For feedback.

[percho]

Being the other thread was closed I will start another for feedback.

Let me ask both sides. This may not be considered relative to the OP but I think it is.

God created Adam and gave him some instructions, then he made a help meet from him.

At this point in time can we assume God had a knowing relationship with all of mankind? Yes or No

I am not sure what I mean by knowing but I think maybe I mean covenant or the kind of a relationship between husband and wife.

Now answer that same question for these points in time and lets compare the answers.

Noah
Abram before name change
Abraham after name change
Moses
When Herod became king
70 AD
Presently

My answers are, yes followed by seven no's.

We can cover the why's later if anyone is interested.

 

[Tom Bryant]

Being the other thread was closed I will start another for feedback.

Let me ask both sides. This may not be considered relative to the OP but I think it is.

God created Adam and gave him some instructions, then he made a help meet from him.

At this point in time can we assume God had a knowing relationship with all of mankind? Yes or No

I am not sure what I mean by knowing but I think maybe I mean covenant or the kind of a relationship between husband and wife.

Now answer that same question for these points in time and lets compare the answers.

Noah
Abram before name change
Abraham after name change
Moses
When Herod became king
70 AD
Presently

My answers are, yes followed by seven no's.

We can cover the why's later if anyone is interested.

Can't really answer the question if you can't define what "knowing" means.

But I would say "yes" to all. He's God. He knows everything and everyone. Anything less than that demeans God. But maybe your definition of know isn't mine.

 

[percho]

Can't really answer the question if you can't define what "knowing" means.

But I would say "yes" to all. He's God. He knows everything and everyone. Anything less than that demeans God. But maybe your definition of know isn't mine.

To know as in this context. Amos 3:1,2 Hear this word that the LORD hath spoken against you, O children of Israel, against the whole family which I brought up from the land of Egypt, saying, You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.
He knew them in the context that he was married to them. You can not say this about Moab or Babylon or even Edom the brother of Israel.

Other than at the time of Adam and Eve can it be said in the context above that God has a knowing relationship with all living mankind.

 

[Iconoclast]

perco,
God only is in covenant with the elect.

 

[percho]

perco,
God only is in covenant with the elect.

I agree. And it has been that way from the beginning. With the exception of when there were only two Adam and Eve, God isn't dealing with all of mankind at any given time. I will add however that I do believe Christ died for all of mankind yet at this moment as in the past he is working with only who he is calling.
Therefore it isn't a question of being predestined for heaven or hell but being predestined for the purpose of God.

 

[J.D.]

perco,
God only is in covenant with the elect.

But here's something to think about - take for example Sodom - why did God punish Sodom, a Gentile city, if God's Law Covenant did not apply to them as well as to Israel?

 

[Iconoclast]

But here's something to think about - take for example Sodom - why did God punish Sodom, a Gentile city, if God's Law Covenant did not apply to them as well as to Israel?

I believe all nations are to answer to the ten commandments;

14And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance.

15And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age.

16But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.

God took exact account of their sins
Psalm 2
1Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?

2The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,

3Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.

4He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the LORD shall have them in derision.

5Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

6Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.

7I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

8Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.

9Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

10Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.

11Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.

12Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him
[/QUOTE]

 

[J.D.]

I believe there are certain essentials for getting CT right. Some of them are:

1. Just as covenants of suzerainty were covenants between conquering/conquered or strong/weak nations, God's covenants with man are imposed covenants. They are in effect by virtue of God's election to impose it. (e.g., God to Abram: "I have called you out"). (Hence the easy marriage of CT and Calvinism).

2. They are all conditional, including the new covenant that requires the obedience of faith. (The Noahic Covenant is the only debatable one and may be the only exception to this rule).

3. All covenants contain blessings for obedience and cursings for disobedience.

4. All covenants have a federal nature to them, so that they apply by extension in some way to all people without exception.

There are plenty of other important features of CT, but for me it wasn't until I understood these that I felt like I had a grip on CT as a biblical hermeneutic.

 

[Van]

Hi Percho, Adam and Eve before the fall we not "spiritually dead;" they were in the garden and walked and talked with God. After the fall, they were separated from God, put out of the garden, and prevented supernaturally from ever returning to the tree of life. Now everyone conceived after that (except Jesus) was born in that "sinful separated from God, dead in sin state.) The many (everyone but Jesus) were made sinners by the act of disobedience of Adam.

But that status does not apply to everyone because God provided a means to return to the tree of life, through faith in Christ Jesus. And so, as was accurately pointed out by others, people who have been chosen and spiritually placed in Christ, have been made alive together with Christ, and therefore are "known" meaning an intimate relationship.

Of course I think Calvinists have totally botched the order of salvation, but at least they are spot on with the result of salvation.

