Will Christians Be Saved?

[youneverletgo]

Mar 13, 2009 3:24:52 GMT -8 Mark said:

How do you know that the Spirit you follow is the Spirit of God? Is it because you were taught so by your pastors and teachers? Muslim suicide bombers are taught the same by their clerics and elders. Is it because you've experienced success and joy from obedience? Mormon missionaries can tell you the same thing. Is it because you've had wonderful emotional highs in your "spiritual interactions" with it? A Greatful Dead concert will have revellers who can relate exactly the same "spirit".

How about because what the Spirit says and teaches lines up consistently with the written Word of God, that He willnot lead you into temptation of give you confidence in what the Bible clearly and consistently defines as sin. He will lead you into all truth.

How can Christians (not all, but those like yourself) claim to be following the Spirit of God when they reject the commandments of God? It is more likely they are following a different spirit.

I hope you realize that you are on very dangerous grounds if you call the Holy Spirit's work evil, or claim that the Holy Spirit is an evil spirit. You had better be nearly 100% sure when making such an accusation.

You are claiming here that me and most other Christians (anyone who doesn't follow the food laws) do not have the real Holy Spirit, but have an evil spirit instead. Anything that we have done while empowered by our Spirit would then need to be attributed to an evil spirit. That is another way of saying we are not saved, because when a person is saved they receive the Holy Spirit.

1JN 4:1 Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.

1CO 12:1 Now about spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be ignorant. 2 You know that when you were pagans, somehow or other you were influenced and led astray to mute idols. 3 Therefore I tell you that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, "Jesus be cursed," and no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit.


The Spirit that is in me fully acknowledges Jesus Christ and is leading me towards Him, not away from Him.

I have done some reading about various spiritual teachers who hear from different spirits. These evil spirits end up teaching pretty much the same thing. They deny Jesus' deity, they get people to look at them instead of God, they lead people to engage in the occult, etc. They also tell people that Jesus is not the only way, deny Jesus' bodily resurrection, deny that Jesus' blood has any power (deny the blood atonement and specifically the substitutionary atonement part), and teach another gospel about how great humanity is. They often teach that humans are really gods. They repeat the lies that Satan told Eve.

CO 1:18 But as surely as God is faithful, our message to you is not "Yes" and "No." 19 For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by me and Silas and Timothy, was not "Yes" and "No," but in him it has always been "Yes." 20 For no matter how many promises God has made, they are "Yes" in Christ. And so through him the "Amen" is spoken by us to the glory of God. 21 Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed us, 22 set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come

EPH 1:11 In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, 12 in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. 13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession--to the praise of his glory.

LK 11:11 "Which of you fathers, if your son asks for a fish, will give him a snake instead? 12 Or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? 13 If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!"

I know who lives in me is the Holy Spirit because I trust in God. He has promised the Holy Spirit to all who are in Christ. Based on His trustworthiness, and because of His work in my life, and how He has led me closer to Jesus.

MT 12:30 "He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters. 31 And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

Now not only is my salvation being questioned here, but the Spirit has been accused of being evil, simply because He hasn't led me to follow the dietary laws.....and although you did not directly answer the question, I'm assuming you think that the pastor I was talking about has an evil spirit too. It seems that every Christian who is not led by the Spirit to follow the dietary laws is claimed to have an evil spirit and not the Holy Spirit. I'm sorry, but I cannot stand for this. I cannot be part of a forum in which even the Holy Spirit is called evil. There's nothing more to be said on this topic from my end of things.

I won't sit here and be insulted any longer, and I won't let you insult any of my pastors either.

I thank you for your patience and for your time, but I'm done here. I bid you all well.

This is where my heart is:
PHP 3:7 But whatever was to my profit I now consider loss for the sake of Christ. 8 What is more, I consider everything a loss compared to the surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ--the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith. 10 I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, 11 and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead.

1 Corinthians 2:2
2 For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.

Galatians 6:14
14 May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.

