The Simplicity of the Gospel in One Word

[37818]

It seems that 1 Peter 3:21 fell out of your copy of my post - I'll restore the critical point "water through antitypal baptism saves."

OK. What do you understand, ". . . in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water." How where those 8 people in the ark saved by the water?

v.21, ". . . The like figure whereunto [even] baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: . . . ."

So water baptism can be said to save in the same manner that Noah and his family was saved being in the ark, saved by the flood.

Before I give the rest of my view, I would like to here more of yours. Thank you.

quite so. A person is not required to continually be baptised, but is required to continually believe.

Do you believe 2 + 2 = 4? Do you have to continually believe that in order for it to remain true? What do you think?

Ah yes, the gospel does save - Should I perhaps be saying sola gospel? Well no - it can only save those who believe.

You do understand that baptism and the gospel are two things? That baptism in not part of the gospel but is commanded and accompanies the teaching of the gospel. The Apostle Paul argued, "For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: . . . ."

-- OUCH! The JUST shall live by FAITH ... Is there a problem with "my soul shall have no pleasure in him?" Assuredly there would be, IF faith in this instance meant "belief".

The word for "faith" and the word for "belief" in the NT is the same word.

Then of course there is Romans 10:9 if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. which some might carelessly assume means the confessing Christ has something to do with salvation, and that confessing might be loosely connected with not shrinking back.

Romans 10:9 is another valid promise like Mark 16:16. The requirement is in faith, ". . . believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, . . ."

Yup - grace is definitely a factor in salvation.

More that that, in Ephesian 2:8, it is by which one is in the state of having been already saved. There are only two conditions, saved or lost. Saved possessing eternal life, being lost not yet possessing eternal life.

" He that hath the Son hath life; [and] he that hath not the Son of God hath not life." -- 1 John 5:12.

[tabibito]

OK. What do you understand, ". . . in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water." How where those 8 people in the ark saved by the water?

They weren't saved by the water, they were saved through the water.

So water baptism can be said to save in the same manner that Noah and his family was saved being in the ark, saved by the flood.

Not by the same means but by opposite means. αντιτυπον is antitype - the opposite type ("figure" in the AKJV).
Pressing a sheet of paper between the plates below will leave the paper raised in the shape of a bird. One is raised, the other is depressed so that they slot together. They are type and antitype, but which is which doesn't matter.
377598_489096057776650_1859410946_n.jpg

Do you have to continually believe that in order for it to remain true?

A person who stops believing is not saved.

10380967_799670256719227_6290578877401481099_n.jpg

baptism in not part of the gospel but is commanded and accompanies the teaching of the gospel.

Even if baptism is not part of the gospel: one place says you are saved by the gospel, another says if you confess with your mouth that Jesus Christ is Lord, another says you are saved by works (specifying) and not by faith alone, another says you are saved by water. That is by no means a complete list. Nowhere says you are saved by faith alone. But if I remember rightly, somewhere says "you are saved by faith." And yes, most of those references say "if you ~ and believe, you are saved" or words to that effect.

More that that, in Ephesian 2:8, it is by which one is in the state of having been already saved.

ἐστε σεσῳσμένοι - (without correction for English grammar) you are have been saved - Correct. It is perfect tense, which signifies a continuing state resulting from past action. It neither signifies nor denies that the state is permanent.

[37818]

They weren't saved by the water, they were saved through the water.
Not by the same means but by opposite means. αντιτυπον is antitype - the opposite type ("figure" in the AKJV).
Pressing a sheet of paper between the plates below will leave the paper raised in the shape of a bird. One is raised, the other is depressed so that they slot together. They are type and antitype,, but which is which doesn't matter.

Really? OK, that is what you think, "it doesn't mater." Noah and his family in the ark were saved by water, the flood destroyed the world that was (2 Peter 3:6, "Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: . . "). You made the correct point of the flood being was the type. Noah and his family were in the ark. Now the anti-type is the believer's baptism. Believer's being in Christ. And baptism, immersion, being the believer's burial with Christ, signifying being dead to this world, and so is going to live for God (Romans 6:4, "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life."). So as Peter stated, ". . . not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God, - by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: . . ."

A person who stops believing is not saved.

The person who stops believing was never saved to begin with. "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God." -- 2 John 1:9. Beside, it is God who saves and God who keeps those whom He saves. Not our own doing.

