Seeking Antagonists

[Darrell C]

Greetings again Darrell C,

I appreciate your response. Possibly I would not be the best candidate for all the different subjects that you have nominated and other subjects that you may want to discuss. For example the first topic:



This is simply a topic that I believe based upon a number of Scriptures, and possibly I would not refer to those that you mention. Possibly Steaver would be better in discussing this subject even though I may not agree with him on every aspect that he states in disagreeing with OSAS. For the record my basis is mainly the Parable of the Sower and the reference in the Olivet Prophecy, Matthew 24:12-13. Also a few examples of believers who HAVE fallen away, eg Demas.

I am primarily looking for antagonists (again that need hold no negative connotation, and Steaver and I are on the same page for the most part.

In regards to the Parable of the Sower, and all of the teachings of Christ for that matter, this is where we consider that Christ's Ministry, while indeed having application to salvation in the ultimate sense...was primarily directed to Israel and the Kingdom which had been promised.

The primary point in the Parables speaks about entrance to the Millennial Kingdom, rather than entrance to the Kingdom of God in a spiritual sense, or, as we say, the spiritual rule and reign of God. In that day the Kingdom in that sense was already established, however, entrance to that Promised Kingdom was not, and in fact is still not. We see in Matthew 25 the events that precede that Kingdom, namely the Sheep and Goat Judgment, which is spoken of in this parable:


Matthew 13:47-48

King James Version (KJV)


47 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind:

48 Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.


This parable is the best example, but when we look at the differences between "the Kingdom of Heaven" and our own general view in this Age concerning the Kingdom of God, whereby we recognize a Kingdom of God's spiritual rule and reign through Christ is already established, and the Millennial Kingdom, then we can better understand the parables and Christ's teaching in general.

Here is the first thing I would point out to you: Christ did not send the disciples out to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ...but the Gospel of the Kingdom.

We know this because He makes it clear:


Matthew 10:5-7

King James Version (KJV)

5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:

6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.



Matthew 15:23-24

King James Version (KJV)

23 But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.

24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.



Christ had a specific Ministry to Israel that was separate from His Ministry to the World, which Ministry even the closest disciples were not privy to and had no understanding of, hence Peter's opposition to Christ dying (which we see on numerous occasions).

The word "lost" here speaks of, not of a people who don't know where they are, but a people in a state of destruction, a state of separation from God. They were living, breathing people, but were, as Christ teaches in John 6...

...dead.

We know that Christ did not come to save Israel exclusively, but the World. The Gospel of Christ goes out to all men, whereas we see the exclusive ministry towards Israel in His earthly ministry.

But, there is much that would have to be gone through in order to look at this aspect of New Testament truth, it is not something that can be looked at in a few posts.

But one thing to consider is that not one of the disciples were Baptized with the Holy Ghost until Pentecost, which marks the beginning of New Covenant salvation, whereby the promises of God are bestowed upon believers.

On the third subject I have had extensive discussion on this Forum, on a thread titled “Trinity” started by Steaver, but also attracting many other participants. I agree with Steaver that you should feel free to use this material, or I could email a revised summary to avoid any question of copyright. I did have an email discussion with a Trinitarian using similar material.

Thanks for that, that is appreciated, but I am looking for direct conversation, rather than simply quoting those of others, though Steaver has introduced that idea and I may actually do that.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

On the second subject I have different views to many on this Forum, because their focus is on Heaven going, both at death and possibly also after the resurrection. I am still confused as what Baptists and others really believe on this topic, as there seems to be a wide variety of opinions.

Baptists are as diverse in their views as anyone else, lol.

As far as going to Heaven, I would suggest to you that this too did not start until the Cross:


Hebrews 9

King James Version (KJV)

6 Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.

7 But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:

8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:

9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;




23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:


Hebrews 10:19-20

King James Version (KJV)

19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,

20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;




Entrance to God, like most things in the Old Testament, was temporal, , shadow (that word also translated "parable") not the substance.

The "Holiest" the Writer speaks of here is Heaven itself, which is contrasted with the First Covenant's provision...the Temple. That is where man met God, and the fact is that man was excluded from God's presence with the exception of the High Priest, who could only go into God once a year. This he did to offer up blood for Israel's sin.

Now contrast that with what the Writer teaches here, contrasting that temporal practice with the very Sacrifice of Christ.

My belief is in the mortality of the soul,

Whereas I see that most Bible Students erroneously impose an immaterial aspect to man's composition and call it a "soul." Confusion on this is why Doctrines such as Soul Sleep and Annihilation have prospered in recent years.

My view is that man is comprised of two parts, even as stated when God created man:


Genesis 2

King James Version (KJV)


7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.


That man has body, spirit, and soul has only two verses that might indicate the use of "soul" as an immaterial aspect. However, if we study Scripture understanding God's creative act concerning man we will see the Lord did not give man a soul...he made man a soul. In other words Adam did not receive a soul, but became one.

And if we look at certain passages with that in view, particularly the Old Testament, we will see that the term simply refers to the person as a whole.

Just as a staring point, consider the Lord Himself when He was separated from His physical body in death:


Luke 24:37-40

King James Version (KJV)

37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.

38 And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?

39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.


The Lord does not speak about a "soul," for the "soul" is the person prior to death. When one dies, their spirit is separated from their flesh, as the Lord makes clear here.

Another would be seen here:


Acts 27:36-37


King James Version (KJV)

36 Then were they all of good cheer, and they also took some meat.

37 And we were in all in the ship two hundred threescore and sixteen souls.


We don't suppose that in view here are immaterial figures being referred to, but, the people that were on board.

One of the favorite proof-texts of Soul Sleepers and Annihilationists is this:


Matthew 10:28

King James Version (KJV)

28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.


It is thought this proves the "soul" is an immaterial aspect because it states two parts in Hell. The simple truth is that this would conflict with the general use of "soul" and overlooks that when men are cast into Hell...they will have been resurrected into their bodies, so the point is here that man cannot destroy on an eternal basis and has no means to kill absolutely. Further, destruction here is the same as it is in the verses we looked at above concerning Israel being destroyed, yet we know that the destruction in view is not a cessation of existence.

But that too is an involved discussion which cannot be concluded on (or shouldn't be) in a few mere verses or posts. We would have to put some serious time into that study.

waiting for the return of Christ for the resurrection and then participating in the Kingdom of God for the 1000 years.

Just for consideration I would suggest to you that the promises of God will all be fulfilled, and that the Kingdom (which we now know will last 1000 years) will be according to Scripture. In Revelation 20 the First Resurrection is a resurrection of only those who die in the Tribulation, and the word "first is the Greek "protos" which also refers to rank, rather than sequence, and seeing we have the Two Witnesses raptured in Revelation 11, we know that sequence of order is not in view in this passage.

There are two Resurrections taught in Scripture, the resurrection unto life, and the resurrection unto damnation. The resurrection which takes place in Revelation 20 is one of the "first," or, a resurrection unto life.

