Featured Questions and their Answers

Ok. So where are you coming up with the Preist thing when I asked you about circumcision of the heart...

"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?"

And you said....

"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."

So you saying the priest in the OT circumcised their hearts by sacrificing animals?

 

Its God and its a internal repentance.

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.”

 

So I asked you the difference between the Old way of God circumcising the heart and the New way of God circumcising the heart?"

You pointed to the priest of the OT verses Jesus Christ our High Priest. Why is one better than the other since you believe either one saved?

 

Read all of Hebrews.

 

Lol. I have, hundreds of times. I'm sure you have also. Now we are here on a "debate board" deliberating our positions on the conclusions we are drawing from the scriptures. Positions and conclusions are tested through questioning, "what about this?, what about that?". I good position will withstand the tough questions. I would not want to hold a position in which I could not defend against tough questions. This is how I actually came to the positions I hold over the past twenty years, by questioning over and over. This is how I continue to determine that what I am holding to sounds right, by debating with others, testing my own positions by asking questions to see if the answers really make sense.

With that said, I appreciate how you have been engaged in answering my questions, but your answers have been vague at times and at times conflate two separate topics, for example, I asked about circumcision of the heart and you answer with the sacrifices performed by the priest.

So I would like to understand your position, but it is difficult when I do not get straight answers to specific questions. And this goes both ways, I always answer every question anyone ever directs towards what i hold to, if I couldn't give a "makes sense" answer according to scripture and life application, I wouldn't have any confidence at all in what I believe. And I think many folks just believe what they are told and do not do the questioning they should.

So now with all that said, if you would like to continue this debate, answering with "read the scripture" is really no answer at all. So here is the last question I had......and "read Hebrews" doesn't help the debate.....

So I asked you the difference between the Old way of God circumcising the heart and the New way of God circumcising the heart?"

You pointed to the priest of the OT verses Jesus Christ our High Priest. While this seams off the specifics of circumcision of the heart, I will go with it and try to understand then...Why is one better than the other since you believe either one saved? If Abraham and all the OT saints died in faith and all went into heaven into the presence of God, what more could they gain by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ?

 

What I think he is trying to say is:

Only the elect qualify for GNOSTIC understanding.

 

First, it is either an intentional false representation of everything I have said, or you have misunderstood everything i have said. Regeneration is REQUIRED for entrance into heaven.

Second, one is SAVED by grace through faith in the God of the OT as revealed through His chosen proven Prophets and as revealed through His NT chosen proven Apostles. From Adam through Abraham through Any this very day.

The only reason one cannot see this as it is so plainly stated in Scripture, which I gave plenty of, which no one could challenge or would challenge, which no one could show OT scripture which dealt with regeneration when asked, is because they have bought into the extremes of Calvinism and have shut down their critical thinking.

Simple question for you which no one has been able to answer....

If Abraham and all the OT saints who died in faith all went into heaven into the presence of God, what more could they gain by the actual physical sacrifice of Jesus Christ?

 

Anyone care to attempt an answer?????

You can also answer what promises did those who died in faith NOT receive?

And...what New way did God circumcise the heart different than the OT way seeing God said it would be a New Covenant?

 

I do have a compiled study so send me a pm with an address I can send it to you at.

Thanks, much for the support, brother. I agree, some pretty basic and simplistic truths rejected because they come into conflict with the indoctrination of the Theology Systems embraced.


God bless.

 

Different how?


God bless.

 

So do you see that crediting of righteousness as having salvific value comparable to believing on the Gospel of Christ? On other words, Abraham was saved on an eternal basis because he believed the Promise but was not privy to the Promise itself?

And for the record, I have never once said the Old Testament Saints were not "saved," but that they were not eternally redeemed. They were "saved" from the eternal perspective but died still awaiting Eternal Redemption which is accomplished by Christ alone, and accomplished when Christ came, died in our (and their) stead, arose from the dead, returned to Heaven, and sent the Comforter Who enlightens natural men to the truth of the Gospel.

Understanding the difference between those two issues requires stepping outside of popular modern theologies.


God bless.

 

All of the OT saints were saved same way we NT ones were, on the basis of the Death of Christ and His resurrection for their stead, but they could not go directly to heaven as that pathway remained closed until Messiah came and did His atoning work for us in our time and space, in history itself...

 

And because it's Protestant...it's undeniable?

