Old Testament re-generation

Hi JohnP

Why I take this as a compliment at least you admit that I was right about something some where. How ever you have been wrong from the beginning.
Mike

 

johnp,

As far back as Adam and Eve I do not think they thought of God as either Jesus or Christ but they did know that God spoke to them as duly noted in Genesis 3:8. This verse clearly allows us to know that the Lord God spoke to the couple, and perhaps the Lord might even have walked into their presence. Thus the words, ‘the Lord God walked in the Garden in the cool of the day,’ and also, the couple ‘hid themselves from the Presence of the Lord God . . . ’ This was the age of innocence and not the dispensation of grace as we know it now in great detail. The names of the Lord---Christ and Jesus came more under the latter covenant since His first coming to earth.

John, you were of the opinion that Christ has always been around and has been known by this name; I do not think you can show this from Scripture. The O.T. laity knew God as Jehovah Lord. The names Christ and Jesus were used under the next covenant.

 

Hello Ray Berrian.

John, you were of the opinion that Christ has always been around and has been known by this name...

I don't know if I said they knew Him by the name of Christ but the idea strikes me that Christ is not a name but an office or function. But I could be wrong without checking it out. But this is interesting.

...I do not think you can show this from Scripture.

What? That Christ was not always around or that nobody knew His name? I'll have a go. I knew a sacrifice had been made for Adam and his sweetheart many years ago but have not followed up this part of our history really.

The O.T. laity knew God as Jehovah Lord. The names Christ and Jesus were used under the next covenant.

You start in the middle of the story. Adam and Eve were the clergy.

Genesis 3:8. This verse clearly allows us to know that the Lord God spoke to the couple, and perhaps the Lord might even have walked into their presence.

I do not except this from you, and perhaps the Lord might even have walked into their presence. Since the passage is as clear as a bell about God speaking to our first parents why is it not as clear as a bell for God walking into the presence of said first parents? Are you to deny the second half of the verse but accept the first? GE 3:8 Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the LORD God called to the man, "Where are you?"

Man in all his glory reaching for Godhood! Who has not wanted that?
GE 3:6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

Typically, literally, they shewed together fig leaves to cover their shame. Figuratively speaking that is. Because as they were rooting around looking for leaves they spent themselves blaming each other for the condition they discovered they had! The death of the spirit.

This was the age of innocence and not the dispensation of grace as we know it now in great detail. The names of the Lord---Christ and Jesus came more under the latter covenant since His first coming to earth.

You see, Adam was the source from which all men sprang. In Romans nine they are referred to collectively as The Lump!
The thing about this Lump was that it was not all the same throughout. Or rather, to stay strictly within scripture, Someone considered the Lump as having two different values making up it's whole. Within that Lump existed, a group that had been chosen to serve God at His Temple. A group that He had set His everlasting love on. This group along with the other were sourced from Adam and that Adam had just lost spiritual contact with his Maker. Only the chosen were lost. Apparently no value was put on the other.

Now Adam and Eve were lost but not for long. God provided a sacrifice for them and from that sacrifice covered the lovers shame Himself. GE 3:21 The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. There is the atonement typified for real. There is salvation by grace. And to follow that up I will present to you; the victory over Satan with the story of the cross , the truth of two tribes out of Eve and the persecution of the Children of God by the other tribe, better known as the world. GE 3:15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel."[/b]

Long before the human race could form a queue they were aware of redeemption's story and they would pass that on. They passed it on because they were a Royal Priesthood and because God calls His sheep with His word and they had the gospel preached to them, the immediate family of Adam and Eve otherwise Seth would not have been Seth and Enoch would have died an unredeemed sinner instead of being transported to Heaven to be near the One he was besoted with.
The furtherest I can get it back without argument is Moses, "HEB 4:6 It still remains that some will enter that rest, and those who formerly had the gospel preached to them did not go in, because of their disobedience."
And of course Noah. Those he preached the gospel too while the ark was being built, the ones that were disobedient.

What you think?

johnp.

 

johnp,

You said,

Christ is a name given to our Lord and it is a title also, that is, there is a meaning behind the name.

Christ is eternal, but people under the Old Covenant did not know Him by this name.

Jesus atonement was effective since the Garden because of the future Cross and Jesus dealt with people’s sins when the believed and followed Him because of their faith in the Lord Jehovah. I may have forgotten, but I do not believe the sacrificial system started until the Levitical Priesthood and Abraham in his time.