I am a firm Pre-Tribulation believer, and this issue is one of some importance, and will impact our soteriology tremendously.

I look to the Promises concerning Eve, and to Abraham and David as the basis of the New Covenant confirmed in Christ.

The New Covenant was established with the Death, burial, and Resurrection of Christ. All who are born again are reconciled to God and brought into union with Him through the Eternal Indwelling of God.

This began on the Day of Pentecost when the Comforter was sent.

I consider immortal souls and heaven going at death is based upon Pagan and Greek philosophy, not upon a proper understanding of the Bible. Again I have discussed some of this at length on this Forum.

Kind regards
Trevor

I would agree that the term "immortal soul" is not an accurate portrayal of Biblical truth, however, the spirit of a man is immortal in the sense that no spirit will ever cease to exist. Believers will spend eternity with God, unbelievers will spend eternity separated from God, and the fact is that unbelievers undergo a "glorification" process which has them resurrected into bodies suited for eternal existence.

At this time, when unbelievers die, they go to Hades, or Sheol, there to await their resurrection and then to stand before God at the Great White Throne Judgment. Believers, though, go to be with God in Heaven, and that is not a pagan view, but a Biblical truth which, should you desire to take a look at it, I am confident can be seen as Biblical truth.

But there are certain issues which one must resolve before understanding that, which takes time, diligence, and effort.

And my hope is that you would like to look into these matters, so it will be up to you my friend.

And now I have overstayed my time, lol, so have to get going.


God bless.

 

[BobRyan]

Hello Bob, long time no type, lol.

Glad to see you still in there, and yes...it does help. You could probably check some old posts to see our interaction some years ago, but as stated in the OP, I am looking for antagonists that take a different position, not because I want to prove my positions correct, necessarily, but to illustrate dialogue on forums between believers, as well as unbelievers (which I think should take place after one has become more familiar with forum discussion as a whole).

Because of Copyright Protection Laws, and the bottomless can of worms that represents, I need express permission from the antagonist for their posts to be used in the book. Learning to interact with those of differing views is something I think we all need to learn, and it is an ongoing lesson, but, as we grow in Christ it becomes apparent that we can interact without enmity and in doing so...we can grow.

So let me know if you're interested, and again, good to "see" you again. Now that I think about it, I think we first met on a different forum.


God bless.

Rumor as it that I have 30,000 posts here - so feel free to grab a few thousand where they apply to your topics. Let me know how it turns out.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

I consider immortal souls and heaven going at death is based upon Pagan and Greek philosophy, not upon a proper understanding of the Bible. Again I have discussed some of this at length on this Forum.

Kind regards
Trevor

How true.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Darrell C,

Although you have mainly addressed the first part of the following to Steaver, some of my response covers your other comments. My response highlights our different perspective:

I get strange looks when I tell people men like Abraham, Moses, and David...basically died in their sins. Because their sin had not been eternally redeemed through Christ's Sacrifice:
It is only under New Testament conditions that transgressions are redeemed on an eternal basis. All Old Testament Saints died still needing their sins to be redeemed by the Blood (Death) of Christ:
It is impossible to impose the Promises of the New Covenant prior to Christ's Death.

Abraham was not under the Old Covenant. The Promises that were made to Abraham ARE part of the New Covenant. Please consider Galatians 3:8-9,15-29, Hebrews 6:9-20, Romans 15:8. It is significant that Abraham and his Seed were promised the Land Genesis 13:14-15. He was told to look north, south, east and west, not to heaven for his inheritance. And note that the promise of the land to Abraham was for ever, thus not temporal, and it did not occur in his lifetime, thus it looked to the future Kingdom. Abraham also understood aspects of the death and resurrection of the Promised Seed, refer Genesis 22.

Yes I agree, this New Covenant needed to be confirmed by the death of Christ, but Abraham and David received Justification by Faith in these Promises. At the heart of these Promises is the Promised Seed, and as such these Promises also looked forward to the death and resurrection of Christ. This Justification by Faith is equivalent, which is stating exactly the same thing in different words as Eternal Forgiveness of sins. God knows the end from the beginning, “calleth those things which be not as though they were” Romans 4:17 (consider 16-25). Thus God forgave Abraham and David in anticipation of the fulfillment of the Promises, and the prophet uses the phrase “the sure mercies of David” in relation to this New Covenant Isaiah 55:1-3, and these sure mercies were even available to those in Isaiah’s time. Paul takes up this phrase together with Psalm 16 and applies it to the certainty that the Messiah needed to rise from the dead, and that this was fulfilled in Jesus Acts 13:34-39. Note also the promises to David were for ever 2 Samuel 7:12-16, and David describes this as “he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things, and sure: for this is all my salvation, and all my desire” 2 Samuel 23:1-7, again a reference to his involvement with the New Covenant.

In regards to the Parable of the Sower, and all of the teachings of Christ for that matter, this is where we consider that Christ's Ministry, while indeed having application to salvation in the ultimate sense...was primarily directed to Israel and the Kingdom which had been promised.
This parable is the best example, but when we look at the differences between "the Kingdom of Heaven" and our own general view in this Age concerning the Kingdom of God, whereby we recognize a Kingdom of God's spiritual rule and reign through Christ is already established, and the Millennial Kingdom, then we can better understand the parables and Christ's teaching in general.

I completely disagree with your distinction. The Kingdom of Heaven and the Kingdom of God are equivalent as a simple comparison between Matthew and Mark and Luke would demonstrate. All of Christ’s teachings and parables relate to the New Covenant. Matthew 5-7 for example apply to those under the New Covenant. The Mosaic Law, the Old Covenant was only added as a temporary measure, but the New Covenant already existed from Eden. Consider Genesis 3:15 which is expanded in Psalm 8, and Psalm 8 is fulfilled in Christ and the New Covenant. It has nothing to do with the Old or Mosaic Covenant. The Kingdom theme actually starts in Genesis 1:26-27 and this is also incorporated into Psalm 8 and its fulfillment in the New Covenant.

Christ had a specific Ministry to Israel that was separate from His Ministry to the World, which Ministry even the closest disciples were not privy to and had no understanding of, hence Peter's opposition to Christ dying (which we see on numerous occasions).
We know that Christ did not come to save Israel exclusively, but the World. The Gospel of Christ goes out to all men, whereas we see the exclusive ministry towards Israel in His earthly ministry.

Jesus and the Apostles had the same ministry, to preach the same Gospel to the Jews and the Gentiles. The Gentiles became the focus only when many of the Jews became hardened in their heart Acts 13:46-47. At the beginning of his ministry Paul preached to the Jew first and then the Gentiles. There is only one gospel, one faith and one baptism.