Here are a few Doctrines of Men of the Protestant movement:

Men went to Heaven prior to being Eternally Redeemed. This is based primarily on their interpretation of what happened to Enoch and Elijah.

Men are are regenerated by God in order to have faith in Christ. Ironically they cannot see the irreconcilable contradiction this demands to their view of Eternal Security (which is something they actually get right). Doubtful many Protestants would even be able to identify that contradiction, much less address it, but you are welcome to try.

Men were able to place faith in Christ despite the fact they did not know He would die in their stead for their sin.

Prophecy doesn't have to be fulfilled. They feel they have liberty to spiritualize Prophecy and deny it need be fulfilled.

Hyper teaching on Election: a denial that men make a decision (and to clarify, I am not endorsing the equally erroneous doctrine of free will, I teach that men make a decision based on the enlightened understanding they are given by God, which leaves God wholly Sovereign in Salvation in both the Old and New Testament).

Now how many of these can we apply to various cults?

And what is one of the primary signs of a cult? Members who will not respond to challenges to their system of belief. Perhaps if you read this thread you would see that the accusations, not to mention slander and outright dishonesty of Protestant has been responded to without a single response to what has been given, which was all given with a Scriptural basis for the response.

Just because something is ?mainstream Protestant Doctrine" doesn't mean it is mainstream Christian Doctrine.

It's only Christian Doctrine if it is Biblical based and without error. Would you equally endorse Baptismal Regeneration? That too is mainstream "Christian" Doctrine, embraced by millions of professing Christians.

Now if you would like to attempt to address anything addressed in the dishonest slander of the OP who has no problem lying about what people have said...

...feel free.

Of course I am sure you are too busy preparing sermons or something along those lines to actually engage in discussing this topic in detail.


God bless.

 

Actually he doesn't answer the question, he simply presents a poorly prepared attempt to teach a view that was embraced for no better reason than to believe something different than what Catholics believed. This is true of embracing the Amillennial position as well.

First, one cannot read Hebrew without concluding that the Old Testament Saints were not made perfect (complete).

Second, using a term like "limbo" plays upon the emotions of those who reject "Purgatory," which then leads to denying a very clear teaching of the Bible which is men went to Sheol/Hades when they died prior to the Cross.

Third, and more importantly, what this view teaches is that men went to Heaven when they were not redeemed by Christ yet. What that establishes is that men are eternally redeemed apart from Christ. And that is the primary problem with failing to recognize the importance of what it is Christ came to do and what He accomplished through the Work of the Cross.

All live unto Him? So then, those such as the Rich Man of Luke 16 live unto God?

The problem here is we see again an equation of Old Testament standards and New Covenant realities. The simple fact is that Eternal Life is possible only through Jesus Christ, and that eternal life was not bestowed prior to His coming.

The dead in Hades are "alive" in the sense that they have not ceased to exist, but no-one would ascribe that existence as eternal life.

But this is what Turretin does here.

Over and over Christ taught He came to give men eternal life through Himself, and in a key passage that deals with both the "fathers" and eternal life Christ sums up in irrefutable terms that He is the source of Eternal Life:


John 6:49-53
King James Version (KJV)

49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.

50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.

51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.


In view is believing on Christ in regards to His Death, Burial, and Resurrection.

The "fathers were, according to Christ...dead. The life received by those who eat of His flesh and drink of His blood (believe the Gospel) is not physical life, because these Jews knew Moses and Joshua were dead physically, and we know that despite receiving the Life of Christ we still die physically. In view is Eternal Life received through believing on Christ. Not simply that He is the Christ the Son of the Living God, but that He is the risen Savior Who died that we might have that life He came to bestow.

John also makes it clear that Regeneration began...when Christ came:


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.


Being born of God began at Pentecost. What Christ told Nicodemus was true despite the fact that it was not taking place yet.

The disciples were not in Christ until Pentecost, this...


John 14:15-23
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.

19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.

21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

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.


Simply hadn't happened at the time Christ teaches the disciples about the Eternal Indwelling of God. The Spirit of God was with them, but would be...in them.

Christ said "I will come to you," and that is precisely what He did when He sent the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost.

So again, the "response" implies men who did not have eternal life went to Heaven, and this before their sins were redeemed through Christ. That is error, and not taught by Scripture.

