The Way of Righteousness.

Originally posted by Rajk999
The ten commandments do not apply Christians. The flaw in your entire argument is that Christians fall under the 'no law' group spoken of by Paul, and are just required to follow their hearts. Paul and the Apostles preached the Gospel of Christ, the commandments of Christ and this is the law of Christ. It certainly not the Law of Moses.

All over the wr ...[text shortened]... efer to the falling away of the old covenant which was brought in by Moses. You cannot miss it.

You've claimed all were forgive, so what does it matter?

Originally posted by KellyJay
You've claimed all were forgive, so what does it matter?

You continue to make an a$$ of yourself. Have you no shame?

Originally posted by Rajk999
You continue to make an a$$ of yourself. Have you no shame?

I will defend my words instead of hide from them.

Originally posted by Rajk999
The ten commandments do not apply Christians. The flaw in your entire argument is that Christians fall under the 'no law' group spoken of by Paul, and are just required to follow their hearts. Paul and the Apostles preached the Gospel of Christ, the commandments of Christ and this is the law of Christ. It certainly not the Law of Moses.

All over the wr ...[text shortened]... efer to the falling away of the old covenant which was brought in by Moses. You cannot miss it.

Really? So it's o.k. if I break every one of them is it? I really don't think that that is true, I was baptized a Presbyterian (now United Reformed Church) and was then brought up with the Church of England, neither of them thinks that the Ten Commandments do not apply to Christians. Whether Gentile Christians should follow Mosaic Law was a major issue for the early Christians and it is entirely likely that Paul would speak on it. What is entirely unlikely is that someone trying to set up a new religion would say that people could achieve salvation without joining. While Paul might have been referring to people who had not heard the Gospels, of which there were plenty, it does not make sense for him to make a big thing of this right at the start of the book and go on about it for four chapters. I'm sorry but your interpretation is not credible.

Originally posted by DeepThought
Really? So it's o.k. if I break every one of them is it? I really don't think that that is true, I was baptized a Presbyterian (now United Reformed Church) and was then brought up with the Church of England, neither of them thinks that the Ten Commandments do not apply to Christians. Whether Gentile Christians should follow Mosaic Law was a major issu ...[text shortened]... e book and go on about it for four chapters. I'm sorry but your interpretation is not credible.

This statement you make .. Really? So it's o.k. if I break every one of them is it? is a good example of poor reasoning ability. Either that or you are a drama queen.

One of the ten is the observance of the Sabbath. Christians are not required to follow that, although some may choose to do it. By virtue of that alone the 10 as a group, do not apply. The other 9 are part of the law of Christ, the commandments of Christ to which Christians subscribe.

Gentile Christians are not required to follow any part of the Law of Moses .. none .. no part whatsoever. If you do some more reading of Pauls writings, that will become clear.

And again the 'no law' statement cannot mean Christians .. that is ridiculous. The New testament is full of laws and commandments for Christians. Have you read the NT in its entirety?

Originally posted by Rajk999
This statement you make .. Really? So it's o.k. if I break every one of them is it? is a good example of poor reasoning ability. Either that or you are a drama queen.

One of the ten is the observance of the Sabbath. Christians are not required to follow that, although some may choose to do it. By virtue of that alone the 10 as a group, do not appl ...[text shortened]... estament is full of laws and commandments for Christians. Have you read the NT in its entirety?

Explain why: "Really? So it's ok if I break every one of them is it?" is an example of poor reasoning.

Oh, and Christians are expected to observe the Sabbeth, what Christ said was that "the Sabbeth was made for man and not man for the Sabbeth." and he said that in the context of opposition by Pharisees to healing people on that day. I don't think that means that one should not put aside one day of rest each week and regard it as holy, even if it isn't the day everyone else puts aside - it just means that it shouldn't be regarded as more important than life itself.

Originally posted by DeepThought
Explain why: "Really? So it's ok if I break every one of them is it?" is an example of poor reasoning.

Oh, and Christians are expected to observe the Sabbeth, what Christ said was that "the Sabbeth was made for man and not man for the Sabbeth." and he said that in the context of opposition by Pharisees to healing people on that day. I don't think tha ...[text shortened]... lse puts aside - it just means that it shouldn't be regarded as more important than life itself.

Figure out the first question yourself.

As for the sabbath, the obervance of special days are no longer a requirement under Christ. This has been done away with since people gravitate to these things and the day itself becomes more important than the reason for the day. Paul said :

One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks. (Romans 14:5-6 KJV)

Christians are free to observe any day they like or none at all. The only requirement is the observance of the death of Christ with the breaking of bread and drinking of wine as Christ instituted for Christians to do it in remembrance of him. No special day of the week was marked off for this.

