How does Scripture (not men) teach us to receive salvation?

[Shaolin]

There are many today who believe the false doctrines promoted by the false 'christian' religion of calvinism. They say that all one must do in order to receive salvation, is to simply believe.

Such people evidently do not know how to read and study Scripture, have never been taught Biblical hermeneutics.

This is what Scripture tells us that we must do if we want to come to God on HIS terms and get saved (note: this does NOT apply to maintaining eternal life, because salvation and eternal life are two completely different things, just as taught in Scripture)...

1. One must choose to believe in Christ:

John 3:15
that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

John 3:16
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but should have eternal life.

John 6:47
Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.


2. One must then choose to repent from his previous sinful lifestyle:

Luke 13:3
No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.

Acts 3:19
Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out,

Acts 17:30
The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent,


3. One must then choose to receive water baptism into Christ:

Mark 16:16
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

Acts 2:38
And Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Galatians 3:27
For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Far too many people believe they are saved just because they believe...with no repentance and no baptism, yet Scripture tells us clearly that such an ideology is false.

..

 

[God's Truth]

There are many today who believe the false doctrines promoted by the false 'christian' religion of calvinism. They say that all one must do in order to receive salvation, is to simply believe.

Such people evidently do not know how to read and study Scripture, have never been taught Biblical hermeneutics.

This is what Scripture tells us that we must do if we want to come to God on HIS terms and get saved (note: this does NOT apply to maintaining eternal life, because salvation and eternal life are two completely different things, just as taught in Scripture)...

1. One must choose to believe in Christ:

John 3:15
that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

John 3:16
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but should have eternal life.

John 6:47
Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.


2. One must then choose to repent from his previous sinful lifestyle:

Luke 13:3
No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.

Acts 3:19
Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out,

Acts 17:30
The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent,


3. One must then choose to receive water baptism into Christ:

Mark 16:16
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

Acts 2:38
And Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Galatians 3:27
For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Far too many people believe they are saved just because they believe...with no repentance and no baptism, yet Scripture tells us clearly that such an ideology is false.

..

This is one topic that is most on my heart and mind, because it is so important on how to be saved and know God better.
As for the Calvinists, they don't believe that you even have to believe to be saved, for they claim a person is saved first and then receive the ability to believe after being saved.
The faith alone doctrine is the belief of so many denominations.
It is like the Calvinists and faith alone believers are against doing anything to get saved or fear it be a condemned works salvation.

As you pointed out, we are to believe that we have to obey Jesus.

Jesus tells us who he saves and he tells us what kind of heart to have to be the one he saves.

Jesus tells us plainly that we have to humble ourselves and change to that of little children, little children who are ready to do everything their Father says.

We are to repent of our sins and believe that Jesus' shed blood on the cross washes us.

We are told to call on Jesus for help us, to save us by giving us his Spirit to live with us.

 

[God's Truth]

When Jesus had his earthly ministry he taught his last will and testament, he taught how to be an heir and what one would receive, then he died and the will went into force.

 

[Shaolin]

When Jesus had his earthly ministry he taught his last will and testament, he taught how to be an heir and what one would receive, then he died and the will went into force.

Actually, this sentiment is common, based upon the following verse:

Hebrews 9:16-17 (ESV)
For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive.

Unfortunately, as with many, many passages in our English Bibles, this passage is grossly mistranslated from the Greek; this is what the passage actually says:

Hebrews 9:16-17
Because when a covenant is being upheld, it is done so through the necessity of the symbolic death of the participants; because a covenant is sure and certain in authority while the participants are dead to themselves and alive to the covenant obligations: it never has power while the participants are living for themselves.

This is further corroborated by the fact that the Greeks did NOT have covenants, they only had contracts, and a ancient near eastern covenants were not simply contracts. Furthermore...

From Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible - "A learned and judicious friend furnishes me with the following translation of this and the 17th verse: 'For where there is a covenant, it is necessary that the death of the appointed victim should be exhibited, because a covenant is confirmed over dead victims, since it is not at all valid while the appointed victim is alive.' He observes, 'There is no word signifying testator, or men, in the original…'" And, "Mr. Wakefield has translated the passage nearly in the same way. 'For where a covenant is, there must be necessarily introduced the death of that which establisheth the covenant; because a covenant is confirmed over dead things, and is of no force at all whilst that which establisheth the covenant is alive.' This is undoubtedly the meaning of this passage; and we should endeavor to forget that testament and testator were ever introduced, as they totally change the apostle's meaning [of this passage]."

While these men have made valid points in their commentaries on this passage, covenanting as understood in the ancient near east was not rediscovered until after these writings, or else the authors knew nothing of them - because ANE covenants could be ratified without the necessity of a blood sacrifice, and even when there was a sacrifice, it was secondary to the ratification process which normally consisted of a covenant meal where both parties partook of the sacrificial animal in symbolic union of lives due to the covenant. The covenant introduced the participants to the fact that they were no longer living unto themselves, but unto their covenant partner, their symbolic deaths - through their animal sacrifices - brought the union into effect, and remained in effect only while the participants 'died to themselves' and lived to the other. Once a partner decided to stop abiding by his covenant agreement to do what he had promised for the other, but began living for himself again, the covenant was violated and brought to an end.

