Featured The Faith of Abraham Two

Okay, another issue still worthy of discussing the points already raised which in my view have received no sufficient response.

The first question posed that has had no response from my view would be in regards to the teaching set forth that believers have "the Spiritual DNA of Abraham."

The question being...how is Abraham the father of Abel, Enoch, and Noah?

Anyone caring to share their thoughts concerning the teaching that believers have the "spiritual DNA of Abraham" are invited to present their position, and, if possible, a Scriptural basis for taking the model of Abraham and attributing a spiritual link I do not see.


God bless.

 

This is taken from the previous thread, The Faith of Abraham. The link for this post is HERE.

I will post this so I can get timestamp to properly notify the antagonist in view. Not sure why I didn't think of this before, but it is one way to negotiate the fact that we cannot get timestamps from closed threads.

And just to make sure my antagonist gets the mesage that a post of his is getting a response, I will also insert @Martin Marprelate so that he does not think I am talking about him behind his back. Which has been happening quite a bit, though this has been the norm on all forums forever, lol.

Its just a Basic Old Testament Principle, Martin:


Leviticus 4:20

And he shall do with the bullock as he did with the bullock for a sin offering, so shall he do with this: and the priest shall make an atonement for them, and it shall be forgiven them.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations



Leviticus 4:26

And he shall burn all his fat upon the altar, as the fat of the sacrifice of peace offerings: and the priest shall make an atonement for him as concerning his sin, and it shall be forgiven him.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations



Leviticus 4:31
And he shall take away all the fat thereof, as the fat is taken away from off the sacrifice of peace offerings; and the priest shall burn it upon the altar for a sweet savour unto the Lord; and the priest shall make an atonement for him, and it shall be forgiven him.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations


Are you really going to deny that God forgave sins based on animal sacrifice? A simple search of the word forgiven will deny such a position. It is explicit as well as implicit, for we see many Old Testament Saints offering up sacrifice, such as Abel, Noah, and Job...before the Law was established.

We just cannot deny that God forgave men of their sins, on a temporal and temporary basis... through animal sacrifice.

Consider Job:


Job 1

King James Version (KJV)

4 And his sons went and feasted in their houses, every one his day; and sent and called for their three sisters to eat and to drink with them.

5 And it was so, when the days of their feasting were gone about, that Job sent and sanctified them, and rose up early in the morning, and offered burnt offerings according to the number of them all: for Job said, It may be that my sons have sinned, and cursed God in their hearts. Thus did Job continually.


Job offered up sacrifice for sin.

And the distinction between these offering of the Old Testament Saints and the Offering of Christ is simply a basic principle of my own view.


Continued...

 

Again, I ask you to answer a simple question: how can they have been looking forward to the Lamb of God when the Gospel of Christ was not revealed unto men?

We see that the disciples of Christ themselves were not "looking forward to the Cross," and did not even believe He had risen from the grace afterward.

They are unbelieving:


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.


And you have never responded to this point, Martin. Why not?


Continued...

 

Were these two people...


Luke 1

King James Version (KJV)


5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.

6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.


...not in need of the Righteousness of Christ?

Why are they declared righteous, Martin?

And why is it that the people of Israel knew they were in need of Redemption through Messiah but you say they were not, because they were already declared righteous? Why were they declared righteous, Martin?


Continued...

 

I agree...Christ did that.

Now...how did He do it, Martin?

When?

And by the way, trying to make these as short as possible for you, so you can address whichever one your time allows.


Continued...

 

"In" Christ Jesus, but, you say that those whose sins were not remitted through the Cross of Christ were in Christ. Right?

Do I have that correct?

And perhaps you could clarify, seeing you feel you have the "spiritual DNA of Abraham," whether you see Abraham blessing us, or God.

And I would especially like for you to clarify that the blessings were received by Abraham's offspring (whether spiritual or or heritage) in the Old Testament.

Which leaves one last question to be asked again: how did Abel, Enoch, and Noah receive these blessing?


Continued...

 

So will you acknowledge that they had not received the Spirit? Or are you going to say they also received the Spirit of Promise, clearly stated not to have been sent, and Who would not come unless Christ returned to Heaven?


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.)



Continued...

 

Actually they died in it, and under it:


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.



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.

13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:

14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

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.



Romans 3:20-26

King James Version (KJV)


20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.


Continued...

 

No, Martin, it is just an expression, If it bothers you I can try to remember to say "I" in the future, lol.