I cannot figure out what you mean when you said that Adam and Eve were the clergy. A joke I guess . . .

I don’t think the Bible says that Adam and Eve were ever reunited to faith in the Lord.

The Gospel only came when Jesus was here at His first Advent. Grace was available since Adam and Even, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and the prophets, but the Gospel is a New Testament expression, meaning, ‘Good News.’

Noah never heard of the word, Gospel. Noah preached repentance and that judgment day is coming. From what we read, no one but Noah’s family members turned to the Lord.

What do you think?

 

Christ is a name given to our Lord and it is a title also, that is, there is a meaning behind the name.

And the meaning behind the name is shown, GE 3:15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel."

I may have forgotten, but I do not believe the sacrificial system started until the Levitical Priesthood and Abraham in his time.

That's a short memory you have Ray. GE 3:21 The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. ...but I do not believe the sacrificial system started until the Levitical Priesthood and Abraham in his time. Then you would be wrong would you not?

I cannot figure out what you mean when you said that Adam and Eve were the clergy. A joke I guess . . .

Since Adam and Eve had a sacrifice made for them they became the children of God, redeemed and loved by God. The were the start of the royal priesthood and as such carried God's word to those to come. Or in other words, the clergy. I jest not.

I don’t think the Bible says that Adam and Eve were ever reunited to faith in the Lord.

You have no scriptural support for your thought like I have for mine.

The Gospel only came when Jesus was here at His first Advent. Grace was available since Adam and Even, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and the prophets, but the Gospel is a New Testament expression, meaning, ‘Good News.’

That is just a denial of the scripture I gave you, ""HEB 4:6 It still remains that some will enter that rest, and those who formerly had the gospel preached to them did not go in, because of their disobedience."

Noah never heard of the word, Gospel. Noah preached repentance and that judgment day is coming. From what we read, no one but Noah’s family members turned to the Lord.

Why change it to 'never heard the expression'? They had the gospel preached to them as did they who fell in the wilderness. and those who formerly had the gospel preached to them did not go in

What do you think?

Of your reply? It fails. It lacks scriptural support and no effort is made to deal with the facts just your denials.

johnp.

 

johnp,

Christ is a name given to our Lord and it is a title also, that is, there is a meaning behind the name.

johnp’s quote: And the meaning behind the name is shown, GE 3:15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel." [/quote]

I am saying that you are offering in Genesis 3:15 the meaning as to what Christ is going to do with Satan. The evil one is a defeated foe, because our security has been won by Jesus atonement. Jesus ‘will crush the Devil’s head’ but the name of Christ is defined as Gr. (Christos) meaning anointed. The Hebrew counterpart is Jeshua, meaning Jehovah is salvation.

I may have forgotten, but I do not believe the sacrificial system started until the Levitical Priesthood and Abraham in his time.

johnp’s quote:That's a short memory you have Ray. GE 3:21 The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. ...but I do not believe the sacrificial system started until the Levitical Priesthood and Abraham in his time. Then you would be wrong would you not? [/quote]

There were different ways in which God dealt with His people from the Garden until now. Some of you brethren have to find blood from an animal to hold up your view of their atonement. The garment of skin for Adam and Eve was to cover their nakedness; it has zero to do with their atonement. Also, Noah had to slaughtered lamb or dove, according to your theory, so Noah was not or will not ever be saved because their was no blood spoken about in his life’s story. No, the atonement is viewed by God as being from before the foundation of the world. Christ’s atonement is what really counts in the mind of God.

I cannot figure out what you mean when you said that Adam and Eve were the clergy. A joke I guess . . .

johnp’s quote: Since Adam and Eve had a sacrifice made for them they became the children of God, redeemed and loved by God. The were the start of the royal priesthood and as such carried God's word to those to come. Or in other words, the clergy. I jest not. [/quote]

In my nine years in Bible College and in three seminaries, I never hear of Adam and Eve having their own priesthood or of them being clergy. Do some of you gentlemen make things up as you study?