Jesus came and introduced and then ratified the New Covenant whereby we can be saved, but He ratified the covenant at the Last Supper when He introduced the cup symbolizing His blood. Commonly, people believe that He ratified it on the cross, but this is not according to covenanting. The cross was the immediate RESULT of ratifying the new covenant, it was not the ratifying element.

Blessings!

..

 

[God's Truth]

Actually, this sentiment is common, based upon the following verse:

I don't believe it is common. I have been discussing with people for many years, people with many different beliefs and have met no other that understood that Jesus taught how to be an heir and what we will receive.

Hebrews 9:16-17 (ESV)
For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive.

Unfortunately, as with many, many passages in our English Bibles, this passage is grossly mistranslated from the Greek; this is what the passage actually says:

Hebrews 9:16-17
Because when a covenant is being upheld, it is done so through the necessity of the symbolic death of the participants; because a covenant is sure and certain in authority while the participants are dead to themselves and alive to the covenant obligations: it never has power while the participants are living for themselves.

This is further corroborated by the fact that the Greeks did NOT have covenants, they only had contracts, and a ancient near eastern covenants were not simply contracts. Furthermore...

My conviction is that we don't have to learn another language to know God's Truth, for God brings us His Truth in our language, or else He would have put it in a command as how to have knowledge. Knowledge and wisdom from God is given by obeying Him.
There was a time shortly after becoming a Christian I was being led to study Greek and Hebrew, and realized that it was not the Way. I understand though it is hard for some people to hear that because they spent so much time studying Greek.

As for the scriptures you quote, that is about something else than what I am talking about, those scriptures you quoted are about how the Jews can leave one covenant and go to another covenant. See the Jews who were under the first covenant might have been afraid to leave that covenant, because they are supposed to be bound to it until their own death. Paul assures them that they can enter the New Covenant with Jesus because they are to die to this world when they want to be saved. We die, we crucify ourselves with Christ to the sins of the world.

From Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible - "A learned and judicious friend furnishes me with the following translation of this and the 17th verse: 'For where there is a covenant, it is necessary that the death of the appointed victim should be exhibited, because a covenant is confirmed over dead victims, since it is not at all valid while the appointed victim is alive.' He observes, 'There is no word signifying testator, or men, in the original…'" And, "Mr. Wakefield has translated the passage nearly in the same way. 'For where a covenant is, there must be necessarily introduced the death of that which establisheth the covenant; because a covenant is confirmed over dead things, and is of no force at all whilst that which establisheth the covenant is alive.' This is undoubtedly the meaning of this passage; and we should endeavor to forget that testament and testator were ever introduced, as they totally change the apostle's meaning [of this passage]."

Again, I think we are talking about different things here.
Jesus was making a New Covenant, which is the New Testament. He explained what it was and how to get saved and become a child of God's and what the heir receives.

While these men have made valid points in their commentaries on this passage, covenanting as understood in the ancient near east was not rediscovered until after these writings, or else the authors knew nothing of them - because ANE covenants could be ratified without the necessity of a blood sacrifice, and even when there was a sacrifice, it was secondary to the ratification process which normally consisted of a covenant meal where both parties partook of the sacrificial animal in symbolic union of lives due to the covenant. The covenant introduced the participants to the fact that they were no longer living unto themselves, but unto their covenant partner, their symbolic deaths - through their animal sacrifices - brought the union into effect, and remained in effect only while the participants 'died to themselves' and lived to the other. Once a partner decided to stop abiding by his covenant agreement to do what he had promised for the other, but began living for himself again, the covenant was violated and brought to an end.

I don't read commentaries from others, unless of course it is to be discussed and debated. I think it can interfere in hearing what the Spirit says.

Jesus came and introduced and then ratified the New Covenant whereby we can be saved, but He ratified the covenant at the Last Supper when He introduced the cup symbolizing His blood. Commonly, people believe that He ratified it on the cross, but this is not according to covenanting. The cross was the immediate RESULT of ratifying the new covenant, it was not the ratifying element.

I'm not sure about exactly what all you are saying...sounds like you are saying Jesus didn't have to die before the New Covenant/Testament went into force?
As I said and hope you will consider that Jesus spent his earthly ministry teaching how to be a child of God, an heir, and that he taught what we will receive, and then he died for that Covenant/Testament, and it went into force.

Blessings!

..

Blessings to you too. I hope that we can continue discussing things of God and we can share our beliefs with each other and not have any bad feelings about it.

 

[Shaolin]

I don't believe it is common. I have been discussing with people for many years, people with many different beliefs and have met no other that understood that Jesus taught how to be an heir and what we will receive.

Be that as it may, this passage has nothing to do with heirship. In context, Apollos is explaining how Christ is the mediator of the New Covenant.

