John3 and Romans2: Part2

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Esaias

See? Legalism views sin as a disease rather than a crime.



Matthew 22:1-14 KJV
And Jesus answered and spake unto them again by parables, and said, [2] The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son, [3] And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come. [4] Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage. [5] But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise: [6] And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them. [7] But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city. [8] Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy. [9] Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage. [10] So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests. [11] And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment: [12] And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless. [13] Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. [14] For many are called, but few are chosen.

Seems like Jesus answered your question. Here's another:

John 10:1-11 KJV
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber. [2] But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. [3] To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out. [4] And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice. [5] And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers. [6] This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them. [7] Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep. [8] All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them. [9] I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture. [10] The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly. [11] I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.

Well, Don, I don't really see how you can salvage your teaching in this thread.

How about if we have a nice discussion about how you Canadians keep voting in Justin Trudeau? Can you ever get rid of him? Why do you all put brown gravy and cheese curds over French fries? Brother Michael Blume was going to mail me some in an envelope a while back. How does Poutine taste cold?

[donfriesen1]

I've shown that those who don't have the law, Ro2.12-16, respond to another law of God of sorts -- the God-given conscience. They thus demonstrate faith of sorts. Had these who desire to live right, without the law, have heard the Word, they would have placed their faith in the Word -- their heart demonstrates this when they respond to the only 'Word' they have, the conscience. Those who contend that these are living by good works thus demonstrate a willingness to ignore the obvious in spite of the facts - these have faith.

[donfriesen1]

Paul shows a time when those who haven't heard the law aren't condemned. Ro5.13. They don't have the sin they possess charged against them, not imputed. Why? Because there is no law. This shows the principle that those who haven't heard the law are not condemned by it. Where there is no law there is no transgression. Ro4.15. But these without the law will still stand to be examined by another 'law', their God-given conscience at the Great White Throne.

[donfriesen1]

Does God condemn babies who die not born again? Of course not. Does this then show an exception to the view that says any during the Church Age must be born again with faith in Jesus to escape hell? If you are like some on this thread you only point to the scriptures which say someone needs to have faith in the shed blood of Jesus and need to be born again. And choose to ignore the obvious: there are exceptions to the rule for those who haven't heard the Gospel as demonstrated by Paul in Ro2.12-16. Its a scriptural concept some choose to ignore. Perhaps these would happily send innocent babies to hell too?

[donfriesen1]

Paul, in Ro, shows all as sinners and all as dead, needing to be born again. The Gospel is the only means shown by the Word to be born again, to gain new life. All who place their faith in the shed blood of Jesus, the lamb of God can be born again. Water baptism in Jesus name is the only scripturally shown method to be born of water, Jn3.5. Receiving the Spirit of God is the only scripturally shown method whereby one is born of the Spirit, Jn3.5. The scripturally shown initial evidence of receiving the Spirit is speaking in tongues.

[donfriesen1]

All who attempt to gain entrance to heaven by means other than that which God provides, the Gospel with its faith in what Jesus did for us on the cross, are attempting to make heaven on their own merits. This is legalism or attempts at salvation by good works, which will not achieve to provide the righteousness needed to allow entrance to heaven. The only righteousness allowing access is God's own righteousness, which is shared with us by the Gospel.

Nothing Ro2.12-16 says contradicts this, if understood as Paul presents it.

[donfriesen1]

These posts are found in John3 and Romans2: Part2. Anyone looking for Part1 can find the link under "Similar Threads" or searching for John3 and Romans2: Part1

[donfriesen1]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Well, Don, I don't really see how you can salvage your teaching in this thread.
How about if we have a nice discussion about how you Canadians keep voting in Justin Trudeau? Can you ever get rid of him? Why do you all put brown gravy and cheese curds over French fries? Brother Michael Blume was going to mail me some in an envelope a while back. How does Poutine taste cold?

The wedding invitation is the Gospel. Does the parable address the situation of those who didn't get the invitation? No. The parable and Jn10 speaks of those who hear the Gospel but choose to try to enter another way -- without the righteousness that God provides, failing.