Even if baptism is not part of the gospel: one place says you are saved by the gospel, another says if you confess with your mouth that Jesus Christ is Lord, another says you are saved by works (specifying) and not by faith alone, another says you are saved by water. That is by no means a complete list. Nowhere says you are saved by faith alone. But if I remember rightly, somewhere says "you are saved by faith." And yes, most of those references say "if you ~ and believe, you are saved" or words to that effect.

Works of faith are never the requirements. Those who trust in their good works will perish.
There are two nevers: ". . . I never knew you." and "they shall never perish." [Matthew 7:21-23. John 10:25-29.]Those who were never really saved, and those who God saves and keeps.

ἐστε σεσῳσμένοι - (without correction for English grammar) you are have been saved - Correct. It is perfect tense, which signifies a continuing state resulting from past action. It neither signifies nor denies that the state is permanent.

ἐστε - verb present active second person plural - you are -
σεσῳσμένοι - verb perfect passive participle nominative plural - saved.

Note it is "by grace" in other words, this is what God is doing. "through faith" the condition being met. "not yourselves" without merit - i.e. it is by grace.

[tabibito]

Noah and his family in the ark were saved by water, the flood destroyed the world that was

No - that is what the Koine Greek says: antitype. The ark brought them safely through the waters. They were saved IN THE ARK through the waters of the flood. The water of baptism is an antitype. ... "saved by not being immersed" as opposed to "saved by being immersed"

The person who stops believing was never saved to begin with. "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God." -- 2 John 1:9. Beside, it is God who saves and God who keeps those whom He saves. Not our own doing.

I won't try to disabuse you of that notion. James stated clearly that we "are not saved by faith alone." If you won't believe him, certainly I won't be able to convince you.

The person who stops believing was never saved to begin with. "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God." -- 2 John 1:9. Beside, it is God who saves and God who keeps those whom He saves. Not our own doing.

Jesus said that some believe for a time and then fall away. Same goes with this one: if you won't believe him, you certainly won't believe me.

Note it is "by grace" in other words, this is what God is doing. "through faith" the condition being met. "not yourselves" without merit - i.e. it is by grace.

I also note that the Koine "it (is not of yourselves)" in this passage matches neither the gender of "grace" nor that of "faith". The circumstance/state signified by the clause "by faith you are saved through faith" is the thing that is not of yourselves. "By grace you are saved" certainly signifies "grace" as the active principle - it is not necessary to do more than read a couple of verses earlier to see the fact - "by grace you are saved" (no mention of faith).

Matthew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who DOES the will of My Father in heaven.

2 John 1:19 - anyone transgressing, anyone not abiding - present participles, active. Nothing in that passage says anything like "has been"

[FarEastBird]

Is it possible to accurately know about God without loving him?

As I was saying before, a person who truly know God and yet hate Him is the worst person you could imagine. It is worst than a person who hits his head with a stone. A person who hits his head with a stone is an "idiot." A person who knows good(God) and would not do(obey) it(Him) is a monster. That is how God really sees a person who claims to know Him, and still disobeys Him.

Consider the example set by Judas. Those who do not love God may yet proclaim him, even though the person is himself not saved... Paul said (roughly) "there are those who preach the gospel thinking that therein lies gain."

There is "NONE" good except God. You know why God is the only good?

Prov 16:4 The Lord hath made ALL things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.

Try to justify that it is God himself who created an evil person, and yet He is holy, and the only good.

(And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.)

[dacristoy]

As I was saying before, a person who truly know God and yet hate Him is the worst person you could imagine. It is worst than a person who hits his head with a stone. A person who hits his head with a stone is an "idiot." A person who knows good(God) and would not do(obey) it(Him) is a monster. That is how God really sees a person who claims to know Him, and still disobeys Him.



There is "NONE" good except God. You know why God is the only good?

Prov 16:4 The Lord hath made ALL things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.

Try to justify that it is God himself who created an evil person, and yet He is holy, and the only good.

(And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.)

Since the fall of Adam, all men are evil/sinners; yet it is evil sinners that Christ came to save. (It is not God's will that any should perish, but rather that all men would come to a saving knowledge of his grace...)

[tabibito]

A person who knows good(God) and would not do(obey) it(Him) is a monster. That is how God really sees a person who claims to know Him, and still disobeys Him.