My conviction is that we don't have to learn another language to know God's Truth, for God brings us His Truth in our language, or else He would have put it in a command as how to have knowledge. Knowledge and wisdom from God is given by obeying Him.

Allow me to try to enlighten you here...IF you spoke koine Greek...and IF the whole world spoke and understood koine Greek, then you might be right. However, you and I were not born in the days of the apostles, neither were we born in Israel, neither do we understand by nature the historical entities of that day that have a great influence upon being able to understand the Bible. It is a historical book written over 2000 years ago, in a different tongue, in a different culture, with different foreign entities to you and I today in this country.

No one...and I mean absolutely no one alive today, Christian or otherwise, can simply pick up the Bible, read it, and expect to understand everything that is stated in it. This is why God sends Teachers to the church, people who He has chosen and specially gifted and equipped to be able to understand His Word and then teach it correctly and accurately to others. The Holy Spirit does not give us special understanding and knowledge on the entities, cultures, languages, etc. that we find in Scripture...what He does is guide us. Part of the problem today in this country, is that few people (if any at all) spend the time with God and His word necessary to be able to be led by the Spirit in every detail of Scripture...again, God forsaw this and gave the church gifted and equipped teachers (Eph. 4:11-14; I Cor. 12:28, among others).

I agree that God gives those who walk in obedience to Him understanding and knowledge...but from what I have observed in my days, few people who call themselves Christians actually walk in obedience to God. I have seen hundreds of people who call themselves Christians speeding down the highway and city streets (disobedience)...cursing (disobedience)...committing adultery (disobedience)...supporting homosexuality and abortion (disobedience) and the list goes on. People don't understand that God is not playing games...when He says to walk in obedience or end up in hell, they seem to believe that grace will keep them out of hell...they will be sorely surprised on judgment day:

John 3:36
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; but whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, because the wrath of God remains on him.

There was a time shortly after becoming a Christian I was being led to study Greek and Hebrew, and realized that it was not the Way. I understand though it is hard for some people to hear that because they spent so much time studying Greek.

I understand...usually only those who have a passion for the truth, or who have been called into ministry, delve into the Greek (and it is not that hard). I could care less about Hebrew, because the Hebrew the OT is written in is a dead language, the Hebrew spoken today is not the same...and it would take half a lifetime to learn it enough to be effective in it, I believe. Plus, we are not living under the old covenant, but the new...therefore, I mainly live in the NT Scriptures.

As for the scriptures you quote, that is about something else than what I am talking about, those scriptures you quoted are about how the Jews can leave one covenant and go to another covenant. See the Jews who were under the first covenant might have been afraid to leave that covenant, because they are supposed to be bound to it until their own death. Paul assures them that they can enter the New Covenant with Jesus because they are to die to this world when they want to be saved. We die, we crucify ourselves with Christ to the sins of the world.

Nope...again, in context (and it is more likely Apollos who wrote Hebrews, not Paul), he is talking about how Christ is the mediator of the new covenant, there is no mention or hint regarding leaving the old and entering into the new...it is all about Christ being the mediator of the new covenant.

Again, I think we are talking about different things here.
Jesus was making a New Covenant, which is the New Testament. He explained what it was and how to get saved and become a child of God's and what the heir receives.

We are...I am explaining the passage that I gave and how it has been grossly mistranslated, giving the false ideology that the new covenant is somehow treated as a last will and testament, when it is not. While what you say in the second line is true, looking again at the context of the entire chapter, up until verse 14 he goes over the old rituals and rules, then beginning in verse 15 he switches and begins talking about the covenant and how ANE covenants were made. No where in this chapter does how to get saved even come up.

I don't read commentaries from others, unless of course it is to be discussed and debated. I think it can interfere in hearing what the Spirit says.

If you are a physician with a patient who has a difficult operation that he needs...are you going to just go chopping around inside his chest without consulting other physicians or a specialist in that problem area? I certainly hope not! Looking at what others have written in the past (when men had more time to spend with God than what the average person today does - meaning that they just might have had more insight because they spent more time with God than we can), while keeping aware of anything that they might have written that is blatantly wrong, can be a great help in studying something that we have little knowledge on today. As long as we set our biases aside so that we CAN hear the Spirit when He would speak to us, then we will be OK.

I'm not sure about exactly what all you are saying...sounds like you are saying Jesus didn't have to die before the New Covenant/Testament went into force?

That is exactly what I am saying. My doctoral thesis was on ancient near eastern (ANE) covenanting, particularly the New Covenant. ANE covenants were NOT ratified by blood sacrifices, they were ratified by partaking of the "covenant meal," which is what Communion is today. Jesus actuated the New Covenant before He went to the cross, and THAT is why He had to go to the cross. One of the first promises God made in the New Covenant was to deal with our sin, and as soon as the covenant was ratified and actuated, He became obligated to deal with sin. If you study the narrative of the Gospel of John carefully, you will see that when it was dark (the sun had gone down, thus beginning the next Jewish day according to their calendar) when Jesus gave the bread and the cup to the apostles. At THAT moment the New Covenant was ratified, and Jesus had to go to the cross the same day, which He did.