I don’t think the Bible says that Adam and Eve were ever reunited to faith in the Lord.

johnp’s quote: You have no scriptural support for your thought like I have for mine. [/quote]

Show me and the others on the board where it says that Adam and Eve were saved. They are not mentioned in Hebrews chapter eleven. The first of the O.T. saints mentioned was Abel. Since Adam and Eve were the beginning of the human race, you would have thought that God would have included them in the hero’s of faith, if they indeed were redeemed. Adam and Eve caused the Fall in the Garden of Eden. You will need to give us a chapter and verse showing us that the couple were saved. You will not find it in the Bible.

The Gospel only came when Jesus was here at His first Advent. Grace was available since Adam and Even, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and the prophets, but the Gospel is a New Testament expression, meaning, ‘Good News.’

johnp’s quote: That is just a denial of the scripture I gave you, ""HEB 4:6 It still remains that some will enter that rest, and those who formerly had the gospel preached to them did not go in, because of their disobedience." [/quote]

Strictly speaking, the word in the Greek speaks more to the preaching of truth. The Four Gospels [Matt., Mark, Luke & John] created the Gr. {euaggelion}--meaning the Gospel. In your quote of Hebrews 4:6 you injected a new word, Gospel, into the verse. If Gospel should have been there the translators would have placed the term Gospel there. But instead they used the word, ‘preached.’ Don’t add your ideas to the Word of God.

Noah never heard of the word, Gospel. Noah preached repentance and that judgment day is coming. From what we read, no one but Noah’s family members turned to the Lord.

johnp’s quote: Why change it to 'never heard the expression'? They had the gospel preached to them as did they who fell in the wilderness. and those who formerly had the gospel preached to them did not go in. [/quote]

What do you think?

johnp’s quote: Of your reply? It fails. It lacks scriptural support and no effort is made to deal with the facts just your denials. [/quote]

My replies have a clear understanding of truth. You have believed what some country preacher taught you years ago and you will not admit that it is serious error or that you could be wrong. The facts are there and I only deny your injection of error into your view of Christianity.

Prove to me where Noah’s sacrifice came from. The answer is that the Lord atoned for his sins and that of his family even before His death on the Cross. They followed Him by faith and trust and the Lord Jesus took care of their eternal security.

Show me where Adam and Eve were saved other than your limp theory about an animal skin. Wow!

Berrian, Th.D.

 

Ray,

Even Jewish scholars in EVERY theology class call God's animal skin clothing as the titled "Proto euaggelion" the first "good news" ... Speaking of Noah ... how awefull and unloving that God would just let 8 people live out of 4 - 6 BILLION people live ! That seems so unjust! So unloving! By the way the "Pitch" that Noah used between the gopher wood to "seal up" the wood... God plays a game with words... the root comes from the same root for ... guess what ... ATONEMENT! Also How did the ark get "SEALED" you know those HUGE doors? ... God did it. No man was either able to enter OR LEAVE once they were shut. Once saved always saved my brothers and the atonement covered ONLY the 8 not the 4 - 6 billion.... All that in one little Jewish story.... And that's just the tip of the iceburg... salvation and atonement of the messiah is EVERYWHERE in the O.T. And they knew about the coming of the messiah AND His sacrifice for sin, the mazzaroth shows the whole work of the redemption of God and His second coming to reign over earth in glory !

 

rc,

You said,

The good news is what we read in our O.T. The Lord God Jehovah walked and talked with the couple in the Garden. I was not educated in a rabbinical school and never heard of their “Proto Euaggelion.”

Yes, it is awful that all but a handful of people went to Hell. Their sins are what put them in that eternal condition. But, even in this fact the Lord was God of justice and maintained that attribute of God which is that aspect of His nature that we are warned about. The Lord God did the right thing because of His holiness and Divine justice. Remember how long Noah preached to the lost?

I hear about the ‘pitch’ when I was a teenager through Dr. Dehaan. I sure hope you do not believe that ‘pitch’ is equivalent to Jesus atonement. Dehann used to say, and “God shut them in.” This was a type of our security in Christ. You are preaching to the choir when you speak of eternal security. I have no problem with this truth. If the atonement covered all sinners in I John 2:2, the Lord did not change His mind back at the time of Noah. If they were not provisionally atoned for then why was Noah preaching to the wicked?

Yes, some people knew about the coming Messiah but not everyone. Just like today we have to tell some for the first time. No one was ever restricted away from the Lord’s atonement under the O.T. or the New.

In the Book of Jude we learn that Enoch preached about the Second Coming of Christ in verse14 and on.