Galatians 2:19-20
19 For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"

Philippians 1:20-21
20 I eagerly expect and hope that I will in no way be ashamed, but will have sufficient courage so that now as always Christ will be exalted in my body, whether by life or by death. 21 For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain.

Psalm 73:25
PS 73:25 Whom have I in heaven but you?
And earth has nothing I desire besides you.

[Mark]

To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
(Isaiah 8:20 KJV)

[Velvela]

You know something? I'm born Jewish, and a follower/disciple/talmid of Adon Yeshua, and I love G-d and uphold and love His . But I'm also kinda liberal and don't obey to the letter.

Some will think I'm 'saved'. Some will think I am not 'saved'. And I don't really care about that. I don't actually worry about the future at all. That's G-d's department. I'm just honest with myself, honest with Him, living my life (the life He has given me) with integrity - and, you know, I trust Him, and I trust it will all somehow pan out OK in the end.

I think the Holy Spirit/Ruach haKodesh will indeed lead back to , but maybe for some it is a long and winding road (and what we think/believe when we get there can also vary).

In the meantime, Ya'akov/James 4.11-12 can be a pretty good guide, I think.

[Mark]

It is true that we ought not be concerned with the condemnation of others, nor should we take on a role of passing condemnation. However, neither is it the loving and respectful thing to ignore the emperor's new clothes.

If one says that they follow "Jesus" but is not relevant to them, then the Jesus they follow is not the Jesus written of for us in the Bible. If someone says they follow the Holy Spirit; but that spirit leads them on a path that is not toward , then that spirit is not of God. Is someone declares that he or she is "saved" and made new in Christ; but continues to live in a pattern that does not draw him or her closer to the God who id described in the Bible, he or she is deceived.

This doesn't mean that the day one comes into obedience, he throws all the unclean foods out of his house. It doesn't mean that he is suddenly a scholar, understanding all applications of the Scripture in his life. It does mean that he is going to be walking in a direction of obedience, holding the Word of God with honor and owning it as truth, not dismissing it and replacing it with human understanding, but growing.

It's ironic that Christians get so bent out of shape when we suggest that their faith may be invalid. Isn't that evangelism? Are they not called to do the same? I've directed Campus Crusade for Christ in both military and college ministries. I understand the doctrines of evangelism from a Christian perspective. They are scandalized that others may see them in need of being evangelized.

There are a number of people in the Christian faith that are saved and growing and learning to walk in obedience. I repeat this because this thread has gotten so long, that it is likely confusing as to who must believe what. However, their growth is stunted by the Christian agendas, not supported by it. A true and vibrant relationship with the living God is literally suppressed. In this community I have had three pastors come to me with the realization that what we have been teaching about is true, that rejection of is rejection of the Messiah Himself! Two of those pastors are gone- they lost their jobs in the Church and left the community. The third one admitted that he could never speak this publicly without destroying both his career and his congregation.

I'm not saying that no one in the Christian Church is following Christ. I am saying that if you reject the to any degree, you are holding God off at arm's length.

[youneverletgo]

Mar 16, 2009 5:21:53 GMT -8 Mark said:

It is true that we ought not be concerned with the condemnation of others, nor should we take on a role of passing condemnation. However, neither is it the loving and respectful thing to ignore the emperor's new clothes.

Okay, I'm actually going to comment on this....even though I said I wouldn't post any more. I have been checking this thread to see if anyone else had anything to say.

Although it probably has not been your intention, the way that you have come across to me throughout this entire thread is -- you are coming across to me as very condemning and judging.

You are using black and white thinking here. To you, lawlessness seems to equal not keeping the letter of the law, including all food laws and whatnot. Just because people are not following the food laws does not mean that we have no law, or that we are living in lawlessness. You are equating not keeping the food laws with living a life in complete sin. That is how you are coming across to me.