I could give you the research, but only if you are serious about reading it because it is a lot...over 30 theological papers on ANE covenanting and their principles of operation.

Blessings to you too. I hope that we can continue discussing things of God and we can share our beliefs with each other and not have any bad feelings about it.

Ditto!

..

 

[God's Truth]

Be that as it may, this passage has nothing to do with heirship. In context, Apollos is explaining how Christ is the mediator of the New Covenant.

When you denied the scriptures were speaking about Jesus making a last will and testament I thought you were confusing it with Romans 7.
I have no idea how you can deny that Hebrews 9 is saying plainly that Jesus came and taught how to be an heir and what we will receive and then he died and his last will and testament went into force.

This scripture proves that Jesus made a covenant/testament, as in a last will and testament:

Redemption through His Blood
Hebrews 9 …15Therefore Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, now that He has died to redeem them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. 16 In the case of a will, it is necessary to establish the death of the one who made it, 17because a will does not take effect until the one who made it has died; it cannot be executed while he is still alive.…


Now read here in Romans, Paul is explaining about how the Jews who want to be in the New Covenant aren't sinning.
In Romans 7 Paul explains that when one wants to enter the New Covenant they die, for when one dies they are no longer under a covenant, and Paul uses a marriage between a husband and wife as an example.


Romans 7
Released From the Law, Bound to Christ

1Do you not know, brothers and sisters—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives? 2For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law that binds her to him. 3So then, if she has sexual relations with another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress if she marries another man.

4So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. 5For when we were in the realm of the flesh, a the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. 6But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

 

[God's Truth]

Allow me to try to enlighten you here...IF you spoke koine Greek...and IF the whole world spoke and understood koine Greek, then you might be right. However, you and I were not born in the days of the apostles, neither were we born in Israel, neither do we understand by nature the historical entities of that day that have a great influence upon being able to understand the Bible. It is a historical book written over 2000 years ago, in a different tongue, in a different culture, with different foreign entities to you and I today in this country.

God brings His gospel to us in our language. Nowhere in the Bible does God say we have to learn another language to know His Truth.

No one...and I mean absolutely no one alive today, Christian or otherwise, can simply pick up the Bible, read it, and expect to understand everything that is stated in it.

We get understanding the way God says in the Bible that we get it, and that is by doing what He says.

This is why God sends Teachers to the church, people who He has chosen and specially gifted and equipped to be able to understand His Word and then teach it correctly and accurately to others.
The Holy Spirit does not give us special understanding and knowledge on the entities, cultures, languages, etc. that we find in Scripture...what He does is guide us. Part of the problem today in this country, is that few people (if any at all) spend the time with God and His word necessary to be able to be led by the Spirit in every detail of Scripture...again, God forsaw this and gave the church gifted and equipped teachers (Eph. 4:11-14; I Cor. 12:28, among others).

There are no more churches as there were in the New Testament times.

We don't need a church they all teach falseness and make one dependent on their pastor.

The churches were needed in the New Testament times because the scriptures were still being written.

We have the Bible and have everything we need to guide us to eternal life.
We have Jesus' words on how to get saved and have Jesus as our Teacher who leaves in our heart.

I agree that God gives those who walk in obedience to Him understanding and knowledge...but from what I have observed in my days, few people who call themselves Christians actually walk in obedience to God. I have seen hundreds of people who call themselves Christians speeding down the highway and city streets (disobedience)...cursing (disobedience)...committing adultery (disobedience)...supporting homosexuality and abortion (disobedience) and the list goes on. People don't understand that God is not playing games...when He says to walk in obedience or end up in hell, they seem to believe that grace will keep them out of hell...they will be sorely surprised on judgment day:

John 3:36
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; but whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, because the wrath of God remains on him.

Many are called few are chosen.

I understand...usually only those who have a passion for the truth, or who have been called into ministry, delve into the Greek (and it is not that hard). I could care less about Hebrew, because the Hebrew the OT is written in is a dead language, the Hebrew spoken today is not the same...and it would take half a lifetime to learn it enough to be effective in it, I believe. Plus, we are not living under the old covenant, but the new...therefore, I mainly live in the NT Scriptures.
Nope...again, in context (and it is more likely Apollos who wrote Hebrews, not Paul), he is talking about how Christ is the mediator of the new covenant, there is no mention or hint regarding leaving the old and entering into the new...it is all about Christ being the mediator of the new covenant.

The writing in Hebrews says things like Paul says, so it doesn't matter anyway, for it is from God. Paul and Apollos spent a lot of time together helping people get saved.

If you are a physician with a patient who has a difficult operation that he needs...are you going to just go chopping around inside his chest without consulting other physicians or a specialist in that problem area? I certainly hope not!

We have to be careful about using our own analogies.

Looking at what others have written in the past (when men had more time to spend with God than what the average person today does - meaning that they just might have had more insight because they spent more time with God than we can), while keeping aware of anything that they might have written that is blatantly wrong, can be a great help in studying something that we have little knowledge on today. As long as we set our biases aside so that we CAN hear the Spirit when He would speak to us, then we will be OK.

