A different gospel?

[Ladodgers6]

Two outa' three ain't bad.

LoL, thanks Eleanor.

He didn't give the law to make righteous because righteousness has always been by faith (Gal 3:11), since Abraham (Ge 15:6, Ro 4:1-3).
They already had righteousness by faith in the promise (Ge 15:5, seed; Jesus Christ, Gal 3:16).
He gave the law ony to reveal sin (Ro 3:20) and to lead them to Christ (Gal 3:24).

I agree with you. I think you misunderstood what I am saying. If one thinks they can merit eternal life through the Law, they must keep the whole flawlessly, Paul says. This is an impossible task for an already condemned sinner under God's curse. For example, the Rich Young Ruler, asks Jesus, what must I do to inherit eternal life? Jesus says you know the commandments: 'Do not commit adultery, Do not murder, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honor your Father and Mother'. Christ was Law preaching to expose him of his sin. The Young Ruler, replies by saying that he has kept since his youth. Jesus demonstrates that he hasn't by telling him to sell everything he has and give the proceeds to the poor (his neighbor), then to follow Christ. What was the two greatest commandments that sum up the rest? This Rich Young Ruler knowing he has a lot of money went away sad, even though Christ told him he will have treasure in heaven.

I know that righteousness comes through Faith in Christ Alone. But both Law & Gospel must be preached together.​

Okay, but Paul is treating of another subject in Ro 2.
He is establishing the righteousness of the Jews (2:1-3:8), having already established the unrighteousness of the Gentiles (1:18-32)
on his way to establishing the unrighteousness of all mankind without exception (3:9-10).
In Ro 2 he is stating the principle by which all Jews are unrighteous; i.e., only the doers of the law are righteous, and they were not perfect doers, therefore, they are likewise unrighteous with the Gentiles.

Paul is driving home a point that the Jews didn't come through a different door. Both Jews and Gentiles are in the same boat before a Holy God. It's the Law that condemns sinners, because through the Law comes knowledge of sin. So, it's the doers of the Law that will be justified Paul reiterates. This is to bring terror to sinners who know they cannot meet the Law's requirements. The Law brings judgement and threats to the ungodly. The Law also drives sinners to the only place to find refuge from the Law, for Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to all who believe.

I hope I was lucid enough because i am a bit tired and in pain from my injuries, so please cut me a little slack, thanks.​

 

[Eleanor]

Thanks for your answer. Is that applied to the whole package of salvation or just in our sanctification? And I do appreciate you taking the time to give me answers.

You're more than welcome!

Synergism is pretty much the domain of sanctification, for election, new birth, faith, salvation, justification, imputed righteousness, resurrection, rapture, are all monergistic.

 

[Carbon]

You're more than welcome!

Synergism is pretty much the domain of sanctification, for election, new birth, faith, salvation, justification, imputed righteousness, resurrection, rapture, are all monergistic.

Found something we disagree on sister.

I believe sanctification is monergistic. It's part of salvation, and all of salvation is monergistic.

 

[Binyawmene]

You're more than welcome!

Synergism is pretty much the domain of sanctification, for election, new birth, faith, salvation, justification, imputed righteousness, resurrection, rapture, are all monergistic.

The reason why I have asked this question: "Is that applied to the whole package of salvation or just in our sanctification?"

Philippians 2:12-13 Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose.​

I would assume in verse 12, that "salvation" is referring to the whole salvation package and not restricted to sanctification. The verse does seem synergistic and the 'working out of salvation' is technically not our own good efforts, but rather context is given "for it is God who works in you" or God's good works is our works in him. But to assume verse 13 is synergism is to be suggesting that all salvation package is synergistic in nature.

 

[Carbon]

But to assume verse 13 is synergism is to be suggesting that all salvation package is synergistic in nature.

Yes, good point.

I say all of it is monergistic.

 

[Arial]

The reason why I have asked this question: "Is that applied to the whole package of salvation or just in our sanctification?"

Philippians 2:12-13 Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose.​

I would assume in verse 12, that "salvation" is referring to the whole salvation package and not restricted to sanctification. The verse does seem synergistic and the 'working out of salvation' is technically not our own good efforts, but rather context is given "for it is God who works in you" or God's good works is our works in him. But to assume verse 13 is synergism is to be suggesting that all salvation package is synergistic in nature.

