Featured Questions and their Answers

So I give Scripture over and over again showing Jesus said no man has entered into heaven at the time Jesus spoke this to Nicodemus (John 3) and Scripture that shows the Living Water/Spirit/Comforter was not yet given because Jesus Christ was not yet glorified (John 7) and no one has dealt with these plain truths with the exception of Protestant connecting Jesus' no man has entered into heaven comment as a "Heavenly teaching" unknown to man, which it was, but at the same time believes Nicodemus should have known this from the OT scriptures, which of course we can't have it both ways. And I get scolded for not listening to reason. I can certainly listen to reason, but you have to reason from the scriptures. All I asked was that you show me from the OT scriptures why Nicodemus should have known about the rebirth?

Let me help everyone out, I know SG has closed his mind, but hopefully others will care to engage and allow the scripture to form our beliefs. Nicodemus, a master of Israel, should he have known about the rebirth? Partially maybe, not much, until Jesus Christ introduced the term born-again and explained it, no master of Israel at the time would have known what Jesus was talking about. Jesus was not really scolding Nicodemus for not knowing, but was expounding on a partially revealed truth found in the OT and showing Nicodemus that He indeed was from God and had more knowledge to give than what had been revealed so far.

Here is the extent of what Nicodemus should have known.....

"Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people." (Jeremiah 31)

This was to be NEW, this was TO COME! Jesus revealed this as the new birth.

Now, do you want to argue that having God's law placed in your inward parts and written on your heart is NOT NEW, has always been from the beginning? Go ahead........I'm listening, I won't block you out....

There is no way Nicodemus or anyone else could have understood born-again from all the more that had been given in the OT scripture. After Jesus filled in the blanks, then we know.

The Kingdom of God, which would be Christ in you, a spiritual Kingdom, was a mystery revealed by Messiah.

"And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand." (Luke 8:10)

 

Deut. 30:6
The LORD your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your descendants, so that you may love him with all your heart and with all your soul, and live.

It's pretty simple

1. OT and NT Saints are Regenerated

2. OT Saints had the Spirit Upon Them--with an External Presence of God's Spirit at the Temple

3. NT Saints have the Spirit of God within them--an internal Presence of God's Spirit--we are the Temple individually and corporately

 

I think it is also, but of course in a different finding than you.

When does this take place? It appears to be a prophecy. The commentaries I read connect it with Paul declaring that all of Israel will be saved at the second coming of Christ when those out of the Tribulation believe.

 

I believe it takes place the moment one believes, and Paul gives evidence to that...

Romans 2
28A man is not a Jew because he is one outwardly, nor is circumcision only outward and physical. 29 No, a man is a Jew because he is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code.

Paul had to have been talking about OT Jews because in the NT we are "One in Christ"--he would not have made this his example if it wasn't true Prior to Christ's Resurrection.

 

Wonderful. And I'll add this...

Behold, the days are coming,” declares the LORD, “that I will punish all who are circumcised and yet uncircumcised--[Jeremiah 9:25]

All the OT Jews had the circumcision of the foreskin, but only those who were believers had the circumcision of the heart. This was not a NT only reality, but is found to be in both the OT & NT saints.

 

Jeremiah says it several times....

Jeremiah 4:4
Circumcise yourselves to the LORD And remove the foreskins of your heart, Men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem, Or else My wrath will go forth like fire And burn with none to quench it, Because of the evil of your deeds.

I believe this is a picture of Faith/repentance and Regeneration

 

If I was to start a thread that stated ppl could be regenerated for years and then be saved later, I'd better dollars to donuts ole steaver would say I was wrong, and rightly so.

But to say ppl can be saved w/o being regenerated is fine according to him.

 

1 Corinthians 4

1Let a man regard us in this manner, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God. 2In this case, moreover, it is required of stewards that one be found trustworthy. 3But to me it is a very small thing that I may be examined by you, or by any human court; in fact, I do not even examine myself. 4For I am conscious of nothing against myself, yet I am not by this acquitted; but the one who examines me is the Lord.5Therefore do not go on passing judgment before the time, but wait until the Lord comes who will both bring to light the things hidden in the darkness and disclose the motives of men’s hearts; and then each man’s praise will come to him from God.

 

I don't think you can draw that conclusion seeing how Paul was writing to the Roman converts some twenty years after the cross of Christ. But if you do stick with this, can you explain why Scripture (OT And NT) calls circumcision of the heart a New Covenant? According to your position, circumcision of the heart is nothing New.

"For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:" (Heb 8)

 

Hebrews 8 is about the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit.

The Ark of the covenant was an external covenant reality in the OT. It's Now an internal reality in the. NT.

OT And NT saints were both born again -made Spiritually alive.

 

Interesting, but...
.
......can you explain why Scripture (OT And NT) calls circumcision of the heart a New Covenant? According to your position, circumcision of the heart is nothing New.

 

Deuteronomy

6“Moreover the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live.


^Old testament. New Covenants always upgrade the old one in more favorable way. You can't lose a benefit.

 

This is certainly a different approach. Problem for you is it states circumcision of the heart will be NEW and FUTURE and NOT the same......

"Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:"

"But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people."

 

Nothing you stated mentions the invalidation of what Deuteronomy says.

 

Never said it did. It is an invalidation of what you say Deuteronomy says.

The days come. Means hasn't happened yet. I will make a new covenant.

Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers. It is New, NOT according to the Old covenant.

After those days. What days? Do you know?

I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. Circumcision of the heart, AFTER those days...........New Covenant. Now when did the New Covenant take place?

This isn't difficult, its pretty straight forward and plainly spoken. Just answer the questions, I know you know the answers, but to give them will destroy any doctrine that states circumcision of the heart was pre After those days.....and simply nothing New.

 

The benefit of having a circumcised heart is the same, the new covenant made a better ministry of it.

This is explained in Hebrews 8:

Hebrews 8
6But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.

A better promise then before doesn't make what was said prior false or ineffective. What it says is hey this new way of getting it will now make the old way obsolete.

Horseback riding in a sense is obsolete today for your day to day stuff, you probably drive a car or a bus. That does not mean that he horse is ineffective to taking you place to place.


As scripture states the main point of the new covenant:

Hebrews 8

1Now the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens,

Before we did not have the benefit of Jesus Christ which opens up to a wider range we see this with the range opening up to the gentiles and opening up to the world.


I get the sense you want to sell the idea it gets more EXCLUSIVE and tighter. Well the old stuff never worked and only foretold of a better promise that finally will work, so everything done prior is just a joke.

That is not providing a better promise that is simply empty promise with a Late patchwork.

 

Our debate is not about the benefit, but whether or not circumcision of the heart is foretold to be New.

Can you explain the difference between the Old way of getting circumcision of the heart and the New way of getting circumcision of the heart?

 

"Our debate is not about the benefit, but whether or not circumcision of the heart is foretold to be New."

I'm trying to make that clear. The old covenant provided circumcision of the heart it wasn't just a prophecy of the new covenant.


"Can you explain the difference between the Old way of getting circumcision of the heart and the New way of getting circumcision of the heart?"

Before you had a high priest at the temple offering sacrifices along with the mosaic law. Now you have Jesus Christ as high priest offering himself on our behalf.

 

You kinda losing me here. Maybe it would help if you gave your definition of circumcision of the heart as you see it from scripture both OT and NT.

 

Deuteronomy

6“Moreover the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live.