Also, in Zechariah chapter fourteen we learn of Christ’s coming theocracy where He will reign over the entire world for 1,000 years. [Revelation chapter 20]

 

He preached for over 40 years... not anywhere near enough to give everyone a "choice" to come into the boat.

 

Me thinks you exaggerate just a weeeebit too much! 4-6 Billion missed the boat? BIIIIIIIGGGGGG BOAT!

 

Hello Ray.

I must say this is a far better effort and one becoming a discussion forum don't you think old chap?

Jehovah is salvation. Not an enabler but He is Mighty to save.

I Am. Moses received the Name so they would not have known Him as I Am. Saviour God is good. They knew Him as God and, as I believe they, Adam and Eve, would have known Him as their Saviour. The Saviour God.

In my nine years in Bible College and in three seminaries, I never hear of Adam and Eve having their own priesthood or of them being clergy. Do some of you gentlemen make things up as you study?

I must admit to you Ray that I did make it up as I went along. But I made sure to mention that before I started. I'd said that the fact that an animal had died had struck me years ago did I not, but I had never followed it up?
It was not just an animal was it? It was the first to thing to die was it not? Not an insignificant creature.
It was first blood to the Lord! The sign of the end of Satan and the beginning of the Church.

Thanks rc! I was going to post this to you but thought I would put it here!
Even Jewish scholars in EVERY theology class call God's animal skin clothing as the titled "Proto euaggelion" the first "good news" ...

Really? Man! I thought I thought of that! Flipping right! I thought it was daylight. I'd not heard of this before.
What you think Ray. Check it out. These are warnings to you. Pay attention to what He is telling you.

Show me and the others on the board where it says that Adam and Eve were saved.

As I go along now. As you say, you can't find stuff like this already in books!
Eve knew her God, "GE 4:25 ..."God has granted me another child in place of Abel, since Cain killed him."...

How could Eve not believe in God? But more, Eve trusted in God as a provider and a granter of favour. Her simple statement, to my mind, has all the grace I would expect from a Royal Priestess. A teacher of righteousness to the human race she and Adam were creating. Only fitting that the children should hear the story and be brought up in the love of God.

They are not mentioned in Hebrews chapter eleven. The first of the O.T. saints mentioned was Abel. Since Adam and Eve were the beginning of the human race, you would have thought that God would have included them in the hero’s of faith, if they indeed were redeemed.

Yes possibly. A valid objection? I don't think so but it has something going for it. I will bear it in mind but it does not overcome by the lack of them being named.

The Gospel only came when Jesus was here at His first Advent.

Deal with this properly man. I showed you that the Israelites had the gospel preached to them. Saying they did not just proves without doubt you are not speaking God's word, "For we also have had the gospel preached to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because those who heard did not combine it with faith." Heb 4:2.
So you are wrong and you won't admit it?
Instead you come out with this;
The Four Gospels [Matt., Mark, Luke & John] created the Gr. {euaggelion}--meaning the Gospel. In your quote of Hebrews 4:6 you injected a new word, Gospel, into the verse. If Gospel should have been there the translators would have placed the term Gospel there. But instead they used the word, ‘preached.’ Don’t add your ideas to the Word of God.
Whatever that is.
For we also have had the gospel preached to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because those who heard did not combine it with faith.
We have had the gospel preached to us, as well as they did. Just as is no different. We have had the gospel preached to us as it was preached to them, "LK 16:29 "Abraham replied, `They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.'"

There were different ways in which God dealt with His people from the Garden until now.

There were? For salvation? Prove it. Strange I do not know of them. Where would I find such information? I thought you said Jehovah is Salvation. You have left me in confusion Ray.

Prove to me where Noah’s sacrifice came from. The answer is that the Lord atoned for his sins and that of his family even before His death on the Cross. They followed Him by faith and trust and the Lord Jesus took care of their eternal security.

You answer that yourself. But I would not say they were atoned for until Christ actually atoned for us on the cross but that it was excepted as a done deal. They followed Him by faith and trust and the Lord Jesus took care of their eternal security as I believe but in you this statement is a twisted travesty is it not. Whose faith, where'd they get that from? Did they hear the word of God or what, a different way was it?

Noah never heard of the word, Gospel.