:nod:

There is "NONE" good except God. You know why God is the only good?

Prov 16:4 The Lord hath made ALL things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.

Try to justify that it is God himself who created an evil person, and yet He is holy, and the only good.

(And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.)

And a person who has been set free is no longer a slave to sin so that he must obey it.

[FarEastBird]

(It is not God's will that any should perish, but rather that all men would come to a saving knowledge of his grace...)

The above was said to those who are under the law. Those who are under the law are "super ignorant" of the truth, and thus regardless what wisdom they possess they still can't figure that they themselves are still under the law. "Because of ignorance," the only way we can appeal to them(those under the law) about God is - according to the only way they know - to justify themselves of works. And so, what is the consequence of adhering to the words you said above? Isn't it "to work" out one's salvation?

What did the Prov 16:4 say, isn't it God made the wicked!!!!!!! Contradicting your word above?!!!! God made some as wicked, some are made as vessels unto destruction!!!!!

The reason there are contradictory laws you find in the bible is because the Bible speaks of two laws: the law of works, and the law of faith. A law can speak of both the law of works, as well as the law of faith. When you take the laws to be literal, you are under the law. But the law of faith is after the spirit, which is not according to letter.

We have to divide the word of God, not really to divide as in take into pieces, but rather to discern things when it is understood as of the law of works, and when it is the law of faith.

So, for example, when is love exercised to be of works, and when it is exercised to be of faith? It does not mean that when a person loves God he does it by faith.

(Truly, the word of faith is nigh thee.... But no matter how wise a person is he would not be able to figure out the difference of works and of faith when he is not an elect. Ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of truth.)

[dacristoy]

The above was said to those who are under the law. Those who are under the law are "super ignorant" of the truth, and thus regardless what wisdom they possess they still can't figure that they themselves are still under the law. "Because of ignorance," the only way we can appeal to them(those under the law) about God is - according to the only way they know - to justify themselves of works. And so, what is the consequence of adhering to the words you said above? Isn't it "to work" out one's salvation?

I personally work out my salvation by placing the faith that God gave me/my faith in the one that saves/can save me.

What did the Prov 16:4 say, isn't it God made the wicked!!!!!!! Contradicting your word above?!!!! God made some as wicked, some are made as vessels unto destruction!!!!!

The contradiction is not mine Bird. The contradiction occurs because of your refusal or inability to understand the necessity to reconcile scripture with scripture. Scripture does not negate scripture as you appear to suggest.

Not my words as you suggest, here are the words spoken in scripture:
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

God made the wicked, true because God made/created all things; but he did not create/make men wicked. Men accomplished that outside the will of God through Adam's disobedience in the garden.. Now both passages are respected as well as reflective of the nature of God. One does not negate the other, but together, reconciled they both guide our understanding of scripture as it represents the nature and actions of God.

The reason there are contradictory laws you find in the bible is because the Bible speaks of two laws: the law of works, and the law of faith. A law can speak of both the law of works, as well as the law of faith. When you take the laws to be literal, you are under the law. But the law of faith is after the spirit, which is not according to letter.

The law of works never included a path to God, When you take the laws to be literal, you are under the law: That is not true. Under the Law means that we were "JUDGED" by the laws pertaining to Good Works, under Grace means that we are judged by the goodness of God. There is no mercy under law. there is mercy under grace.

We have to divide the word of God, not really to divide as in take into pieces, but rather to discern things when it is understood as of the law of works, and when it is the law of faith.

So, for example, when is love exercised to be of works, and when it is exercised to be of faith? It does not mean that when a person loves God he does it by faith.

(Truly, the word of faith is nigh thee.... But no matter how wise a person is he would not be able to figure out the difference of works and of faith when he is not an elect. Ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of truth.)

FYI, you appear to embrace the tenets of Reformed Theology, I have studied it extensively; my rejection of it is exhaustive and absolute. It IMHO maligns the holiness of God.

[37818]

No - that is what the Koine Greek says: antitype. The ark brought them safely through the waters. They were saved IN THE ARK through the waters of the flood. The water of baptism is an antitype. ... "saved by not being immersed" as opposed to "saved by being immersed"

Yes, as the type, they were IN THE ARK." And the anti-type to the ark is the believer being IN CHRIST. Unless the person is IN CHRIST the anti-type to "through water" being baptism does not save in any way. IN THE ARK through water, IN CHRIST in baptism. Which Peter explained, ". . . not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God, - by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: . . ."

