Featured The Faith of Abraham

Martin, I agree with your analysis because I believe it is based upon a correct exegesis of Romans 4 as the bedrock of your position. I think you would agree with me that Romans 4 was the bedrock foundation for the Reformation and its doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone without works.

However, lets suppose both you and the Reformer's exegetical basis for interpreting Romans 4 came to the conclusion that Abraham's justification was a process of "being justified based upon his actions, beliefs and faith." With that interpretational basis of Romans 4 of Abraham's justification, how could the Reformation have occurred?With that view, could you sustain your position above? What difference would your position that Abraham's justification was an ongoing process of "being justified based upon his actions, and beliefs and faith" and Rome's interpretative basis of the same chapter?

If Romans 4 is interpreted after that manner how would it affect the doctrine of justifcation in particular and salvation in general? Would you consider that difference of interpretation vital to the doctrine of salvation, in fact, vital to entering heaven? Can you think of a more serious error than that view of Romans 4 to the whole scheme of salvation?

 

So what I am saying is, that if Romans 4 and Abraham's justification is interpreted as "being justified based on his actions, beliefs, and faith" then it does not merely affect the way Old Testament Saints are justified but it affects how all saints are justified because Romans 4 is one of the essential pillars for justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone without works" (but not without regeneration from which good works generate).

Both Darrel and Van are attacking the very Biblical foundation of Paul's doctrine of justifcation by faith without works. Darrel interprets Romans 4 to not merely be inclusive of works but actually "based on" works, plus beliefs, plus faith. Van empties the term justified of its vital essentials that actually obtain justification "before God." He makes an artificial distinction between imputed righteousness and justification when Paul claims imputed righteousness along with remission of sins IS justification, without which justification has no meaning or existence.

 

No, Martin, we were not discussing whether Abraham is in the Kingdom or not.

Please quote me where I denied Abraham was a member of the Kingdom of Heaven.

I'm a little surprised at this. But I'll be glad to continue the discussion.


God bless.

 

Darrell C said:


Martin Marprelate said:

I see what you're getting at but I can't accept it. Abraham is the father of all who believe; he believed in the Lord Jesus Christ (John 8:56). That he didn't see it in the same detail and glory that we see it doesn't matter. He was saved in just the same way that we are- by grace through faith. "And I say to you that many shall come from the east and the west, and sit down with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the sons of the kingdom [in this context, unbelieving Jews] will be cast out into outer darkness......" (Matthew 8:11-12).

As I have said before...Abraham is not my father, God is.

The faith I have comes, not from the example of Abraham, I did not know of him until after I met Christ, and knew Him. Sorry, just had to get that out there.

No, Abraham is not my father.

You can't take something that is illustrative and meant to be an example and make it nullify who the Father of the sons of God is.

Abraham is my brother, not my father.

Paul and John said they were fathers as well...


1 Corinthians 4:15

King James Version (KJV)

15 For though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.


3 John 4

King James Version (KJV)

4 I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth.


Now who is John and Paul's Father?

I have the Holy Ghost, lol.

Not "Abraham's DNA."

Honestly, what is in the water around here.


Galatians 3:7-9

King James Version (KJV)

7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.

8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.

9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.


Did you stop to think that the context of addressing the error of Judaizers might correlate to his point here?

And that Abraham is maintained in an equality with those who would be blessed through Christ?




Romans 4:11-12

King James Version (KJV)


11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:

12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised.


Still don't see anything that replaces My Heavenly Father with...Abraham.

Was it Abraham, Martin, that provided men that never heard of Abraham with the internal testimony of the will of God?

Do we see Abraham integral to this...


Romans 2:11-16

King James Version (KJV)


11 For there is no respect of persons with God.

12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another)

16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.


Did Abraham have anything to do with Gentiles evidencing that the Law was written in their hearts?

If you want to view Abraham as your father, that's okay with me.



God bless.

 

You have misrepresented me, and I will address the OP, but, not going to let you off that easy brother: you are under the burden of not only addressing my response (and no complaints about it being too long, you started the thread) but you are also under the burden of quoting me and justifying your charge.

So here is the first challenge: quote me denying Abraham is in the Kingdom of Heaven.

And I will remind you, I do not forget conversations, what I have said, and what I believe. You already know how this is going to play out...

...we are going to see that our discussion examined what "the Kingdom of Heaven/God" is, and that there are distinctive Kingdoms.

So a little disappointed in you brother. But that's okay, lol, we'll get it worked out, right?




God bless.

 

And I will pose to anyone who might read this, anyone else want to affirm that the Children of God have the "DNA of Abraham?"

First time I have seen this argument, so just curious if anyone wants to affirm that.


God bless.

 

At least have the courtesy to put @Van in there so he has the opportunity to defend himself when people are talking about him behind his back.


God bless.

 

So when did Abraham see that Day, Martin?

While he was alive? Or dead?

And did Abraham know the Seed was singular?

If so...he was the only one.

Sara was a Patriarch?



Do yo really see the promises as "afar off" Martin?

Do you really not understand that these (some of the Patriarchs and a wife ) did not receive the promises?

That they were not made perfect?

