What is Heresy?

[JesusFan]

Has he responded to Schreiner?

Also very important in this dialoge would be
The Future of Justification by John Piper

 

[JesusFan]

That is untrue. Have you read the posts in this thread? Have you read the threads to which I linked you?

I have rad all of them, and notice that you seem to be misunderstanding them in some areas of disagreement, as again, those such as ones posted about earlier to not deny the Cross, salvation, second coming event etc

 

[JesusFan]

That is untrue. Have you read the posts in this thread? Have you read the threads to which I linked you?

Lets take your listed points one at a time here my Brother

• What is the orthodox doctrine on Jesus? What is orthodox Christian Christology? Put it in as few words as you can but answer the question asked, please.

Jesus is the Second person of the Trinity, the One who was and is God incarnated into human flesh, the One with 2 natures, and right now is the eternal God man

• What is the orthodox teaching on salvation? Are works believed to save in orthodox Christian doctrine?
• Both Covenant and Dispy theology would agree that we are saved by Grace alone received thru Faith alone due to the Psa atonement of the Lord Jesus done on behalf of His saved persons , and both agree that good works would be the fruit and evidence of salvation, but not opart of the cause
• 
  
• What is the orthodox teaching in ecclesiology? Does God have two peoples in orthodox Christian doctrine?
• Both would ffirm the only saved now would be in the Church, saved jews and Gentiles who received jesus as savior and Lord
• What are the common views held by all the accepted Christian eschatologies? Do any of them beside Dispensational Premillennialism separate the rapture from the second coming? Do any of them think modern Israel is relevant to Christian eschatology (beside DPism)?
• Dispy has the pretrib rature, but there are those holding to also mid and post trib rapture views
• Which Christian theology (beside DPism) produces and promotes false prognosticators?
• Interesting discussion

 

[Josheb]

N.T. Wright's response to Thomas Schreiner centers on fundamental disagreements regarding the nature and meaning of justification, the role of good works, and the imputation of Christ's righteousness.
Key points of Wright's response to Schreiner:

• Nature of Justification: Wright argues that justification is a forensic (law court) declaration by God that someone is part of his covenant people (ecclesiology), which includes forgiveness of sins. Schreiner, while acknowledging ecclesiological implications, insists justification is primarily a soteriological issue concerning the forgiveness of sins and being declared righteous before God as an individual.
• Imputation of Righteousness: Wright rejects the traditional Protestant concept of "imputation" (Christ's righteousness being transferred to the believer) as a "category mistake," arguing righteousness is not a "substance or a gas" that can be passed around the courtroom. Schreiner argues that imputation is a vital biblical concept, answering the question of how a righteous God can declare ungodly sinners righteous.
• Role of Works in Final Justification: This is a major point of contention. Wright holds that "final justification" at the last judgment will be "in accordance with" a believer's Spirit-inspired works, as evidence of their prior justification by faith. Schreiner and other critics argue this language is too close to a "basis of works" and moves outside the mainstream of the Reformation understanding, which holds that justification is solely on the basis of Christ's work alone, confirmed by faith at the final judgment.
• The Problem in Paul's Day: Wright suggests that Paul's main concern was the exclusion of Gentiles from the covenant community by Jewish "works of the law" (e.g., circumcision, food laws). Schreiner maintains that Paul was primarily confronting a deep-seated legalism and all human effort to achieve acceptance with God, making the debate applicable to individual salvation in any era.
• View of the Reformers: Wright often suggests that the Reformers, particularly Luther, were asking the wrong questions of the text of Paul. Schreiner pushes back, arguing that while exegetical refinements are possible, the Reformers' core insights about justification by faith alone remain true to the biblical text.

The debate between Wright and Schreiner has largely taken place through books (Schreiner's The Future of Justification: A Response to N.T. Wright and Wright's Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision), articles, and a notable face-to-face discussion at the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) in 2010. Wright has used these platforms to clarify his position, sometimes adjusting his terminology (e.g., clarifying "in accordance with" versus "on the basis of" works) but largely maintaining his core views.

What if they are both wrong?

 

[Josheb]

I have rad all of them, and notice that you seem to be misunderstanding them in some areas of disagreement....

Prove it.

Pick one statement I've posted about Dispensational Premillennialism's teaching and prove I've misunderstood.

 

[Josheb]

Lets take your listed points one at a time here my Brother

• What is the orthodox doctrine on Jesus? What is orthodox Christian Christology? Put it in as few words as you can but answer the question asked, please.

Entire books on Christian Christology have been written so you're not going to get a lengthy exposition on the subject here. What I can and will provide is an answer that is specifically relevant to the teaching of Dispensational Premillennialism.

Orthodox Christian Christology asserts Jesus is now King, not that he will one day in the far distant future become king only when he returns to earth. The scriptures upon which that position is based include (but are not limited to) Ps. 110:1; Mt. 28:18; Mk. 16:19; Lk. 22:69; Jn. 18:37; Php. 2:9; Eph. 1:20-21; Col. 1:16; Heb. 2:8; 1 Pet. 3:22; and Rev. 19:16. This is also a logical necessity given Christ's inherent divinity (he cannot, logically, be God and also not King). A Reformed articulation of this position is found in the WCF Chapter 8, Article 1. Simply put, the historical, orthodox position taught in Christianity is that Jesus has always been king, but the messianic kingdom was inaugurated at his first coming, when Jesus lived, died, resurrected, ascended, was seated at God's right hand.

Do you agree? Is Jesus now already and everywhere King over all creation?

 

[Josheb]

I will take one point at a time. I've just answered your inquiry about orthodox Christology. I'm broaching the next inquiry now because I have already answered it and take your asking the question as evdience my posts weren't actually read..

Jesus is the Second person of the Trinity, the One who was and is God incarnated into human flesh, the One with 2 natures, and right now is the eternal God man

• What is the orthodox teaching on salvation? Are works believed to save in orthodox Christian doctrine?

See Post #153 and please do not ask me questions I have already answered. Salvation is by grace through faith for works, and NEVER by works. This is what scripture explicitly states, and it has been the orthodox position of Christianity since the founding of the Church. It is also a logical necessity because it is logically impossible for anything finite to reach anything infinite.

Do you agree?