If one says that they follow "Jesus" but is not relevant to them, then the Jesus they follow is not the Jesus written of for us in the Bible. If someone says they follow the Holy Spirit; but that spirit leads them on a path that is not toward , then that spirit is not of God. Is someone declares that he or she is "saved" and made new in Christ; but continues to live in a pattern that does not draw him or her closer to the God who id described in the Bible, he or she is deceived.

And you have no right to pass judgment on me or anyone else online because YOU DON'T KNOW US. You have no idea whether or not God is leading me closer to Him. You can't see how I actually live my life. I didn't say that the was not relevant at all. Jesus was quoting from it when He gave the two greatest commandments, which I try to live by. I do believe that they cover everything because when you try to live by those, you are living from a standard of love. You ask yourself questions about whether or not an action is beneficial to another person, if it is acting in their best interest, if it is loving to them.

If you act out of love towards your husband, you're not going to have an affair. I still agree with the law that says do not commit adultery. However, if I'm living by the standard of love, then I'm not going to sin in that way. Those who have the Holy Spirit know that it is wrong to sleep with someone you're not married to because of
2CO 3:1 Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Or do we need, like some people, letters of recommendation to you or from you? 2 You yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts, known and read by everybody. 3 You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.

and other such verses.

This doesn't mean that the day one comes into obedience, he throws all the unclean foods out of his house. It doesn't mean that he is suddenly a scholar, understanding all applications of the Scripture in his life. It does mean that he is going to be walking in a direction of obedience, holding the Word of God with honor and owning it as truth, not dismissing it and replacing it with human understanding, but growing.

It's ironic that Christians get so bent out of shape when we suggest that their faith may be invalid. Isn't that evangelism? Are they not called to do the same? I've directed Campus Crusade for Christ in both military and college ministries. I understand the doctrines of evangelism from a Christian perspective. They are scandalized that others may see them in need of being evangelized.

And this is the reason that I'm responding to this post.

I have always heard that evangelism is going out in the power of the Holy Spirit, being obedient to Him by sharing the gospel and witnessing......then letting Him take care of the rest.

It's the Holy Spirit's job to convict people and to change their hearts. I can't force someone to agree with what I believe. I can't force Jesus on someone. I can't force them to accept Him. I do what God calls me to do. I testify to who God is and what He has done and is doing in my life, and I share the gospel with them. I simply just get in a conversation with people. But I give them the freedom to respond to God. I don't force them to make a decision, and I don't yell at them and condemn them in order to try to force them.

Unfortunately Christian evangelism has gotten a bad reputation because of how certain Christians approach the subject. Again, I'm sure that they think they are doing it out of love, and they probably don't realize how they come across to non-Christians. Yelling at someone and telling them that they are going to hell does not help. It actually pulls people away from God and makes them want to have nothing to do with Jesus and Christianity. It is not received by others as love. Forcing people to feel condemned is not helpful either.

If another Christian came up to me and started yelling at me that I was going to hell, I would be offended by it for the same reason as on this forum. You don't know where my heart is, and you are not my judge. Jesus is my Judge.

Evangelism isn't about telling someone that they may not be saved. The focus should not be on condemnation, but rather on Christ. If another Christian approached me and didn't know that I was already a Christian, and started sharing the gospel with me in a loving way, I would have no problem with that. I would have a conversation with them and I would let them know what I did believe and where I stood. If they were KJV only individuals who thought I was going to hell because I read the wrong Bible version, I would attempt to give a reason for this. As long as they do not sit there and condemn me to hell, there would be no problem.

Online evangelism does not really work very well. It is too easy to misunderstand what the other person is saying, and you don't know how someone is saying something (can't see emotional expressions, can't tell what tone of voice someone is using, etc.) It's much better to talk to someone in person, face to face. That way you can sit down and actually have a conversation with them. You can find out where they stand, how they are defining words, etc.

