The Gospel According to History

Truth2Freedom's ^ | Feburary 1,2013 | Nathan Busenitz

[editor-surveyor]

.
>> “What is the purpose of baptism?” <<

.
To yield your self completely to Yeshua, confessing, and repenting of your sins, and walking out ultimately to righteousness, as though the river in which you were baptized washed away the vestiges of your old sinful life.
.

[LearsFool]

Perhaps you didn’t realize that the word translated “church” or “assembly” is the same word used to describe the congregation of Israel in the wilderness, and their assemblies at the feasts, etc.

When Jesus said “I will build My church”, He wasn’t talking about a building with a spire and a cross on top, and a pulpit and pews inside. He was talking about a group of people - HIS congregation of people, as distinguished from other, previous ones such as in Exodus 12:6 or Isaiah 1:13.

We find Jesus fulfilling that prediction in Acts 2, as He adds to His assembly/church/congregation those who are saved.

Given all the abuse and misuse of the word “church” in popular speech today, I can understand your reluctance to use it. But like “works”, what’s important is that we understand what the Bible authors meant when they used it, and use these words in the same way. Wouldn’t you agree?

[redleghunter]

Those who have trust and faith in the propitiatory sacrifice of Jesus Christ to cleanse one for all sins as a regenerated soul get in the water to proclaim in status. The change from condemned creature to new creation.

“But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.” 1 John 1:7

[Elsie]

I would say those 7 churches are made up of law keeping Jews who believe that Jesus was the Messiah.

Say all you want; they are CATHOLIC churches.

Jews had SYNAGOGs; or had you forgotten?

[Elsie]

Yup!

Acts 22:10
“’What shall I do, Lord?’ I asked. “
‘Get up,’ the Lord said, ‘and go into Damascus. There you will be told all that you have been assigned to do.’

[Elsie]

It is not Dr Luke and Paul who are confused........

The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message.

[editor-surveyor]

I agree with your take on “assembly.”

Church is not what he said, church, even at the time that the English translations were first done was a human corporation, with man made rules, just like those of the Pharisees of old.

Most of the congregation in the wilderness was lost due to lack of faith and belief, as Paul noted in Hebrews, but a few then, just as a few now, had belief and faith and remained in his assembly. He makes no distinction between the believers in the desert, and his disciples when he walked the Earth.

Most of those attending “church” today are no better off than those of old that he declared would not find his rest. For that reason, it is counter-productive to allow the word ‘church’ to have a connotation of “house of believers.”

Yeshua assured us that few would find his way that leads to his narrow gate, and it is deceptively, perilously dishonest to allow the easy-believe class to find self assurance in the church they attend. There’ll be no salvation by association.

The word of God didn’t use the word church; it called for a congregation or assembly, not a local synagogue or national temple, thus I just do not use that wobbly word. Too many here really think a church can save them.

.

[RnMomof7]

The Church’s doctrines do not contradict a single line from those you copied from the Church Fathers; there is no contradiction whatsoever, and to imply that there is shows an utter lack of understanding of the doctrines of the Church.

So what does Rome do with the contradictions?

[editor-surveyor]

.
>> “Now the question becomes, what sort of works IS he talking about when he says salvation is “not of works” (Eph. 2:9, etc.)?

If we can determine that, I think we can clear up this whole confusion” <<

====================================== .
There are actually a number op places to look, each of which should provide sufficient clues to determine what the repulsive works must be.

First, it is notable that it is only Paul that cautions against any works. The other writers never brought the subject up. There is a clue buried in this fact: Paul is the only apostle that taught and enforced, even to the point of murder, the false law of the Pharisees. The others lived under them until Yeshua explained their invalidity, but never taught them.

Additional help comes from places where Paul supports works just as strongly as James and John did.

Romans 2:

[12] For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
[13] (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
[14] For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
[15] Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts,

Or 1Corinthians 11:

[1] Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
[2] Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.

It is also notable that Paul made a concerted effort to keep every feast, even if it meant a sea voyage to get to Jerusalem soon enough.

Luke, writing in Acts made it clear that the Law of Moses was what Paul taught in attempt to make believers of the people he encountered:

Acts 28:

[23] And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening.
[24] And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not.
[25] And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that Paul had spoken one word, Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers,
[26] Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive:
[27] For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

The quote of Isaiah also shows us another thing; that those he evangelized that day were definitely Hebrews.

One would have to believe that Paul was schizophrenic, not to realize that he argued two different sets of laws.