Paul when lecturing about circumcision, which angered the Jews, noted :

As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication. (Acts 21:25 KJV)

No observance is required except ... etc etc. Nothing about keeping sabbath.

There is no record of early Apostles keeping the sabbath.. none.

Originally posted by Rajk999

Changing the Bible again to suit Mr Witness Lee?

What did I change ?

You have not produced a sample of me encouraging Christians to live unrighteously.
LIE #1 not backed up

Now produce what the Bible said and how I "CHANGED" what it said.

LIE #2

Paul says 3 classes of Christian saints:
1. does good works and is rewarded
2. does nothing good but still gets eternal life
3. does evil and is destroyed.

Wrong.

Two classes:

Matches perfectly what Jesus Christ and Peter says as well.

Those rewarded when He established His millennial kingdom - one class.
Those who suffer loss but are saved yet so as through fire - another class.

BOTH classes have the old man destroyed.

First class willingly, cheerfully, in trust, in faith with cooperation with the cross of Christ.
Second class as a discipline with a flavor of punishment at His second coming, for their procrastination and unwillingness to die to the old manner of life in order to live in Christ.

Two groups - overcomers and defeated.
Two groups - saved and rewarded. and saved yet having all contrary nature destroyed.

Do those rewarded have their old man destroyed ? Or is it only those disciplined who do ?

Let's look at one overcomer - Paul.

" I am CRUCIFIED ... with Christ; and it is no longer I who live. But it is Christ who lives within me." (Gal. 2:20)

He allowed the Holy Spirit to put to death his old man - cooperatively, willingly throughout of Christian life.

The destruction of the old man exhorted by Paul with a WILLING attitude -

"Knowing this, that our old man has been crucified with Him in order that the body of sin might be annulled, that we should no longer serve sin as slaves." (Rom. 6:6)

Here again, WILLING, cooperation in FAITH with Christ's grace. Cooperation with the work of the Holy Spirit in the age of grace.

The one destroyed as a discipline in First Corinthains 3 does not undergo this nullification willingly with cooperation. For procrastination, he will undergo the same kind of being crucified with Christ during the time when he SHOULD be being rewarded.

This discipline will have an altogether different flavor from what it would have had had he cooperated with GRACE in the church age as Paul.

There are not three classes of Christians -

1.) Saved and rewarded.
2.) Saved and disciplined.
3.) Saved and then UNSAVED.

That is your bad teaching and poor understanding of Scripture.

Two classes:

"If anyone's work which he has built upon the foundation remains, he will receive a reward; (v.14)

ONE Class.
Now the other class of the TWO.

"If anyone's work is consumed, he will suffer loss, but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire. (v.15)

Do you not know that you [SAVED CHRISTIANS] are the temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwells in you ? (v.16)

If anyone destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him, for the temple of God is holy, and such are you." (v.17)

Two classes.

Now where does the Lord Jesus also speak of TWO classes ? One notable place is here:

" Then Jesus said to His DISCIPLES, If anyone wants to come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me.

For whoever wants to save his soul-life shall lose it ["suffer loss"] ; but whoever loses his soul-life for My sake shall find it [receive a reward] .

For what shall a man be profited if he gains the whole world, but forfeits his soul-life? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul-life?

For the Son of Man is to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He will repay each man according to his doings." (Matt. 16:24-27)

All this word was spoken to WHO ? It was spoken " ... to His disciples".

Originally posted by Rajk999
Figure out the first question yourself.

As for the sabbath, the obervance of special days are no longer a requirement under Christ. This has been done away with since people gravitate to these things and the day itself becomes more important than the reason for the day. Paul said :

[i]One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day ...[text shortened]... thing about keeping sabbath.

There is no record of early Apostles keeping the sabbath.. none.

Well you see, you cannot justify your statement that "this shows poor reasoning ability." which shows that it was an empty insult and that you are not worth discussing things with.

Originally posted by DeepThought
Well you see, you cannot justify your statement that "this shows poor reasoning ability." which shows that it was an empty insult and that you are not worth discussing things with.

I guess you concede
- that the Ten Commandments are no longer applicable, and
- that Paul could not possibly have called Gentile Christians a people "with no law"..

Originally posted by sonship

Changing the Bible again to suit Mr Witness Lee?

What did I change ?

You have not produced a sample of me encouraging Christians to live unrighteously.
LIE #1 not backed up

Now produce what the Bible said and how I "CHANGED" what it said.