Part of the problem that we had on this thread is that I had trouble communicating to you where I stood. We weren't really having a conversation. I think you misunderstood most everything that I said and read it through a filter of your own bad experience you had as a Christian. We probably needed to define terms and make sure that we knew what each other meant by certain words (such as salvation and saved). I might not have been using the definitions that you thought I was using, and therefore you assumed I was saying something that I wasn't, and you reacted to what you thought I was saying. Even within Christianity not everyone uses the same definitions for all terms.

There are a number of people in the Christian faith that are saved and growing and learning to walk in obedience. I repeat this because this thread has gotten so long, that it is likely confusing as to who must believe what. However, their growth is stunted by the Christian agendas, not supported by it. A true and vibrant relationship with the living God is literally suppressed. In this community I have had three pastors come to me with the realization that what we have been teaching about is true, that rejection of is rejection of the Messiah Himself! Two of those pastors are gone- they lost their jobs in the Church and left the community. The third one admitted that he could never speak this publicly without destroying both his career and his congregation.

this is judgment on your part without really knowing if/how God is working in our lives. Some Christians don't grow in their faith, but this is not so with all Christians.

I don't plan on posting again...I just thought that I would make a comment in regard to evangelism.

[Mark]

Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
(1 John 3:4 KJV)

For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
(James 2:10 KJV)

Your arguement is with the text... not me.
And, if you don't recall, you asked.

[youneverletgo]

Mar 17, 2009 16:07:43 GMT -8 Mark said:

Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
(1 John 3:4 KJV)

For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
(James 2:10 KJV)

Your arguement is with the text... not me.
And, if you don't recall, you asked.

James 2:10 in context:

1My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. 2For if a man comes into your assembly with a gold ring and dressed in fine clothes, and there also comes in a poor man in dirty clothes,3and you pay special attention to the one who is wearing the fine clothes, and say, "You sit here in a good place," and you say to the poor man, "You stand over there, or sit down by my footstool,"4have you not made distinctions among yourselves, and become judges with evil motives?

5Listen, my beloved brethren: did not God choose the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him?6But you have dishonored the poor man. Is it not the rich who oppress you and personally drag you into court?7Do they not blaspheme the fair name by which you have been called?

8If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF," you are doing well.

9But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors.10For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become (T)guilty of all.

11For He who said, "DO NOT COMMIT ADULTERY," also said, "DO NOT COMMIT MURDER." Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.12So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty.13For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment.


James is talking about a specific situation -- people are not treating the poor believers in a way that is loving to them. Instead, they are showing special favor to the important, rich, and influential believers. They are treating the poor people as if they are lesser. Showing favoritism to certain people is not acting out of love. The standard here is still love, and he even quoted, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

Okay, this is my last post unless some other subject matter stirs me up, as the evangelism topic did.

I'll continue to keep checking this thread for a while.

[Mark]

Over and over you justify your lawlessness by parcing away words, limiting the scope of what is being said by mishandling the text.

Messiah said that those who ignore the least of the commandments, they will be counted least in the kingdom of heaven. I seem to remember His words enduring forever.

If I get to define righteousness by my understanding of love and you get to do the same, the result is anarchy. God's definition of love is (Matt. 22:39-40). Anything less than that is sin.

Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.
(James 4:17 KJV)

Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
(Romans 7:12 KJV)

It's not just about clean and unclean meats, which seems to be the issue thatyou have made it; but God places unclean meats, idolatry, witchcraft and homosexuality on equal terms as far as their level of depravity in His eyes. He is the same yesterday today and forever. He doesn't change. His definition of sin doesn't change.

The issue is that your not going to stand before God with your standard of righteousness and get say that you were a pretty good person. You're going to stand before God in silence and He will declare if you have accepted His offering of grace on His terms or if you invented a religion to fit your own ideas.

[youneverletgo]

Mar 17, 2009 18:32:34 GMT -8 Mark said:

The issue is that your not going to stand before God with your standard of righteousness and get say that you were a pretty good person. You're going to stand before God in silence and He will declare if you have accepted His offering of grace on His terms or if you invented a religion to fit your own ideas.

