
You're wrong. No one can "merit" righteousness is correct, but the reason is because no one could be sinless. Except Jesus. He was righteous not because of His devotion to God - HE WAS GOD. He was righteous because He was sinless.

God accounts as his people ("reckons righteous") those who are devoted to Him (who are "faithful").
You are right .... old testament, new testament, then, now, we can all be reckoned righteous by God because of our faithfulness. It is through faith that we receive the imputation of Christ's righteousness, and in such we are reckoned righteous in God's sight. That's not the issue, Ormly claims that we can be righteous in and of ourselves, and we can't. We can be RECKONED righteous, because of our faith, through grace, and the imparted, imputed righteousness of Christ that we thus receive.


Jesus was devoted to God, obeying him even to death on the cross, so God powerfully vindicated him as the core of God's covenant people.
Are you mormon? JW? Jesus was God. He wasn't reckoned righteous because of His faith, He was faithful because He was righteous in and of Himself. The only human ever to live the fully righteous life. Because He wasn't just man, He was the God-man.

Abraham was devoted to God so God account him one of God's people. Those who are God's people can still sin, but God overlooks and forgives sin by his grace.
I've never disputed that.

The NT is all about being God's people ("the righteousness of God"), which is acheived by devotion to him ("faith"). Until you get that basic concept you're going to completely miss almost all of Pauline theology.
Again I've never disputed that, in fact that is what I'm arguing. We can have the righteousness of God imputed in us through our faith. We can be accounted as righteous through our faith. That though is not what Ormly is arguing, He claims we can be righteous in and of ourselves.

1. It's coming from the Bible, maybe you think those bits of the bible should be removed for being theologically unsound according to you?
No, but I think they should be taken in context. Because I say that I'm the strongest man in the world doesn't make it so. Because someone writes that they are righteous does not make it so. They may be accounted righteous because of their faith, but it is a foreign righteousness, not one in and of themselves.

[Tercel]

Berean,

I am an Orthodox Christian. I indeed believe Jesus was God. Nothing I have said was at all intended to imply otherwise.

Righteousness is right-actions, it is a lack of wrong doing, it has to do with being right in all things, in all relationships, of a lack of wrong-doing, and ONLY God is righteous!This seems a pivitol problem. Yes, I am perfectly aware how you as a person following the traditional Protestant/Reformed theology want to define righteousness in this way. And I am telling you in my capacity as a person fairly well studied in Pauline theology that this is just incorrect.
I will follow this post with a clear analysis of Paul's quotations about no one being righteous and you can see for yourself what the Bible says.

We can be RECKONED righteous, because of our faith, through grace, and the imparted, imputed righteousness of Christ that we thus receive.Yes we are accounted righteous through faihfulness to God. Righteousness is not "imputed" though, the Reformers were just plain wrong in their judicial paradigm: Pauline theology follows a covenantal paradigm not a judicial one.

He wasn't reckoned righteous because of His faith, He was faithful because He was righteous in and of Himself.Jesus was precisely accounted righteous due to his faithfulness to God. That is Paul's basic point around which absolutely everything else is based. In a rather complex way (a way in which you don't really mean the words) it is true to say He was righteous in and of Himself, but that's certainly not Paul's main point.

No, but I think they should be taken in context. Because I say that I'm the strongest man in the world doesn't make it so. Because someone writes that they are righteous does not make it so. So when they write that they are righteous it doesn't make it so... but when they write that other people are wicked it does make it so? And it in fact makes it so that everyone is wicked?
:eek:
How does this logic work?

[Tercel]

I thought it would be worth laying out blatantly for all to see what is going on with the “no one is righteous” passages. I challenge anyone with the slightest amount of brain in their head to read this and still maintain that Paul is claiming in this passage in Romans 3 that every individual in history is sinful.

Paul in Romans 3:9-18 says the following:

Romans 3:9-18
No, not at all; for we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under the power of sin, 10as it is written: "There is no one who is righteous, not even one; 11there is no one who has understanding, there is no one who seeks God. 12All have turned aside, together they have become worthless; there is no one who shows kindness, there is not even one." 13"Their throats are opened graves; they use their tongues to deceive." "The venom of vipers is under their lips." 14"Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness." 15"Their feet are swift to shed blood; 16ruin and misery are in their paths, 17and the way of peace they have not known." 18"There is no fear of God before their eyes."

Now, note the reason he is making the quotes: To prove that both Jews and Greeks are under the power of sin.

Consider Hitler who thought the German people were the supreme race, especially superior to the Jews and gypsies. Imagine Hitler had thought that God loved Germans and that the Germans had been adopted by God as God's True People; that God had elected them to be His people by His grace; that God had Himself instituted their government and written their laws as proof of this. Because the German people had been chosen by God they would therefore consider themselves superior to others far more.

This is what Jewish thinking was like in the first century. They were proud of being God's Elect, proud of His gracious choice of them, proud of their status as the chosen nation, proud of the Law God had given their ancestors which served day-to-day to demonstrate to all their distinguishedness as the true People of God, as those who truly had favour in God's sight. It wasn't favour that they had earned, but favour that had been given to them by God. They believed they had been elected by God's unmerited grace. And so they expected God to in this same grace protect them from sin, and smite the ungodly evil gentiles. The Law of Moses, they believed, was proof of their Election, not the means to it. They thought God had already chosen the, they were the elect. The law, the scriptures, the covenants with their ancestors: All proof of God choosing them as His People. They as individuals didn't need to do anything, from birth they were born Jews, born into God's elect people.

It is this that Paul attacks in Romans. Yes, he says, the gentiles do often behave in terrible ways, but the Jews are very often no better. It is not, he says, the mere fact that the Jews “have” the law that makes them God's true people – they have to actually be, as individuals, devoted to God. Righteousness (which plainly and simply means being part of the true people of God) is not something inherited by being born a Jew, but rather something that involves personal devotion to God. In chapter 3 he draws this argument toward its conclusion and reiterates that being part of the people of God is something that comes by individual devotion to God like Jesus had (who, due to his devotion, God declared righteous by raising Him from the dead, proving that those who are God's people are those who have devotion like Christ's).

Now, the point of this is that in chapter 3 Paul quotes several scriptures that are often assumed to mean that everyone sins. Firstly that idea is totally irrelevant to his argument: That's not what Paul is trying to prove. It might be true, it might not be true, but it's not what Paul's trying to say. Paul's point is that the Jews are not inherently better off than the Gentiles: God doesn't supernaturally protect people who are born Jews from sin any more than he does people who are born Gentiles. Paul's ultimate conclusion therefore is that God's true people, those who are truly righteous, consists of anyone and everyone – be they Jew or Gentile – who is devoted to God.

Now this has nothing directly to do with sin. One can be righteous and still sin: just as you can be an American citizen and break the law yet still be an American, one can be one of God's people and err and yet still be one of God's people. It it not a matter of legalistic error, but a matter of the heart: Those who are truly devoted to God, though they might humanly err are still His People, but those who are truly opposed to God and His purposes, though they might do the occasional good or even a lot of good are still not His people. Paul's aim is thus to reach this conclusion that it is by devotion that one becomes God's people, not by being born a Jew, and neither (for that matter) by obeying the commandments God gave Moses (Paul argues that fixing bounds on the people of God was never the purpose of the law at all, rather the law was just a helpful guide for day-to-day life).

So in Romans 3:10-18, when Paul quotes verses about people being sinners, what he needs to convince the reader of in order to make that part of his argument work is that just as there are some Gentiles out there who blatantly sin and are opposed to God and his purposes, similarly there are some Jews out there who do likewise. All he needs to do is find a group of Jews who are clearly not God's true people and then he can point to them and prove his point that it is not by being born a Jew that you are one of God's true people. Thus Paul picks specific examples from the OT: from specific places and specific times in history when prophets or writers have commented that a specific group of Gentiles or a specific group of Jews were totally opposed to God.

In all Paul's OT quotations it is essential to look at the OT context of the quote, often you learn as much about Paul's argument from the context as you do the actual words quoted. Remember they did not have chapter and verse divisions back then, so to reference a lengthy passage all Paul can do is quote one verse from it. (He would have known his Jewish readers were familiar with the context of the verse – unlike many of us today) So let's look at his quotations in context:

Paul's first quote is from Psalm 14:1-3 / Psalm 53:1-3 (Psalms 14 & 53 are identical)

Psalm 14
1Fools say in their hearts, "There is no God." They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds; there is no one who does good. 2The Lord looks down from heaven on humankind to see if there are any who are wise, who seek after God. 3They have all gone astray, they are all alike perverse; there is no one who does good, no, not one.
4Have they no knowledge, all the evildoers who eat up my people as they eat bread, and do not call upon the Lord? 5There they shall be in great terror, for God is with the company of the righteous. 6You would confound the plans of the poor, but the Lord is their refuge. 7O that deliverance for Israel would come from Zion! When the Lord restores the fortunes of his people, Jacob will rejoice; Israel will be glad.