As far as going to Heaven, I would suggest to you that this too did not start until the Cross:

I do not believe in going to Heaven at death or at the return of Christ. I believe in the Kingdom of God upon the earth for the 1000 years Isaiah 2:1-4, Daniel 2:35,44, Zechariah 14, Acts 3:19-21, 2 Timothy 4:1-8.

I agree with much of what you state concerning the “Soul”, but disagree with your view that our conscious self is preserved and continues fully in the form of our spirit after death. I believe we, including all our thinking processes, return unto the dust at death awaiting the return of Jesus Genesis 3:19, Daniel 12:2. The figure of “sleep” is used to indicate this cessation of thought. I have not covered every thing that you have stated, but hopefully the above may be sufficient to focus our discussion if you are interested. I will allow you to decide what direction this will take however.

My impression though is that your position seems to ignore many parts of the Bible, the teaching of Genesis, possibly much of the prophets as you regard this relates to Israel only, and extremely sadly the teaching of Jesus for a similar reason. I see the need for all of these, that they are all relevant to our life in Christ. Also the lessons from the Law of Moses, especially as expounded in the Book of Hebrews. We can understand the greatness of Christ by comparing the preliminary, the shadow.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Darrell C]

Rumor as it that I have 30,000 posts here - so feel free to grab a few thousand where they apply to your topics. Let me know how it turns out.

in Christ,

Bob

Is that to say you are giving express permission for me to use your posts in discussions we have had?


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Greetings again Darrell C,
Although you have mainly addressed the first part of the following to Steaver, some of my response covers your other comments. My response highlights our different perspective:

It would be better to simply address what I have said, and even better if done in completion, as it limits the necessity of addressing issues which have no relevance. And I will point those out as we go.

Also, much Scriptural presentation has been provided which has gone unaddressed. It will be impossible to work through these things unless we address the Scripture itself.

But I do thank you for the response, it does indeed give us a platform to begin discussion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
I get strange looks when I tell people men like Abraham, Moses, and David...basically died in their sins. Because their sin had not been eternally redeemed through Christ's Sacrifice:
It is only under New Testament conditions that transgressions are redeemed on an eternal basis. All Old Testament Saints died still needing their sins to be redeemed by the Blood (Death) of Christ:
It is impossible to impose the Promises of the New Covenant prior to Christ's Death.

Abraham was not under the Old Covenant.

I ask you, how is this relevant to my statement. I have never said Abraham was under the Covenant of Law, and I would ask you to address the point that is made:

I get strange looks when I tell people men like Abraham, Moses, and David...basically died in their sins. Because their sin had not been eternally redeemed through Christ's Sacrifice:

I would also just note that animal sacrifice began in the Garden, that is, substitutionary death for the sins of men, and if you look at Abel's sacrifice you will see that is what he brought. The shedding of blood for remission of sins did not begin with the Law. Abel did, as did Noah and Job, all three prior to the Law (at least Job is thought to be contemporary with Abraham).

The Promises that were made to Abraham ARE part of the New Covenant.

Please consider Galatians 3:8-9,15-29, Hebrews 6:9-20, Romans 15:8. It is significant that Abraham and his Seed were promised the Land Genesis 13:14-15. He was told to look north, south, east and west, not to heaven for his inheritance. And note that the promise of the land to Abraham was for ever, thus not temporal, and it did not occur in his lifetime, thus it looked to the future Kingdom. Abraham also understood aspects of the death and resurrection of the Promised Seed, refer Genesis 22.

Nothing I have said denies your statements here, though I would say it is a matter that the promises made to Abraham have their fulfillment in the New Covenant, which was God's Plan from the beginning.

In other words, these Covenants are connected, though we must distinguish the fact that Abraham did not receive the promises, nor did, as we see in Hebrews, any of the Old Testament Saints:

Hebrews 11:13, 39-40

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.

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.


So to sum up a singular point I will try to make, what I see you doing, as well as many others, is imposing erroneously the bestowal of promises prior to the time they were actually bestowed. A promise fulfilled is no longer a promise but a reality, and that is why the Writer of Hebrews has such a strong emphasis on the contrast between shadow/parable/elementary principles and completion.

There is simply no arguing the fact about whether they received the promises or not, Scripture is clear they did not.

We see that here as well...

Acts 1

King James Version (KJV)

4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.

5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

Even John the Baptist prophesied the day when this would be fulfilled, showing that it was not, in that day, fulfilled:


Matthew 3:11-12

King James Version (KJV)

11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

The Lord's reference to John's baptism is a clearly contrasted with the Baptism with the Holy Ghost, which as we see...is yet days future for the disciples.

Now tell me...how can you impose this promise into a context of the Old Testament? John did not. Christ did not. The Writer of Hebrews did not.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

Yes I agree, this New Covenant needed to be confirmed by the death of Christ, but Abraham and David received Justification by Faith in these Promises.

But they did not receive remission of sins nor the Eternal Indwelling of the Spirit of God, Who was sent only after Christ returned to Heaven.

They did not receive the promises.

Christ speaks of this future event here:


John 14:16-17

King James Version (KJV)

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.

John 16:7-9

King James Version (KJV)

7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;


This speaks of the distinctive ministry of the Holy Ghost as compared to His ministry among men in the Old Testament, of which the ministry of Christ is included, for it is not until the promises of the New Covenant are established, both through Christ's death, burial, and resurrection, as well as His return to Heaven and sending of the Comforter in this particular ministry. The differences would be that until one's sin is atoned for, and those transgressions redeemed, Reconciliation did not take place. Further, we can see that the understanding of the Gospel of Christ was neither revealed nor understood...even by the disciples themselves.

While Christ was prophesied, and men knew He was coming, not one of them had an understanding that Christ would die for their sins. Peter on several occasions can be seen to try to thwart the Redemptive Plan of God.

And while the Spirit empowered men for ministries such as Prophet, Priest, and King, that is not an equivalent to the revelation of the Gospel, as spoken of here by Paul:


1 Corinthians 2:6-10

King James Version (KJV)

6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:

7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:

8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.


Romans 16:23-26

King James Version (KJV)

25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:


In no way is the revelation of the Gospel to be made an equivalent to the revelation provided to the Old Testament Saints. They did indeed anticipate Messiah, the problem was, when He came...He did not meet their understanding and was thus rejected of them.

That is because the Mystery of the Gospel of Christ was not revealed to men in that day.

Nor were the promises bestowed. as seen here:


Hebrews 9:13-15

King James Version (KJV)

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.

...we see that the transgressions of the Old Testament Saints were redeemed by Christ, and that when He died. All Old Testament Saints could offer up was the temporary atonement of animal sacrifice.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

At the heart of these Promises is the Promised Seed,

That is correct, yet we see that there is a prophetic tense to that which would take place, and we should not forget that.

The Promise of Messiah was not fulfilled until He came. The associated promises were not bestowed until the New Covenant was established. Man's sins were not redeemed and forgiven until Christ made Atonement.