Wait...is your definition of grace having the ability to follow the law to the letter, and then living up to that?

If so, then we have completely different definitions.

I agree with you that I won't get to stand before God with my standard of righteousness and get to say that I was a pretty good person. No one will.

That is because no one is righteous, and no one will be declared righteous by following the law. No one will be declared righteous by being perfect.

The only way that a person can be seen as righteous before God is if they are covered in the blood of Jesus. Jesus' blood makes us righteous; not the good that we have done. There is no righteousness found apart from Jesus Christ.


Just wanted to make that point. I'm done now.

Edit:
An additional thought....

I just realized something. I always wondered why in Acts the "unclean" animals were compared to non-Jews in Peter's vision. In that vision God says not to call something unlcean that He has made clean.

Perhaps the entire purpose of the food laws was for that very conversation.....or rather, to show that those things that were once considered unclean are made clean in Christ.

Initially maybe God set out clean animals and unclean animals as an analogy of Jews (those who were clean) and non-Jews (those who were unclean). And then when Christ came, He came to die for everyone, and all those who accepted Him, whether they were "clean" or "unclean" became clean in Him.

And also, since the reason for the "unclean" and "clean" people was done away with, then the analogy was too.....a distinction between unclean meats and clean meats. All have been made clean in Christ.

[Mark]

The difference is that you are saying, "Let us continue to do evil that grace may abound." I'm saying that those who live in Christ will not continue to live in sin. You're saying that you get to make up your own definition of what love is and what sin is- I'm saying that God gave us these definitions in His .

Your manipulation of the Acts 10 passage is case in point. God never says "what I have made clean call not unclean." The text reads "what I have made clean call not common." Christian teaching reads over the text without really reading it, not comprheneding that there is a distinction between these two terms. Please take a look at the thread on Acts 10.

[youneverletgo]

Mar 18, 2009 3:24:10 GMT -8 Mark said:

The difference is that you are saying, "Let us continue to do evil that grace may abound." I'm saying that those who live in Christ will not continue to live in sin. You're saying that you get to make up your own definition of what love is and what sin is- I'm saying that God gave us these definitions in His .

Your manipulation of the Acts 10 passage is case in point. God never says "what I have made clean call not unclean." The text reads "what I have made clean call not common." Christian teaching reads over the text without really reading it, not comprheneding that there is a distinction between these two terms. Please take a look at the thread on Acts 10.

The NASB, which I have heard is one of the most accurate translations of the Bible, is greatly respected by Christian scholars. Even theologically liberal Christian scholars respect its accuracy. Here's what it says in Acts 10:

9On the next day, as they were on their way and approaching the city, Peter went up on the housetop about the sixth hour to pray.

10But he became hungry and was desiring to eat; but while they were making preparations, he fell into a trance;11and he saw the sky opened up, and an object like a great sheet coming down, lowered by four corners to the ground,12and there were in it all kinds of four-footed animals and crawling creatures of the earth and birds of the air.

13A voice came to him, "Get up, Peter, kill and eat!"

14But Peter said, "By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything unholy and unclean."

15Again a voice came to him a second time, "What God has cleansed, no longer consider unholy."

16This happened three times, and immediately the object was taken up into the sky.



The KJV is not that accurate in many places. Also, KJV was translated at at time in which some words carried different meanings than they do today. If you talk to many scholars, both theologically liberal and theologically conservative, you will learn that many of them consider KJV to be one of the worst (least accurate) translations. Common back in the day when KJV originally came out probably was equal to unholy.

[youneverletgo]

Mar 18, 2009 3:24:10 GMT -8 Mark said:

The difference is that you are saying, "Let us continue to do evil that grace may abound." I'm saying that those who live in Christ will not continue to live in sin. You're saying that you get to make up your own definition of what love is and what sin is- I'm saying that God gave us these definitions in His .