This is an example of a specific time when some evil ungodly gentiles were oppressing the Jews. Clearly verse 2&3 cannot be meant as universal generalisations, because the writer makes it abundantly clear that there are very definitely righteous people on earth in vs 4-7: The ones that are being persecuted by these wicked people.


Paul's second quote is from Psalm 5:9.

Psalm 5
1Give ear to my words, O Lord; give heed to my sighing. 2Listen to the sound of my cry, my King and my God, for to you I pray. 3O Lord, in the morning you hear my voice; in the morning I plead my case to you, and watch. 4For you are not a God who delights in wickedness; evil will not sojourn with you. 5The boastful will not stand before your eyes; you hate all evildoers. 6You destroy those who speak lies; the Lord abhors the bloodthirsty and deceitful.
7But I, through the abundance of your steadfast love, will enter your house, I will bow down toward your holy temple in awe of you. 8Lead me, O Lord, in your righteousness because of my enemies; make your way straight before me. 9For there is no truth in their mouths; their hearts are destruction; their throats are open graves; they flatter with their tongues. 10Make them bear their guilt, O God; let them fall by their own counsels; because of their many transgressions cast them out, for they have rebelled against you. 11But let all who take refuge in you rejoice; let them ever sing for joy. Spread your protection over them, so that those who love your name may exult in you. 12For you bless the righteous, O Lord; you cover them with favor as with a shield.

Here a Jew speaks of the wickedness of some of his Jewish enemies, who are painted as pretty ungodly and wicked in vs 4, 6 & 9. And yet the writer clearly is not trying to say everyone is evil. In vs 7,8, 11-12 he makes it quite clear that some people righteous and devoted to God, himself included.


Paul's third quote is from Psalm 140:3

Psalm 140
1Deliver me, O Lord, from evildoers; protect me from those who are violent, 2who plan evil things in their minds and stir up wars continually. 3They make their tongue sharp as a snake's, and under their lips is the venom of vipers. (Selah) 4Guard me, O Lord, from the hands of the wicked; protect me from the violent who have planned my downfall. 5The arrogant have hidden a trap for me, and with cords they have spread a net, along the road they have set snares for me. (Selah) 6I say to the Lord, "You are my God; give ear, O Lord, to the voice of my supplications." 7O Lord, my Lord, my strong deliverer, you have covered my head in the day of battle.
8Do not grant, O Lord, the desires of the wicked; do not further their evil plot. (Selah) 9Those who surround me lift up their heads; let the mischief of their lips overwhelm them! 10Let burning coals fall on them! Let them be flung into pits, no more to rise! 11Do not let the slanderer be established in the land; let evil speedily hunt down the violent! 12I know that the Lord maintains the cause of the needy, and executes justice for the poor. 13Surely the righteous shall give thanks to your name; the upright shall live in your presence.

Here again, a Jew laments the wickedness of some of his people. He calls on God to wipe out the evil and rescue those who are upright. Clearly this is a specific historical situation in which a particular people are considered wicked and others are considered upright and righteous.


Paul's fourth quote is from Psalm 10:7

Psalm 10
1Why, O Lord, do you stand far off? Why do you hide yourself in times of trouble? 2In arrogance the wicked persecute the poor— let them be caught in the schemes they have devised. 3For the wicked boast of the desires of their heart, those greedy for gain curse and renounce the Lord. 4In the pride of their countenance the wicked say, "God will not seek it out"; all their thoughts are, "There is no God." 5Their ways prosper at all times; your judgments are on high, out of their sight; as for their foes, they scoff at them. 6They think in their heart, "We shall not be moved; throughout all generations we shall not meet adversity." 7Their mouths are filled with cursing and deceit and oppression; under their tongues are mischief and iniquity. 8They sit in ambush in the villages; in hiding places they murder the innocent. Their eyes stealthily watch for the helpless; 9they lurk in secret like a lion in its covert; they lurk that they may seize the poor; they seize the poor and drag them off in their net. 10They stoop, they crouch, and the helpless fall by their might. 11They think in their heart, "God has forgotten, he has hidden his face, he will never see it."
12Rise up, O Lord; O God, lift up your hand; do not forget the oppressed. 13Why do the wicked renounce God, and say in their hearts, "You will not call us to account"? 14But you do see! Indeed you note trouble and grief, that you may take it into your hands; the helpless commit themselves to you; you have been the helper of the orphan. 15Break the arm of the wicked and evildoers; seek out their wickedness until you find none. 16The Lord is king forever and ever; the nations shall perish from his land. 17O Lord, you will hear the desire of the meek; you will strengthen their heart, you will incline your ear 18to do justice for the orphan and the oppressed, so that those from earth may strike terror no more.

Here the writer laments the evils of the particular gentile tribes occupying the land. A particular group of people in a particular situation are being evil. Similarly the writer is not meaning to say that everyone in the world throughout history is evil because he makes clear in verses 14, 17-18 that there are some who do not deserve suffering and should be receiving salvation at the hands of God.


Paul's fifth quote is from Isaiah 59:7-8:

Isaiah 59
1See, the Lord's hand is not too short to save, nor his ear too dull to hear. 2Rather, your iniquities have been barriers between you and your God, and your sins have hidden his face from you so that he does not hear. 3For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue mutters wickedness. 4No one brings suit justly, no one goes to law honestly; they rely on empty pleas, they speak lies, conceiving mischief and begetting iniquity. 5They hatch adders' eggs, and weave the spider's web; whoever eats their eggs dies, and the crushed egg hatches out a viper. 6Their webs cannot serve as clothing; they cannot cover themselves with what they make. Their works are works of iniquity, and deeds of violence are in their hands. 7Their feet run to evil, and they rush to shed innocent blood; their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity, desolation and destruction are in their highways. 8The way of peace they do not know, and there is no justice in their paths. Their roads they have made crooked; no one who walks in them knows peace.
9Therefore justice is far from us, and righteousness does not reach us; we wait for light, and lo! there is darkness; and for brightness, but we walk in gloom. 10We grope like the blind along a wall, groping like those who have no eyes; we stumble at noon as in the twilight, among the vigorous F182 as though we were dead. 11We all growl like bears; like doves we moan mournfully. We wait for justice, but there is none; for salvation, but it is far from us. 12For our transgressions before you are many, and our sins testify against us. Our transgressions indeed are with us, and we know our iniquities: 13transgressing, and denying the Lord, and turning away from following our God, talking oppression and revolt, conceiving lying words and uttering them from the heart. 14Justice is turned back, and righteousness stands at a distance; for truth stumbles in the public square, and uprightness cannot enter. 15Truth is lacking, and whoever turns from evil is despoiled. The Lord saw it, and it displeased him that there was no justice.
16He saw that there was no one, and was appalled that there was no one to intervene; so his own arm brought him victory, and his righteousness upheld him. 17He put on righteousness like a breastplate, and a helmet of salvation on his head; he put on garments of vengeance for clothing, and wrapped himself in fury as in a mantle. 18According to their deeds, so will he repay; wrath to his adversaries, requital to his enemies; to the coastlands he will render requital. 19So those in the west shall fear the name of the Lord, and those in the east, his glory; for he will come like a pent-up stream that the wind of the Lord drives on. 20And he will come to Zion as Redeemer, to those in Jacob who turn from transgression, says the Lord. 21And as for me, this is my covenant with them, says the Lord: my spirit that is upon you, and my words that I have put in your mouth, shall not depart out of your mouth, or out of the mouths of your children, or out of the mouths of your children's children, says the Lord, from now on and forever.

This is one of those times in history where Israel has almost completely turned away from God. The prophet chastises the people – a particular group of people at a particular time - for their evil, but believes God will save a faithful remnant (vs20-21). Thus the prophet is not saying that all of Israel at that time were unfaithful.


Paul's sixth quote is from Psalm 36:1

Psalm 36
1Transgression speaks to the wicked deep in their hearts; there is no fear of God before their eyes. 2For they flatter themselves in their own eyes that their iniquity cannot be found out and hated. 3The words of their mouths are mischief and deceit; they have ceased to act wisely and do good. 4They plot mischief while on their beds; they are set on a way that is not good; they do not reject evil.
5Your steadfast love, O Lord, extends to the heavens, your faithfulness to the clouds. 6Your righteousness is like the mighty mountains, your judgments are like the great deep; you save humans and animals alike, O Lord. 7How precious is your steadfast love, O God! All people may take refuge in the shadow of your wings. 8They feast on the abundance of your house, and you give them drink from the river of your delights. 9For with you is the fountain of life; in your light we see light. 10O continue your steadfast love to those who know you, and your salvation to the upright of heart! 11Do not let the foot of the arrogant tread on me, or the hand of the wicked drive me away. 12There the evildoers lie prostrate; they are thrust down, unable to rise.