When we impose into the Old Testament that which was not there we will confuse a great number of doctrines.

and as such these Promises also looked forward to the death and resurrection of Christ.

I would disagree. If anyone should have been privy to Christ's death and what that would mean for mankind it should have been the disciples.

Do we see that here...


Matthew 16:20-23

King James Version (KJV)

20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.

21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.

23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.


It was one thing to have revealed to them that Jesus was the long awaited Messiah, but another altogether to say they understood, or preached...the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

They did not, and as Paul writes, we understand that this is because it was simply not revealed to them.

Here is another passage reflecting that truth:


Colossians 1:25-27

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:

27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:

This Justification by Faith is equivalent,

In an eternal sense, I would agree, they were, through faith, eternally secure.

However, we cannot negate clear teaching which establishes their sins were not atoned for, which had to take place.

We would have to also make animal sacrifice an equivalent to the Sacrifice of Christ, and this is primarily what the Writer of Hebrews makes clear is not the case:


Hebrews 10:1-4

King James Version (KJV)

1 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.

2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.

3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.

4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.


The contrast is between the sacrifice of animals and the remission of sins afforded by them and the remission of sins afforded through Christ's death. He drives this point home here:


Hebrews 10:14

King James Version (KJV)

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


The "perfection" in view here simply means "completion," so what he is saying is that Christ's death, as the promise of the New Covenant foretold, makes one complete in regards to remission of sins, and this, unlike the remission of sins afforded Old Testament Saints...eternally.


Now look again at what the Old Testament Saints did not receive:


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.


And consider when they were made perfect:


Hebrews 12:18-24

King James Version (KJV)

18 For ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest,

19 And the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words; which voice they that heard intreated that the word should not be spoken to them any more:

20 (For they could not endure that which was commanded, And if so much as a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned, or thrust through with a dart:

21 And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake)

22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,

23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.


Not the "souls" of just men (Old Testament Saints justified by the faith spoken of in Ch.11) made perfect, but the spirits of just men made...complete.

There was no completion in regards to remission of sin prior to the Cross. There was no eternal indwelling of the Holy Ghost until Pentecost.

We simply cannot impose fulfillment of these promises when Scripture is specific they were not received.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

which is stating exactly the same thing in different words as Eternal Forgiveness of sins.

So what is the Writer speaking of here...


Hebrews 9:13-15

King James Version (KJV)

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.


...?

What need was there for Christ to die if the sacrifices of Levitical Service and those prior to the Law...were equivalent?

God knows the end from the beginning, “calleth those things which be not as though they were” Romans 4:17 (consider 16-25).

Doesn't change the fact that the promises of the Old Testament were promises until received.

And Hebrews makes it clear, as does Christ in Acts One, not to mention John 14-16...that they were not received in those days.


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.)


We cannot make the mistake of equating what was bestowed to men with what would take place through Christ's ministry of Eternal Salvation.

Not one person prior to Pentecost met the requirement for trusting in Christ and thus receiving life through Him:


John 6:50-54

King James Version (KJV)

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.

54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.


"Eating of His flesh and drinking His blood" simply means...trusting in His death. No man could do this before He came from Heaven and died, that they might trust in that death.

And this is contrasted with the temporal and physical provision of the Old Testament Economies:


John 6:31-33

King James Version (KJV)

31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.

32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.

33 For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.


Moses is included in those fathers, and Moses did not have the Life Christ came to bring:


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.


This does not mean they ceased to exist, as it speaks of the absence of the life afforded through Christ, which did not, and could not precede Him actually coming down from Heaven.

We know they still existed in their spirits based on...


Matthew 17:2-4

King James Version (KJV)

2 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.

3 And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.

4 Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

Thus God forgave Abraham and David in anticipation of the fulfillment of the Promises,

I wouldn't argue that, but it is a little like a prisoner being pardoned: it is not until he is out of prison that it is fulfilled.

Abraham and David died having only offered up the blood of animals on their own behalf. It is something they did in accordance to the prescribed will of God.

And the simple truth to remember is seen here:


Hebrews 10

King James Version (KJV)

1 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.

2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.

3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.

4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.


Substitutionary death predates the Law, as seen in the sacrifices of Abel, Noah, and Job.

God did forgive men their sins, but not in completion, which was promised in the Promise of the New Covenant:


Hebrews 8:12-13

King James Version (KJV)

12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.


Now compare that with...


Hebrews 10

King James Version (KJV)

3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.

4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.


This is a stark contrast between two different economies.

And note v.13:


Hebrews 8:12-13

King James Version (KJV)

12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.


This too marks the fact that the Two Covenants were not both in effect at the same time.

and the prophet uses the phrase “the sure mercies of David” in relation to this New Covenant Isaiah 55:1-3, and these sure mercies were even available to those in Isaiah’s time.

But the promises of the New Covenant were not. David looked forward to fulfillment, but did not receive those promises. He was not made perfect until Christ died for his sin.

Paul takes up this phrase together with Psalm 16 and applies it to the certainty that the Messiah needed to rise from the dead, and that this was fulfilled in Jesus Acts 13:34-39. Note also the promises to David were for ever 2 Samuel 7:12-16, and David describes this as “he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things, and sure: for this is all my salvation, and all my desire” 2 Samuel 23:1-7, again a reference to his involvement with the New Covenant.

To Paul the Mystery was revealed. To David it was concealed:


1 Peter 1:9-12

King James Version (KJV)

9 Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.

10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:

11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

12 Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.


The prophets understood it was prophecy, and that it was in the future it would be fulfilled.


Continued...

 

[Bro. James]

Jesus, the Lamb of God, slain from before the foundation of the world--when the names were written in the Lamb's Book of Life. Salvation is of the Lord. Job: "I know that my redeemer lives, and on the earth again shall stand"--written many years B.C.

Jesus and Nicodemus, Book of John, ch. 3: Jesus told Nicodemus, a master theologian with letters, that he must be born again to enter the Kingdom of God. Nicodemus had not a clue. Self-righteous and lost. We have many like that today--they have not a clue.

OSAS is a blessed assurance which comes from being born from above. If one thinks one can be lost after true salvation, one does not understand salvation. It cannot be: all of the above. This is pretty black and white. God does not author confusion. The missing ingredient: spiritual discernment.

Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

 

[Darrell C]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
In regards to the Parable of the Sower, and all of the teachings of Christ for that matter, this is where we consider that Christ's Ministry, while indeed having application to salvation in the ultimate sense...was primarily directed to Israel and the Kingdom which had been promised.
This parable is the best example, but when we look at the differences between "the Kingdom of Heaven" and our own general view in this Age concerning the Kingdom of God, whereby we recognize a Kingdom of God's spiritual rule and reign through Christ is already established, and the Millennial Kingdom, then we can better understand the parables and Christ's teaching in general.

I completely disagree with your distinction.

Most do, lol.

