Baptist Forum

I am continually amazed in the number of people that believe replacement theology is the same as covenant theology. I was reading a blog today written by a dispensationalist who accused all Calvinist in believing in replacement theology. It is not important what John Calvin believed as far as dispensationalism and covenant theology or replacement theology when discussing what we refer to as Calvinism. When we discuss Calvinism we refer to the acronym T.U.L.I.P. which does not address covenant, replacement, or dispensationalism.

Paul explains the grafting of the Gentiles to the Jewish root of Israel, and he makes it very clear that grafting is not replacement. For some reason members of the body of Christ want to put up a wall between Gentiles and Jews, and between Israel and the Church. I don't understand why it is so hard for some to believe or comprehend that Israel is and was from the start the church. Paul tells us in Eph 2:11-22 at the wall that divides Jews in the Gentiles has permanently been destroyed. The Law has been replaced with the New Covenant this is not the Church replacing Israel, Jerusalem or the Jewish people. There is no more Jew or Gentile Rom. 10:12; Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11.

Let's try this for an analogy, if I take a bucket of water from my well and I poured that bucket of water into Lake Erie, have I replaced Lake Erie with my well water? No of course not. This whole argument reminds me of the problem Paul was addressing in the book of Galatians. It appears to me that there those who still put themselves and their traditions ahead of the body and the mission given to us by Christ.


Blessings
JB

The topic of original sin has been around a long time. There are many question in many deferent answers as to what is original sin and does it effect all human kind, are we all responsible for Adam's sin. Or could it be that Adam sin brought a curse on all mankind that we are now responsible for.

Before we discuss this I like to list here you use of other people from the past. Justin Martyr believed that Adam's sin placed the entire human race under a curse he believed that Adam sin basically set up all of Adam's descendants to be morally corrupt.

Irenadus, believed that Adam was a moral and spiritual and intellectual child prior to his Senate and was underdeveloped as to his perfection. He believed that all mankind sins find their source in Adam's sin of disobedience to God.

Augustine, however regarded even if it's guilty of original sin he also believed that this guilt in the offense is remitted through (infant) baptism.

Tom Aquinas, he believes that the human nature of sin is transported from parent to child and believes that all human beings are guilty of Adam sin and they derive that from their nature and from that single act.

Martin Luther believed that the image of God was totally lost upon Adam sin and men now possesses a corrupt nature and that man now born from Adam seed are guilty of the same sin. He believes that man is totally corrupted he also believes that human beings now no longer exist in God's image but rather an image of the devil.

John Calvin believes that because of Adam's sin we are deprived of any standards or any righteousness in any part of our soul. Calvin believes that sin has impaired the will to do good.

Rauschenbusch, believes that the original sin was not only inherited by biological promulgation but also by social assimilation.

Karl Barth, believes that the original sin is reenacted in each one of us. He also believes that Jesus is the true and original Adam and he believes that the Adam of Genesis was a negative side and the work of Christ is a positive side he also believes that the will of the sinner is in bondage and the mind has been destroyed by sin John Dagg, believes it because of Adam all the human race is totally deprived of any righteousness. He does believe however that God's love still can't emanate from man's heart and does.

James Boyce, believed that God had entered into a covenant of works with Adam and that Adam violated that covenant, representing the human race. And of course the violation of that covenant has brought all humanity to the sentence of eternal death.

E. Mullins, believes exactly the opposite of Boyce and he states that no biblical evidence exist to support the notion that Adam was ahead of the human race and that the covenant of works existed between God and Adam.

Dale Moody, believes that Adam sin broke the relationship between God and humans. He states that ungodliness his ignorance of God and a result thereof sent. Moody rejects Augustine's position of the original sin in the suggestion of the admitted guilt. He did however believe that the tendencies toward sinful behavior are biologically inherited.

Of course I have not quoted scripture in this post and have not taken sides. What do you think on the subject of original sin?

ZLaw

Genesis 14:18
And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine ; now he was a priest of God Most High.

Hebrews 7:11
Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law ), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be designated according to the order of Aaron ?