The psalmist looks out into the world and observes that some people are wicked, some people are upright. The writer definitely believes there are people in the upright and devoted to God category. I'm not sure whether this is meant as a reference to Jews or Gentiles specifically (possibly the particular Psalm was associated by the Jews of Paul's day to one of the two groups – maybe it was sung at a particular festival) or perhaps it is just Paul's final generic reflection that it is a simple fact that there are some wicked people out there and some righteous people out there and that race has nothing to do with it.


Paul has proved exactly what he needed to with these quotations: That Jews have no inherent protection from sin merely by virtue of being Jews. In God's eyes both Jews and gentiles are in the same boat: they can be devoted to God and His purposes and be accounted His People or reject God and his purposes for them and be not part of His people. Thus his initial statement of what he is setting out to prove by quoting these verses: “both Jews and Greeks, are under the power of sin,” (Romans 3:10)

The notion that every single individual is evil is quite irrelevant to Paul's argument and more importantly: Directly contradicts all 6 of the OT passages Paul references in support of his argument.

I will leave you with this dilemma:
a) Either Paul is arguing that every single person in all of the world is horribly fallen and sinful and not righteous and is quoting every single one of his OT quotes in direct contradiction to the actual meaning of the passages; or

b) Paul is not arguing that at all, but rather that which I described earlier, and Paul is making accurate use of in-context quotations.



PS to all: When reading Paul's letters please always, always, read the entire chapter of the OT book being quoted from for each of his OT quotations. It will always help you understand his meaning greatly.

[Ormly]

The Bible also says:

1. The one who believes in Him is not condemend. The one who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God. (Jn 3:18)

2. I am the door, if anyone comes in through me he will be saved

3. I am the Way the Truth and the Life, no one comes to the Father but through me.

4. For there is no other name under heaven given among people by which we must be saved.

Just a small sampling once again.
But it can't apply to those who never hear, can it?

[Ormly]

Sinlessness is not the same thing as righteousness


Yes it is. Righteousness is right-actions, it is a lack of wrong doing, it has to do with being right in all things, in all relationships, of a lack of wrong-doing, and ONLY God is righteous!

Indeed, it is, with one exception I've tried many times to point out. The distinction must be made with regards to the sin of man that man can't erase i.e., the sin of Adam's trangression. In this endeavor man will always come up short in the supply needed to satisfy God's standard. Corrupt blood cannot heal corruption. Only Jesus could do that by being born from above; something equal to God Himself. Here we can see how the "canceling out" upon the death of Jesus, man's sin penalty, could be so. [+A + -A=0] On his own Man can be righteous in his life unto a pleasing that Father in His mercy and grace will not condemn but because of His Holiness unholy righteous man is held captive, not by God's choice but of necessity, away from God's presence. This condition is what Jesus rectified at the cross.
This righteousness from [heathen] man is based on [a] faith in [a] God who he believes watches his actions; who sees all and is a rewarder of them that do righteously, whatever he deems that to be in his mind that doesn't violate his conscience.



No one can "merit" righteousness is correct, but the reason is because no one could be sinless. Except Je sus. He was righteous not because of His devotion to God - HE WAS GOD. He was righteous because He was sinless.


Jesus was fully righteous because His blood was pure. In this He didn't need to be God. This same Jesus gives us, by regeneration, the same blood. That's what regeneration means. That's what 'being again' means. Think about the priviledge we have in this. The only thing He couldn't give us at this time is a new body for it all to dwell in. In this we must control the issues. He gives us the power to perform the task in this weak earthbound frame. --- "He who overcomes I will....."

[Ormly]

PS to all: When reading Paul's letters please always, always, read the entire chapter of the OT book being quoted from for each of his OT quotations. It will always help you understand his meaning greatly.

:smile: Excellent post,Tercel! It's nice to see some teaching without agenda put up on the board. I hope you have other folk with whom you are able to share, who have ears to hear for the sake of learning and growing in Christ.:smile:

[Berean Todd]

But it can't apply to those who never hear, can it?
Why not? The Bible says that if we respond to what light we are given we will be given more light. I believe that if among the peoples representative of the "what about the deep, dark African/South American tribe" argument, that if any respond to the light they have of general revelation, then they will be given more. How? There are missionaries for one. For another, God is still more than able to speak through special revelation. He did so with Paul. He did so throughout the Bible. He can do so still today. There are even at least reported cases, of missionaries going into south america and coming across people who had never seen white men before and asked to be told more about Christ. I don't know how reliable the stories are, but they are out there.

But all of that asside, your argument above appears to be "the Bible says that but it can't really apply, because I don't like that." Not a very strong case.

[Ormly]

Why not? The Bible says that if we respond to what light we are given we will be given more light. I believe that if among the peoples representative of the "what about the deep, dark African/South American tribe" argument, that if any respond to the light they have of general revelation, then they will be given more. How? There are missionaries for one. For another, God is still more than able to speak through special revelation. He did so with Paul. He did so throughout the Bible. He can do so still today. There are even at least reported cases, of missionaries going into south america and coming across people who had never seen white men before and asked to be told more about Christ. I don't know how reliable the stories are, but they are out there.

But all of that asside, your argument above appears to be "the Bible says that but it can't really apply, because I don't like that." Not a very strong case.You assume much without sound reasoning.

#1. The preaching of Christ is NOT for salvation but for discipleship. "Go and make disciples" were His words. If a native never hears of Christ but lives a righteous life by his convictions that there is God, and dies, he dies justified because of his faith. The blood of Jesus, having been shed, now cleanses him of the sin of Adam, making peace with God, and thus the native is made completely righteous. His salvation is secure without anyone ever speaking to him. Make sense? If not, why not?

See Romans 5.1 and make application to him in this. It's not hard to figure out.

[Berean Todd]

#1. The preaching of Christ is NOT for salvation but for discipleship. "Go and make disciples" were His words.
I have posted lots of words of Christ, including that only those who believe in His name are saved, and you have ignored it.

If a native never hears of Christ but lives a righteous life by his convictions that there is God, and dies, he dies justified because of his faith.
Not according to the Bible, or many verses I've posted, which you are ignoring.

Make sense? If not, why not?
Of course not, because you like to pick and choose your verses. You can't fit one into your isogeted view of what you want Scripture to say? You just throw it out and ignore it when we bring it up.

[GoBahnsen]

Have you read trout's likening of Orm to a baloon that is inflated and then let go? It sort of flies around, bouncing off walls and ceiling. Rather amusing to watch.

I don't agree with Tercel on everything, but at least he is readable and makes sense. If Orm would present himself in like manner he might not be catching heat from some of us.

I'm trying to create a new invention. You've heard of the fly-swatter. I was thinking about an Orm-swatter. When he starts that buzzing around your ears thing, you just go get the Orm-swatter out. Could be used for others as well. Or a spray might be more effective. I don't know just some ideas. Probably already been invented.

[FreeBrightMind]

So did all the millions of Aboriginal people in North and South America go straight to white man's hell prior to the xtians arrival? Did they ask for more information about jebus when Columbus landed on the beach? Every generation for 1500+ years damned to eteranl fire for being born on the wrong continent. Some tribes didn't see a whiteman until 1880 in North America. South America even later. Hell is going to be really crowded with injuns. :lol:

[GoBahnsen]

So did all the millions of Aboriginal people in North and South America go straight to white man's hell prior to the xtians arrival? Did they ask for more information about jebus when Columbus landed on the beach? Every generation for 1500+ years damned to eteranl fire for being born on the wrong continent. Some tribes didn't see a whiteman until 1880 in North America. South America even later. Hell is going to be really crowded with injuns. :lol:This is one of the very reasons I'm a Calvinist. I believe in a God who isn't going to lose anyone He has ever planned to save. If these you mention do indeed go to "Jesus's hell" (not white man's), the hell Jesus warned people to fear God about because He has the power to cast both body and soul into this hell (Jesus' teaching). If these end up there, it isn't some unfortunate accident. It is according to the plan and purposes of God who will have mercy on whom He wills and pity upon those of His choosing.

And apparently it has pleased God to leave certain continents in darkness for centuries before He brings the glorious light of His Gospel to break forth upon the darkness of idol worship and the doctrines of demons. Who are we to judge these matters?

[Ormly]

I have posted lots of words of Christ, including that only those who believe in His name are saved, and you have ignored it.
Nonsense. Jesus didn't come to save the righteous, did He? They were already justified by faith, also correct? So all the righteous needed was for Jesus to shed His blood that they be set free of the sin stain of Adam, correct? If not, please point out my error.

As to the fate of the ungodly the preaching will fall on deaf ears by the simple reasoning they are ungodly. But how would one know unless he first preaches to the ungodly that they be informed --- after all within the ranks of the ungodly may be some future Godly folk who are only ungodly because they live with no hope, and knowledge? But how will they know unless a preacher preaches to them the good news of such a hope?