However, there is no debating about whether the Gospel of Christ was a Mystery not revealed to men then. There is no disputing that Christ is the Bread of Life, and that apart from believing on Him, and specifically in His death...one does not have life. There is no disputing that there is a place in time when the Bread of Heaven came down, and that Christ Himself contrasts that eternal provision with the temporal provision given to the Old Testament Saints.

The Kingdom of Heaven and the Kingdom of God are equivalent as a simple comparison between Matthew and Mark and Luke would demonstrate.

I agree, but that does not make them equivalent to the Kingdom established through Christ.

I think it was this thread in which I made the statement that the Kingdom of God was already established. Just looked, must have been another thread. Anyway, it is true that there is a Kingdom which refers to the rule and reign of God in the hearts of believers. There is also a distinction as to a specific Kingdom, and the Kingdom in view is not existence in Heaven, but that reign God has among His people here.

For example, would we think this...


Matthew 25:13-15

King James Version (KJV)

13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.

14 For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.

15 And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.


...refers to anything other than the Lord returning?

And what Kingdom is in view in this passage?

It is the Millennial Kingdom. This is not speaking of salvation through the Cross and entering the Kingdom which born again believers enter into, but the Judgment of Christ when He returns and entrance to...the "Kingdom."

And this relates in particular to Israel, which is why the Lord told them not to go unto any but the Lost Sheep of Israel.

All of Christ’s teachings and parables relate to the New Covenant.

No, they do not.

Many of Christ's teachings deal specifically within the context of the Law.

If you would like to present those passages which may relate, please do so (and please present the Scripture, not just the verses), but to say they all relate to the New Covenant is not accurate.

For example:


Matthew 5:21-24

King James Version (KJV)

21 Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

23 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee;

24 Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.


How do these relate to one in Covenant with God through the New Covenant? If you believe you are still in danger of Hellfire, we could discuss Eternal Security. But at least you cannot claim to offer up according to the Law. Right? And that is the offering Christ speaks of.

Secondly, we know that Christ abided and fulfilled the Law, so it makes little sense to impose the New Covenant which had to have His death before being established:


Hebrews 9:15-16

King James Version (KJV)

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.

16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

Matthew 5-7 for example apply to those under the New Covenant.

Not one person hearing that message was under the New Covenant, and while there are basic truths that do apply to New Covenant believers, you are a long way from substantiating this statement...

All of Christ’s teachings and parables relate to the New Covenant.

The Mosaic Law, the Old Covenant was only added as a temporary measure, but the New Covenant already existed from Eden.

This first statement is true. Not sure why you think that is relevant to anything I said, lol.

However, the latter is incorrect: it would not have been promised if it was already in existence.

And the fact that the Law was "added" due to the transgressions of men shows clearly it has "existed from Eden."

That would be like saying "Christ existed from Eden," which would equally untrue because there was a day and time in which He was born into this world. The Son existed prior to even the world being formed, for He created the world. But the Messiah did not arrive until some two thousand years ago, and it was at that time in which He established the New Covenant, and only them were men brought into relationship with God through the New Covenant.

Consider Genesis 3:15 which is expanded in Psalm 8, and Psalm 8 is fulfilled in Christ and the New Covenant. It has nothing to do with the Old or Mosaic Covenant. The Kingdom theme actually starts in Genesis 1:26-27 and this is also incorporated into Psalm 8 and its fulfillment in the New Covenant.

No, the "Kingdom Theme" doesn't start in Genesis, as there are numerous aspects to the Kingdom, one of which being the Millennial Kingdom, which has to be distinguished as a temporal and literal Kingdom on this earth, as opposed to the rule and reign of God in the hearts of believers.

Revelation is progressive, and not all things have been known to men at all times. We can identify the Gospel in Genesis, but not even the disciples of Christ had the Gospel revealed to them. It was until Pentecost...Mystery.

Quote:
Christ had a specific Ministry to Israel that was separate from His Ministry to the World, which Ministry even the closest disciples were not privy to and had no understanding of, hence Peter's opposition to Christ dying (which we see on numerous occasions).
We know that Christ did not come to save Israel exclusively, but the World. The Gospel of Christ goes out to all men, whereas we see the exclusive ministry towards Israel in His earthly ministry.

Jesus and the Apostles had the same ministry, to preach the same Gospel to the Jews and the Gentiles.

The Gospel of the Kingdom, not the Gospel of Christ. Show me one person that understood the Gospel prior to Pentecost. Show me one person that trusted in Christ's death...before He died.

The Gospel of the Kingdom has a relevance specifically to Israel and the promised Kingdom they anticipated. All of Christ's teachings (that reference the Kingdom) can be applied to that prophecy.

For example, it is a truth that not one person will enter into the Millennial Kingdom except they be born again.

The Gentiles became the focus only when many of the Jews became hardened in their heart Acts 13:46-47. At the beginning of his ministry Paul preached to the Jew first and then the Gentiles. There is only one gospel, one faith and one baptism.

All post-Pentecost.

Now address the fact that the disciples were sent only to Israel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
As far as going to Heaven, I would suggest to you that this too did not start until the Cross:

I do not believe in going to Heaven at death or at the return of Christ. I believe in the Kingdom of God upon the earth for the 1000 years

And I would suggest you have embraced a teaching which we can look at. It is doubtful I will change your mind but would be glad to talk to you about it.

The only reason to deny entrance to Heaven at death would be embracing soul sleep, which hinges upon an interpretation of what "sleep" means, not to mention one's understanding of the Biblical usage of the word "soul."

Isaiah 2:1-4, Daniel 2:35,44, Zechariah 14, Acts 3:19-21, 2 Timothy 4:1-8.

If you have Scripture you feel is relevant you will need to post them. Remember, you are the one trying to defend your position.

As far as embracing a literal Millennial Kingdom, we are on the same page on that.

I agree with much of what you state concerning the “Soul”, but disagree with your view that our conscious self is preserved and continues fully in the form of our spirit after death. I believe we, including all our thinking processes, return unto the dust at death awaiting the return of Jesus Genesis 3:19, Daniel 12:2.

Not sure how you can agree with me when my position denies the use of soul in a context where a "soul" dies or ceases to exist, even consciously, at physical death.

The Old Testament is primarily temporal and applies to the physical condition of man. References to "souls sleeping" refers to the death of the physical body, not the immaterial aspect of men. That should be clear enough in Christ's teaching here:


Luke 16:19-23

King James Version (KJV)

19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:

20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,

21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.


They did not cease to exist, nor lose consciousness, but we see they are still quite conscious. And we do not impose a context of torment in one laying lifeless in a coffin or in the ground.

Secondly, when it comes to "sleep," that this is consistently a euphemism for physical death is seen here...


John 11:11-14

King James Version (KJV)

11 These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep.

12 Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well.

13 Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep.

14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.


If the Lord defines "sleeping" as death, and we see the Lord raise him from the dead, that should really be enough to settle the issue.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

The figure of “sleep” is used to indicate this cessation of thought.