[winodog]

The beatitudes are Gods constitution for the Kingdom. In other words that is what it will be like when God establishes his kingdom on the earth. The one the law abiding jews have been waiting 3,500 years for.

I apologize for the harsh words earlier. Thanks for not responding in kind. That does no good kinda like us preaching at each other. : )

[winodog]

lol touché on the “say” part.
Those “churches” are the called out assembly of jews who believe Christ was the Messiah. They are waiting for the trib to start.

[winodog]

By the way, Peter stayed in Jerusalem preaching to Jews, he never went out to the world with the other Apostles like Paul did. If those seven churches were gentiles then who established them?

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

” get in the water to proclaim in status”

So says the tradition of men.

The Scriptures teach something completely different.

The Scriptures declare baptism saves us.
The Scriptures declare baptism is for remission of sins.
The Scriptures declare baptism is for receiving the Holy Spirit.
The Scriptures declare baptism places one in Christ.

Funny how the Church left behind by the Apostles taught baptism as it is found in the Scriptures, as evidenced by the writings of the Church Fathers.

The whole tradition of men that baptism is for obedience or a public declaration of the salvation which had already occurred did not appear on the world stage until the 16th century.

[editor-surveyor]

.
It is wholly proper that we get hot about this stuff, its eternal life, or NOT!

.

[editor-surveyor]

.
.
>> “The Scriptures declare baptism saves us.
The Scriptures declare baptism is for remission of sins.
The Scriptures declare baptism is for receiving the Holy Spirit.
The Scriptures declare baptism places one in Christ.” <<

.
Not the kind of “Baptism” you’re talking about!!!!

.

[LearsFool]

"For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified."

Yes, indeed. But ARE there any doers of the law who will be justified?

See, Paul is arguing here that just HAVING the law doesn't justify anyone. You've got to KEEP the law - and keep it perfectly - before you can be found "not guilty". That's the "works" of Romans right there: Flawless law-keeping.

So again, are there any justified doers of the law? "No, not one."

"for we before laid to the charge both of Jews and Greeks, that they are all under sin; as it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one" - Rom. 3:9ff

"that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may be brought under the judgment of God: because by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight; for through the law cometh the knowledge of sin." - 3:19-20

So what are you saying, Paul? Why is is that no one can be justified by works of the law? Because all the law can do is expose our sin...only drag us before the Judge and accuse us...only point out our crimes and convict us.

The only way works of law could justify a man is if he never violated it. Such a man could stand fearless before the Judge and the law could make no charge stick against him. God would HAVE to acquit him, because he's guiltless. (With "works" like that, sure, a man could boast before God!)

But since nobody is in that position ("for all have sinned"), Paul can safely say, "by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight."

If we're ever to stand before the Judge guiltless, it'll have to be on some other basis than our law-keeping record - our record of "works of the law" - because we screwed up that option the first time we sinned.

Our Plan A for justification (acquittal) was to keep the law without sinning. Looks like we're gonna need a Plan B!

[editor-surveyor]

.
Synagogue is a Greek word, or had you forgotten?

Jews didn’t speak Greek, even the few that Knew Greek.

The Maccabee revolt settled that long before Yeshua arrived in person.

.

[editor-surveyor]

.
>> “Yes, indeed. But ARE there any doers of the law who will be justified?” <<

.
Yes, millions of them that do the law because he wrote it on their hearts.

Those that know him not, but “do” the law will be judged by the law as everyone will, but will be found short.

>> “See, Paul is arguing here that just HAVING the law doesn’t justify anyone.” <<

Nope, you have to read the whole chapter.

He is simply pointing out that all that are in Yeshua do the law because it is their nature. “Written on their hearts.”
.

[LearsFool]

No, Paul disagrees:

"by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight"

[LearsFool]

Look at Paul's explanation of "Plan B", and I think you'll see that it sheds more light on what he means by "works of the law":

"We reckon therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law." - 3:28

"For if Abraham was justified by works, he hath whereof to glory" - 4:2

"Now to him that worketh, the reward is not reckoned as of grace, but as of debt." - 4:4

And especially here:

"Even as David also pronounceth blessing upon the man, unto whom God reckoneth righteousness apart from works, saying,
Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered.
Blessed is the man to whom, the Lord will not reckon sin." - 4:6-8

What does that mean, "righteousness apart from works"? Why, it's forgiveness.

There's a righteousness from works - that's flawless law-keeping, resulting in acquittal.
And there's a righteousness apart from works - that's forgiveness of law-breaking, resulting in acquittal.