Your manipulation of the Acts 10 passage is case in point. God never says "what I have made clean call not unclean." The text reads "what I have made clean call not common." Christian teaching reads over the text without really reading it, not comprheneding that there is a distinction between these two terms. Please take a look at the thread on Acts 10.

I did read the thread on Acts 10, and that is when I read someone posting something about us non-Jews still being considered dirty....someone suggested that Cornelius was really Jewish, etc.

And no, I'm NOT saying that we get to make up what we want. Rather, I'm saying that God calls Christians to live by a standard of love, and it IS His love.

You referred to the passage where Jesus talks about visiting those who were sick, hungry, and in prison. Once again, if people are living by the Spirit, they will be led by Him to serve others from a motive of love. It is loving to visit hurting people....it is loving to give hungry people food, it is loving to visit sick people, it is loving to visit those in prison. The Holy Spirit will compel believers to respond in loving ways to hurting people.

For example, last Saturday a bunch of people from my church decided to visit people in a nursing home and to pass out food to poor people in the neighborhood that are church is in. We did this because we knew that they needed the food (the poor people) and they needed visitors (the people in the nursing home). We wanted to step out in God's love and just be with people who were hurting.

Is that living by a standard of evil? Is that saying, "let us do evil so that grace may abound." Now you may say, yes it was evil because we did it on Saturday, which according to you guys, should be the Sabbath.

Once again, it is obvious to me that a discussion between you and I is going to go nowhere. I wish you well.

[Mark]

You shoudl know that if where you were intending for this discussion to "go" is a reversal on the position regarding Observance, that would be in direct violation of the Rules and guidelines of this forum. You shouldn't be surprised that this would be unsuccessful.

I'm very glad that you've taken the time to look into other posts. There are a lot of directions we may have gone and repeated discussions that have already occurred elsewhere.

I still would like to answer a few of the things you have brought up such as James 2:10, recognizing and discerning fraudulent spirits, and problems with (why I cannot accept) the Nicene Creed. These discussions deserve their own topic. I would appreciate your involvement in them, should we have the opportunity to continue in those directions.

I apologize if you feel I haven't done justice to this discussion. Things are busy and not likely to slow down anytime soon. However, I appreciate your sticking with it and fleshing out the differences and similarities in what we believe.

NASB may be a pretty good translation... but I read Greek. The word translated "unholy" or "common" in KJV is koinos. You may recognize the term kononia, often translated as "fellowship". The word means those in common. In the context of Acts 10, it would refer to meats which are "clean" according to their type; but had been rendered unfit to eat by association with an "unclean" substance or experience.

Mark

[youneverletgo]

Mar 18, 2009 16:17:34 GMT -8 Mark said:

You shoudl know that if where you were intending for this discussion to "go" is a reversal on the position regarding Observance, that would be in direct violation of the Rules and guidelines of this forum. You shouldn't be surprised that this would be unsuccessful.

I'm very glad that you've taken the time to look into other posts. There are a lot of directions we may have gone and repeated discussions that have already occurred elsewhere.

I still would like to answer a few of the things you have brought up such as James 2:10, recognizing and discerning fraudulent spirits, and problems with (why I cannot accept) the Nicene Creed. These discussions deserve their own topic. I would appreciate your involvement in them, should we have the opportunity to continue in those directions.

I apologize if you feel I haven't done justice to this discussion. Things are busy and not likely to slow down anytime soon. However, I appreciate your sticking with it and fleshing out the differences and similarities in what we believe.

NASB may be a pretty good translation... but I read Greek. The word translated "unholy" or "common" in KJV is koinos. You may recognize the term kononia, often translated as "fellowship". The word means those in common. In the context of Acts 10, it would refer to meats which are "clean" according to their type; but had been rendered unfit to eat by association with an "unclean" substance or experience.

Mark

Mark,

If this is the direction that our conversations go, I would be glad to continue in this forum.