The "We" refers to Christians, because we do not equate the declaration of righteousness that is not the declaration of Christ's righteousness to the Righteousness of Christ revealed to men in this Age.

Again...why was Abraham declared righteous, Martin?

Irrelevant tot he discussion.

You are not going to change the fact that all were guilty, and that all were in need of the Redemption that is in Christ alone.


Galatians 3:22-23

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.


Consider this statement, Martin:


Colossians 2:13-14

King James Version (KJV)


13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;


Now as brought up before in several threads, we have to ask if Gentiles are the only ones in need of the blotting out of ordinances against them. What we would have to conclude is that Jews were not also found guilty under the Law, and we know that is not the case. We would, if we supposed only Jews were born again through the Law...bring so much conflict to the Word of God that we would very soon be forced to admit that our position was in error.

This is a simple truth of Scripture. Just as the fact that there was remission of sins under the previous provision, vicarious animal sacrifice. That was the means for God to remit sins, and until Christ died on the Cross that is the method of remission of sins ordained of God.

Yes, I am fully confident that the Holy Ghost has not only revealed these basic truths to me, but that these truths were not revealed to Ages and Generations past.

He has revealed them to you too, and when you can address these points raised I think that the "we" shall be a little bit bigger group.

And I am referring to the "we" that does not equate a declaration of righteousness seen bestowed to the Just with the Declaration of the Righteousness of Christ in this Age, no implication or comment towards your salvation, just want to make that clear.


God bless.

 

(emphasis mine)

Is that not what you implied when you called my faith, and by extension my salvation...into question?

You back-peddle in your statement, that is evident in what you say here:


That is because you are not believing the Bible. Paul is never described as the father of all who believe; Abraham is. I could really stop there. Your error is already made manifest.

First of all may I raise my hand and say that I have Abraham's spiritual DNA. No doubt about it. Abraham is my spiritual father. How do I know that? The Bible tells me so.

I don't believe it is right to debate someone who denies the word of God so clearly and egregiously as you have. We might discuss exactly how Abraham is father of believers, but when you simply deny it in the face of multiple texts baldly stating the fact, to debate with you gives the suggestion that denial of Scripture is a reasonable position.

Do you not understand that your argument is not with me or with Biblicist, but with God?
It is not we who are saying that believers are the sons of Abraham, it is Almighty God, and you are shaking your puny fist in His face, denying His words and trying to mock Him.

Sooner you than me.



@Biblicist also calls my faith and salvation into question:


So any person on this forum that denies "Abraham" is their "father" image in this sense is admitting they are not a child of God or they are not "of faith."


The Biblicist said: ↑

Here is the thing, if Darrell is not a "child of Abraham" in this contextual sense - those who are in HIS IMAGE of justification by faith he is not a child of promise.


Anyone who does not have Abraham as his "father" in the contextual sense defined by Paul in Romans 4 does not have God as his "father" because Abraham is the father, as contextually defined for "ALL WHO ARE OF FAITH. And the term "father" has nothing to do with "spiritual DNA" but with LIKENESS or the specific PATTERN of Abrahamic justification by faith without works, full remission of sin (vv. 6-8) and full imputed Christ rightouesness (vv. 5-6; 23-25).


What is sad is that you are now seeing the futility of such a teaching...yet you go right back to it to justify yourself. We will see that in the end statements of this post.

Says what, Martin? That Abraham is the spiritual father of all who believe?

Oh, so going to adopt my own position now.

Wise choice, my friend.

Look at your statements above and try, with a straight face, to say you did not say you had the Spiritual DNA of Abraham and that he is your spiritual father:

First of all may I raise my hand and say that I have Abraham's spiritual DNA. No doubt about it. Abraham is my spiritual father. How do I know that? The Bible tells me so.

You did say that, right? I give the link, you can look for yourself.


Continued...

 

And that is sad. Its always sad to see theology evolving and going in the wrong direction.

Not I.

In the contextual sense you fellas back-peddle to, after such adamant argument for your view...Paul is more a father to me than Abraham.

And Abel believed. Enoch believed. Noah believed. Melchisedec believed.

How is he their father, and would you question their salvation?

And what exactly is that, Martin?

Abraham did not receive the Promised Spirit Christ sent, and he did not receive remission of sins. He did not receive the revealed Gospel Mystery.

What spiritual thing did Abraham receive that we all do?

I will help you out here...he received revelation from God and he was obedient to it.

Thus was Abraham declared righteous.


Continued...

 

But we don't have to question God as you falsely charge me, Martin.

We should know that Abraham was not the spiritual father of...