Yeah that is funny because so many claim to be scholars and are blatantly wrong. Catholic priests and leaders of the Mormon church come to mind, also Calvinists and Lutherans.

That is exactly what I am saying. My doctoral thesis was on ancient near eastern (ANE) covenanting, particularly the New Covenant. ANE covenants were NOT ratified by blood sacrifices, they were ratified by partaking of the "covenant meal," which is what Communion is today.

When people partake of the Lord's supper it is just in remembrance.
We have to drink Jesus' blood and eat his flesh and we only do that by believing and obeying his commands.
After we believe and obey...that is, after we drink his blood and eat his flesh, Jesus gives us pure water to drink. Jesus giving us pure water to drink is Jesus giving us his Holy Spirit.

Jesus actuated the New Covenant before He went to the cross, and THAT is why He had to go to the cross. One of the first promises God made in the New Covenant was to deal with our sin, and as soon as the covenant was ratified and actuated, He became obligated to deal with sin. If you study the narrative of the Gospel of John carefully, you will see that when it was dark (the sun had gone down, thus beginning the next Jewish day according to their calendar) when Jesus gave the bread and the cup to the apostles. At THAT moment the New Covenant was ratified, and Jesus had to go to the cross the same day, which He did.

I could give you the research, but only if you are serious about reading it because it is a lot...over 30 theological papers on ANE covenanting and their principles of operation.

That is kind of you but I am not still learning about it I have had it revealed to me.
I can imagine all the studying you have done though and hope you understand that I have too and I won't be offended and hope you will not either.

Ditto!
..

Right on.

 

[Shaolin]

When you denied the scriptures were speaking about Jesus making a last will and testament I thought you were confusing it with Romans 7.
I have no idea how you can deny that Hebrews 9 is saying plainly that Jesus came and taught how to be an heir and what we will receive and then he died and his last will and testament went into force.

OK...lets try this again, by the numbers...

I did not deny that Jesus came, taught, and brought into being the New Covenant, I have never said that nor have I ever denied it...perhaps I am not speaking clearly to you.

Secondly, Jesus did NOT bring a "testament," He brought a covenant, there is a HUGE difference. It is not the Old Testament and New Testament - it is the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. But because Greeks didn't have covenants, when they were writing the NT Scriptures they used the word for testament because it was the closest thing to what a covenant was.

Thirdly, the New Covenant went into force at the Last Supper, the very moment when He gave them the cup:

Matthew 26:26-28
26 Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is my body."
27 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink of it, all of you,
28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

As I stated before, since the discovery of ANE covenants we have learned a great deal concerning them. It is FALSE teaching that the New Covenant was ratified and put into force at the cross. The blood He spilled on the cross was for forgiveness of sin, NOT for ratifying the new covenant. The wine (ablution) in the cup He clearly states "is My blood of the covenant," which means that the ablution took the place of blood for the ratification of the covenant. I have studied covenants for over 12 years, I know what I am talking about.

This scripture proves that Jesus made a covenant/testament, as in a last will and testament:

Redemption through His Blood
Hebrews 9 …15Therefore Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, now that He has died to redeem them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. 16 In the case of a will, it is necessary to establish the death of the one who made it, 17because a will does not take effect until the one who made it has died; it cannot be executed while he is still alive.…

No, it does not, because as I showed you earlier, verses 16-17 have been grossly mistranslated, and then I gave you what the Greek actually states. I will give it to you again so that you don't have to go back and look at the old post:

Hebrews 9:16-17
16 Because when a covenant is being upheld, it is done so through the necessity of the symbolic death of the participants;
17 because a covenant is sure and certain in authority while the participants are dead to themselves and alive to the covenant obligations: it never has power while the participants are living for themselves.

I then went on to explain to you, because I know that you have not had any kind of formal teaching on covenants, exactly what Apollos is saying here...and it seems like you either read right over it or ignored what I shared with you. A covenant is NOT a testament, Jews have NEVER had what is called a "last will and testament," ever. When they passed things to others at their deaths, it was always through covenant, not a "will." Greeks had wills and contracts, Jews never had.

Now read here in Romans, Paul is explaining about how the Jews who want to be in the New Covenant aren't sinning.
In Romans 7 Paul explains that when one wants to enter the New Covenant they die, for when one dies they are no longer under a covenant, and Paul uses a marriage between a husband and wife as an example.

Romans 7
Released From the Law, Bound to Christ

1Do you not know, brothers and sisters—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives? 2For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law that binds her to him. 3So then, if she has sexual relations with another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress if she marries another man. 4So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. 5For when we were in the realm of the flesh, a the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. 6But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

Paul is explaining to Christian Romans that when they came to Christ, they died to the law of Moses. Then, the rest of the chapter, he explains how God sees those who are in Christ when it comes to sin...if I am really saved, I don't want to sin, but the sin nature that dwells in our flesh continually pushes us to sin. He says that when we sin, because we are in Christ and we (our spirit) don't want to sin, but the flesh causes us to sin, God does NOT count that sin against us, right up into chapter 8 verse 1..."Now, therefore, there is no condemnation to those who are in Christ..."