LIE #2

Paul says 3 classes of Christian saints:
1. does good works and is ...[text shortened]... b]

All this word was spoken to WHO ? It was spoken [b]" ... to His disciples".[/b]

You are correct.

Paul speaks of two classes of Christians:
1. Those who get eternal life - who do good works
2. Those who dont. - who defile themselves
However within group 1 there can be several sub groups, with several kinds of rewards.

Jesus speaks of two classes of followers:
1. Those who get eternal life - who do good works
2. Those who dont. - who do evil works

Peter speaks of two classes of Christians:
1. Those who get eternal life -
2. Those who dont.

James speaks of two classes of people:
1. Those who get eternal life - faith + works
2. Those who dont. - faith alone

Jude speaks of two classes:
1. Those who get eternal life - righteous
2. Those who dont. - ungodly

John speaks of two classes:
1. Those who get eternal life - who obey the commandments of Christ
2. Those who dont. - who do not obey the commandments of Christ

The Bible is consistent.

Originally posted by Rajk999

What you do not seem to get is the Jesus Christ IS the eternal life.

" He who has the Son of God has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life." (1 John 5:12)

(Only one exception can I locate, which I will not discuss now for simplicity's sake)

Do you have the Son of God ? If you DO you have eternal life.
Do you know that you do not have the Son of God ? Receive then the Son of God that you may too have eternal life.

Now, WHY then did the apostle John write to his audience this particular truth (1 John 5:12) ? He tells us himself in the very next verse. It is because he wants the brothers and sisters in Christ to KNOW that they have eternal life.

"I have written these things to you that you may know that you have eternal life, to you who believe into the name of the Son of God." (v.13)

So where are we ? John and those as the audience of his epistle HAVE the Son of God and therefore HAVE eternal life.

Shall we go on a bit? Now in the very SAME letter, John has a warning to those who have eternal life. Here's the warning:

" And now little children, abide in Him, so that if He is manifested, we may have boldness and not be put to shame from Him at His coming." (1 John 2:28)

1.) "Little children" here are saints, believers, children of God, Christians.

2.) "Little children" includes all three levels of believer to whom he has been talking, namely - children, young men, fathers. In other words here "little children" refers to different levels of spiritual maturity among the Christians, (See 2:12-14)

3.) John exhorts these saints to "ABIDE in Him" [Christ]. Logically, if abiding in Christ were unavoidable and automatic, there would be no need for John to exhort the believers to do what they cannot HELP to do.

Since it is an exhortation, it must be practiced, heeded, continued, obeyed.

4.) One of the reasons to "abide in Him" is so that IF Christ is manifested they may not "have boldness" and be "put to shame from Him".

Here other translations in English may be misleading. It is not a FEELING of being ashamed. It has not the meaning of one's personal feeling. Rather it is to be "PUT ...to shame".

There is the possibility that a saved saint may be "put to shame from Him at His coming."

The strong implication is discipline of some type. That is discipline for a lack of abiding in Him. It is being caught OFF GUARD. It is presumptuous and/or foolish neglect to be in constant contact with the Spirit of Christ - "abide in Him".

Once more, here is the exhortation to those who have eternal life.

"And now, little children, abide in Him, so that if He is manifested, we may have boldness and not be put to shame from Him at His coming." (v.28)

God wants us to have "boldness" because we are familiar with fellowshipping with Christ - ABIDING in Christ. He does not want us to fail to abide in Him, sloppily, neglectfully, presumptuously so that we lose BOLDNESS before Him when He appears. He also does not want us to have to be "put to shame from Him at His coming."

The being put to shame from Him at His coming is temporary. It cannot last more than one thousand years. Perhaps it could be some portion of that as the Lord sees fit. But this I do not know.

Originally posted by Rajk999
I guess you concede
- that the Ten Commandments are no longer applicable, and
- that Paul could not possibly have called Gentile Christians a people "with no law"..

What does obeying anyone or thing do for anyone if all is forgiven from the beginning to the end?

Originally posted by KellyJay
What does obeying anyone or thing do for anyone if all is forgiven from the beginning to the end?

You continue to make an a$$ of yourself. Have you no shame?

Originally posted by sonship
What you do not seem to get is the Jesus Christ IS the eternal life. ..

What you do not seem to get is that I AGREE that Jesus Christ IS the eternal life.

Where we part company is your definition of
WHO HAS THE SON OF GOD.

You say that whoever professes with their mouth their faith or belief, they are saved, and they have the Jesus, the Son of God. You preach mouthworship and lipservice, something that God hates, God abhors and which the Bible condemns in the strongest language.

The Bible says, those who have the Son of God are those who:
- follow His commandments
- live righteously
- do good works
These people have Jesus and have eternal life.