...Abel, Enoch, or Noah.

Do you really not see how foolish making a concrete principle out of Paul's teaching is? Abraham is a model. That is the only context we can Biblically put into the teaching.

When you apply a mystical spiritual application you overstep your bounds.

Abraham is not your father...God is your Father. You do not have "the spiritual DNA of Abraham," you have the Holy Spirit.

How am I in disobedience by simply stating a very basic principle...no Christian denies? Not even you fellas, lol.

I am quite content to deal with the "facts" you have already presented.

And I would appreciate some answers to some very simple questions.

If you do not want to deal with the Doctrine I have supported from the Word of God, okay, I am not going to harass you. But, as long as you are making comments and failing to recognize the sheer absurdity of attributing Abraham with a spiritual quality that is integral to be a child of God through faith...

...I will continue to deal with it.


God bless.

 

Again, nothing but insult.

I have made it clear many times that the remission of sins was temporal and temporary, and that there is a distinction we have to draw between that remission and Remission of Sins through Christ.

Your posts are not dealing with the context the quotes are given Biblicist.

It is not I that is ignorant of the fact that you, and @Martin...are forced to equate remission of sins altogether, and it is amusing to see those two distinctive provisions both affirmed (when convenient) and denied (when convenient).

Once again you are trying to debate with yourself. Don't you get tired of destroying discussion and debate with your lectures?

Go back and read the context of my post to Martin, and leave your false arguments...in your head.

However, if you want to deny that sins were remitted through animal sacrifice, as Martin did, just state that publicly.


God bless.

 

I hvae already quoted what Martin tried to convey, as well as you:

@Martin Marprelate said...

That is because you are not believing the Bible. Paul is never described as the father of all who believe; Abraham is. I could really stop there. Your error is already made manifest.

First of all may I raise my hand and say that I have Abraham's spiritual DNA. No doubt about it. Abraham is my spiritual father. How do I know that? The Bible tells me so.

I don't believe it is right to debate someone who denies the word of God so clearly and egregiously as you have. We might discuss exactly how Abraham is father of believers, but when you simply deny it in the face of multiple texts baldly stating the fact, to debate with you gives the suggestion that denial of Scripture is a reasonable position.

Do you not understand that your argument is not with me or with Biblicist, but with God?
It is not we who are saying that believers are the sons of Abraham, it is Almighty God, and you are shaking your puny fist in His face, denying His words and trying to mock Him.

Sooner you than me.


You are not forgotten:

@Biblicist also calls my faith and salvation into question:


So any person on this forum that denies "Abraham" is their "father" image in this sense is admitting they are not a child of God or they are not "of faith."


The Biblicist said: ↑

Here is the thing, if Darrell is not a "child of Abraham" in this contextual sense - those who are in HIS IMAGE of justification by faith he is not a child of promise.


Anyone who does not have Abraham as his "father" in the contextual sense defined by Paul in Romans 4 does not have God as his "father" because Abraham is the father, as contextually defined for "ALL WHO ARE OF FAITH. And the term "father" has nothing to do with "spiritual DNA" but with LIKENESS or the specific PATTERN of Abrahamic justification by faith without works, full remission of sin (vv. 6-8) and full imputed Christ rightouesness (vv. 5-6; 23-25).

So maybe you should actually address the OP.

The truth is, Biblicist, that anything you can find to disagree with me about will suffice, and you made the mistake of jumping on the Spiritual DNA of Abraham bandwagon before giving it sufficient thought.

Now, speaking of honesty, how about sharing how it is that Abraham is the Spiritual Father of Abel, Enoch, and Noah.

And I will just leave that as the one question you can answer, and show that you are interested in discussion or debate.

You are forgiven your many insults and questioning of my salvation, I am only interested in discussing the doctrine with you. But, that means you must also answer my questions. And in this thread, I call you to properly quote me and give links for anything you say I have said.


God bless.

 

Martin, you have no ability to debate with me. If you did...you would address the posts.

You have back-peddled, then back-peddled again.

And that you would continue to call my salvation into question is remarkable, never really expected that from you.

You are attributing Abraham with supernatural qualities Paul never intended us to impose into his teachings. I see nothing different in this and the error of the Catholic calling Mary the Co-redemptrix.

I view Paul's teaching, as I said early on...as a model. That's it. It does not bleed over into the spiritual realm, and Abraham was just a man...like everyone else.

But the record is clear, those who wish to claim to have the spiritual DNA of Abraham can step up and clarify, as you have.


God bless.