However, none of this has anything to do with what we originally began speaking about. Christ did come and establish the New Covenant; he inaugurated it at His baptism by John, and ratified it with the cup at the Last Supper, when He instituted Communion.

Blessings!

..

 

[Shaolin]

God brings His gospel to us in our language. Nowhere in the Bible does God say we have to learn another language to know His Truth.

Yes...neither does He tell you how to urinate...it is common sense.

It is also common sense that when it comes to trying to read a book that was written over 2000 years ago, in a foreign language, in a foreign culture, with a foreign history and experiences, etc....that if...IF...one wants to learn what that book states accurately, then we must spend time learning to have a working knowledge of that language, history, culture, etc. For example, if you don't understand ANE covenants, then you WILL get things wrong in the NT...just like calvin and luther did. Why? Because the NT Scriptures are collections of New Covenant documents...and if you read them as anything BUT a covenant, then you will get things wrong.

We get understanding the way God says in the Bible that we get it, and that is by doing what He says.

Sure...that's why He says to "Study to show yourself approved..." If you think that God is simply going to give you the understanding on everything in Scripture without you putting any effort into it, then you are sadly mistaken.

There are no more churches as there were in the New Testament times.

Of course there aren't any physical churches...but if what you are saying is that the church today (the Body of Christ) is not the same church (Body of Christ) that it was in NT times, then we have begun to enter into another area where your understanding is sorely lacking the facts. The church is the church, plain and simple. God gave to the church pastors, apostles, prophets, evangelists, and teachers...and until the church is taken up out of the earth, these five ministerial offices of the church will always be part of the church. To claim otherwise is to call God a liar, because He is the one who stated as such in His Word.

We don't need a church they all teach falseness and make one dependent on their pastor.

Really...this explains a lot about some of your posts. Scripture tells us not to abandon the assembling together for church services...exactly what do you think Paul was writing about in I and II Corinthians (as well as others)? So...you are confessing that you do not attend any church, and from what you have stated before, neither have you had any kind of professional instruction in learning the Scriptures?

What you are saying, is that you are a "lone ranger" when it comes to the church...and that leaves a LOT to be considered.

The churches were needed in the New Testament times because the scriptures were still being written.

Really...so, what churches did Jesus address in Revelation 2&3? In case you have false understandings there, too...those "churches" were church ages, not just physical churches. The last church Jesus addresses, the church of Laodicea, is the present church age. The Church, and the churches, are part of God's plan from beginning to end...whoever told you that we don't need churches today, was a moron and didn't know what he was talking about. If you came to that conclusion on your own, then you have been deceived, because that is the exact opposite of what Scripture tells us...of what God tells us.

We have the Bible and have everything we need to guide us to eternal life.

That is only part of what the church is about. Stone only sharpens stone when we are in physical communion with one another...there can be no church ministry without a church (meaning the purpose of the spiritual gifts in I Cor. 12). You have a great misunderstanding of what Scripture teaches regarding the purpose and need of the local body of believers...and that is perhaps why so much of what you understand is false. That in and of itself, is a point in fact of what I am talking about. In the church we are corrected and put back on the right track...when we go off by ourselves we leave ourselves open to all kinds of spiritual attack and doctrines of demons and seducing spirits.

We have Jesus' words on how to get saved and have Jesus as our Teacher who leaves in our heart.

Yes...and He teaches us to attend church for specific reasons...so why aren't you listening to Him on that point? Could it be that you are not hearing His voice...

Many are called few are chosen.

Your intent here comes straight out of calvinism, a false religion. I sense that we are coming to an end of conversation...because I cannot continue if you are going to continue denying basic Christian doctrine.

We have to be careful about using our own analogies.

There you go again...I do believe we are going to have to call it quits. Like I said, I cannot abide someone who calls himself a Christian yet denies the basic doctrines of Christianity.

Yeah that is funny because so many claim to be scholars and are blatantly wrong. Catholic priests and leaders of the Mormon church come to mind, also Calvinists and Lutherans.

Sure...there are secular scholars who call themselves Christians who are not - that does NOT mean we throw the baby out with the bath water, which is what you seem to be doing.

When people partake of the Lord's supper it is just in remembrance.
We have to drink Jesus' blood and eat his flesh and we only do that by believing and obeying his commands.
After we believe and obey...that is, after we drink his blood and eat his flesh, Jesus gives us pure water to drink. Jesus giving us pure water to drink is Jesus giving us his Holy Spirit.

Wrong again...most likely because you do not attend any church. Listen to what He Himself tells you...

John 6:53-55
53 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.
54 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.
55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.

This passage has nothing to do directly with belief and obedience - it has to do with Communion. If you do not partake of Communion on a regular basis, which is one of the stipulations in order to remain abiding in the New Covenant, then you are not saved, you do not have eternal life, and you are not in Christ...just as He clearly states.

