How many gospels are there?

1. Paul used the first person plural, "we", including himself. It saddens me that Paul believed such a thing.

2. The conclusions we will make that just go against the heart of our eschatological certainty.

3. Wow, I can't believe what I just read. I never thought I'd see the day that Paul's hope would be questioned by another believer.

 

Paul was very well aware that his hope of glory was just that a "hope."

But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.

He knew full well and tries to warn us today (but there aren't many that are taking heed) that we too could be a castaway.

This is a race that we are running and we must be found qualified at the end of it. And if we are found disqualified (castaway) we don't get the prize.

The prize is not guaranteed. It's conditional.

 

Before I get on to what I actually want to say, I want to comment that I think that JJump is not saying that Abraham is not saved, just the passage that most people point to. If he believed God and followed God before that, then he was saved before that. (This may have already been covered, but I've been teaching classes all day and haven't read the entire thread.)

The stage is set well before James 2:14. It's set in 1:21: "Jam 1:21
Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls."

James is a book specifically about the salvation of the soul, which involves works. It involves "faith that works". It concludes with 5:20: "Jam 5:20
Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins."

This is thanatos death which has to do with losing your life (the salvation of your soul) in the age to come.

The stage has been set before we get to 2:14, which talks about works.

 

1. I'm afraid you don't understand Paul's eschatological hope.

2. But I guess you can't because you would have to give up your hold on the Subjunctive Mood.

3. Do this one thing: consult a few reliable Greek Grammars and then you and I can continue on this discussion, because you seem to be on a verbal odyssey.

4. In the meantime, I will cling to the certainty of my eschatological hope that I find so obvious in Paul (Col.3:3, 4; 2 Tim 4:6-8; yet some say Paul was not certain of his eschatological hope).

 

"Christ" itself is not a name or a person, it is an adjective used to describe someone. It simply means "anointed". You can look in the LXX and see in Leviticus 4:5 that the priest is anointed. (Of course, "god" is also a title and not a name, but that's a different, but related, discussion.)

The gospel has many facets, which are referred to as "little gospels" by many people. The gospel contains many gospels, so to speak. There is the gospel of salvation, the gospel of the Kingdom, etc. They are contained within the Gospel.

If the gospel of salvation were the end all, then we could discard the entire Bible except for Acts 16:30-31, because the rest would be pretty useless.

 

Just as Esther does not contain "God". Does that mean that it doesn't contain God?

 

So, what are those warnings? "Better make sure you really, really, really, TRULY believe so that you can make sure you're really really saved, and if you're really really saved, then you'll have these works, but works don't play into it."

Are the warnings and exhortations to saved people or unsaved people?

To whom are the warnings?

 

When you believe in the present tense, and you stopped believing, you have believed in the aorist. If you believe in the present tense, and you never falter, and then you die, from a human perspective, you have believed in the aorist tense. If you believe but for a moment, then something happens that causes you to doubt, you have believed in the aorist tense.

If you were to graph these, they would all be dots; they would all be punctiliar action. But, you could use a small dot to represent one, and a big dot to represent the other.

If you murder someone (an event), you cannot unmurder them. An event cannot be undone.

What is obedience for?

Look at the type that we are given. The children of Israel were given a Promised Land. Genesis 15:18: "In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:"

Most people forget that this promised land, which was promised based on nothing more than being in the family (a type of born from above) was made. They equate "Promised Land" with "Land Flowing With Milk and Honey".

The Land Flowing with Milk and Honey was also promised, but that promised was based on being faithful (a type of the Kingdom; born again)

Before they even stepped foot outside their homes in the land of Goshen, they were already in the Promised Land. They were saved.

But, their journey of faithfulness to receive the better part of that inheritance began with doing something; being baptized in the Red Sea. But, they were already in the Promised Land before being baptized.

Two promises; one based on nothing but being in the family, one based on works. They are not mutually exclusive; you can have both. You can stop at being in the family without following in obedience; you don't have to be faithful if you don't want the better part of the inheritance. But, you cannot have the better part of the inheritance without the other.

 

I know I've asked this before, but do you people ever work?