I won't try to disabuse you of that notion. James stated clearly that we "are not saved by faith alone." If you won't believe him, certainly I won't be able to convince you.

I'm not so sure you understand this meaning.
Nor the whole argument. ". . . And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. . . ." Genesis 15:6, Abraham was justified by faith alone many years prior to being justified by his works, Genesis 22:.
". . . For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. . . . to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." -- Romans 4:3-5.

One of the purposes of salvation is to have good works (Ephesians 2:10). Without the salvation, good works do not count (Matthew 7:21-23).

Jesus said that some believe for a time and then fall away. Same goes with this one: if you won't believe him, you certainly won't believe me.

Because there was no depth to that person's faith. Shallow ground, in my understanding, not being saved. Mind you, you gave an argument without support. see Matthew 13:20, 21.

I also note that the Koine "it (is not of yourselves)" in this passage matches neither the gender of "grace" nor that of "faith". The circumstance/state signified by the clause "by faith you are saved through faith" is the thing that is not of yourselves. "By grace you are saved" certainly signifies "grace" as the active principle - it is not necessary to do more than read a couple of verses earlier to see the fact - "by grace you are saved" (no mention of faith).

No. "by grace" not "by faith through faith" which is non-sense. The grace and the salvation is provided by God alone. The grace is from God, our faith is from God (Romans 10:17). So of course it is "not of ourselves."

". . . Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, . . . " -- James 1:18.

2 John 1:.9 - anyone transgressing, anyone not abiding - present participles, active. Nothing in that passage says anything like "has been"

. . . πας ο παραβαινων και μη μενων εν τη διδαχη του χριστου θεον ουκ εχει . . .

[tabibito]

IN THE ARK through water, IN CHRIST in baptism. Which Peter explained, ". . . not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God, - by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: . . .

Peter says through the water, which (nominative - the thing that performs the action) antitype (adjective - declined for the nominative) baptism (nominative - the thing that performs the action) now saves (the action performed by the nominative noun[s] or pronoun[s])you (accusative - the object subjected to the action). Your argument has a solid foundation of illiteracy. Even Calvin was aware of the fact that baptism is a factor in salvation: which is not to say that he properly understood the role that water plays. 644146_489819517704304_823616038_n.jpg


1John 3:2 but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is. 3 And everyone who has this hope in Him purifies himself, just as He is pure.

[tabibito]

θεον ουκ εχει (present indicative active) ... does not have God. And being present tense - here and now, does not have God. What may have been in the past is not a factor.

No. "by grace" not "by faith through faith" which is non-sense.

since I did not say anything like that, this is a non-sequitur.

The grace and the salvation is provided by God alone. The grace is from God, our faith is from God (Romans 10:17). So of course it is "not of ourselves."

grace/mercy/charity χαρις ... and the gift from god is the condition of being saved (which arises from grace/mercy/charity and through faith), does not arise from works and is not of yourselves.

In short "you have not saved yourselves, you have been extended mercy."
Indeed without faith, works are useless.

Act 26:20 “but (I) declared first to those in Damascus and in Jerusalem, and throughout all the region of Judea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent, turn to God, and do works befitting repentance.

Repentance is not the sum of the gospel requirements upon believers.

[37818]

Peter says through the water, which (nominative - the thing that performs the action) antitype (adjective - declined for the nominative) baptism (nominative - the thing that performs the action) now saves (the action performed by the nominative noun[s] or pronoun[s])you (accusative - the object subjected to the action). Your argument has a solid foundation of illiteracy. Even Calvin was aware of the fact that baptism is a factor in salvation: which is not to say that he properly understood the role that water plays.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]1157[/ATTACH]

You suppose illiteracy where you are ignorant of my view. You conflate salvation, the promise of salvation and the salvation in baptism which one must be IN CHRIST and to already be saved to even obtain this.

I'm going to summerize the three issues: 1) One is already saved being IN CHRIST (1 John 5:12). 2)The promise of salvation to the one who believes and is baptized is true promise. But baptism is not any kind of requirement in order to be saved in that promise. Baptism being a work of faith. 3) The benefit of baptism, is the benefit of the good conscience with the power of Christ's resurrection is a type of salvation which benefits the saved believer from this world, signifying that the believer is going to live for God not this world. It, baptism, being the anti-type to the flood which destroyed the world that was.