That is kind of you but I am not still learning about it I have had it revealed to me.

Then you have just witnessed against yourself that you are listening to demons, and not the Holy Spirit. What I gave you is what Scripture teaches, and you deny what it teaches...therefore, what you are receiving from the spiritual realm is NOT from God...because God does not contradict Himself, ever.

I can imagine all the studying you have done though and hope you understand that I have too and I won't be offended and hope you will not either.

You just finished saying that you didn't learn it because you claim to have had it "revealed" to you...so which is it? IF...and I do mean IF...you have studied it, and came away with the errors that you have, that tells us that you either allowed your bias to interfere with your study, or that you have never learned a complete Biblical hermeneutic through which we need to study Scripture through. In either case, what you have come to (respectively) is not according to what Scripture says.

..

 

[God's Truth]

OK...lets try this again, by the numbers...

I did not deny that Jesus came, taught, and brought into being the New Covenant, I have never said that nor have I ever denied it...perhaps I am not speaking clearly to you.

Sounds like you did. Watch, you are going to do it again...

Secondly, Jesus did NOT bring a "testament,"

See that? You did it again.

He brought a covenant, there is a HUGE difference. It is not the Old Testament and New Testament - it is the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. But because Greeks didn't have covenants, when they were writing the NT Scriptures they used the word for testament because it was the closest thing to what a covenant was.

It is the same thing.

Thirdly, the New Covenant went into force at the Last Supper, the very moment when He gave them the cup:

No. Jesus had to die.
Even when Jesus was on the cross that is the time he said it is finished.

Matthew 26:26-28
26 Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is my body."
27 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink of it, all of you,
28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

As I stated before, since the discovery of ANE covenants we have learned a great deal concerning them. It is FALSE teaching that the New Covenant was ratified and put into force at the cross. The blood He spilled on the cross was for forgiveness of sin, NOT for ratifying the new covenant. The wine (ablution) in the cup He clearly states "is My blood of the covenant," which means that the ablution took the place of blood for the ratification of the covenant. I have studied covenants for over 12 years, I know what I am talking about.

Seems like you are kicking air.

No, it does not, because as I showed you earlier, verses 16-17 have been grossly mistranslated, and then I gave you what the Greek actually states. I will give it to you again so that you don't have to go back and look at the old post:

Hebrews 9:16-17
16 Because when a covenant is being upheld, it is done so through the necessity of the symbolic death of the participants;
17 because a covenant is sure and certain in authority while the participants are dead to themselves and alive to the covenant obligations: it never has power while the participants are living for themselves.

I then went on to explain to you, because I know that you have not had any kind of formal teaching on covenants, exactly what Apollos is saying here...and it seems like you either read right over it or ignored what I shared with you. A covenant is NOT a testament, Jews have NEVER had what is called a "last will and testament," ever. When they passed things to others at their deaths, it was always through covenant, not a "will." Greeks had wills and contracts, Jews never had.

How you get that is just strange to me.

Paul is explaining to Christian Romans that when they came to Christ, they died to the law of Moses.

The Romans were not in the law of Moses.
Paul spent a lot of time explaining to the Gentiles why they were excluded from God and can now be included. He also spent a lot of time explaining about the Jews and how they can now enter a New Covenant when Covenants are usually for the life of a person.

Then, the rest of the chapter, he explains how God sees those who are in Christ when it comes to sin...if I am really saved, I don't want to sin, but the sin nature that dwells in our flesh continually pushes us to sin.

That is about a person BEFORE they are saved.

He says that when we sin, because we are in Christ and we (our spirit) don't want to sin,

Read it more carefully because that is not what he is saying.
Paul explains about a person under the law and without faith (because the law was not based on faith, for some Jews had faith and some did not).

Those under the law and without faith had a hard time obeying God, for they really never had faith in Him.

but the flesh causes us to sin,

Those without faith in God.

God does NOT count that sin against us, right up into chapter 8 verse 1...

God didn't but now He does.

"Now, therefore, there is no condemnation to those who are in Christ..."

If you obey God according to the teachings of Jesus, then there is no condemnation.

However, none of this has anything to do with what we originally began speaking about. Christ did come and establish the New Covenant; he inaugurated it at His baptism by John, and ratified it with the cup at the Last Supper, when He instituted Communion.

Jesus had to die and nothing was ratified until he died. That is when it was finished.

 

[God's Truth]

Yes...neither does He tell you how to urinate...it is common sense.

See why I don't use analogies that aren't in the Bible?

It is also common sense that when it comes to trying to read a book that was written over 2000 years ago, in a foreign language, in a foreign culture, with a foreign history and experiences, etc....that if...IF...one wants to learn what that book states accurately, then we must spend time learning to have a working knowledge of that language, history, culture, etc. For example, if you don't understand ANE covenants, then you WILL get things wrong in the NT...just like calvin and luther did. Why? Because the NT Scriptures are collections of New Covenant documents...and if you read them as anything BUT a covenant, then you will get things wrong.