 

[percho]

But here's something to think about - take for example Sodom - why did God punish Sodom, a Gentile city, if God's Law Covenant did not apply to them as well as to Israel?

2 Peter 2:6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned [them] with an overthrow, making [them] an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;

 

[percho]

I believe all nations are to answer to the ten commandments;


God took exact account of their sins
Psalm 2
1Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?

2The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,

3Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.

4He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the LORD shall have them in derision.

5Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

6Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.

7I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

8Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.

9Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

10Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.

11Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.

12Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him

[/QUOTE]

I believe this verse agrees with you being if the Commandments were only for Israel then no one else would be guilty of transgression.

Romans 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

 

[J.D.]

2 Peter 2:6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned [them] with an overthrow, making [them] an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;

Yes, very good - a New Testament commentary on an Old Testament precept. It shows continuity.

 

[percho]

I believe there are certain essentials for getting CT right. Some of them are:

1. Just as covenants of suzerainty were covenants between conquering/conquered or strong/weak nations, God's covenants with man are imposed covenants. They are in effect by virtue of God's election to impose it. (e.g., God to Abram: "I have called you out"). (Hence the easy marriage of CT and Calvinism).

2. They are all conditional, including the new covenant that requires the obedience of faith. (The Noahic Covenant is the only debatable one and may be the only exception to this rule).

3. All covenants contain blessings for obedience and cursings for disobedience.

4. All covenants have a federal nature to them, so that they apply by extension in some way to all people without exception.

There are plenty of other important features of CT, but for me it wasn't until I understood these that I felt like I had a grip on CT as a biblical hermeneutic.

One of my favorite phrases in the whole of the word of God, found twice.
Take the definite article away and it would solve a lot of Van's errors in his following post as well as a lot of others. Read James Coffman on Habakkuk 2:4 while I do not agree totally with him he is closer than most. This part I think he has correct, "The just shall live by my faith,"F10 a clear reference not to the inward act of believing on the part of God's servant, (What follows I disagree.) but to the "faith" or "religion" God had enjoined.

I believe it is the faith of (literally) Christ. The, the doesn't belong.
By grace are you saved through faith. The faith of Christ.
Lets look at Hebrews 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of [our] faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Our isn't there however here the is there. The author and finisher of the faith.
? The faith brought about by obedience. Look at the balance of the verse and compare it to Hebrews 5:7,8. Balance, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God. Then: Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
Through obedience of faith he became: Next verse in Hebrews 5 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
Eternal salvation equals eternal life the gift of God.

 

[J.D.]

One of my favorite phrases in the whole of the word of God, found twice.
Take the definite article away and it would solve a lot of Van's errors in his following post as well as a lot of others. Read James Coffman on Habakkuk 2:4 while I do not agree totally with him he is closer than most. This part I think he has correct, "The just shall live by my faith,"F10 a clear reference not to the inward act of believing on the part of God's servant, (What follows I disagree.) but to the "faith" or "religion" God had enjoined.

I believe it is the faith of (literally) Christ. The, the doesn't belong.
By grace are you saved through faith. The faith of Christ.
Lets look at Hebrews 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of [our] faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Our isn't there however here the is there. The author and finisher of the faith.
? The faith brought about by obedience. Look at the balance of the verse and compare it to Hebrews 5:7,8. Balance, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God. Then: Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
Through obedience of faith he became: Next verse in Hebrews 5 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
Eternal salvation equals eternal life the gift of God.

I have to admit that I'm undecided about the details of this issue, but I think Coffman is on the right track. I think the Bible presents a continuity between the faith and personal faith - a parallel between the Church (the faith) and the Christian (personal faith). We Baptists tend to shy away from assigning salvation to the realm of the Church, and well we should in light of the Roman Catholic abuse of the doctrine. But the Bible assumes a correlation between personal faith and the observance of the ordnances. I should say that the correlation between personal faith and the ordnances is NOT a RC doctrine, for they do not hold to a correlated or parallel relationship between the two, but a one-and-the-same relationship - salvation is not just through the church, but by the church. Oh well, enough of this rambling for now.

 

[revmwc]

Being the other thread was closed I will start another for feedback.

Let me ask both sides. This may not be considered relative to the OP but I think it is.

God created Adam and gave him some instructions, then he made a help meet from him.

At this point in time can we assume God had a knowing relationship with all of mankind? Yes or No

I am not sure what I mean by knowing but I think maybe I mean covenant or the kind of a relationship between husband and wife.

Now answer that same question for these points in time and lets compare the answers.

Noah
Abram before name change
Abraham after name change
Moses
When Herod became king
70 AD
Presently

My answers are, yes followed by seven no's.

We can cover the why's later if anyone is interested.