Now that is my view. Your agreement with my view is not required by me of you. You can disagree with my view, and continue to explain why you think it is in error all you want. Thank you.

Here is the simple truth: It is God alone who decides who is saved and lost - regardless of our views. Though our [wrong] views can keep us from doing God's will.

I prefer to state it this way: It is God who does the saving and God who does the keeping. [James 1:18; John 10:25-29.] And that salvation is as easy [Matthew 11:28-30] and as simple as believing in God's Christ [1 John 5:1, 12].

1John 3:2 but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is. 3 And everyone who has this hope in Him purifies himself, just as He is pure.

Yes. 1 John 1:8-2:2.

θεον ουκ εχει (present indicative active) ... does not have God. And being present tense - here and now, does not have God. What may have been in the past is not a factor.

Then are you saying not having God is not a factor in not having abided in the teaching of Christ?

since I did not say anything like that, this is a non-sequitur.

Oh.

. . . . The circumstance/state signified by the clause "by faith you are saved through faith" is the thing that is not of yourselves. . . .

grace/mercy/charity χαρις ... and the gift from god is the condition of being saved (which arises from grace/mercy/charity and through faith), does not arise from works and is not of yourselves.

In short "you have not saved yourselves, you have been extended mercy."
Indeed without faith, works are useless.

Without salvation the works will condemn the lost.

Act 26:20 “but (I) declared first to those in Damascus and in Jerusalem, and throughout all the region of Judea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent, turn to God, and do works befitting repentance.

Repentance is not the sum of the gospel requirements upon believers.

Without repentance one is not yet a believer. Repentance precedes the faith. And only a genuine believer [whom God has already saved] will do the works.

[FarEastBird]

I personally work out my salvation by placing the faith that God gave me/my faith in the one that saves/can save me.

I believe that you have not searched some of the crucial realities why your belief in work is actually problematic, especially when in reference of how the kingdom of God would be at peace. I believe that common mistake of searchers of Godhead is to limit themselves according to what the Bible says, or whatever spiritual writing they adhere. In the case of Christianity, observing the world is even enough for us to have knowledge of the godhead; for God speaks to us through His creation. But one thing, for sure, about knowledge, which the Christian God tells us, that we cannot know the Godhead without being an elect. God requires knowledge more than offering of works, yet it is God who gives knowledge to whom he elected according to his purpose.

There are lot of things I really want to discuss, but I know we are very limited through the forum. But I will hope you try to give a deep study about loving foolish people who have zeal of God. I’m seriously asking you to try and study them(foolish people) and understand what they contribute in the problems in the society, even in the church. Somehow many wise Christian leaders have to numb themselves about questions they could not answer just to survive in their hope. No matter what, we will all be lumped as imperfect beings, which basically involves the lack of knowledge. We have to resolve the issue of ignorance, and love is not the solution that God is offering, knowing Him is, or understanding the godhead is.

Oh… I asked you the above noting that you said that you have studied extensively about what I believed. I was not influenced by Reformed theology. Reality will teach you more than the wisest of men.

The contradiction is not mine Bird. The contradiction occurs because of your refusal or inability to understand the necessity to reconcile scripture with scripture. Scripture does not negate scripture as you appear to suggest.

Not my words as you suggest, here are the words spoken in scripture:
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Note that you are appealing to work out salvation. I am not denying that the Bible is not filled with such kind of persuasions. But look at things in a broader way.

God gave the law to Israel to take care of sins. But the law only takes care of sin on a temporal basis, it does not solve the problem of our nature that we will inevitably sin again…and again…and again….. On top of that, we have to resolve sins that we ignorantly commit. Regardless we did such sins ignorantly we still have to resolve it; thus the law requires us to have a solution for it. Sin, regardless how small it is, will bring death. Admitting that we are sinners, and loving God, would not take away the problem of sin.

And one crucial point that lead me to my sort of Calvinistic soteriology is this: No one can promise with certainty that he would not sin in a given day, else God will require us of such in our entire lives. I believe, the reason we are being convicted by just one sin, regardless we may fulfill all other laws, is because we actually have no power over sin. We have a lesson of that through Peter in the gospel. Peter knew Christ better than of the other disciples; even the spirit revealed to him that Jesus is the Christ. But when Peter promised Christ to be always with him in the night of Christ’s persecution, Jesus told Peter that he will deny him instead.