No, I did not come here with the intention of getting anyone to STOP following the law. This might have been missed earlier, so let me say it again. I have nothing against believers who wish to keep the laws of the Old Testament, including the food laws. You personally testified earlier that the laws have helped you in your own personal relationship with God. That is awesome. It would not be my place to tell you to stop following the laws. All of this is between you and God. I can understand and respect your decision to keep these laws.

My issue here in this thread has been the condemnation of us Christians who do not keep all of the laws in the Old Testament, such as the food laws. As a believer in Jesus Christ, I feel very strongly when someone suggests that because I don't practice my faith in the same way that they do, that I should be condemned for it. The reason I posted in this thread was to show that I believe people are saved by grace through faith.

Whether or not a believer is supposed to keep the food laws is an entirely separate issue.

I think that condemning people for not following the food laws is just as bad as condemning someone FOR following the food laws. And that is because salvation is by grace through faith, and it is not based on whether or not someone follows laws.

I know there are Christians out there who would condemn all of you for keeping all of the laws in the Old Testament. If I ever encounter a Christian who condemns Messianic Jews to hell, I will confront them about it. I'm serious. I will challenge them (Christians who condemn people for keeping the law).

Perhaps this helps you understand my position better. I simply sought to defend us Christians who do not keep all of the laws, since the very question of this thread was "Will Christians be saved?" I was coming at this from a defensive position, and not an offensive position. (I was seeking to defend Christian salvation based on the fact that salvation is by grace through faith, and not by how well a person adheres to certain laws. I was not attempting to suggest that no believer should keep the food laws).

Sure. I would be glad to discuss the other topics with you....provided that we both approach these topics from a perspective of discussion, and that neither of us seeks to condemn the other. I came to this forum with the understanding that I would most likely have differences of opinion. I do want to see what you think, but I also would wish that my own position would be respected. By no means to I expect us to agree with each other. But two people can have different viewpoints without it turning into something like, "well, my opinion is the real one and you know nothing, and are stupid."

Because we have different opinions, it can be sometimes be easy to misunderstand the other. Sometimes we may need to ask the other to clarify their position, to make sure that we have understood each other correctly.

If you wish to start any of these as new topics, that would be fine with me. Just let me know you have begun them as new topics. Let me know where these topics are located, and we can begin

A discussion about the Nicene Creed would be awesome. While you can explain why you do not agree with it, I would like to have the opportunity to say why I do agree with it. I think if we have a discussion about it without the intent being to try to change the other's viewpoint, it would be good. This would help us understand where each other is coming from without trying to force the other to accept our perspective.

I understand about being busy. I'm pretty busy as well, and I'll probably try to limit my responses to once a week or so. This will give me a chance to really think about your posts and give you a response. Maybe another direction we could take would be to have a thread in which we ask one another some questions. Like, "what is your position on this?" And then allow the other person to answer. Then you could give your own perspective. That way it would not be threatening to either side, and we could each freely express what we believe without it turning into an argument. What would you think about a "Messianic Jew and Christian Question and Answer" thread?

Well, I don't read Greek, and therefore I can't really get into a discussion about Greek words. I cannot defend the "unclean/unholy" vs. "uncommon" word choice. I don't have the knowledge to do this. This means that I won't be able to discuss with you Greek words. All I can point to is what the translations that I have say. I'm simply not qualified to get into a debate with you regarding word translation. You are welcome to share with me what your own translation of the Greek, but I refuse to debate you about it. It's just an area that I'm unqualified to discuss.

That being said, I look forward to our discussions

[youneverletgo]

By the way, for the Nicene Creed topic, I have a copy of the creed typed out somewhere.

I can make the first post to the thread, simply putting the creed up there.

Then I'll let you go first saying why you disagree with it. I'll follow that up by saying why I do agree with it. This might be a good topic to start out with. If you want to break it out into section by section and discuss why you do not agree with a certain part, that would be cool.

I just don't know what section of the forum this thread should be posted on.

Let me know, and I'll start the topic.