I thought it was two words is it not. Good and News. Mind you it looks like one word! The 'word' gospel places you at the back of the class.
Why was you in Bible College for nine years man? Big bibles were they? I don't really know what a seminary is so I looked it up. Was it a Protestant seminary or a Catholic one? I would be interested to know that I think if you don't mind telling me. Three years in a vicar factory is the way I would put it, is that right?
When I'm sitting down contemplating the word of God my wife says I'm doing nothing 'again'! You spent twelve years doing nothing man! Did you have to sit up or could you lay down? I'll rise my next glass of whiskey to you in salute.

Why was Noah preaching to the wicked? The word of God does more than soften. The word of God hardens too.

In the Book of Jude we learn that Enoch preached about the Second Coming of Christ in verse14 and on.

Where's the argument then if you know that? Or have you changed your mind? Have you changed your position?

johnp.

 

You mean that God's message to Noah to Build an Ark did not prove to be GOOD NEWS for Noah?

After all when we first heard the GOSPEL, none of us thought it was good news either!

 

johnp,

Agreed.

Yes, I agree that Jehovah is salvation. I did not say He is merely an enabler. Those are your words. In other words, I agree with you.

I think Genesis 4:26d is a significant line of demarcation. ‘Then men began to call on the Name of the Lord.’

In my nine years in Bible College and in three seminaries, I never hear of Adam and Eve having their own priesthood or of them being clergy. Do some of you gentlemen make things up as you study?

In Genesis 6:18 before the Flood, God establishes His covenant with Noah and family. These people were in a covenant relationship to the Lord, but the church was future the time of Matthew 16:18. Jesus said, ‘I will/shall build My church.’ The Day of Pentecost was the birth of the Christian church when thousands were brought into the Kingdom in one day.

Ray is saying, “I’m alert to error when it comes my way.”

Show me and the others on the board where it says that Adam and Eve were saved.

Ray is saying: ‘A lot of people believe that God gives favors and children to their homes, but are not born again.

They are not mentioned in Hebrews chapter eleven. The first of the O.T. saints mentioned was Abel. Since Adam and Eve were the beginning of the human race, you would have thought that God would have included them in the hero’s of faith, if they indeed were redeemed.

The Gospel only came when Jesus was here at His first Advent.

The Four Gospels [Matt., Mark, Luke & John] created the Gr. {euaggelion}--meaning the Gospel. In your quote of Hebrews 4:6 you injected a new word, Gospel, into the verse. If Gospel should have been there the translators would have placed the term Gospel there. But instead they used the word, ‘preached.’ Don’t add your ideas to the Word of God.

There were different ways in which God dealt with His people from the Garden until now.

I do not believe the message of the Major and Minor Prophets was the same message that the Apostle Paul preached throughout Asia Minor. The prophets did not know the details of the Cross, the empty tomb, ascension and glorification of Jesus to His throne. You must agree with this. Right?

Prove to me where Noah’s sacrifice came from. The answer is that the Lord atoned for his sins and that of his family even before His death on the Cross. They followed Him by faith and trust and the Lord Jesus took care of their eternal security. No one that I know under the Old Covenant spoke of the Lord God Jehovah as Jesus, the personal and human name of God in the flesh. (and yes, I know that Jesus Christ is Divine)

No twisted travesty at all. Adam, Eve, Noah, Enoch, Abraham or Moses or the prophets never spoke in terms of the man Jesus. They understood the concept of the Lord God only.

Noah never heard of the word, Gospel.

I’ll be pleased to take a lesser seat in Heaven; I am more than glad that He called me and I responded to Him in faith. I went to Bible College and got a B.S. degree in theology and then spent another year taking courses because by then I knew I was going to become a minister of the Gospel. From there I went to a superlapsarian Calvinistic seminary for one year and could not deal with all the error taught there. The Systematic Theology professor would not entertain any other views than his Westminster education taught him. This makes six years of study. Then I went to a Biblical evangelical seminary for two years and received the B.D. degree. I pastored 25 years in Pennsylvania, Ohio and in North Carolina. Studying each week for a message taught me a lot of new truth. And in the year 2,000 I graduated Magna Cum Laude with a Th.D. degree. My dissertation was on the subject: “Quasi Augustinian Theology.” The ninth year was my courses leading to the doctorate degree in Christian theology. I am still learning by some of the ideas that surface here. To God be all the glory! The Baptist Board topics keep me in the Word. My training was all in non-Catholic seminaries.