No need to defend Scriptural truth, the Old Testament Saints were not made perfect (complete) in regards to remission of sins, that is just a Biblical fact:


Hebrews 10:1
King James Version (KJV)

10 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.


Hebrews 10:14
King James Version (KJV)


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

Only Christ can redeem on an eternal basis. So if one wants to believe men went to Heaven when their sins had not been forgiven and they were not eternally indwelt (which means they were not in Christ, not in God in Eternal Union) then okay. But if you want to believe what the Bible teaches then you will have to reject the popular pulpit mythology of the Theology Systems that are popular today.


Continued...

 

They were made perfect as in being saved by grace alone/faith alone by the basis of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, but the fullness such as straight to heaven, having Jesus as High priest, indwelling Holy Spirit etc had to wait until jesus came and did the finishing of the salvation plan of God.

 

And what would that have meant to the first century Jew? Heaven? No, the same thing Paradise meant to them: Sheol/Hades.

And we do not see Abraham referring the rich man's brothers to the Gospel, but because this is instruction relevant to the Age of Law...he refers them to Moses and the Prophets:




Luke 16:27-31
King James Version (KJV)

27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:

28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.

29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.


If Abraham and Lazarus are in Heaven, then we must conclude that they went to Heaven based on something other than faith in Jesus Christ. And the Lord through Abraham tells us what that was...Moses and the Prophets. That is what Abraham states will keep his brothers from eternal torment. So the question to ask is can we really agree with those of the view that men went to Heaven through what boils down to the keeping of the Law? Justified, yes, because Paul makes it clear in Romans 2 that Gentiles would be justified because they performed the works of the Law written on their hearts (or in other words they performed the revealed will of God given them directly through internal witness).

But Eternally Redeemed on that basis?

Absurd. Only Christ can eternally redeem the sinner and He does not do that apart from our being credited His righteousness. Abraham was justified based on what he did, but Eternal Redemption is based on what Christ did.

False doctrine, there is no easy way to put it.

Eternal Life comes from Christ alone, and that life was not given unto men until the True Bread actually came.

To call the Bosom of Abraham "eternal life" is simply absurd.
Christ did not teach that:

John 6:49-53
King James Version (KJV)

49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.

50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.

51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

I find it surprising that people would look at this as anything other than nonsense. He equates John lying on the bosom of Christ with Abraham's Bosom. Simply amazing.

Next he replaces Christ with Abraham and gives him an equable position, thus equating Abraham with Christ Himself.

Lazarus could not be to Abraham what John was to the Lord because...Lazarus did not know Abraham, Abraham did not know Lazarus. And...Abraham is never given a role of savior in Scripture.

And what is the glaring fact that Turretin misses?

This will take place in the future. Christ and the disciples preached "The Kingdom is at hand," and that is the Kingdom long awaited by the people.

The only mystery here is that created by the imaginings of men.

Lazarus is more loved by God Who is no respecter of persons?

There will be men in Heaven who are shown preferential love? Some will lie on Christ's bosom and some won't?

Luke 16 is pretty simple: during the Age of Law two men die, one goes into torment and the other into Abraham's Bosom. If Christ meant to speak of men going into Heaven then He would have said Lazarus was in Heaven.

The simple truth is that we do not have "the same faith" Abraham had. Abraham believed God would give him a son, and bless the world through his seed. We believe that Jesus Christ died for our sins and that by trusting in Him we receive eternal life.

Big difference.


Continued...

 

Paradise is used twice to refer to Heaven in the New Testament Epistles, but, this is not likely the Paradise referred to by Christ. Where did Christ go? This is made clear...


Acts 2:29-31
King James Version (KJV)

29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.

30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.


His Person went to Hades, and the obvious thing to ask is...why?

The answer lies in the fact that the way into the Holiest of All, that is, Heaven, was not made manifest to men prior to His Death. This has already been shown in the beginning of this thread (Post #15) so let's take a look at Christ going to Hades Himself and again ask...why? The answer is because those who died prior to the Cross had not yet received the Eternal Remission promised by God in the Old Testament:


Jeremiah 31:31-34
King James Version (KJV)

31 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:

32 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:

33 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.

34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.


Hebrews 10:15-18
King James Version (KJV)

15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,

16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;

17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.

18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.