Not according to the Bible, or many verses I've posted, which you are ignoring.

If I ignore them is only because you are using them wrongly or they done apply. I never pass a good reference that pertains to the subject at hand. Making distinctions when using scripture is of the utmost necessity.

Of course not, because you like to pick and choose your verses. You can't fit one into your isogeted view of what you want Scripture to say? You just throw it out and ignore it when we bring it up.
This is what I asked:
If a native never hears of Christ but lives a righteous life by his convictions that there is God, and dies, he dies justified because of his faith.

How come you just can't give a yes or no or voice an opinion to that statement? I'll put it in the form of a question if that will help. Here:

If a native never hears of Christ but lives a righteous life by his convictions that there is God, and dies, is he not justified because of his faith when he dies and the blood of Christ cleanses him of all sin?


Does that help?:ahem:

[Ormly]

This is one of the very reasons I'm a Calvinist. I believe in a God who isn't going to lose anyone He has ever planned to save. If these you mention do indeed go to "Jesus's hell" (not white man's), the hell Jesus warned people to fear God about because He has the power to cast both body and soul into this hell (Jesus' teaching). If these end up there, it isn't some unfortunate accident. It is according to the plan and purposes of God who will have mercy on whom He wills and pity upon those of His choosing.

And apparently it has pleased God to leave certain continents in darkness for centuries before He brings the glorious light of His Gospel to break forth upon the darkness of idol worship and the doctrines of demons. Who are we to judge these matters?But that's not the reason for the gospel, is it? <I mean if you understand the Bible>

4000 yrs without the gospel of peace being made with God for the righteous who died before they could realize it in their earthly life; who lived with only a hope of redeemer, -- of such were the justified. And you claim "mystery"?

[Berean Todd]

How come you just can't give a yes or no or voice an opinion to that statement? I'll put it in the form of a question if that will help. Here:


If a native never hears of Christ but lives a righteous life by his convictions that there is God, and dies, is he not justified because of his faith when he dies and the blood of Christ cleanses him of all sin?


I allready did answer your question, and explained how a native could very well be saved. However, within the very strict confines as you structure it above I would say that it is a trick question, because none are righteous, so the question is null and void. NONE are righteous. We can be accounted righteous through faith in God, but NONE are righteous, and as the Bible is clear there is no other name by which men must be saved.

[Ormly]

[/indent][/indent]I allready did answer your question, and explained how a native could very well be saved. However, within the very strict confines as you structure it above I would say that it is a trick question, because none are righteous, so the question is null and void. NONE are righteous. We can be accounted righteous through faith in God, but NONE are righteous, and as the Bible is clear there is no other name by which men must be saved.
:ahem: Well since you give the same answer that reveals your lack of understanding of the scriptures you'll just have to be content with my ignoring your out of place scripture references. In other words they don't fit the scene of history and God's provision for those who have loved and served Him before Jesus went to the cross. Sorry.

[Berean Todd]

...s you'll just have to be content with my ignoring your out of place scripture references.
Since you are either too stubborn, blinded or ignorant to reply to a list of my scriptures, let's just deal with one passage, and if I'm taking it out of context, go ahead and show me where and how it better fits into your interpretation that mine.

John 3:13 For only I, the Son of Man, have come to earth and will return to heaven again. 14And as Moses lifted up the bronze snake on a pole in the wilderness, so I, the Son of Man, must be lifted up on a pole, 15so that everyone who believes in me will have eternal life.
Wow, pretty strong words from Jesus there, who says that He is like the pole lifted in the wilderness and only those believing in Him have eternal life. Nothing about righteousness, only belief in Him. Faith in Him.

16"For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. 17God did not send his Son into the world to condemn it, but to save it. 18 There is no judgment awaiting those who trust him. But those who do not trust him have already been judged for not believing in the only Son of God

Wow, those who don't believe in HIM have been judged for not believing in Him. But that doesn't quite fit your paradigm does it. So was Jesus a liar? Or are you so wonderfully smart that you can explain this away?

In other words they don't fit the scene of history and God's provision for those who have loved and served Him before Jesus went to the cross. Sorry.
You mean it doesn't fit what you are willing to accept about God. Too bad you are too stubborn to listen to what He says, and are still trying to make God into what you want Him to be, or are comfortable with Him being.

[Tercel]

This is one of the very reasons I'm a Calvinist. I believe in a God who isn't going to lose anyone He has ever planned to save.And I believe in a God who desires to save everyone which is one of the very reasons I reject Calvinism. Thus I draw the logically obvious (and biblical) conclusion that hearing the gospel does not affect anyones chances of going to hell.

Ormly is entirely right in his argument that people are righteous through devotion to God not through hearing the gospel, and that a godly person who has never heard the gospel is saved. That is precisely what Paul says. Short of doing another far-too-long post on the subject in order to lay it out for the blind to see, I will point out that Paul appeals to the fact that creation itself testifies about God and everyone has heard its message, and could have devoted themselves to God based on its testimony. The idea that people need to hear the specific message about Christ's incarnation to be saved never ever enters Paul's mind.

If these end up there [in hell], it isn't some unfortunate accident. It is according to the plan and purposes of GodSo if God had planned all along to send humans to hell, why does the Bible specifically state in its references to hell that hell was designed by God for the devil and his angels? Surely its failure to add "and also designed for the great mass of humanity whom God had predestined for destruction" is a little hint that predestining the masses to eternal burnination wasn't on God's to-do list?


Berean,

I would like to respond to your challenge to Ormly to deal with your scripture verses, by dealing with them.
I have not studied John nearly as much as I have Pauline theology, but even I can tell you offhand that:
a) The word that gets translated "believe" in the bible is just a plain bad translation (its the same word that is elsewhere rendered as "faith" or "trust" or "faithfulness") and is better rendered "devotion".
b) "Eternal life" (literally "life of the ages") is just the Johannine version of the phrase "Kingdom of God/Heaven" that's used in the other gospels, and seems likely to be not referring to the afterlife in the same way that the Kingdom of God doesn't. The "life of the ages" is thus most probably a quality (not quantity) of life in the here and now, whereby the renewed Kingdom of Israel is established with God once again at its head as had happened many times before in the OT.

Thus Jesus in the "believe in me to get eternal life" phrases is basically saying that by following him you'll get to be part of the renewed kingdom of Israel, as God works through Jesus to set it up.
So just looking at it now, it seems to me that John 3:16-18 is thus saying (in perfect agreement with Pauline theology I might add) that through Jesus' sacrificial death, God institutes a new covenant community around him (in exactly the same way as in the OT), which is participated in by those who are devoted to him. Those who are rejecting him are rejecting their part in this new Israel and hence will be judged in the here and now (not talking about the afterlife) and those who are devoted to him will become part of this new community. Obviously this new community is the Church.

That's just offhand though (but it does seem to work and agree with Paul), as I mentioned before, I'm no expert in Johannine theology.

[Ormly]

That's a good observation, Tercel, though I prefer to view His words "Believe in Me" as a present tense opportunity that good folk can now benefit from. This as opposed to the "non-opportunity" of the OT that left good folk who believed in God with only justification. Faith now has flesh on it and has made Peace with God.[Romans 5.1]. So now if I want peace with God and I have the gospel I cannot say I believe in God and not believe in Christ since peace comes by Christ Jesus and my justification by faith in God cannot be apart from believing Christ. My faith is in vain if I reject Christ when told the good news ergo, my faith is not in vain if I'm not told the good news.

So why tell good folk, righteous-blameless before God, the good news of Christ? What was in the mind of Jesus when He gave His disciples the great commission?

[FreeBrightMind]

So do the indians, native americans of both north and south america, go to hell or not?

[Ormly]

So do the indians, native americans of both north and south america, go to hell or not?Did they live believing in a God that persuaded them to live righteously? That's what I have being getting at, isn't it?? If so then what was my comment on this? What does the Bible say about those who live righteous lives?

[Tercel]

That's a good observation, Tercel, though I prefer to view His words "Believe in Me" as a present tense opportunity that good folk can now benefit from. This as opposed to the "non-opportunity" of the OT that left good folk who believed in God with only justification. Faith now has flesh on it and has made Peace with God.[Romans 5.1]. So now if I want peace with God and I have the gospel I cannot say I believe in God and not believe in Christ since peace comes by Christ Jesus and my justification by faith in God cannot be apart from believing Christ. My faith is in vain if I reject Christ when told the good news ergo, my faith is not in vain if I'm not told the good news.I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at... It seems quite clear that the true People of God were always accounted people of God ("reckoned righteous") based on their devotion to God and His purposes. That principle didn't change with Christ. Abraham was accounted God's man based on his devotion, Paul says Gentiles who act in accordance with their consciences can be account God's based on their acting in agreement with God's purposes, and that Jews can be accounted God's people if in their devotion to God they obey His commands. The whole point of Paul's argument is that since participation in God's covenant people is, and has always been, by devotion to Him and His good purposes, it follows that Gentiles who are devoted to God/godly people are equally part of God's true covenant people just as much as Jews are. The whole point of the "justification by faith" (that people are accounted God's by their devotion to Him) teaching is that Gentiles can be part of the Church because of their devotion to God.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say that the OT people were left with "only" justification. Yes, their devotion to God caused them to be accounted one of His people, but what is the "only" getting at? You quote Romans 5:1, but the People of God in the OT had "peace with God" every bit as much as the People of God in the NT.