Some believe that, but I would suggest that it is a misunderstanding of both Old and New concepts, as well as overlooking the difference between the temporal of the Old versus the eternal of the New.

Again, this combines erroneous understanding of both "sleep" and "soul."

For example, here is one of the more known verses you might consider the context of:


Ezekiel 18:4

King James Version (KJV)

4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.


Now, I ask you to consider what this means if we consider that in view is a living, physical person...under the Law.

What was often the penalty for failure to keep the Law?

Physical death.

Who exacted that penalty?

Other men.

Now tell me if you think that if this is a reference to the immaterial aspect of man dying, do you also see this...


14 Now, lo, if he beget a son, that seeth all his father's sins which he hath done, and considereth, and doeth not such like,

15 That hath not eaten upon the mountains, neither hath lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, hath not defiled his neighbour's wife,

16 Neither hath oppressed any, hath not withholden the pledge, neither hath spoiled by violence, but hath given his bread to the hungry, and hath covered the naked with a garment,

17 That hath taken off his hand from the poor, that hath not received usury nor increase, hath executed my judgments, hath walked in my statutes; he shall not die for the iniquity of his father, he shall surely live.


...as meaning one gains a righteous standing, thus eternal life...through the keeping of the Law?

I hope not...


Galatians 2:21

King James Version (KJV)

21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.


Two things to consider: the Law did not provide a righteousness equivalent to the righteousness of Christ imputed to born again believers; we again see a contrast between Christ and the Law. What Christ accomplished should never be equated to that afforded in the Old Testament.

And Ezekiel is in a context of being under the Law. It is failure to keep the Law that is in view.

Again, consider that passage with an understanding that the "soul" in view is the person in their physical existence, and the "death" in view is physical death, not the death of man's immaterial aspect, which is properly his spirit...not his soul.

God created man's physical body. breathed the breath of life into man, and man became a living soul, not...received one.

Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

I have not covered every thing that you have stated, but hopefully the above may be sufficient to focus our discussion if you are interested. I will allow you to decide what direction this will take however.

I can't see that you have even touched upon the passages that I presented.

We will never accomplish anything unless we address these issues, primarily what the other presents, in detail.

It would likely be better to address one issue, as each of these need a concerted focused effort applied to properly address them. If you would like to continue the discussion, perhaps you would choose one issue that might be of more importance to you.

My impression though is that your position seems to ignore many parts of the Bible,

Not sure how you conclude that. I have not ignored anything but addressed each statement directly. And I am confident that if you give it a chance, you will see the harmony of the doctrinal views I present.

So far I would say that what is holding you back most is equating salvation throughout the record of Scripture. Failure to distinguish Promise and Promise Fulfilled is something most are guilty of. I don't say that to offend, it is simply how I see it. When you can reconcile your view that the Old Testament Saints received the promises of God, and the clear statement of Christ (in relation to the Comforter) and the writer of Hebrews (in relation to the New Covenant and completion in regards to remission of sins), then perhaps you might justify a view that equates the Two Covenants.

You pointed out, correctly, that the Law was given temporarily. So how can you see concurrence when you understand that truth?

the teaching of Genesis,

Would it be fair for me to say "You left out the teaching of Ezekiel?" lol

It simply has not come into focus. But since you bring it up, can you at least tell me if you see a difference between these two promises of God...


Genesis 3:15

King James Version (KJV)

15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.


Ezekiel 36:22-27

King James Version (KJV)

22 Therefore say unto the house of Israel, thus saith the Lord God; I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went.

23 And I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the heathen shall know that I am the Lord, saith the Lord God, when I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes.

24 For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.

25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.





The difference is dramatic, and this illustrates the progressive nature of prophecy. The former does not include the revelation of the latter, yet both are applicable to the Redemptive Plan of God which will culminate in the establishment of the New Covenant.

Let's see prophecy progress a little further:


John 14:20-23

King James Version (KJV)

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.



Would it surprise you if I told you this was Prophecy? It is. Christ speaks of what is going to happen at a future time, it has not happened at the time of the teaching. Christ had just told them the Spirit was with them, but would be in them. We see the Trinity here in that it shows the Father and the Son Both said to indwell them, and this through the sending of the Holy Ghost in His particular ministry as Comforter.

But we see that here also:


John 14:16-18

King James Version (KJV)

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.


We see it here as well:


Revelation 3:20

King James Version (KJV)

20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.


The point is not to derail to a discussion about the Trinity, but to point out...this is Prophecy.

It was not occurring in the Old Testament Economies.

possibly much of the prophets as you regard this relates to Israel only,

What I said was that Christ had a specific ministry to Israel.

If you would care to explain why the Lord commanding His disciples not to go to Gentiles and Samaritans I will be happy to hear it.

Again, not quite fair to charge me with "ignoring" these things, especially when you have not really addressed the points I have made.

and extremely sadly the teaching of Jesus for a similar reason.

Don't be sad, lol, I am confident I can show you that not one jot or tittle is ignored, overlooked, negated, nor refuted.

The Word of God maintains a divine consistency because it is the Inspired Word of God. And again I am confident I can show you that.




Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

I see the need for all of these, that they are all relevant to our life in Christ.

Yet you equate the Old Testament economies with the New. The simple fact is that this is plainly seen to be inconsistent with Prophecy. The Comforter, for example, was promised in the Old Testament, and sent to us at Pentecost.

That is what is in view here:


Acts 1

King James Version (KJV)

4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.

5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.


Remember, John prophesied of this, showing it to be prophecy, something unfulfilled, even as we see the Lord doing so, though the time is set to "not many days hence."

And we are given insight to the hearts of the disciples, who, not being Baptized with the Holy Ghost...still await that physical Kingdom, that is...the Kingdom of God taught of by Christ:


6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?


Why were they expecting it?

Because (1) they (Israel) had been promised this, (2) because they had in fact preached it when sent out, (3) because they were not yet Baptized with the Spirit and thus had the Mystery of the Gospel revealed to them, and (4) they were still natural men, which is what anyone who has not been Baptized with the Holy Ghost is.

The Baptism with the Holy Ghost is conversion itself:


Titus 3:4-5

King James Version (KJV)

4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;


He saved us by the washing/cleansing of the new birth which is in fact a result of the Eternal Indwelling of God. The "renewing" here does not refer to the Holy Ghost renewing something in us (though that is true as well), but speaks of the renewal of the union between God and man that was lost through Adam's sin. That is why Christ states the "fathers were dead, because at that time they had only physical bread from Heaven (manna), and awaited the Bread of Heaven to come. He began bestowing that Life at Pentecost.

Now back to Acts:


7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.


First, I would point out that the Lord does not respond to their question concerning the "Kingdom" by saying "Oh, the plans have changed." Instead, simply, "It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power." In other words...that time is not for you to know.