The solution to this kind of problem has to be that God should be in control of all things. And basically, that is the message of the gospel. The law of Moses is about God’s personal plan about the spiritual temple that God will create, the church, the Jerusalem, the city of God. Christ came to fulfill his part of the law, being the lamb to be offered in the day of Nisan. So, the gospel of Christ is about him fulfilling his part on the plan of God about the Church.

Second foremost problem is the ignorance of men. In a full perspective it is really hard to distinguish a Church leader’s job in managing the affairs of the Church. Much more will be harder to discern the question of how, and of what way, will he do his job. Besides this difficulty, the church members themselves are not aware, or are simply ignorant of the deep burden of a Church leader. So here we have a problem of the difficulty of discerning the burden of leadership, and the problem of the church discerning the rightful leader.
Now, the solution to the second problem is to hold on to the prophecies of God. When God spoke of how to discern whom He sends to the people, He said that the evidence of whom he sends is of the person’s ability to prophesy(Deut18:21-22). On the other side of this, the prophesy itself foretold that “God will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and come to naught the understanding of the prudent;” this simply, yet deeply, meant we cannot rely on our own ability to think. Even Christ himself, in dealing with his disciples, told them at times that they would not understand him, until the time comes. As a true leader the difficulty of giving the message as well as the members having the ability to discern is impossible. So the way for the church to be in unity is when a Church leader prophesies and comes to be fulfilled. We can know, this way, that it is God who unifies us, not men.

Of course, for a person who rely on his will, his failure is inevitable.

God made the wicked, true because God made/created all things; but he did not create/make men wicked.

So you believe that men have freed themselves from the causal chain, and became gods themselves? This is a lie, and this has a domino effect on the whole of your beliefs. But this is even beside the point.

If you truly know what is good and evil, there is no such thing as good person: as Jesus said, there is none good but God alone. All men falls to imperfection! God requires perfection. The problem of imperfection is basically what I explained above.

Men accomplished that outside the will of God through Adam's disobedience in the garden. Now both passages are respected as well as reflective of the nature of God. One does not negate the other, but together, reconciled they both guide our understanding of scripture as it represents the nature and actions of God.

And you will call this wisdom? Sorry, I will disagree.

The story of Adam is a parable just like the story of Jacob and Esau on the womb. My understanding, briefly, is that the sinfulness of Adam is contrasted to Christ’s holiness. And what is contrasted is the image. The sinful image is passed on to every human being, which the apostle Paul says is a natural event that happens to every man. The image of sinfulness, earthly, afterwards the image of holiness. But not all attain the image of holiness.

The law of works never included a path to God, When you take the laws to be literal, you are under the law: That is not true. Under the Law means that we were "JUDGED" by the laws pertaining to Good Works, under Grace means that we are judged by the goodness of God. There is no mercy under law. there is mercy under grace.

Look deeply to what you are espousing: God convicted us of imperfection, and then saves us as long as we have the heart to submit to Him. Sincerely, that is quite absurd. Check out the Church and just don’t read and reason with the Bible. Do you see how many who sincerely submit to God and yet cause the confusions in the body of Christ? If you allow all these sincere believers of God, what would you expect of the scenario of the kingdom of God will become? The same confusions that you have here on earth.

FYI, you appear to embrace the tenets of Reformed Theology, I have studied it extensively; my rejection of it is exhaustive and absolute. It IMHO maligns the holiness of God.

I sincerely believe that you do not know the difference between the doctrines of men, with the truth.

You want to present a loving God, which is but doctrines of men.

But if I present to you that God is a potter and we are the clay, surely there is a different kind of love that God bestows on the vessels of glory.

Both the doctrines are in the Bible, but which is it that speaks truth?

[apostoli]

Of your accusing me a gnostic is simply to hide your ignorance of the gospel, and attempt to discredit to attempt to know God.



I said "knowing the truth", not "knowing there is one God." You know the difference. Does knowing that there is one God meant that one knows the Godhead, or the truth?


Below is what Jesus, himself, said:


And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. John 17:3

The word used at John 17:3 (ginōskō) does not refer to an intellectual knowledge but knowledge gained through an intimate relationship, such as the intimate knowledge a husband or wife attains about their spouse...ie: what makes them tick!