The way I see it is that sanctification is monergystic---as is all of salvation---but that does not mean we do not have the responsibility of obeying what His word teaches us. God does not do the obeying for us.

 

[Eleanor]

LoL, thanks Eleanor.

I agree with you. I think you misunderstood what I am saying. If one thinks they can merit eternal life through the Law, they must keep the whole flawlessly, Paul says. This is an impossible task for an already condemned sinner under God's curse. For example, the Rich Young Ruler, asks Jesus, what must I do to inherit eternal life? Jesus says you know the commandments: 'Do not commit adultery, Do not murder, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honor your Father and Mother'. Christ was Law preaching to expose him of his sin. The Young Ruler, replies by saying that he has kept since his youth. Jesus demonstrates that he hasn't by telling him to sell everything he has and give the proceeds to the poor (his neighbor), then to follow Christ. What was the two greatest commandments that sum up the rest?​

This Rich Young Ruler knowing he has a lot of money went away sad, even though Christ told him he will have treasure in heaven.
I know that righteousness comes through Faith in Christ Alone. But both Law & Gospel must be preached together.

This may be where a general misunderstanding originates in the people of God; i.e., when they hear that the law condemns them of unrighteousness because of their failure to keep it perfectly.
But the NT fact is that the law was not given for righteousness, because
1) righteousness has always been by faith (Gal 3:11) since Abraham (Ge 15:6, Ro 4:1-3),
2) there was no law before Abraham to disobey and condemn them (Ro 5:12-15),
3) law is not our issue in the gospel, Adam is our issue in the gospel (Ro 5:18).

Paul is driving home a point that the Jews didn't come through a different door. Both Jews and Gentiles are in the same boat before a Holy God. It's the Law that condemns sinners, because through the Law comes knowledge of sin.​

However, the knowledge of sin; i.e., knowing what it is, does not condemn, it simply informs.

In demonstrating to the Jews their own unrighteousness as the people of God (i.e., their condemnation by the sin of Adam, Ro 5:18),
Paul does not use Adam's sin in his argument.
He uses what they lived with day in and day out that would demonstrate it in terms convincing to them; i.e., the law.

Yes, the law was given to reveal sin that they might walk in obedience and please God.
But it was not given to make them righteous, which had always been by faith alone (Gal 3:11, Ge 15:6, Ro 4:1-3).
All mankind was condemned long before the law, as demonstrated in the death of all mankind prior to Moses before there ever was a law.
And also keeping in mind, there was no law between Adam and Moses and, therefore, no sin--yet they were all guilty of sin because they all died, which death is caused by sin ("The wages of sin is death." Ro 6:23).
So it's not the law which caused the death of all mankind between Adam and Moses, it is Adam that caused their deaths.

We have somewhat changed the NT focus from Adam as the problem of our condemnation to the law as the problem.
But in the NT our condemnation is not about Mosaic law keeping, which was never given to make righteous (Gal 3:11), but only to reveal sin (Ro 3:20), that we might know what godliness is by contrast.
Condemnation of all mankind is about imputation of the sin of Adam (Ro 5:18).
And righteousness of all the righteous is about imputation of the righteousness of Christ (Ro 5:19).

So, it's the doers of the Law that will be justified Paul reiterates.

Keeping in mind that is a statement made in an argument specifically regarding the Jews (Ro 2:13), not a statement made in regard to all mankind who didn't even have the law (Ro 2:14-15).
The law is part of Paul's argument to the Jews of the unrighteousness of all mankind, including even the Jews, the chosen people of God (Ro 3:9-10),
in demonstrating that all mankind is locked up in sin, with their only hope being God's mercy (Ro 11:32).

This is to bring terror to sinners who know they cannot meet the Law's requirements. The Law brings judgement and threats to the ungodly. The Law also drives sinners to the only place to find refuge from the Law, for Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to all who believe.

I hope I was lucid enough because i am a bit tired and in pain from my injuries, so please cut me a little slack, thanks.

You're doing great. I know pain is no fun.
But there is just a little more to do this than "both Law & Gospel must be preached together."

 

[Eleanor]

Found something we disagree on sister.

I believe sanctification is monergistic. It's part of salvation, and all of salvation is monergistic.

"To will and to do" (Php 2:3)?