Secondly, while our Charismatic brethren might view vv.7-8 to speak of empowerment in an Old Testament sense, it is clear that in view is receiving the Comforter, and through that...they would understand the truth, and go out and preach it.

And that is precisely what happened on the day of Pentecost.

Some will argue they already had the Spirit in a New Testament sense, but that conflicts with what Christ states here, as well as what he teaches in John 14-16.

Also the lessons from the Law of Moses, especially as expounded in the Book of Hebrews.

Hebrews primarily contrasts the deficiency of the Law in comparison with the completion of Christ's Work and the New Covenant.

I would agree there is a lesson or two to be found in Hebrews concerning the Law, such as chapters 3-4 where we see those in the Wilderness fell due to unbelief. One great irony being that loss of salvation teachers (the L.O.S.T.) use this passage to impose a New Covenant salvation being lost.

Unbelievers cannot lose their salvation...they were never saved to begin with.

but because many, like you, impose New Covenant promises into a period when they yet remained promise and unfulfilled, they completely diminish the Work of Christ and the reality of Eternal Salvation through belief on His Name.

We can understand the greatness of Christ by comparing the preliminary, the shadow.

Kind regards
Trevor

And that is amazing, that you can call it "preliminary" yet still equate the two.

One last passage in this response (I promise, lol):


Hebrews 5:10-14

King James Version (KJV)

10 Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.

11 Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.


The Writer, addressing Jews (in it's historical context), stops his dissertation about Christ, our Great High Priest.

The charge is that they, the Hebrew People (not Christians), are dull of hearing. That is to say...lazy and childlike in their understanding.


12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.


His point here is that for the time they have been associated with Christ, not only should they be teaching, rather than being taught, but they need to be taught, using your own word...the preliminaries. That is...the ABCs which were given in the Hebrew Scriptures.

They need to be taught the basics again, before they can progress to that which is complete, or...perfect.


13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.

14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

The term "full age" here is a derivative of the root word "telos," and it speaks of completion, which better suits the context than an interpretation of "mature" (as it is often erroneously made to mean so that it can be used by the L.O.S.T. to undergird their teachings).

How we conclude this is simply by keeping his statement in the context of the Book itself, and simply moving on to the next verse:


Hebrews 6

King James Version (KJV)

1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,

The "principles," or "first principles" are the foundational doctrines provided in the revelation of the Hebrew Scriptures, which the Writer charges them of being ignorant of and in need of being taught...again. The words that are colored are links to Strong's Online Concordance.

And those foundational principles are to be left (not abandoned, but progressed from) and...not laid again.

This again contrast the incomplete (the revelation of the Old Testament) and the Complete (the revelation of the New).

And when we understand this theme in Hebrews we can better interpret it, and it is completely consistent with the Harmony of Prophecy and all Revelation provided by God in regards to the Redemptive Plan of God, which you have correctly stated...begins in Genesis.

Revelation is not equated throughout Scripture, but we can say it is all in harmony with itself, and points to the same Redemptive Plan God planned to establish from before the world was formed.

Again, thanks for the response.


God bless.

 

[steaver]

Brother Darrell,

Thank you for spending so much time on this topic and laying it all out with solid dividing of the word of truth. I really don't see how anyone with a desire to get it right could refute your exegesis. Great work! You are definitely open to the Holy Spirit's teaching.

What an exciting time to be living in the time of the New Covenant fulfilled!! Sadly, so many don't see anything exciting about it. They just see the same old same old. They don't see the blessing of regeneration fulfilled in Christ as anything special. They believe it has been the same old, same old from the garden of Eden.

Sadly they unwittingly make Christ's ministry here on earth nothing Great or New to get excited about. 'Eh, nothing new, Christ has been regenerating people forever, so what? He really didn't have to actually die, be resurrected and be glorified for the New Covenant to actually begin.'

God bless! :thumbsup:

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Darrell C and (steaver),

(Steaver: Your Post gives me some insight to your beliefs, something that did not quite make sense to me when we discussed the Trinity.)

I appreciate all your responses and your suggestion that it would be “better” for me to respond “in completion”. I started and completed only two of your Posts #27-28, but then decided the task is too large, as there are 10 Posts, #27-31, 33-37. Rather I decided to give a few comments on each Post and these are far from complete as they mainly state my position. Perhaps the biggest difference is that you suggest the New Covenant has a lot to do with the Comforter and the eternal indwelling of the Holy Spirit. I consider the New Covenant consists of the promises made to Abraham and David, and these are confirmed in the death and resurrection of Jesus. I also believe that the gospel and the kingdom are ONE theme from Genesis to Revelation.

Post #27: Abraham was under the New Covenant and his sins were forgiven even before the death of Jesus. Abraham will receive the fulfillment of the promises when he is raised from the dead. The promises made to Abraham are not connected with the promise of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost and afterwards. Why mix the two?

Post #28: Abraham and David did receive remission of sins. Again why introduce “the Eternal indwelling of the Holy Spirit”? This is not the Biblical definition of the New Covenant. The OT faithful did not receive temporary atonement by animal sacrifice. The animal sacrifices of themselves accomplished nothing. These sacrifices only looked forward to Christ’s sacrifice. Abraham and David were saved by faith not by ritual.

Post #29: The Disciples were at first in ignorance of the need for the death of Jesus, but Abraham and David had some understanding of this Genesis 22, Psalm 16, 22, 23. Abraham was not temporarily atoned for by a sacrifice of an animal, but he was justified by faith, he was counted righteous, that is his sins were forgiven, when he believed in the promise concerning the seed Genesis 15:5-6. This is the New Covenant. The Old Covenant did not take away sins. What God forgives is forgiven, what God accounts as righteousness is accounted as righteousness. Again why state “There was no eternal indwelling of the Holy Ghost until Pentecost”? What has this got to do with Abraham and the New Covenant?

Post #30: Abraham was not accounted righteous by the sacrifice of animals, so your statement and question is invalid. And yet Abraham and David will be in the Kingdom because of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. That is another reason why they will be in the grave until the return of Jesus, every man in his own order. Again you attempt to link the Comforter John 14-16 with Abraham and David. They are NOT connected. David WILL receive “the sure mercies of David”, that is life from the dead and immortality through the Lord Jesus Christ. The transfiguration does not prove that Moses and Elijah were already spirit beings. One possibility amongst many other suggestions, is that they could have been temporarily raised from the dead. One of our senior expositors has another suggestion.

Post #31: I reject the concept of Substitutionary death. This is a wrong view of the animal sacrifices, and also Christ did not die as our substitute, but as our representative. The concept of substitution does not agree with the Bible as it does not allow for forgiveness. Again you seem to mix the “Mystery” with the New Covenant. Abraham and David understood in part “the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. Yes it was future.