I don't know why you argue that people have to believe in Christ when told the good news in order to retain their place in the People of God... as you seem to realise, the argument results in the conclusion that it is bad to tell people the good news.
Firstly there is comparatively little mention of devotion to Christ in the Bible: Mostly it talks about devotion like Christ's. What we need, says Paul is the attitude that Christ Jesus had, who was obedient to God through all things even death on a cross, and for this reason God raised him up in power (Phil 2). Thus we believe that if we are devoted to God like Christ was, God will account us part of his people, and give us the same resurrection and blessings as were given to Christ. To Paul, Christ is the proof that justification is by devotion to God, he is not an extra thing that we have to believe in. Copying him will lead to our justification - we will be justified by our devotion to God, but believing in Christ has nothing directly to do with justification.

So why tell good folk, righteous-blameless before God, the good news of Christ? What was in the mind of Jesus when He gave His disciples the great commission?In Christ's work and life, God's conquest of evil, sin, death, and the devil and his love for us is revealed. God frees people from possession by demons, heals their sickness, bears all the suffering the demonic powers can throw at him when they nail him to the cross and yet is still faithful to God through all this and then God proves that even when evil does its very worst he still triumphs: by raising Christ in power and glory from the dead, and by this same act proves that death is not something to be feared but something that God has proven his victory over. From beginning to end, the gospel of Christ is the story of the victory of good over evil, of evil doing its worst and good still triumphing, it frees us from fear of evil and inspires us to go out and repeat Christ's actions - to free people from the evil that ensnares them, to be ministers of reconciliation reconciling the world back to God, defeating the powers of Satan at every turn and taking people from the kingdom of darkness and showing them the love of God and bringing them into the kingdom of light and freedom. Christ's defeat of evil isn't complete, it is still out there ensnaring people who wait for us to free them and bring them into the outstreched loving arms of God. It will still hurt us, even kill us like it did Christ. But God has given us the assurance that one day all evil will be defeated, creation will be set free from its bondage and there will be no more suffering, all things will have been brought back to the love of God and God will be all in all.
That's the good news of Christ, and that's why we tell people it.

Around Christ is centered the true community of God, those who are devoted to God, devoted to freeing people from evil, devoted to God's good purposes for the universe. Anyone devoted in these ways is part of the People of God centered in Christ, regardless of whether they know it or believe it or have heard of Christ.

[Tercel]

So do the indians, native americans of both north and south america, go to hell or not?Same as everyone else:
When God's love and goodness and truth is revealed to them, will they like what they see? Will they praise God and enthusiastically join with him in being part of a renewed world free from all evil? Or will they cling to their own evil, corrupted by it will they reject God and his purposes, will they set themselves against Him and everything good?

It's up to them, same as it's up to you and same as it's up to me. Let me tell you: I see the evil in me, the power of it, and I am afraid. Yet at the same time I want to see evil destroyed, I am opposed to the evil which is in me, and so though I do not cease stuggling against that evil, my very opposition to evil gives me assurance that I am on God's side against the evil and that He and me together will defeat the evil in me in the end.
It would be if I was on the side of evil in the evil vs good battle that I would have to worry... if I was evil in my deepest heart and loved the suffering of others and praised the deeds of the wicked, and hated the thought of a renewed world in which I could not hold others in bondage to me or inflict suferring on them... then I would be right to worry that I might be part of the chaff of evil swept away by God when He frees others from my power.

But as it is, the evil I do I hate in my heart, and I look forward to the time when together with God I break free from it. But if it is hard for the righteous man to be saved from the evil within them, how much harder will it be for the wicked? But much of what is impossible for man is possible for God, so I am still hopeful that perhaps everyone and everything that has ever lived or breathed might be eventually fully rid of its evil and at one with God and His loving goodness. If God were to free all, even the Hitlers of this world from the evil within them and make them into saints, would that not be the most glorious victory of all? I hope in my heart that this may come to pass, yet I know the power of evil, and the wickedness of some men and know that God has given to all the free will to chose between good and evil and accept that some men might forever reject God and goodness.

[GoBahnsen]

Ormly is entirely right in his argument that people are righteous through devotion to God not through hearing the gospel, and that a godly person who has never heard the gospel is saved. That is precisely what Paul says. Short of doing another far-too-long post on the subject in order to lay it out for the blind to see, I will point out that Paul appeals to the fact that creation itself testifies about God and everyone has heard its message, and could have devoted themselves to God based on its testimony. The idea that people need to hear the specific message about Christ's incarnation to be saved never ever enters Paul's mind.
Dang, I just told Orm the other day that you made sense. But the above paragraph isn't Christianity, it's some religion that doesn't need the Gospel message. Just be a good boy Johnny.



So if God had planned all along to send humans to hell, why does the Bible specifically state in its references to hell that hell was designed by God for the devil and his angels? Surely its failure to add "and also designed for the great mass of humanity whom God had predestined for destruction" is a little hint that predestining the masses to eternal burnination wasn't on God's to-do list?
Yeah, I remember well my Arminian days of telling sinners that God never made hell for man. That always appealed to their fallen hearts. I was trying to sell them a nice version of God you know. The big pink bunny that B Todd refers to (negatively).

But Jesus warned humans to fear the one Who has power to cast humans into hell. What do you think? When God ordained hell, He was thinking "I hope I never have to send a human here"? Like He is some kind of a dunce? A three stooges god? Of course God knew when He prepared that place for Satan and the demons, that all those who were of their father the devil would go there too.


What are you? OVT?

[Ormly]

Dang, I just told Orm the other day that you made sense. But the above paragraph isn't Christianity, it's some religion that doesn't need the Gospel message. Just be a good boy Johnny.


Yeah, I remember well my Arminian days of telling sinners that God never made hell for man. That always appealed to their fallen hearts. I was trying to sell them a nice version of God you know. The big pink bunny that B Todd refers to (negatively).

But Jesus warned humans to fear the one Who has power to cast humans into hell. What do you think? When God ordained hell, He was thinking "I hope I never have to send a human here"? Like He is some kind of a dunce? A three stooges god? Of course God knew when He prepared that place for Satan and the demons, that all those who were of their father the devil would go there too.


What are you? OVT?He's all your's Tercel. I want no part of this jerk-water. :eek:----------- :ahem:

[Tercel]

Dang, I just told Orm the other day that you made sense. But the above paragraph isn't Christianity, it's some religion that doesn't need the Gospel message. Just be a good boy Johnny.It's nice to hear I make sense. I think it's sad that Calvinism has twisted Christianity so far that you can't even recognise the Christianity of the apostles and first millennia Church as Christianity.

Yeah, I remember well my Arminian days of telling sinners that God never made hell for man.It's nice to see you actually knew the Bible once, since that's precisely what the Bible says.

What are you? OVT?Yes I am a staunch adovocate of the Open View. I believe it is the most biblically consistent position, and very consistent with and complementary to the theology of the Fathers (though I freely admit that they did not all agree with me here, but then they did not all agree about other issues such as the nature of hell or the millennium either). I am open to the more standard teachings of the Church on the timelessness of God, but such a doctrine appears to me to be plagued with insoluable logical and theological problems and I am not convinced an appeal to "mystery" as a solution is reasonable when the Open View provides an obviously consistent, biblical, logically sound, and theologically complementary alternative.

[Tercel]

Berean,

Let's turn back to Job. My question to you is: What is the point of the story of Job?

I suggest that the purpose of the story is to explore the thesis of whether everyone who suffers does so due to their sin. Job, is described as someone "blameless" in God's sight. Yet suffering comes to him. Job's friends tell him "you must have sinned", as they believe that all suffering is directly caused by God in punishment for sin. Job (accurately) maintains his innocence. He friends insist that on the contrary he must have sinned, for he is suffering. But Job continues to (rightly) maintain that he has not sinned and this suffering cannot be coming to him as a result of any sin. In short the basic moral of the story is that the idea that all suffering comes in retribution for our sin is wrong - that we can be blameless and upright before God and yet still receive suffering due to beings like Satan who desire to bring suffering on others. Is that a fair account of the book of Job do you think? If not, why not?

Now, if you insist that Job is inherently sinful before God, the plot doesn't seem to make much sense - Job then becomes deserving of all the suffering he is receiving, which seems to miss the purpose of the book, and be in fairly blatent contradiction with God's statements about the uprightness of Job.