 

[Ladodgers6]

This may be where a general misunderstanding originates in the people of God; i.e., when they hear that the law condemns them of unrighteousness because of their failure to keep it perfectly.
But the NT fact is that the law was not given for righteousness, because
1) righteousness has always been by faith (Gal 3:11) since Abraham (Ge 15:6, Ro 4:1-3),
2) there was [/i]no law[/I] before Abraham to disobey and condemn them (Ro 5:12-15),
3) law is not our issue in the gospel, Adam is our issue in the gospel (Ro 5:18).

Well 2 of 3 ain't bad...LoL. On the 3rd point, Adam brought sin, death, and condemnation by his One Act of disobedience. Disobedience to what? God's commandments, in the Covenant of Works, Adam was to fulfill this Covenant with Obedience, but failed and breach it. And now all of Adam's progeny are under the curse of it.​

However, the knowledge of sin; i.e., knowing what it is, does not condemn, it simply informs.​

Okay, so if the Law commands you not to murder, and you already murdered someone, the Law does not condemn you? Paul says that the Law is ministry of death for a sinner.​

In demonstrating to the Jews their own unrighteousness as the people of God (i.e., their condemnation by the sin of Adam, Ro 5:18) Paul does not use Adam's sin in his argument.
He uses what they lived with day in and day out that would demonstrate it in terms convincing to them; i.e., the law.

Yes, the law was given to reveal sin that they might walk in obedience and please God.
But it was not given to make them righteous, which had always been by faith alone (Gal 3:11, Ge 15:6, Ro 4:1-3).
All mankind was condemned long before the law, as demonstrated in the death of all mankind prior to Moses before there ever was a law.
And also keeping in mind, there was no law between Adam and Moses and, therefore, no sin--yet they were all guilty of sin because they all died, which death is caused by sin ("The wages of sin is death." Ro 6:23).
So it's not the law which caused the death of all mankind between Adam and Moses, it is Adam that caused their deaths.

We have somewhat changed the NT focus from Adam as the problem of our condemnation [I[to the law[/I] as the problem.
But in the NT our condemnation is not about Mosaic law keeping, which was never given to make righteous (Gal 3:11), but only to reveal sin (Ro 3:20), that we might know what godliness is by contrast.
Condemnation of all mankind is about imputation of the sin of Adam (Ro 5:18).
And righteousness of all the righteous is about imputation of the righteousness of Christ (Ro 5:19).

Keeping in mind that is a statement made in an argument specifically regarding the Jews (Ro 2:13), not a statement made in regard to all mankind who didn't even have the law (Ro 2:14-15).
That is part of Paul's argument of the unrighteousness of all mankind, including even the Jews, the chosen people of God (Ro 3:9-10),
in demonstrating that all mankind is locked up in sin, with their only hope being God's mercy (Ro 11:32).
​

You're doing great. I know pain is no fun.
But there is just a little more to do this than "]both Law & Gospel must be preached together.

I'll reply to the rest of the post after I get some rest, sorry, I'll be back.

 

[Carbon]

"To will and to do" (Php 2:3)?

I’ll look into this when I get home. Sorry, what did I do?

 

[Eleanor]

The reason why I have asked this question: "Is that applied to the whole package of salvation or just in our sanctification?"

Philippians 2:12-13 Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose.​

I would assume in verse 12, that "salvation" is referring to the whole salvation package and not restricted to sanctification.

The only thing left of the salvation package to be done is our sanctification, through obedience in the Holy Spirit which leads to righteousness, leading to holiness (Ro 6:16, 19).

The verse does seem synergistic and the 'working out of salvation' is technically not our own good efforts, but rather context is given "for it is God who works in you" or God's good works is our works in him. But to assume verse 13 is synergism is to be suggesting that all salvation package is synergistic in nature.

Why is that?
Sanctification is all that is left to do. Paul is not referring to what was already done by God at the new birth; i.e., faith, salvation, justification.

Particularly in light of the work of our actual righteousness in sanctification, which work leads to righteousness leading to holiness (Ro 6:16, 19).

 

[Ladodgers6]

Here's a video on N.T. Wright own mouth on what he denies, though as I said before, Wright is so convoluted and shifty that it's hard to make out what he believes. Watch this video.

 

[Binyawmene]

The way I see it is that sanctification is synergistic---as is all of salvation---but that does not mean we do not have the responsibility of obeying what His word teaches us. God does not do the obeying for us.

Hi Arial. I don't think we ever had the chance to have a discussion before....