True! What’s new? The truth is that any of those antediluvian sinners could have believed in the Lord God as Noah did.

In the Book of Jude we learn that Enoch preached about the Second Coming of Christ in verse14 and on.

I have no argument with you here. I was just backing up your idea. I have known that Enoch preached about the Second Coming of the Lord, for many years. I never had reason to change my mind about this fact. My position remains the same. Just think approximately 4,300 years have passed since Enoch preach the Second Coming and we as present day Christians still believe and know that His will come again in the future. This is our faith, at least one aspect of it.

 

Ray, WHICH colleges did you go to?

 

rc,

I did not go to Oxford, Harvard or Yale Divinity School. At this point in time I have not offered information as to where I went to college and seminary. It seems plenty to have people criticise what you believe, without sitting in judgment as to the seminary where a person has studied.

I will say that the Systematic Theology professor at the Calvinistic seminary was Dr. Rudolph who was a graduate of Westminister Theological Seminary. One year was all I could endure and it was in Philadelphia. He was a 'hardliner' with his philosophical mantra. He was a Superlapsarian Calvinist.

 

I'm glad you didn't go to the Ivy league, else you would of most likely ended up an atheist ! ha ha ha...

 

Hello Ray it's good to talk to you.

First blood was the line.
Where did this lot learn to call on the Name of the Lord if they did not learn it from the elect? Faith comes by hearing and hearing the word from Adam and Eve. There is no other option as far as I can see. Unless you say that God Himself came down and taught them. Unless you are saying that men of themselves tried to do that which their perfect parents could not do and that with no information. How would they know they had to trust God unless someone told them?
That is the whole story from the beginning to end as recorded in the OT. It is as rc said, "salvation and atonement of the messiah is EVERYWHERE in the O.T."

Now this is the bit that confuses the hell out of me. You believe that Jesus Christ died for sins. You, in particular, believe in the perseverance of the saints. You say that you believe in Christ not because He caused you to, except by way of chatting you up, (Well it's nicer than wooing ain't it?), persauding you of the truth, and maybe giving you a leg up, but you believe you believed of your own volition without interference from above. So it does not matter that Christ died for you as such, that does not make Him a Saviour. He just made it possible for you to save yourself. Like He blew the walls of the prison but it is you that must leg it. Like the doctor that says we have done all we can now it up to the patient. What makes Him a Saviour for you? But an enabler are not words I put into your mouth but the conclusion of your faith. Your faith saves you therefore your faith is your saviour you think. That's logic.
What is it Ray that causes God to be a Saviour? A saviour saves. Yet you claim that as your own and not God's. Salvation is of Ray because it is you Ray that saves yourself by believing and believing is the condition for salvation. The condition for salvation is met in you by yourself O mighty one.

Thanks for the answer concerning schooling.
Why you went to a superlapsarian Calvinistic seminary for one year is hard to fathom.
What was Jesus saying in that verse? I was always under the impression that Christ was saying that on this type of confession, 'you are the Christ', but I see now that I was in error. Since I held that view I was inconsistent with my belief that the Church started way back. I had not realised, thank you. MT 16:17 Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. Is the way He builds His Church. Only those that are so blessed as to receive the revelation of God becomes a Child of God.
I was looking at Peter instead of Christ! Silly me.

That's lame. Was Eve not born again? The thing that gets me is more evidence is introduced but you ignore it. Even Jewish scholars in EVERY theology class call God's animal skin clothing as the titled "Proto euaggelion" the first "good news" ... An animal died and you pass over that without a thought? You saying the animal died just to kit out Adam and Eve does not do justice does it? Not to you?

Wrong!
For we also have had the gospel preached to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because those who heard did not combine it with faith. I do not believe the message of the Major and Minor Prophets was the same message that the Apostle Paul preached... For we also have had the gospel preached to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because those who heard did not combine it with faith.

That is a sandwhich made from the bread of life. Eat your words man!
[I can see my evangelistic skills have not deserted me!]

Ray. If you get hungry for more I'll leave this here so you can have seconds.
For we also have had the gospel preached to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because those who heard did not combine it with faith. The Gospel only came when Jesus was here at His first Advent. For we also have had the gospel preached to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because those who heard did not combine it with faith.