Are you kidding? Lutherans and Calvinists are the ones who think you have to study Greek. And the Catholics used to teach they had to read the Bible only in Latin, the language they received the Bible.

You want to preach what God says? Then don't preach things He doesn't say.

Nowhere anywhere does God say we will need to learn the language in which the scriptures were written PERIOD!

Sure...that's why He says to "Study to show yourself approved...

Does NOT mean learn another language.

" If you think that God is simply going to give you the understanding on everything in Scripture without you putting any effort into it, then you are sadly mistaken.

I already told you how GOD SAYS we get understanding.
We get understanding by obeying Him.

Of course there aren't any physical churches...but if what you are saying is that the church today (the Body of Christ) is not the same church (Body of Christ) that it was in NT times, then we have begun to enter into another area where your understanding is sorely lacking the facts.

That would be weird to twist that into what I said, because I plainly said the scriptures are the truth and I said we are the church.
Why even go off onto something insulting that only an idiot would believe? Where did I ever give you that idea? If you are going to go there then have proof of it first and don't make it like I said that or implied that.

The church is the church, plain and simple. God gave to the church pastors, apostles, prophets, evangelists, and teachers...and until the church is taken up out of the earth, these five ministerial offices of the church will always be part of the church. To claim otherwise is to call God a liar, because He is the one who stated as such in His Word.

There is no more church as there were in the New Testament times.

The churches in the New Testament times were IN PEOPLE'S homes.
It was a time when we needed the Apostles to preach the truth and write them down.
We have all the truth that we need written down.
Jesus tells us how to make him your Shepherd and Teacher.

Really...this explains a lot about some of your posts. Scripture tells us not to abandon the assembling together for church services...exactly what do you think Paul was writing about in

hahahaha It explains how you got some of your beliefs from false teachers.

Paul said that to people because they did not have enough scriptures yet to guide them into all truth.

I and II Corinthians (as well as others)? So...you are confessing that you do not attend any church, and from what you have stated before, neither have you had any kind of professional instruction in learning the Scriptures?

What you are saying, is that you are a "lone ranger" when it comes to the church...and that leaves a LOT to be considered.

Jesus is my Teacher.

You chose to believe things from a ranger who got a lot of followers of them instead of those pastors/rangers showing you how to make JESUS YOUR TEACHER.

You think you picking and choosing here and there from mere men is the Way?

 

[Shaolin]

See why I don't use analogies that aren't in the Bible?

Are you kidding? Lutherans and Calvinists are the ones who think you have to study Greek. And the Catholics used to teach they had to read the Bible only in Latin, the language they received the Bible.

You want to preach what God says? Then don't preach things He doesn't say.

Nowhere anywhere does God say we will need to learn the language in which the scriptures were written PERIOD!

Does NOT mean learn another language.


I already told you how GOD SAYS we get understanding.
We get understanding by obeying Him.


That would be weird to twist that into what I said, because I plainly said the scriptures are the truth and I said we are the church.
Why even go off onto something insulting that only an idiot would believe? Where did I ever give you that idea? If you are going to go there then have proof of it first and don't make it like I said that or implied that.

There is no more church as there were in the New Testament times.

The churches in the New Testament times were IN PEOPLE'S homes.
It was a time when we needed the Apostles to preach the truth and write them down.
We have all the truth that we need written down.
Jesus tells us how to make him your Shepherd and Teacher.


hahahaha It explains how you got some of your beliefs from false teachers.

Paul said that to people because they did not have enough scriptures yet to guide them into all truth.

Jesus is my Teacher.

You chose to believe things from a ranger who got a lot of followers of them instead of those pastors/rangers showing you how to make JESUS YOUR TEACHER.

You think you picking and choosing here and there from mere men is the Way?

Again, you don't know what you are talking about, and I am done. I don't need to argue with someone who only protects his false biases and is not a truth seeker.

Good luck in making it, you need it.

..

 

[Shaolin]

Jesus is my Teacher.

No, He isn't. If Jesus was your teacher then you would have every doctrine correct, but you have demonstrated that you have precious little truth in your own theories...but since you are a bias defender and not a truth seeker, you will never be able to come to the truth of Scripture.

So, again, bye...

..

 

[God's Truth]

Again, you don't know what you are talking about, and I am done. I don't need to argue with someone who only protects his false biases and is not a truth seeker.

Good luck in making it, you need it.

..

You speak nonsense against me, I was kind to you and was patient and respected our discussion, until you turned it into an insult fest for yourself with punches and no double edged sword.

 

[God's Truth]

No, He isn't. If Jesus was your teacher then you would have every doctrine correct, but you have demonstrated that you have precious little truth in your own theories...but since you are a bias defender and not a truth seeker, you will never be able to come to the truth of Scripture.

So, again, bye...

..

blah blah blah

You think you insulting me is a defense for truth. Shame.

 

[Br. Bear]

I recall in the New Testament ,a couple of times, where it was noted that they
were unlearned men, yet had Truth
a reference to Jesus and to Apostles

Something we do well to remember.