[GoBahnsen]

He's all your's Tercel. I want no part of this jerk-water. :eek:----------- :ahem: Orm on Orm: You don't understand where the jerk is in your water. You speak of things you haven't read. You are guilty of willful ignorance and don't see your need. Study John 2:12 and see me when you get it.:wink:

[seer]

BT said:

Notice the bold there - yes there are places where PEOPLE tell God they are righteous. Find me one where God says that anyone is righteous before Him. Job was an amazing example of an upstanding, godly man ... and yet God had to put him in his place pretty well.


Luke 1:

"In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zechari'ah, of the division of Abi'jah; and he had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth.And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless."

Psalm 18:20-22

"The LORD rewarded me according to my righteousness; according to the cleanness of my hands he recompensed me. For I have kept the ways of the LORD, and have not wickedly departed from my God. For all his ordinances were before me, and his statutes I did not put away from me."

Was the Psalmist in error?

Matt.13:17

"Truly, I say to you, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it."

Was Christ in error? Did righteous men exist?

[Ormly]

I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at... It seems quite clear that the true People of God were always accounted people of God ("reckoned righteous") based on their devotion to God and His purposes. That principle didn't change with Christ. Abraham was accounted God's man based on his devotion, Paul says Gentiles who act in accordance with their consciences can be account God's based on their acting in agreement with God's purposes, and that Jews can be accounted God's people if in their devotion to God they obey His commands. The whole point of Paul's argument is that since participation in God's covenant people is, and has always been, by devotion to Him and His good purposes, it follows that Gentiles who are devoted to God/godly people are equally part of God's true covenant people just as much as Jews are. The whole point of the "justification by faith" (that people are accounted God's by their devotion to Him) teaching is that Gentiles can be part of the Church because of their devotion to God.Church are those devoted to Christ -- Not God. Of course we all know it involves God but Christ is the centerpiece of the Church. On this there can be no argument.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say that the OT people were left with "only" justification. Yes, their devotion to God caused them to be accounted one of His people, but what is the "only" getting at? You quote Romans 5:1, but the People of God in the OT had "peace with God" every bit as much as the People of God in the NT.I speak of a time frame in this because peace with God came by Jesus Christ and Him crucified. That hadn't happen for those in the OT. Justification was the limit of their reward for their righteousness.

I don't know why you argue that people have to believe in Christ when told the good news in order to retain their place in the People of God... as you seem to realise, the argument results in the conclusion that it is bad to tell people the good news.If you know you are a sinful being and are told who cleanses you and you reject it does not your sin remain? Doesn't Paul speak to this? How else can man be cleansed if he rejects the only one who cleanses him? --- I make the distinction -- not can clean him, but does clean him. Jesus died for the sin[s] of everyone. Better that you are never told, right? Paul says so and it would seem so.

Hebrews 2:3 (NASB-U)
how will we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard,

For us redeemed the word "neglect" is appropiate but I have no difficulty substituting in the word "reject" when making application to my remarks above. I hope you see that.

Firstly there is comparatively little mention of devotion to Christ in the Bible: Mostly it talks about devotion like Christ's. What we need, says Paul is the attitude that Christ Jesus had, who was obedient to God through all things even death on a cross, and for this reason God raised him up in power (Phil 2). Thus we believe that if we are devoted to God like Christ was, God will account us part of his people, and give us the same resurrection and blessings as were given to Christ. To Paul, Christ is the proof that justification is by devotion to God, he is not an extra thing that we have to believe in. Copying him will lead to our justification - we will be justified by our devotion to God, but believing in Christ has nothing directly to do with justification.All of what you speak above has to do with the redeemed moving on and becoming son's of God and them entering into God's rest as Jesus did while on earth.[Heb.4; Heb.6]. All after the fact of salvation.

In Christ's work and life, God's conquest of evil, sin, death, and the devil and his love for us is revealed. God frees people from possession by demons, heals their sickness, bears all the suffering the demonic powers can throw at him when they nail him to the cross and yet is still faithful to God through all this and then God proves that even when evil does its very worst he still triumphs: by raising Christ in power and glory from the dead, and by this same act proves that death is not something to be feared but something that God has proven his victory over. From beginning to end, the gospel of Christ is the story of the victory of good over evil, of evil doing its worst and good still triumphing, it frees us from fear of evil and inspires us to go out and repeat Christ's actions - to free people from the evil that ensnares them, to be ministers of reconciliation reconciling the world back to God, defeating the powers of Satan at every turn and taking people from the kingdom of darkness and showing them the love of God and bringing them into the kingdom of light and freedom. Christ's defeat of evil isn't complete, it is still out there ensnaring people who wait for us to free them and bring them into the outstreched loving arms of God. It will still hurt us, even kill us like it did Christ. But God has given us the assurance that one day all evil will be defeated, creation will be set free from its bondage and there will be no more suffering, all things will have been brought back to the love of God and God will be all in all.
That's the good news of Christ, and that's why we tell people it.
What He did that you speak of is what we are supposed to be about doing and not just telling people that Jesus did it. We are the reason for following Him. We are to be witnesses in all that He did. We have the greater responsibilty is in this that we show forth the riches of His glory.

Around Christ is centered the true community of God, those who are devoted to God, devoted to freeing people from evil, devoted to God's good purposes for the universe. Anyone devoted in these ways is part of the People of God centered in Christ, regardless of whether they know it or believe it or have heard of Christ.No. I don't think you are at all correct in this. In order for anyone to be centered in Christ they must know of Him. That's the priviledge we have this side of the cross. People need to know what that priviledge is all about. In the OT they had faith in the "reality" of God alone as redeemer. The old convenant could only speak of the new. Those in the new have a greater covenant centered in the "actuality" of Jesus Christ. Therein is the difference. Therein is the greater blessing they we have obtained in Him and by Him. Remember Abraham pointed to this day.--- and saw it but by faith alone.

John 14:26 (NASB-U)
"But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.

That verse was spoken to the redeemed of the Lord, by Jesus.

[Berean Todd]

So why tell good folk, righteous-blameless before God, the good news of Christ? What was in the mind of Jesus when He gave His disciples the great commission?
You've defeated your argument right there, but just for the sake of pointing that out all the more:

Mat 28:18-20 (NJKV) And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, All authority is given to Me in Heaven and in earth. Therefore go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things, whatever I commanded you. And, behold, I am with you all the days until the end of the world.



Mar 16:15 (Message) Then he said, "Go into the world. Go everywhere and announce the Message of God's good news to one and all.



Joh 17:18 (NKJV) As You have sent Me into the world, even so I have sent them into the world.



Joh 20:21 (NKJV) Then Jesus said to them again, Peace to you. As My Father has sent Me, even so I send you.



Why would Jesus tell them to go be His witnesses, to go into the world, to carry the gospel, if that was not needed, or could even possibly condemn them if they hear it and reject it?

[Ormly]

You've defeated your argument right there, but just for the sake of pointing that out all the more:

Mat 28:18-20 (NJKV) And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, All authority is given to Me in Heaven and in earth. Therefore go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things, whatever I commanded you. And, behold, I am with you all the days until the end of the world.



Mar 16:15 (Message) Then he said, "Go into the world. Go everywhere and announce the Message of God's good news to one and all.



Joh 17:18 (NKJV) As You have sent Me into the world, even so I have sent them into the world.



Joh 20:21 (NKJV) Then Jesus said to them again, Peace to you. As My Father has sent Me, even so I send you.



Why would Jesus tell them to go be His witnesses, to go into the world, to carry the gospel, if that was not needed, or could even possibly condemn them if they hear it and reject it?
You've just revealed your lack of understanding of what the gospel of the good news is. Sorry. Perhaps if you carefully study the scriptures you submit to correct me you will find your error.

[Berean Todd]

You've just revealed your lack of understanding of what the gospel of the good news is. Sorry. Perhaps if you carefully study the scriptures you submit to correct me you will find your error.
Ok, go ahead and enlighten us as to the following then:

1. What is the Gospel of Jesus?

2. If people were righteous before Christ, then why did He have to die on the cross?

3. If it is unnescacary for people to know of Christ to reach heaven, why did He send us out to tell them?

4. Why are we told that salvation comes through the hearing/preaching of the Word?

[GoBahnsen]

BT said:

Notice the bold there - yes there are places where PEOPLE tell God they are righteous. Find me one where God says that anyone is righteous before Him. Job was an amazing example of an upstanding, godly man ... and yet God had to put him in his place pretty well.


Luke 1:

"In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zechari'ah, of the division of Abi'jah; and he had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth.And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless."

Psalm 18:20-22

"The LORD rewarded me according to my righteousness; according to the cleanness of my hands he recompensed me. For I have kept the ways of the LORD, and have not wickedly departed from my God. For all his ordinances were before me, and his statutes I did not put away from me."