Post #32 by Bro. James: I reject OSAS. We must endure until the end. Consider “to him that overcomes” stated 7 times in Revelation 2-3. Abraham’s faith is revealed in at least three stages, when he was justified by faith Genesis 15:6, when he was strong in faith regarding the promise of Isaac, and when his faith was shown fully when he was willing to offer Isaac Genesis 22. This progress in faith needs to be reflected in our lives and we should seek to not fall away. Darrell often uses the Book of Hebrews, and the very purpose of this Letter was to encourage the Hebrew believers in Christ so that they would not fall away, and regress to Judaism. Undoubtedly some failed, as Matthew 24 warns. Others were willing to suffer, going outside the gate, identifying with the crucified Messiah.

Post #33: There is a big difference between the manna in the wilderness and the eternal life that is guaranteed to David and Abraham because of their faith. Again you are mixing the Mystery with the New Covenant.

Posts #34-#37: Too much to answer and too many new subjects and I have run out of time even after two days. I reject a distinction between the teaching of Jesus and the teaching of Paul. There is added detail after the death and resurrection of Christ, consider Acts 8:5,12. The things concerning the Name of Jesus Christ are now added in fuller detail, even though the prophets and Jesus himself previously revealed some of the sufferings of Christ. I do not believe in “soul sleep” as the term is ambiguous. We return to the dust when we die, awaiting the resurrection. I believe that there is One God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

One question that may help my understanding of your perspective: Is the coming of the Comforter connected with the Holy Spirit Gifts – Prophecy, Healing, Speaking with Tongues etc? Were these gifts temporary? Perhaps if you could limit yourself to one or two Posts at a time, then I could answer with more detail in one Post, and then possibly we can make steady progress. Possibly only one or two subjects initially – your choice, but I like Abraham and David and justification by faith.

Some OT passages are quoted or alluded to on numerous occasions in the NT. For example Genesis 1:26-27, 12:1-3, 13:14-15, ch.22, Psalm 8, 16,110, Isaiah 6, 42, 53, 55. All of these show that there is one consistent teaching in both OT and NT. Do these fit into your theology?

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Darrell C]

Greetings again Darrell C and (steaver),

(Steaver: Your Post gives me some insight to your beliefs, something that did not quite make sense to me when we discussed the Trinity.)

I appreciate all your responses and your suggestion that it would be “better” for me to respond “in completion”. I started and completed only two of your Posts #27-28, but then decided the task is too large, as there are 10 Posts, #27-31, 33-37. Rather I decided to give a few comments on each Post and these are far from complete as they mainly state my position.

I broke them up to make it easier to respond to. Just curious if you know how to use the quote features, and if not, let me know, I will be glad to help you with that. You put your antagonists at a disadvantage when you do not quote and post what was actually said, and it makes discussion harder for them if they have to spend time going back to see what exactly you are responding to.

There is a button at the bottom right corner of each post that says "QUOTE," and if you hit that it will put you in what I call the quote box. Just type your comments under everything that is in the quote box, and if you don't know how to break the posts up, again, I'll be very glad to help you with that.

But however you want to post is your choice, and I don't mind either way. I would suggest that if you have relevant Scripture, if you do not actually post them, mentioning them will not likely matter, as most are not going to look them up. You can go to biblegateway and copy and paste verses. This will make your posting more effective and to the point.

Perhaps the biggest difference is that you suggest the New Covenant has a lot to do with the Comforter and the eternal indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

There is good reason for that. As mentioned before, the New Covenant was promised, not a reality in the Old Testament.

That they were still awaiting the fulfillment of the Promises can be seen on the Day of Ascension:


Acts 1

King James Version (KJV)

4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.

5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.


As already mentioned, the promise in view is specific to the coming of the Comforter. This is a fulfillment of that which was prophesied by John the Baptist, who said "One is coming Who will Baptize you with fire and with the Holy Ghost:"


Luke 3:16

King James Version (KJV)

16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:


We also see that the Life Christ came to give is not bestowed during Christ's ministry here:


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.)


It was not until after Christ's glorification (His resurrection) that the Spirit would come. He makes this clear in John 14-16 (though just a small mention in ch.15).

I consider the New Covenant consists of the promises made to Abraham and David, and these are confirmed in the death and resurrection of Jesus.

That is correct. However, you are imposing the fulfillment in the Old Testament, and the promise of the New Covenant and the specifics that were revealed were unknown to Abraham. This is why all Theologians distinguish between the Covenants (Noahic, Abrahamic, Law, Davidic, et cetera).

You cannot read John 14 and 16 and think that the New Covenant is already established. You cannot read the New Testament and consider that as a possibility.

Consider:


Matthew 26:28

King James Version (KJV)

28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.


Hebrews 9:16

King James Version (KJV)

16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.



The New Covenant was ratified by the Blood (Death) of Christ. It is impossible to impose it prior to that.

Paul states...


2 Corinthians 3:6

King James Version (KJV)

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.


In this we again see the contrast made between the Law and the New Covenant, the Spirit that is given with this Covenant, and the death associates with the Law.

No man gained eternal life through the Law. No man was made righteous through the Law.

I also believe that the gospel and the kingdom are ONE theme from Genesis to Revelation.

They are, however, revelation is progressive.

Show me the ones looking forward to the New Covenant...in the Wilderness. They were not. That includes Moses.

To impose the New Covenant into those economies is like imposing the Law into Abraham's day. It was not established, hence the distinction in Scripture as to when it started, as well as why:


Galatians 3:16-19

King James Version (KJV)

16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.


The Promises of God are a progressively revealed theme that begins in Genesis and are harmonious throughout Scripture as more of God's Redemptive Plan is revealed to men. The culmination will be in the Eternal State, where at that time believers will have received their glorified bodies and dwell eternally with God.

And just as that aspect of God's Redemptive Plan has not yet been fulfilled, even so, in Christ's day, the New Covenant was yet future, awaiting His death, burial, Resurrection, ascension, and the sending of the Holy Spirit, Who is distinguished in Ministry in comparison with that which He performed in the Old Testament Economies.

We see that here...

John 14:20-23

King James Version (KJV)

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.


John 14:16-18

King James Version (KJV)

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.


And here I am simply reiterating what I have already said, which would not be necessary had you quoted this and responded. Note above that this is all prophetic, and speaks of a day that is coming. Note that the Spirit of God is with them, but will be in them.

And as far as eternal indwelling of the New Covenant contrasted with the Old Testament ministry of the Spirit, this...


16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;


...shows two important truths in regard to the difference.

First, go back to v.1 and understand that the coming of the Comforter is contrasted with Christ Himself, meaning, Christ was leaving them (hence His statement "Let not your hearts be troubled"), but...He was going to return to them, and this because the Comforter was coming.

Secondly, don't miss the importance of the word "another" in relation to the Comforter, this distinguishes...another. What that means is that the Comforter that is coming will be different than Who is currently available, though this word means "one of the same kind."

Christ in His earthly ministry was not going to abide with them forever, because His task was to die for the sins of men, be glorified, and then...He would send the Comforter.


Continued...