This is just one promise the Writer of Hebrews makes clear the Old Testament Saints did not receive when they died:


Hebrews 11:13
King James Version (KJV)

13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.


Hebrews 11:39-40
King James Version (KJV)

39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:

40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.


That's why men could not come into the presence of God...their sin was not redeemed by Christ:


Hebrews 9:12, 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.


Secondly, the problem with presenting the thief in the first place is...this takes place after Christ has died for the sin of mankind.

But, if one is in the habit of making moot points the basis for their belief...so be it.


Continued...

 

Hades can be described as "limbo," and just because a Protestant wants to try to equate that with Catholicism's Purgatory only shows that they don't mind being deceitful in their quest to support their doctrines.

And again when Paradise is used to refer to Heaven these are Post Cross mentions, even that of the thief, because Christ died prior to the theif and when he did die, it is likely he would have gone to Heaven because Christ had atoned for his sins. When exactly those in Sheol/Hades went to Heaven is not something we can be dogmatic about, because we simply are not given the specifics.

Again, a false statement, because this is peculiar to the thief on the cross.

Secondly, faith in Jesus Christ did not begin until Pentecost. Men believed Him to be the Messiah but did not believe on Him as the Risen Savior. Not even the disciples of Christ were believing on Him in that respect. The reason?


John 20:9 King James Version (KJV)

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


The reason?


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:

He does no such thing. That is like saying "Men always went to Heaven because Paul taught believers go to be with the Lord. It's a New Covenant Age of Grace context. But that is the problem with numerous Protestant doctrines...they impose New Covenant elements into Old Testament Eras.

So this point falls on its face as well.


Continued...

 

In the case of Elijah "heaven" is usually referring to the sky. In the case of Enoch we are never told he went into Heaven, or heaven, but that he did not "see" death, which can mean he did not experience death. Where he went is just as easily Hades and more probable, unless we want to invalidate many teachings of the New Testament.

Secondly, we see Elijah in the same state as Moses on the Mount of Transfiguration. Moses died, that is not disputed, and when he died his spirit was separated from his body. When appearing on the mount Elijah would have been a spirit as well.

And it's curious, if Elijah went to Heaven, how then does a letter come from him after he was caught away...


2 Chronicles 21:9-12
King James Version (KJV)

9 Then Jehoram went forth with his princes, and all his chariots with him: and he rose up by night, and smote the Edomites which compassed him in, and the captains of the chariots.

10 So the Edomites revolted from under the hand of Judah unto this day. The same time also did Libnah revolt from under his hand; because he had forsaken the Lord God of his fathers.

11 Moreover he made high places in the mountains of Judah and caused the inhabitants of Jerusalem to commit fornication, and compelled Judah thereto.

12 And there came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet, saying, Thus saith the Lord God of David thy father, Because thou hast not walked in the ways of Jehoshaphat thy father, nor in the ways of Asa king of Judah,


...?

This is what is said:


Hebrews 11:8-10
King James Version (KJV)

8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.

9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:

10 For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.


And they died not receiving it:



Hebrews 11:13-14
King James Version (KJV)

13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.

14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.


The "Rest" promised in the Old Testament was a physical rest that is made eternal only in Christ:


Hebrews 4:8
King James Version (KJV)

8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.


The other "day" spoken of is the Day of Christ.

It's a false argument to equate Hell with Hades and to suggest that is what is meant when we speak of men going to Hades.

This is no different than trying to make it Purgatory.

But that is how men with weak doctrine do it, they have to contrive false arguments to stay in a discussion.

And it is certainly interesting that the OP relies on what men say rather than trying to expound upon these issues from the Word of God.

But wait a minute, why, if he was saved...would he be waiting for salvation?

I would agree that this Psalm has first application to David. But, why would it be strange that David commits his spirit to the Lord? It is simply relying on God for his eternal destiny. Secondly, how does that change Christ's teaching that the Spirit, in the ministry of Comforter...

...wasn't given to men yet?


John 7:38-39
King James Version (KJV)

38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

You guys try to proof-text your man-made doctrines and ignore the teaching of Christ.

Are you suggesting that men were glorified before Christ was?

He is the Firstborn from the Dead, the first to die and rise again never to die again.


Acts 26:22-23
King James Version (KJV)

22 Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come:

23 That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.


No man was glorified prior to Christ, that is the doctrine of cults. Not the Doctrine of Scripture.


Continued...