Featured The Limited Gospel?

I have just given numerous citations in the preceding posts, Van. That is in fact the focus of the discussion at this point (and really the focus of the discussion in the OP.

According to Scripture's teaching, not my view, Abraham was righteous according to the flesh (temporally), not righteous on an eternal basis as men are when they are freely justified through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus.

And I wish you would learn a new word, brother. Obfuscation is a really cool word, but if you use it in every sentence it gets rather tiresome.

If you would like to address something I have said, please do so, but please don't charge me with a view that is the exact opposite of what I have just posted. That too gets tiresome.


God bless.

 

Correct.

An everlasting covenant, not The Everlasting Covenant:



Hebrews 13:20-21
King James Version (KJV)


20 Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant,

21 Make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.


The Everlasting Covenant was inaugurated with the Blood of Jesus Christ, not the blood of animals:


Genesis 15:8-10
King James Version (KJV)

8 And he said, Lord God, whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it?

9 And he said unto him, Take me an heifer of three years old, and a she goat of three years old, and a ram of three years old, and a turtledove, and a young pigeon.

10 And he took unto him all these, and divided them in the midst, and laid each piece one against another: but the birds divided he not.


The Abrahamic Covenant is not the New Covenant, nor does it contain all of the Promises God would add to the promises made unto Abraham. The New Covenant does not nullify the specific promises given to Abraham, and those promises are fulfilled in the New Covenant, but, it is not the Abrahamic Covenant.


Continued...

 

You'd have to be a little more specific, lol.

The fact is that we can apply tenets of the Covenant of Law to the New Covenant, because GOd's principles are taught in the Law, and we establish those same principles in our lives. At least we are supposed to.

For example, we still do not commit idolatry, steal, lie, murder, etc.

However, it has to be understood that the Covenant of Law was specific to the Nation of Israel, it was not given to the world in general. Israel is an Old Testament picture of the Church, who herself is a picture of the One Fold seen in the Eternal State.

We are a witness nation unto God, His people.

Sure you can: the seed being revealed as the Seed, yet Abraham receiving the seed (singular), and the seed (plural, as innumerable as the stars).

What he says is that the Abrahamic Covenant was not nullified, it does not say God did not add to tehphysical understanding Abraham would have received it as. And in fact we see that even the Disciples of Christ looked for a physical fulfillment. Which is why Peter rejected the notion of Messiah dying, which was a rejection of the Gospel, by the way, though he is not found guilty because God was not revealing this to men, not giving them the understanding He would when the Spirit was sent.

That is like trying to say "The Abrahamic Covenant did not add to the promise of redemption in the Adamic Covenant."

Its not "adding," or changing, its the nature of progressive revelation, Gup. The Gospel of Christ has always been the Plan of Redemption (from before the world was formed), and it is slowly revealed throughout the Hebrew Scriptures.


Continued...

 

Again, the Abrahamic Covenant is not "the Covenant of Faith."

The Faith of Christ is the Faith in view when Paul writes...


Galatians 3:22-24
King James Version (KJV)

22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.


This dogmatically denies the "faith of Abraham" is the Faith of Christ.

The Faith of Christ did not come until the appointed time, and is not equable to believing God concerning physical provision.

That is why the Writer of Hebrews denies to his brethren that they can continue to function, and be in relationship to God through the Foundational Principles of the Word of God (which would have been the Hebrew Scriptures, the Old Testament):


Hebrews 6:1-2
King James Version (KJV)

1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,

2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.


Abraham had a general faith in God, that is evident, because The Faith of Christ had not yet come, and would not until He had arisen from the grave, returned to Heaven, and sent the Comforter (the Spirit of Promise, the Spirit of Grace, the Spirit of Truth) to bring conviction in a ministry directly to the hearts of men. He enlightens the natural mind to the spiritual things of God, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ...

...heads that list.

We are not called to go into another country, and we do not whine to GOd that we have no heir...

...we have received the Promises God has given mankind through Christ.


Continued...

 

Completely irrelevant to anything I said.

You quoted two things I have said, and presented a page of commentary...based on a false argument.

I made it clear that salvation has always been by the grace of God through faith. You respond with "Faith is not a work."