Romans 6: 13, 16, 19 NIV

13 Do not offer any part of yourself to sin as an instrument of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer every part of yourself to him as an instrument of righteousness.

16 Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness?

19 I am using an example from everyday life because of your human limitations. Just as you used to offer yourselves as slaves to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer yourselves as slaves to righteousness leading to holiness.​

The NIV uses the word "offer," but paristemi simply means "present, or stand close beside". It carries the idea of "stand-by, until God does his work in you". And the "you yield" is plural second person in the present indicative active. Just because the grammar is active voice does not negate God is doing the passive work in us. And its not a middle active voice by subject is doing himself or herself, rather receiving the action from God, but its just active voice or the subject state of action.

 

[Arial]

Hi Arial. I don't think we ever had the chance to have a discussion before....

Romans 6: 13, 16, 19 NIV

13 Do not offer any part of yourself to sin as an instrument of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer every part of yourself to him as an instrument of righteousness.​

​

16 Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness?​

​

19 I am using an example from everyday life because of your human limitations. Just as you used to offer yourselves as slaves to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer yourselves as slaves to righteousness leading to holiness.​

The NIV uses the word "offer," but paristemi simply means "present, or stand close beside". It carries the idea of "stand-by, until God does his work in you". And the "you yield" is plural second person in the present indicative active. Just because the grammar is active voice does not negate God is doing the passive work in us. And its not a middle active voice by subject is doing himself or herself, rather receiving the action from God, but its just active voice or the subject state of action.

I must go edit my post and caution myself to always do that before I post as what I said is exactly the opposite of what I believe. When I used the word synergistic I meant monergystic!!!

 

[David1701]

NT Wright is an Anglican. They are really not much different to Catholics here in the UK.

I'm not an Anglican; but, I'd say that this is a very sweeping statement! The members of the Anglican organisation, in the UK, range all the way from Liberal, to Evangelical, to Anglo-Catholic (they are the ones like Roman Catholics).

I wouldn't take Wright very seriously in general.

He's seriously in error, in a few areas, but I wouldn't take him lightly; he's quite influential.

There's always something amiss when people attempt to say Paul is different to Christ. Always something, I dunno, a bit "demonic" about that.

It could be demonic, or it could be simply fleshly.

 

[Binyawmene]

I must go edit my post and caution myself to always do that before I post as what I said is exactly the opposite of what I believe. When I used the word synergistic I meant monergystic!!!

I think certain people are only seeing one side of monergism as being passive only like in regeneration. But from my position monergistic concept teaches both "passive" and "active". Its active because you still have freedom in God's will through your sanctification process (Romans 9:19). Not your own free will but freedom in God's will. Synergism has it problem like if you don't hold up to your side, then God is always faithful and willing to continue to hold up his side. Or do you have the free-will to resist God's side in your sanctification. (Romans 15:16, 2 Thessalonians 2:13 "the sanctifying work of the Spirit," 1 Peter 1:2).

 

[Eleanor]

Well 2 of 3 ain't bad...LoL. On the 3rd point, Adam brought sin, death, and condemnation by his One Act of disobedience. Disobedience to what? God's commandments, in the Covenant of Works, Adam was to fulfill this Covenant with Obedience, but failed and breach it.
And now all of Adam's progeny are under the curse of it.​

Yes, Adam is the issue in the gospel.

Okay, so if the Law commands you not to murder, and you already murdered someone, the Law does not condemn you? Paul says that the Law is ministry of death for a sinner.

If you are not born again, you are already condemned with or without the murder.
If you are born again, God forgives your sin of murder with the confession of it to him (1 Jn 1:9).

I'll reply to the rest of the post after I get some rest, sorry, I'll be back.

"Swell!"

 

[Eleanor]

I’ll look into this when I get home. Sorry, what did I do?

Nuthin' to be sorry for.

I'm asking about the "to do" in Php 2:13, which sounds synergistic rather than monergistic, as you propose.

 

[Eleanor]

Here's a video on N.T. Wright own mouth on what he denies, though as I said before, Wright is so convoluted and shifty that it's hard to make out what he believes. Watch this video.

Why doesn't he just speak in simple Biblical terms?
Why the fork-ed tongue?

Sumthin's rotten in Denmark.

 

[Carbon]

Nuthin' to be sorry for.

I'm asking about the "to do" in Php 2:13, which sounds synergistic rather than monergistic, as you propose.

Oh okay.