Poutine is great when its hot. A word to the wise: people would refuse Blume's shipment. Send the envelope back to Blume for him to enjoy cold. (He's only 60 miles (100 km for Canadians) from me.)

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

Paul shows a time when those who haven't heard the law aren't condemned. Ro5.13. They don't have the sin they possess charged against them, not imputed. Why? Because there is no law. This shows the principle that those who haven't heard the law are not condemned by it. Where there is no law there is no transgression. Ro4.15. But these without the law will still stand to be examined by another 'law', their God-given conscience at the Great White Throne.

Don, in my opinion, you don’t take the Bible as a whole. Your approach is still based up what you believe God should do. In Acts it speaks that there was a time which God winked at Man’s ignorance. But in the advent of Christ He commands all to repent. Simple.



Acts 17:29-31

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

[donfriesen1]

Perhaps a sport illustration will help -- street hocky + rink hockey comparison.

Streeet hockey is some kids with hockey sticks, a puck or ball, two clumps of snow with an imaginary line for a goal. But its great fun for those who like to compete and use there skills. Street hockey is played without rules, for the most part. Perhaps the only one is if the puck crosses the imaginary line -- its a goal. Not at all like rink hockey, where everyone has equipment, nets, lines in the ice, referees and penalty boxes. Invariably, in street hockey there will be a kid who'll cry out 'NO GOAL, it was offside'. But rink rules don't apply in street hockey. There's no such off-side rule because there's no blue line, no off-sides. Rink hockey has got a gazillion rules which everyone has got to follow or there's consequences. Street hockey you almost can do anything, as long as you're not malicious or over the top because even though there are no rules, there are still some almost undefined rules or the game couldn't be played.

Covenant relationship with Jesus has got rules which non-covenant relationship doesn't. Some will cry out that that person who got into heaven wasn't baptized or didn't believe in the Cross. But it still counts when there are no rules, as Paul says - they don't have law, and the puck crossed the line when they 'showed the work of the law in their heart'.

When Hagar was living with Abraham and Sara as a servant she came under their roof, she was covered by their covenant with God. When she was kicked out she lost the benefits, but still had a relationship with God of sorts, because the Word shows her as receiving a blessing of God while without a covenant.

Does anyone think that Gentiles sin when they aren't circumcised? Yet breaking rules for those in covenant. Does anyone living right but not participating in the Abrahamic covenant of circumcision go to hell? Would any righteous like Enoch, who, living in the same Age as Abraham, but not in the same covenant, would they go to hell uncircumsized? No, because the rules of Abraham's covenant didn't apply to anyone but Abraham. Covenant rules apply only to people in covenant and it is wrong to apply NT covenant rules to people who don't have the Gospel or the law. Any obeying the God-given conscience will be judged according to that conscience but not by Gospel laws which they have never heard. To think that God will d...mn such a one portrays God as an unjust judge who applies rules that aren't known. Ro5.13 says God does not impute sin when there is no law.

Does anyone think that NT rules are eternal rules, that they apply retroactively to any previous. No, they are not eternal but Age rules which apply only to the Age they are given in and only to those who hear them. God does not apply rules to those who don't hear then acording to the principle shown in Ro5.13. But does God have eternal rules which if those of any Ages break they suffer the consequences? Which eternal rules are seen in all Ages? We are made in the image of God and the eternal rules are found in the image. The conscience is part of the image and is in effect in all ages.

These Gentiles during the NT Age in Ro2 have relationship with God of sorts, even though they have no covenant and God can bless them. Every illustration or parable has got limits as to how far it can be used to show divine truth. Don't get to extremes with this one either.

Frustration has arisen in many commenters in this thread when the arguments they put forward, rules of the NT, were ignored and not responded to because it had been repeatedly stated that what Paul wrote of was for those who had no law, therefore were outside of covenant, and not replied to as not relevant. The frustration caused was not done intentionally.