‘I will build My church.’
Jesus said that.
"He is the LORD; let him do what is good in his eyes."
Eli said that.
Titus said, In everything set them an example by doing what is good. In your teaching show integrity, seriousness 8 and soundness of speech that cannot be condemned, so that those who oppose you may be ashamed because they have nothing bad to say about us. 2:7-8.
Ray is saying: ‘A lot of people believe that God gives favors and children to their homes, but are not born again.

Eve trusted in God as a provider and a granter of favour. She was not speaking out Christian platitudes. Next you would have her saing, "Saints preserve us."

Now I do not know yet if this is so. The evidence is leading that way but we cannot know 100% whether Adam and Eve were saved. The best is probabilities and mine are more likely. You cannot win because in the end there is no verse that says they are not saved. You have the Hebrews passage, another not stated. That's all you have and of course your aversion to the doctrine's of grace.
I have a sacrfice to show the congregation. I have the gospel being preached at least to the Israelites walking around and around in the wilderness.
And you say that Enoch prophesied the coming of the Lord. Why? And then say they had never heard of anything to do with Christ?
What doctrine do you defend by saying that Adam and Eve were not saved by grace? You pervert the word and ignore another who said that that was the good news, a dead animal.
Had you never heard of "Proto euaggelion"? A million questions came to mind when I read that post. Why did that not happen to you?
I asked you to check it out but you ignore it. It puts a crimp in your stlye old chap.
And I say Eve trusted her Lord provider. She could say, "The LORD Will Provide." Along with Abraham and the rest of our clan.

Of course you recognise error when it comes your way. How could you not be aware of doctrinal conflicts? If it does not meet with your interpretation then it must be error. I'm sure we all suffer from this to some extreme or another. But to avoid that I come here to stick my head above the parapet to see if what I have allows me to stand there without my head getting knocked off.
When I am faced with a difficult scripture or passage I deal with it. I trust God and know that what He says can be trusted. I am at anchor my soul rests in God.
If I believe in one way and I find the scripture says I'm wrong I'm wrong and change, but grow.
You with all your learning have only managed to reverse the things of God and in that you are guilty of calling good bad and bad good.
This is good, "the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so." That is a safe harbour.
But you set your face against it and say you decide for God! This is bad. You should be a great teacher by now yet you are having to be told the basics. Can God not do as He please? If you answer yes then He can manipulate your will can He not. No? Then God cannot do as He pleases and there you go again setting your face against him.
The sinful mind is hostile to God. Deal with it. You can't say, "But we can." The bible says we can't.
The statement is an absolute. "the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so."
To believe is to obey God's law. Instead of being aware of the errors against your doctrine you should see the errors of your doctrine in the light of scripture. That you don't bodes ill. The verse above is unalterable. Anything more than 'cannot' is darkness.

If I understand you right; What would a person that sits at the feet of Jesus want with a lesser seat? Better a Mary than a Martha and that's for sure. The washing up can wait there are better things to do. Everything else can go hang I'm busy at the feet of Jesus doing nothing.

See what I mean? "the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so." It is just two fingers up at Him! You say that the truth is any can and God says none can. That's God's truth? The lie you proclaim is selfrighteousness.

And just how would they know anything about God? This I must hear.
"the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so." If as you say Adam and Eve were not saved then they are hardly likely to produce children that would be guided by the knowledge of God but the opposite would be true. At emnity with our maker does not induce one to reach out for Him except with a hammer and nails. Tell me where I am wrong. How did they hear the word of God so they could believe?
A thought occurred to me when we were talking about the dead animal line in tailoring. I thought the animal could not have been a rabbit, too small. If it was a dinosaur then they would have to build a really big wardrobe to hold all the stuff. Then I thought, what about a sheep. Then it hit me that He could quite easily have made them garmets of wool or cotton! I might be slow but I get there man. Why kill an animal? Would you like to comment on why the death of the animal if it was just for rags. In fact, why the shame? What has being naked and in tune with God and being a naked sinner got to do with anything?

johnp.

 

Do you think the message of the prophets which boils down to "HAVE FAITH IN GOD!", is a different message than the one the Apostles teach which is, "HAVE FAITH IN GOD THE SON!"?

 

For we also have had the gospel preached to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because those who heard did not combine it with faith.

What do you think I think? The gospel is the same as it ever is. Your answer is no the gospel has never changed.

johnp.