That is a popular notion, but that does not warrant equating the Abrahamic Covenant with the New Covenant.

If it were the New Covenant of the New Testament, then someone should have told the Lord:


Matthew 26:28
King James Version (KJV)

28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.


Animal blood inaugurated the Abrahamic Covenant, not the Blood (death) of Christ.

Someone should have told Paul as well:


2 Corinthians 3:6-8
King James Version (KJV)

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?


We are not "ministers of the Abrahamic Covenant," but ministers of the New Covenant.

Sorry, but that is simply incorrect.

Look at your proof text again, and you will see that the Law was meant to lead us to Christ...

...not Abraham.


God bless.

 

Not until they received the promise of eternal inheritance and were made perfect.

They received eternal life retroactively when Christ died for their sins. While they were alive the only provision they had for sin was the blood of bulls and goats and calves, which could not take away sins. The last sacrifice for sins they would have offered up would have been that of an animal, who died in their stead to bring about temporal remission of sins, which was temporary, and had to be continually offered as long as one was alive.

The Law could not take away sins, nor make one perfect (complete) in regards to remission of sins:


Hebrews 10:1-4
King James Version (KJV)

1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.

3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.

4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.


And that includes animal sacrifice prior to the establishment of the Covenant of Law, noted by the Writer here:


Hebrews 12:22-24
King James Version (KJV)

22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,

23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.


He takes animal sacrifice back to the first person we see offering up sacrifice, Abel. We know that it is not His death in view, because it would make little sense to contrast Christ's death with Abel, who died for no-one, and died in need of Christ dying for him.

The Law could not give life:


Galatians 3:21-22
King James Version (KJV)

21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.

22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.


But Christ's Sacrifice does take away sins, and makes the comer thereunto perfect (complete) in regards to Remission of Sins...forever:


Hebrews 10:10-14
King James Version (KJV)

10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:

12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.


And His Sacrifice (of Himself) and Resurrection does give life:


1 Peter 1:3
King James Version (KJV)

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,


God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself. To remedy the condition of separation that began in Adam.

It is a common misconception that the Old Testament Saints received the Atonement prior to the Cross. That view cannot be supported by Scripture, and in fact is denied by the Word of God.


God bless.

 

No I would not see them as having their sins remitted due to Christ...that is the entire point of the Writer of Hebrews: Remission of Sins was not accomplished until Christ died, and the sins of the Old Testament Saint (the Just) we redeemed at the same time:


Hebrews 9:12 and 15
King James Version (KJV)

12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.


The Eternal Indwelling is not something they had either, which is evident in Christ's teaching throughout John 14.

For example:


John 14:15-18
King James Version (KJV)

15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.


Here we see the eternal indwelling of the Spirit and the Son.

Here...


John 14:22-23
King James Version (KJV)

22 Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?

23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.


...we see the indwelling of the Father and Son. Now the important thing we want to notice is that it is...

...not happening at the time of the teaching.

Christ is speaking of what is going to happen when He sends the Spirit of Truth, the Comforter.


God bless.

 

UNderstood, it happens to all of us, lol. I once spent about three pages addressing what came out of a "slip of the tongue."

So you are now saying that Abraham did not receive the Gospel of Christ and understand it?

We shall see.

On the contrary, you are imposing what I just said above.

The Mystery of the Gospel of Jesus Christ was not revealed to Abraham, nor to any saint, nor to the sons of men...in Ages and generations prior to the coming of the Spirit of Truth:


Ephesians 3:3-6
King James Version (KJV)

3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,

4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)

5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;


This stands a,one and clarifies the Mystery revealed to Paul was not made known prior to this revelation.

To limit it to a context of Gentile Inclusion is the mistake most make because of the following statement:


6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:


The revelation is the Mystery of Christ, and that is not limited to Gentile Inclusion, even as it is not here:


Romans 16:24-26
King James Version (KJV)

24 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

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:

Made known to "all nations" includes Israel.


Continued...

 

This is what you said, to which I said "...that is not the Gospel:"

We don't just inherit it by being qualified as descendants of Abraham. We must...

...belong to Christ.

Secondly, that is the whole point I am making: you are equating those who "followed in the steps of Abraham" with those who, in this Age, have turned to Christ through the Gospel.