Was the Psalmist in error?

Matt.13:17

"Truly, I say to you, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it."

Was Christ in error? Did righteous men exist?This to me is a good example of the fallacious reasoning of Arminian thought. The Arminians like to go verse shopping, pushing their cart down the aisles and putting "arminian" verses is their shopping cart. Then they say to us Calvies "look what I bought at the verse store...pretty neat huh?"

Scripture must interpret Scripture or even the atheists will have a shopping field day, bringing all the apparent Biblical contradictions out of their cart and showing us their booty. But Christians will have none of that because they know God isn't going to contradict Himself.

So if Scripture is so explicit as to tell us that there are NONE righteous, and if we didn't see that part, then the writer goes on to pound it home...NO NOT ONE; we must ask, which part of none don't you understand?

Therefore, when the Bible speaks of righteous people, rather than contradiction, we understand that it doesn't mean they were sinless. It means they were people of faith in YHWH. They believed God and it was counted unto them for righteousness. What do you think, Zechari'ah never got angry with his wife and did not seek her forgiveness? Or what of their sins of omission? What of the times they took action without prayer? Or slept in too late, forgetting to keep a promise they had made. All the things they did or didn't do which they ought to have done, things that Jesus was never guilty of.

I'm not saying they weren't upright folks and if we knew them we would probably speak highly of them as righteous people, but they would be humble enough to never let their lips speak of perfection in righteousness. And they no doubt were keenly aware of their need for a Redeemer.

So we Calvinists and other consistent believers will have nothing of this notion that people are right with God based on their own righteousness. Paul had a righteousness concerning the law which he called blameless, then said it was trash. He knew it wasn't going to make Him right with a Holy God, nothing short of Christ's perfections is what we need.

[Berean Todd]

Scripture must interpret Scripture or even the atheists will have a shopping field day,
Absolutely!

So we Calvinists and other consistent believers will have nothing of this notion that people are right with God based on their own righteousness. Paul had a righteousness concerning the law which he called blameless, then said it was trash. He knew it wasn't going to make Him right with a Holy God, nothing short of Christ's perfections is what we need.
Exactly - Paul spent leangthy ammounts of time talking about how he was a "Pharisee of Pharisees", "zeallous for the law", that if anyone could boast in the flesh it was him. Yet he considered it all rubbish - only through the Gospel of Christ did he find true peace with God, and only through the Gospel of Christ will ANYONE find true peace with God.

[GoBahnsen]

Absolutely!


Exactly - Paul spent leangthy ammounts of time talking about how he was a "Pharisee of Pharisees", "zeallous for the law", that if anyone could boast in the flesh it was him. Yet he considered it all rubbish - only through the Gospel of Christ did he find true peace with God, and only through the Gospel of Christ will ANYONE find true peace with God.Isn't God good to reveal that to a couple bums like us!:ale:

[seer]

Therefore, when the Bible speaks of righteous people, rather than contradiction, we understand that it doesn't mean they were sinless. It means they were people of faith in YHWH. They believed God and it was counted unto them for righteousness. What do you think, Zechari'ah never got angry with his wife and did not seek her forgiveness? Or what of their sins of omission? What of the times they took action without prayer? Or slept in too late, forgetting to keep a promise they had made. All the things they did or didn't do which they ought to have done, things that Jesus was never guilty of.

I have no problem with that. But the fact is, there are righteous men. Is it righteousness by faith - of course... So there are righteous men - which means Paul's point about NO ONE being righteous is hyperbole.

[Berean Todd]

I have no problem with that. But the fact is, there are righteous men. Is it righteousness by faith - of course... So there are righteous men - which means Paul's point about NO ONE being righteous is hyperbole.
Then Seer, you have no problem with GoB or me, because we are debating/pointing out errors in those who are claiming that in and of themselves, apart from faith in Christ there are righteous people, which there are not.

[Ormly]

Then Seer, you have no problem with GoB or me, because we are debating/pointing out errors in those who are claiming that in and of themselves, apart from faith in Christ there are righteous people, which there are not.
Perhaps you can explain what faith was it that righteous men, declared by God to be, had in the OT and in who was it placed? --- That should be easy for you.

[Berean Todd]

Perhaps you can explain what faith was it that righteous men, declared by God to be, had in the OT and in who was it placed? --- That should be easy for you.
Jehovah God of Israel, though they did not know it to one day be His name, it was Jesus Himself whom Abraham shared a meal with, whom Jacob wrestled, etc, etc.

Heathens in South America do not worship Jehovah God of Israel, American Indians do not worship Jehovah God of Israel. Oriental mysticists, budhists, hindus, muslims do not worship Jehovah God of Israel.

Moreover, OT saints looked forward to the cross, NT saints look back at it. There is no righteousness in following Judaism today, for Messiah has come, and they deny Him, the only True, Living God, the only one in whom is salvation.

[GoBahnsen]

Jehovah God of Israel, though they did not know it to one day be His name, it was Jesus Himself whom Abraham shared a meal with, whom Jacob wrestled, etc, etc.

Heathens in South America do not worship Jehovah God of Israel, American Indians do not worship Jehovah God of Israel. Oriental mysticists, budhists, hindus, muslims do not worship Jehovah God of Israel.

Moreover, OT saints looked forward to the cross, NT saints look back at it. There is no righteousness in following Judaism today, for Messiah has come, and they deny Him, the only True, Living God, the only one in whom is salvation.:thumb: :thumb: :thumb:

[Tercel]

This to me is a good example of the fallacious reasoning of Arminian thought. The Arminians like to go verse shopping, pushing their cart down the aisles and putting "arminian" verses is their shopping cart.Whereas Calvinists have come to their own human conclusions which no amount of God's word is ever going to change?

So if Scripture is so explicit as to tell us that there are NONE righteous, and if we didn't see that part, then the writer goes on to pound it home...NO NOT ONE; we must ask, which part of none don't you understand?Did you read my post earlier in this thread (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=754875&postcount=22) on these verses? (If not, please read it, carefully, especially the scripture quotations – it is one of the most important things I have written in these forums) I demonstrated that all six of the six Old Testament passages Paul is quoting in the “no one is righteous” section do NOT say that no individual person at all in the whole world ever is righteous. That is just to miss Paul's point completely and you are making Paul out to be a liar and saying his has willfully misinterpreted the OT passages. I ask you to put your money where your mouth is with “scripture interprets scripture”: Either pay attention to the context of passages or admit that you deliberately distort scripture and ignore context in order to get it to agree with the doctrine you have decided is true.

As it is, you have arbitrarily decided that the “no one is righteous” passages are talking about inherent righteousness (they are not – see their context) of every single person in the world (they are not – see their context). And therefore you have come to the totally arbitrary conclusion that the passages are saying that no one is inherently righteous. That idea is irrelevant: what is definitely the case is that's not what the passages are saying. Read my post (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=754875&postcount=22), carefully, look at the passages. What is the writer meaning?Don't say “here is what he has to be saying, therefore he is”, look at the text carefully.

Therefore, when the Bible speaks of righteous people, rather than contradiction, we understand that it doesn't mean they were sinless.That's okay as far as it goes, but you need to understand that this same meaning applies to the verses that say “no one is righteous”. They are targeted at a very specific group of people in the world and are pronouncing that none of that group has the righteousness that comes through devotion to God. They are not talking about inherent righteousness (which just doesn't make sense – righteousness is always accounted, it just can't be inherent in the way you mean it), but accounted righteousness!

Righteousness is a fairly simple concept: God has decreed that he will work in a special way with certain people, His Covenant People, and He has decreed that these people will be defined by their devotion to Him. Hence anyone who is devoted to God is accounted part of His people. They are accounted part of the “people of God” (aka the “righteousness of God”). You can't be “inherently” part of God's people – the concept is nonsensical, God has declared that people will be His People through devotion to Him and hence to be His people you need devotion to Him and He will account you as part of His people. Righteousness is nothing more nor less than being part of God's people. It comes by devotion to God.

When a Psalmist looks at his enemies and says “none are righteous” he doesn't mean that none of them were inherently righteous, he means that none of them are devoted to God. And he certainly doesn't mean that no one in the world is righteous!

Paul had a righteousness concerning the law which he called blameless, then said it was trash.Paul's conception of righteousness concerning the law was this:
That Israel was already the people of God. God had elected them, and there was no changing that. As proof of their election God had given them the law. (kind of Calvinistic I suppose) Thus they saw the law as proof of their being God's People (ie their “righteousness”).

Paul attacks this notion by saying that righteousness doesn't come merely by being a Jew, something more is needed: devotion to God.
“It is not the hearers of the law who are righteous in God's sight, but the doers of the law who will be justified.” (Romans 2:12)
And again:
“But if you call yourself a Jew and rely on [having] the law and boast of your relation to God.... do you dishonour God by breaking the law?” (Romans 2:17, 23)

And as Paul makes clear later, it is not obedience to the [i]law per see that justifies, but obedience to God coming from a heart that is devoted to Him.