As believers in Jesus Christ we know, we have a personal relationship with Him. This would that we have an intimate relationship with Him. We are given the Holy spirit who indwells us and seals that relationship of knowing Jesus as our Lord and Saviour. Once we are saved we are given instruction on living and the Holy spirit to help us descern thre word of God. We still have a volition to choose to serve or not serve and to choose to be obedient or not, so we have that intimate relationship because of Faith, but the fellowship is lost when we choose to walk in sin and away from Him. We are still saved, still have the Holy spirit in us but we are defiling the temple and that closeness is not there, we must confess in order to get that fellowship restored, just as Adam and Eve had to confess we ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil and Christ made the way for their restoration. So that knowing you are trying to describe is the intimate relationship we have when we continue to walk with the Lord and we know Him by the revelation of the Holy Spirit that dwells in us.

 

[Van]

Hi Percho, I see that you made mention of "Van's errors in his following post" but did not indicate what they might be?

I believe when we put our faith in Christ, that provides our access to God's grace. Romans 5:2. Is that the error you are referring to?

I believe God credits "our" faith in Christ as righteousness, Romans 4:4-5. Is that the error you are referring to?

Jesus said Your faith has saved you?

Whoever believes in Him?

Is the error you refer to my belief we put our trust in Christ?

 

[percho]

Hi Percho, I see that you made mention of "Van's errors in his following post" but did not indicate what they might be?

I believe when we put our faith in Christ, that provides our access to God's grace. Romans 5:2. Is that the error you are referring to?

I believe God credits "our" faith in Christ as righteousness, Romans 4:4-5. Is that the error you are referring to?

Jesus said Your faith has saved you?

Whoever believes in Him?

Is the error you refer to my belief we put our trust in Christ?

You proved my point Van. God credits the righteousness of God to us through the faith of Christ not our faith or anything that we believe.As I understand it, it is because of the obedience of faith exercised by Christ that we are imputed with the righteousness of God. The just shall live by my faith. That was God speaking in that passage. We are justified by the faith of Christ.

Rom. 3:25 is very interesting also in this concept.

 

[percho]

I have to admit that I'm undecided about the details of this issue, but I think Coffman is on the right track. I think the Bible presents a continuity between the faith and personal faith - a parallel between the Church (the faith) and the Christian (personal faith). We Baptists tend to shy away from assigning salvation to the realm of the Church, and well we should in light of the Roman Catholic abuse of the doctrine. But the Bible assumes a correlation between personal faith and the observance of the ordnances. I should say that the correlation between personal faith and the ordnances is NOT a RC doctrine, for they do not hold to a correlated or parallel relationship between the two, but a one-and-the-same relationship - salvation is not just through the church, but by the church. Oh well, enough of this rambling for now.

Jd

I would value your comments on what i wrote concerning the Hebrews passages.

Thanks

 

[J.D.]

Jd

I would value your comments on what i wrote concerning the Hebrews passages.

Thanks

I'm not sure where you're going with it. You are focusing on the idea that we are saved by the faith of Christ - is it your position that we are justified, not by our faith in Christ, but by Christ's faith itself? I have seen this and studied over it a few years ago. Taking every instance of the phrase "faith of Christ", I could not conclude either for or against the teaching, since, as we are discovering, it can be difficult to know whether "the faith of Christ" refers to Christ's own faithfulness toward God and the Covenant, or the body of faith (Coffman's "religion"), the Church system with its ordnances.

I don't know if that helps or just shows my ignorance but in any case I'm tired and don't really know what I'm saying so I'm logging off now. Bye.

 

[Van]

Reply to Percho

You proved my point Van. God credits the righteousness of God to us through the faith of Christ not our faith or anything that we believe.As I understand it, it is because of the obedience of faith exercised by Christ that we are imputed with the righteousness of God. The just shall live by my faith. That was God speaking in that passage. We are justified by the faith of Christ.

Rom. 3:25 is very interesting also in this concept.

Thanks for explaining your view, which is: God gives us the faith of Christ. And you believe I am mistaken for believing God credits our faith in Christ as righteousness.

Now concerning that I proved your point, that seems a tad weak!

Romans 5:3 says Abraham believed in God and and it was credited to him as righteousness. No "faith of Christ" here, just God crediting Abraham's faith as righteousness. Then in verse 5, the one who believes in Him who justifies the ungodly. If you look at the Greek, the word translated "in" actually means "on" so those who place their faith on Christ are in view, not the action of having Christ's faith placed on them.

Now in Romans 5:2 we see that we have obtained our access or introduction to the grace in which we stand (our salvation) by faith. If the faith was given us, then that faith would not provide access to grace, it would be grace.

There are four verses that are commonly translated faith in Christ but should be translated Christ's faithfulness or faithfulness of Christ. But that still leaves many many verses that clearly indicate we are to believe in Christ, not that we are to be instilled with Christ's faith.

Let's leave it that you believe I am in error, and I believe you are in error on this point.