"Abraham believed God" is contrasted with those who receive the blessing Abraham was foretold of, but did not himself receive. We believe on the Risen Savior, not generalities as Abraham did.

So if you want to "take exception" to the simple fact that I am not a son of Abraham, that is your choice, lol. This I can tell you, Abraham was not a son of GOd as we are made sons of God now that the Mystery of the Gospel of Christ has been revealed. I don't have to adopt modern concepts to "believe the Scripture."


And lastly, you are still overlooking one simple fact...

...Abraham did not receive the Promise.

So why do you equate Abraham's faith with that of my own, or yours.

Abraham was given promise, but did not receive it. I have made that point numerous times and yet you still ignore it, and continue to present Abraham as though his faith is equal to ours, rather than a model, as Paul makes clear.

Bingo.

You don't agree, lol. You keep arguing that they "placed faith in the Risen Savior" outside of time.

They did not. That would make the teaching of the Mystery of the Gospel moot.

And as far as "Jesus' Perspective, that is another thing you overlook" the Man Jesus Christ has a beginning in time. He was the Eternal Son of GOd born into human flesh at a specific point in time.

And that is what Abraham was promised, yet he did not know this. Paul makes this point and in no way does he impose an understanding in Abraham, while at the same time teaching that the Gospel of Christ was a Mystery.

Its either one or the other, not both.


God bless.

 

Would you like to post what it is that warrants a question like this?

How is this even relevant to what I said?

You said this:

I think I've already dealt with this sufficiently, but let me say again, there are Mysteries (plural) revealed in the New Testament, and the other thread dealt with one of those Mysteries (plural), the Mystery of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Its not a matter of "how and why faith matters," but the object of faith, which is different between Abraham and believers today, who do not have a general faith in God or His Promises, but place their faith specifically in Jesus Christ.

RIght, lol. And this is the same thing you first said to me, "praying" I would change my view. You would have me adopt yours? A teaching that it doesn't really matter if men place their faith in Christ or not?

That Abraham was just as saved as we without believing on Christ?

No thanks, my friend, I will stick with my own view that you, and most, equate the faith of Abraham with the faith of the born again believer, who have been, unlike Abraham, forgiven their sins through the Atonement, Reconciled to God through Christ's death, and indwelt by God in eternal union.

So, begin sorting, Gup.

You did it again, lol.

You simply do not have an understanding of what a Mystery is.

It is knowledge...not previously revealed.

Do you also think the Rapture was known in part in the Old Testament?

My own understanding has nothing to do with the fact that you are, publicly...making up position as you go. That is why your position is so unstable.

And you have just said one thing then reversed yourself..again:

That's the point of this thread, Gup...Abraham did not receive a "limited Gospel."

He did not receive "part of the mystery."

Again, you say you agree, all the while arguing against what it is you say you agree with.

Now you say he didn't need it to be, which denies most of the arguments you have already submitted..

Now, the fact is, you are right here...he did not need the Mystery of the Gospel revealed to him to be saved, he simply needed to be obedient to the revelation he did receive, believe God, and place his faith in God.

And that is quite different from what men are called to believe in today. They are called to believe on Jesus Christ, and general faith for those who have heard the Gospel will result in Eternal Judgment.

You're still trying to defend your previous arguments, lol. "A full understanding?"

There was...no understanding, because the Mystery of the Gospel of Jesus Christ was not revealed to the sons of men, or the saints, in any Age or Generation, but is now revealed to His holy Apostles and Prophets by the Spirit.

Once you set your pride to the side and stop trying to defend it, you can move on to embracing doctrine that is stable, and stands against the isleading concepts popularly held by many these days.

Here we go again.

You denying what you've just said.

Abraham did not place faith in the Gospel of Christ as understood by Paul as Paul expounds the Mystery of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

What blessing? Blessing was to come through Abraham, and what Paul teaches is that the blessing...was Christ.

But you don't really believe that.

You have been arguing that Abraham placed faith in Jesus Christ.

So you believe two things to be true?


God bless.

 

This is false doctrine, and I have shown you several times that it is.

Now, go find Scripture to support your heresy.


God bless.