[Tercel]

Church are those devoted to Christ -- Not God. Of course we all know it involves God but Christ is the centerpiece of the Church. On this there can be no argument.You've got a reasonable argument, but people before Christ seem to break your case. Consider Abraham whom God accounted one of His people due to his devotion to God. He certainly wasn't devoted to Christ, but he was still part of God's people. Hence I'd have to say that Christ heads the Church because he is first and foremost in his devotion to God. What makes people part of God's community is their devotion to God, not their devotion to Christ. The Church is centered around Christ, but consists of those devoted to God, not those devoted to Christ.

I speak of a time frame in this because peace with God came by Jesus Christ and Him crucified. That hadn't happen for those in the OT. Justification was the limit of their reward for their righteousness.I can't agree here. The peace with God in Romans 5:1 comes by justification. It doesn't seem to be anything new – people who were God's people in the OT would have had peace with God just as much, as it says God overlooked their sins (Rom 3:25).

If you know you are a sinful being and are told who cleanses you and you reject it does not your sin remain?Of course. If someone want to be cleansed they'll have to accept Him sometime, either now or at some later date.

[GoBahnsen]

The Church is centered around Christ, but consists of those devoted to God, not those devoted to Christ.


Opppps!:eww:

[Berean Todd]

You've got a reasonable argument, but people before Christ seem to break your case.
In begining was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

All things were created through Him.

There is no "before Christ."

Consider Abraham whom God accounted one of His people due to his devotion to God. He certainly wasn't devoted to Christ, but he was still part of God's people.
Abraham may not have known His name to be Jesus Christ, but it was the Son whom shared a meal with Abraham back in Genesis.

Hence I'd have to say that Christ heads the Church because he is first and foremost in his devotion to God.
Christ is first and foremost in devotion to God?? What are you selling here? Christ is God.

The Church is centered around Christ, but consists of those devoted to God, not those devoted to Christ.
How can you divide thus, Christ is God. Maybe you just aren't typing clearly enough, but you seem to be sounding like one who would deny the deity of Christ.

[GoBahnsen]

In begining was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

All things were created through Him.

There is no "before Christ."


Abraham may not have known His name to be Jesus Christ, but it was the Son whom shared a meal with Abraham back in Genesis.


Christ is first and foremost in devotion to God?? What are you selling here? Christ is God.


How can you divide thus, Christ is God. Maybe you just aren't typing clearly enough, but you seem to be sounding like one who would deny the deity of Christ.And the heat is on...:popcorn:

[Tercel]

In begining was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

All things were created through Him.

There is no "before Christ."There is a "before Christ's incarnation" which is what "before Christ" is short for. We use it in our dating system:
BC = "Before Christ".

Prior to the incarnation, people like Abraham did not know of Jesus Christ, nor his death on the cross, nor his resurrection etc. Abraham's devotion was to God, not the Christ who died on the cross.

Christ is first and foremost in devotion to God??Do you deny that Christ is more devoted to the Father than anyone else?

How can you divide thus, Christ is God.They are ontologically identical essences, but are known in different ways. It was suggested that before Christ's incarnation, people were justified by being devoted to God as he was known through the creation of the world, and after people heard the gospel of Christ's incarnation they had to change their devotion to the person of Christ as known through the incarnation. This is effectively the logic as I see it behind Ormly's statement that once people hear the gospel they have to believe it, else bad stuff happens. My response is that what people need is devotion to the ontological entity of God - it doesn't matter whether it is in His creator aspect or His incarnate aspect, in the end it refers to the same being because Christ is God. Thus people who are devoted to God the creator, but don't believe the story of Christ's incarnation are still justified because they are devoted to God. The idea that one must believe in the incarnation of Christ to be justified runs contrary to Paul's thinking.

Nothing happened at the incarnation that changed how people are justified. They are still justified in the same was Abraham was, the same way Moses was, and for that matter the same way the incarnate Christ was: By devotion to God. That's something the incarnation proved.

The gospel is not something everyone needs to believe, it is good news which tells us more about the purposes and powerful acting of God in this world.

Now why don't you stop playing semantic games and deal with the meat of the arguments...

[Ormly]

There is a "before Christ's incarnation" which is what "before Christ" is short for. We use it in our dating system:
BC = "Before Christ".

Prior to the incarnation, people like Abraham did not know of Jesus Christ, nor his death on the cross, nor his resurrection etc. Abraham's devotion was to God, not the Christ who died on the cross.

Do you deny that Christ is more devoted to the Father than anyone else?

They are ontologically identical essences, but are known in different ways. It was suggested that before Christ's incarnation, people were justified by being devoted to God as he was known through the creation of the world, and after people heard the gospel of Christ's incarnation they had to change their devotion to the person of Christ as known through the incarnation. This is effectively the logic as I see it behind Ormly's statement that once people hear the gospel they have to believe it, else bad stuff happens. My response is that what people need is devotion to the ontological entity of God - it doesn't matter whether it is in His creator aspect or His incarnate aspect, in the end it refers to the same being because Christ is God. Thus people who are devoted to God the creator, but don't believe the story of Christ's incarnation are still justified because they are devoted to God. The idea that one must believe in the incarnation of Christ to be justified runs contrary to Paul's thinking.

Nothing happened at the incarnation that changed how people are justified. They are still justified in the same was Abraham was, the same way Moses was, and for that matter the same way the incarnate Christ was: By devotion to God. That's something the incarnation proved.

The gospel is not something everyone needs to believe, it is good news which tells us more about the purposes and powerful acting of God in this world.

Now why don't you stop playing semantic games and deal with the meat of the arguments...First off, I commend you for presenting a very good post in regards to Paul's writings on righteousness. Berean and co. need to review and respond to your remarks and quit wilfully ignoring it as never written only to continue to adhere to the error of their thinking that no one was righteous in the OT. That's just plain stupid and unworthy anylonger of a reply .

Having said that we too have a disagreement and I find myself caught between two opinions with holes in them with me holding a third hopefully without holes. A question to you and Berean and Co. that will lay the ground work that must be answered before a correction to anyones thinking can be made. If we can't find agreement in this some of us are in trouble and further discourse will be pointless. It is this:

Assuming no more silly argument about the righteous existing in the OT, where did they go when they died and why?

[Berean Todd]

It was suggested that before Christ's incarnation, people were justified by being devoted to God as he was known through the creation of the world,
The premise you put fourth is bad in many areas, but here is one big one. Man was never saved through devotion to God "as known through creation", God, Jehovah, Yahweh revealed Himself to us. He walked with Adam in the garden. He spoke to Noah. He sat and ate with Abraham. He wrestled with Jacob, was the burning bush to Moses, and stood before Joshua. He revealed Himself to us. People were saved through faith in the God who revealed Himself to them.

[Berean Todd]

Assuming no more silly argument about the righteous existing in the OT, where did they go when they died and why?
They went to "Abraham's Boosom" or "Paradise", until the time that Christ paid the price on the cross, and He took them with Him to heaven at the ascention.

[Ormly]

They went to "Abraham's Boosom" or "Paradise", until the time that Christ paid the price on the cross, and He took them with Him to heaven at the ascention.I couldn't have said it better. We might even say that this was God's "holding tank" for those found righteous in Him before the cross and resurrection, correct? He set those captives free! :lol:

Ok, moving on. We see from the above that they were justified by faith unto a righteousness but they were still without access to God because of Adam's trangression for which man's righteousness alone could never cancel out. This argument satifisfies the quote: "there is none righteous, no not one" so often used to prop up the wrong teaching of "tulip" Isn't that also correct? The righteousness that redeems man man doesn't and can't possess aside from Christ' shed blood, shed for him.. Therefore when we read Romans 5.1,2 this is what it is referring to. Justified by faith and [now] they, as we, have peace with God because of Jesus going to the cross and shedding innocent blood in their behalf and not just for them, but us too. Paradise is no longer a place inbetween where any of the righteous in God have to go to. They, because of the shed blood of Jesus, can now step directly into the presence of a Holy God. --- Make sense?? If so, I'd like to speak of faith and conversion next.

[Berean Todd]

Ok, moving on. We see from the above that they were justified by faith unto a righteousness but they were still without access to God because of Adam's trangression for which man's righteousness alone could never cancel out.
Wrong, they were considered righteous because of faith, but it was not only Adam's sin that had to be removed but their own. We all sin. All. None are without sin. Everyone sins. Can I say it any more plainly? Because the Bible is plain in this teaching that you want to ignore. They could not enter heaven, yes because of Adam's sin, but also because of their own sin. They awaited the atonement for that sin from Christ on the cross.

This argument satifisfies the quote: "there is none righteous, no not one" so often used to prop up the wrong teaching