How is this...


Exodus 6:4

King James Version (KJV)

4 And I have also established my covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, the land of their pilgrimage, wherein they were strangers.


...relevant to their being strangers and pilgrims?

Do you really not understand why...


they are said to have faith?

Now I ask you, where do we see in any of these that Abraham had the knowledge of the Mystery of the Gospel?

Is having faith in the Messiah all it takes to be saved?

There are many Jews who are trusting in the Coming Messiah, still looking for the Consolation of Israel.

Are they saved, Martin?


God bless.

 

Kind of hard for us to be "blessed together with Abraham" seeing that there are significant differences between Abraham's faith and ours.

How often do you obey the command to receive remission of sins by offering up of your flock, Martin?

Abraham did not have the understanding of Messiah being God manifest in the flesh, dying in his stead, rising from the grave glorified, returning to Heaven, and sending the Comforter Who would perform a specific Ministry in an Age Abraham was not a part of.

Just tell me how he knew, when not only is it stated...


Colossians 1:25-26

King James Version (KJV)


25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:


It's not just a matter of Gentile Inclusion, brother, it is a matter that it is the Hidden Wisdom of God, not revealed to the Ages and Generations which precede that in which this statement is made.

And if you would like to pursue this one element of this discussion, just let me know.

Let's see this in its entirety and see how many of my questions you have answered, Martin:


Martin Marprelate said: ↑

Darrell C said:

While we can say that believers prior to this Age were in the Kingdom of God from an eternal perspective, we have to consider that Christ distinguishes between the spiritual rule and reign of God in the hearts of believers and Kingdom Christ often taught about:

Matthew 11:11

11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.


Because JTB did not have the benefit of seeing our Lord's death and resurrection as we do. Yet he will be sitting down with Abraham in the kingdom of heaven, no doubt about it.

1. So would you say...there is something different about our salvation from John's?



2. And is that Kingdom that he will sit down in different from the one we are in today? We are in the Kingdom, you know:


Colossians 1:13

King James Version (KJV)

13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:


3. So do we exclude John the Baptist from the Kingdom of God which was present under the Law and in previous Ages?

4. Do we not recognize John as a man of faith, just, and without question...saved by the grace of God?

But we see the distinction Christ draws between John and the least in the Kingdom.

5. Was John, according to the teaching of Christ...in the Kingdom you and I are in while he was alive?


Five questions, Martin. Where are the responses?

And the context has been returned (see unanswered question 2 above).

Speak for yourself. Truly John is, and was, in the Kingdom of God, but, John was not alive to see God establish the Promised Throne of the Son of David.

Furthermore, I certainly hope you are not raised at the last day. I am quite confident you will be raised at the Pre-Tribulation Rapture.

As all who are members of the Body of Christ will be.

Those raised at the last day will most likely only be the Lost. It is probable that those who die during the Millennial Kingdom are not glorified until then, but, Paul makes it clear that the Church is raised, alive and dead alike...at the same time.

And if we ever get back to our discussion about the Kingdoms seen in Scripture, perhaps we can speak of that Kingdom Abraham will be a part of, which has nothing to do, in your words , with "God's kingship, rule or recognized sovereignty (Luke 17:21; Matthew 6:10)." Not that Kingdom, but the literal thousand year Kingdom presented in Revelation 20.




God bless.

 

Not actually relevant to my statement or Doctrine. It is quite clear I am not denying John as being excluded from salvation.

You are repeating the same false argument offered by another member. Will you also dodge my address of this charge or will you have the honor to debate this honestly?

You will not quote me from one thread, on this or any other forum, where I deny that John, or any other Old Testament Saint was saved by grace through faith.

Not one quote, Martin.

And that you entirely exclude our discussion about the Kingdoms is, for me, very disappointing.

But I will say that this...

He looked forward by faith; we look back,

...is vague and misleading, in my opinion.

Not one Old Testament Saint, and not even one disciple of Christ...were looking forward to Christ's death with the understanding necessary to equate it to those of us that have received, by the Promised Spirit, the Revelation of the Gospel Mystery.

If you want to debate that element of this discussion just let me know.

Continued...

 

Not according to you:

Well Darrel, I only note that the Lord Jesus does not say, "The church is like.....," He says, "the kingdom of heaven is like......" IMO, the kingdom of heaven is more than simply the church. It is:
1. God's kingship, rule or recognized sovereignty (Luke 17:21; Matthew 6:10).
2. Complete salvation: all its spiritual and material blessings. "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." And they.......said, "Then who can be saved?"' (Mark 10:25-26).
3. The church: the community of men and women in whose hearts God is set apart as King. "....And on this rock I will build My church........I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 16:18-19).
4. The redeemed universe: the new heaven and new earth. ".......Inherit the kingdom prepared for you......" (Matthew 25:34).

This is a long way of saying, yes, in the parable, the 'sons of the kingdom' are the Church, but you should not automatically assume that 'kingdom of heaven' = church.

And there is nothing different in you distinguishing the Kingdoms and myself, with the exception that my own deal with the differing dispensations.

And I made quite a few comments on them, Martin, so why are you not including those statements? Did you think my views would change? That I would not just reiterate what I have already said?