Ephesians 2:10 does say that we are made to good works. "Create" originally means "make habitable" or "to found". But, the verse goes on to say that we might or might not do them. So, we are "founded" or "made" to do good works, but there is no guarantee that we will do them. If we don't do them, that doesn't mean that we are unsaved; it simply means we didn't do what we were supposed to do.

Galatians 2:16: "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified."

What are "works of the Law"? What are the commandments of God? What are the good works that we are "made habitable" to do?

Do works themselves justify us, or are we justified because we do them?

 

Simply put:
1. I am a five point Calvinist.

2. I am committed to Reformed Theology because it is biblical.

3. Then, I know you know what I believe about eternal salvation and works of sanctification.

 

1. Faith in our works do not justify.

2. Whether it be the Law of Moses/Law or the commandments of God, they do not justify. I believe Paul has made that unequivocally clearly.

3. I engage in good works because God marked them our beforehand that I should walk in them. The Grammar of Eph 2:4-10 points to that.

4. But I get no credit. God is at work in me both to will and work according to his good pleasure. That to me is the mystery of sanctification.

5. I see the same principle at work in 1 Cor 15:10 and Gal 2:20.

 

How does this apply then to the questions/statements that I've brought up?

 

I didn't say that it was faith in our works. I said that it was faith that works. (Unless I made a typo, which I do from time to time when I'm typing fast. BTW, do you people ever work?)

Luke 1:6 tells us that Zechariah and Elizabeth were just because they were walking in the precepts and statutes of God; they were blameless. Doesn't mean they were sinless.

The law does not justify, but we are justified by being obedient. Can you be obedient while committing adultery? How about while being covetous?

But, faith, which is a lifestyle, is both more and less than keeping the commandments. You don't live by faith if you're under the law, but you can't live by faith if you're above the law.

Well, you should walk in them. But, what if you don't? Does that mean you're unsaved?

Why is it not both? If you do something through faith, cannot God get the glory, and you get the glory? Not only that, you can recieve glory here or glory at the Judgment Seat of Christ. (I also think that if you receive glory here, did you do it to receive glory, or is it just happenstance, but I digress.)

Yes. We need grace so that we may serve him acceptably. But, both books are written to saved people, and it's about works, not getting born into the family. It's about the things we should be doing.

Should we be doing them because we love the Lord? Absolutely!

But, we've also been promised rewards and wages for doing them, and if Lord esteems them enough to offer rewards, should we not esteem the rewards enough to want them?

The Bible tells us that we will receive an inheritance if we live under the law, but that inheritance is a mere pittance to what we receive for faith. Ishmael, a type of the law, received an inheritance; Isaac, a type of faith, received a far superior inheritance.

 

So, you don't esteem the things that God esteems. Why not?

 

By your statement, are you advocating that all references to the gospel angulf the same idea? Do they all deal with the need to be born from above? (Spiritually saved?)

If so, why were the believers and saints called upon to recieve or believe the "my gospel" of Paul if they had indeed alredy recieved by faith "the gospel?"

 

And this is one of the biggest mischaracterizations of folks that believe in the gospel of the kingdom. Foes always try to say that we think we are better than people and that we are prideful of our works.

That couldn't be further from the truth. It is only by grace that these works are done through us and not by us, but by the Spirit of God.

But as HoG has pointed out grace is the key in works. And let me give you a working definition that I heard from a friend's dad (who is a pastor in NC). Grace is God doing for man what He requires of man and then giving him credit as if he did it himself.

I have never heard a definition of grace better than that.

God does for me what he requires of me and then gives me credit as if I did the acts myself. This is true of salvation by grace through faith and this is also true of the grace needed for the works (Eph. 2:10) that I "should" be doing after eternal salvation is complete.

So we have nothing to toot our horn about despite what others might say.

 

So does that mean you get no crowns and no gold, silver, and precious stones at the Bema? And no blame for the wood, hay, and stubble either?

Yeah, I think it would be "pivotal" if you thought you were getting to the Bema reqards judgment by doing nothing. :sleeping_2:

skypair