Are you really going to deny the difference between John being under the Law...and the Body of Christ being in relationship with God through the New Covenant?

Seriously?

Being under the Law is just a minor aspect of John's participation in the Kingdom of God?

You wouldn't affirm it would be a minor aspect of someone today saying they were under Law, would you? I know you wouldn't.


Continued...

 

See more clearly?

No Old Testament Saint understood at all.

Here are some Old Testament Saints under Law:


Mark 16:9-14

King James Version (KJV)


9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.

10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.

11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.

12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.

13 And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.

14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.


The disciples did not believe on the Risen Lord.

And if Christ makes it clear they are unbelievers, who are you to equate their belief with ours?

You need to study what happens after the Resurrection, Martin.

Consider:


John 20:9

King James Version (KJV)

9 For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.


Go and confirm who this is speaking about.

The Angels' rebuke is missed by some:



Luke 24

King James Version (KJV)


1 Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.

2 And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.

3 And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus.

4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:

5 And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?

6 He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee,

7 Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.

8 And they remembered his words,


They weren't sitting around awaiting Christ's Resurrection, so how is it that you can say...

...they were looking forward to it?


Continued...

 

And what did they see?

They were seeing the Promised Messiah.

The disciples acknowledged that, and not because they deduced it, but because they were enlightened by the Father to know that truth:


Matthew 16:13-17

King James Version (KJV)


13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.


But do we ignore the rest of the story? And assume that the disciples were placing their faith in the Messiah that would die in their stead?

That would be foolish:


Matthew 16:20-23

King James Version (KJV)


20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.

21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.

23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.


Want a good sermon, brother? Do one on stumbling blocks (space intentional, pun intended).




Continued...

 

Another good example of one enlightened by God to declare the Gospel, but completely unaware of the Gospel:


John 1:29

King James Version (KJV)

29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.


Matthew 11

King James Version (KJV)

1 And it came to pass, when Jesus had made an end of commanding his twelve disciples, he departed thence to teach and to preach in their cities.

2 Now when John had heard in the prison the works of Christ, he sent two of his disciples,

3 And said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another?


A moment of weakness? Kind of like Peter, when he cursed and denied he even knew Christ?

No, simply a matter of John being used of God to declare the Gospel, as He did with many other Old Testament Prophets, yet not having the Mystery revealed to him.



Romans 16:25-26

King James Version (KJV)


25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:


If you would like to discuss this element of my Doctrine, let me know. We can break this down and I can guarantee you it is going to change. The Mystery of the Gospel was not revealed to past Ages and Generations, but is now revealed to the Saints of God. It is now made manifest.

It was kept secret since the World began.

And I never said he was not.

Just as I never said the Old Testament Saints were not justified.

Just like i have never denied that the Old TEstament Saints were...

...saved.

But as I tried to clarify for another member, there is a difference in our salvation and the salvation enjoyed by the Old Testament Saint, just as there is a difference between our salvation now and the salvation we will enjoy when we are glorified. We are still saved, but we do not nullify, nor negate the distinctions drawn by Christ and the Apostles.

And that is what most do.

And as I have said for years on this forum, there is an equation of salvation which was bestowed under Law, and salvation which is enjoyed by those who are now in relationship with God through the New Covenant.

Now, brother, I have addressed your OP, so the ball is in your court.

Let's discuss it, lol.


God bless.

 

You are correct, I did misquote you, I should have put "spiritual" in there, but, I was in a hurry (trying to finish up because my wife had gotten home) and figured you and anyone seriously wanting to enter the discussion would understand the statement based on the context of the discussion. But again, I fully admit "spiritual" should have been in there.

So let's look at what was said:

"Abraham's DNA" is contrasted with having the Spirit of God, which is why we are children of God:


John 1:11-13

King James Version (KJV)


11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.


And while I am sure, if you read the post, you know that I am not speaking about a physical association with Abraham, you are right, others may not understand that.

Now that I have acknowledged that misrepresentation, do you want to discuss your statement?

What I should have said, and say now to clarify the context of the discussion, is...

I have the Spirit of God...not the spiritual DNA of Abraham.

Abraham has no "spiritual DNA" to bestow to other men, he was a fallen man like as we are, and died still in need of Eternal Redemption.

That is just Basic Biblical Truth.

Here is what John states:


Matthew 3:9

King James Version (KJV)

9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.


Despite the fact that Abraham is a great model for faith, he is not the source or inspiration for my faith. My faith was not generated from looking at Abraham's life and saying, "Gee, I want to be like that." My faith was generated through the process of the Convicting Ministry of the Comforter, as was yours. I did not have aspirations of being a great man of faith, I was more convinced of the utter hopelessness of my situation, knew I was destined for Hell, and I turned to the One God told me was my only salvation from that condition.

I did not inherit anything from a man but a condition of separation, and I did not inherit something from God...I was placed in Christ, He in me, and that is the point I was making.

No "spiritual DNA," but the reception of the Promised Spirit.

So let's discuss this spiritual DNA of Abraham if you like.

Let's discuss the other issues you raise. I'm all for that.


God bless.