In the Old Testament God made sure that no priest of Israel would ever become a king He also made sure that no king would ever become a priest. How did He do this, well we have Genesis 49:10 and we have Exodus 28:1. However there is the order of priesthood that can be king and high priest and that is the order that Christ belongs to 'Melchizedek'. Our text tells us that Melchizedek was in fact the king of Salem, which is today Jerusalem. Now you ask why is this important, well there's two things to consider one Christ is to be king of Israel to set on David's throne and He also is the high priest the Most High-Priest, thirdly he holds the office of prophet, which either a king or a priest could hold. The other problem is with the lineage of the Levites is they could not minister or be priest of Gentiles because gentiles do not believe or follow the law this would mean if the Messiah came from the lineage of the Levites He could only die for salvation for the Jews and not the Gentiles. It was important that Christ be sacrificed for all nations, all men, and this was the way that it had to be done. Just remember that if he was a Levite he would be commanded to receive tie from people according to law and that would limit the value of His blood.


JB

Isaiah 9:6  For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders ; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. NAS

For a Child hath been born to us, A Son hath been given to us, And the princely power is on his shoulder, And He doth call his name Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace. YLT

For unto us a child is born , unto us a son is given : and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor , The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. KJV

For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. NIV

For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be on his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. WEB

For there has been a child born to us, there has been a son given to us; and the princely rule will come to be upon his shoulder. And his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. NWT (JW)

ZLaw

Daily Readings
By
Charles H. Spurgeon

Morning
“Nevertheless I am continually with thee.”
- Psalm 73:23
“Nevertheless,”-As if, notwithstanding all the foolishness and ignorance which David had just been confessing to God, not one atom the less was it true and certain that David was saved and accepted, and that the blessing of being constantly in God’s presence was undoubtedly his. Fully conscious of his own lost estate, and of the deceitfulness and vileness of his nature, yet, by a glorious outburst of faith, he sings “nevertheless I am continually with thee.” Believer, you are forced to enter into Asaph’s confession and acknowledgment, endeavour in like spirit to say “nevertheless, since I belong to Christ I am continually with God!” By this is meant continually upon his mind, he is always thinking of me for my good. Continually before his eye;-the eye of the Lord never sleepeth, but is perpetually watching over my welfare. Continually in his hand, so that none shall be able to pluck me thence. Continually on his heart, worn there as a memorial, even as the high priest bore the names of the twelve tribes upon his heart for ever. Thou always thinkest of me, O God. The bowels of thy love continually yearn towards me. Thou art always making providence work for my good. Thou hast set me as a signet upon thine arm; thy love is strong as death, many waters cannot quench it; neither can the floods drown it. Surprising grace! Thou seest me in Christ, and though in myself abhorred, thou beholdest me as wearing Christ’s garments, and washed in his blood, and thus I stand accepted in thy presence. I am thus continually in thy favour-”continually with thee.” Here is comfort for the tried and afflicted soul; vexed with the tempest within-look at the calm without. “Nevertheless”-O say it in thy heart, and take the peace it gives. “Nevertheless I am continually with thee.”

Evening
“All that the Father giveth me shall come to me.”
- John 6:37
This declaration involves the doctrine of election: there are some whom the Father gave to Christ. It involves the doctrine of effectual calling: these who are given must and shall come; however stoutly they may set themselves against it, yet they shall be brought out of darkness into God’s marvellous light. It teaches us the indispensable necessity of faith; for even those who are given to Christ are not saved except they come to Jesus. Even they must come, for there is no other way to heaven but by the door, Christ Jesus. All that the Father gives to our Redeemer must come to him, therefore none can come to heaven except they come to Christ.
Oh! the power and majesty which rest in the words “shall come.” He does not say they have power to come, nor they may come if they will, but they “shall come.” The Lord Jesus doth by his messengers, his word, and his Spirit, sweetly and graciously compel men to come in that they may eat of his marriage supper; and this he does, not by any violation of the free agency of man, but by the power of his grace. I may exercise power over another man’s will, and yet that other man’s will may be perfectly free, because the constraint is exercised in a manner accordant with the laws of the human mind. Jehovah Jesus knows how, by irresistible arguments addressed to the understanding, by mighty reasons appealing to the affections, and by the mysterious influence of his Holy Spirit operating upon all the powers and passions of the soul, so to subdue the whole man, that whereas he was once rebellious, he yields cheerfully to his government, subdued by sovereign love. But how shall those be known whom God hath chosen? By this result: that they do willingly and joyfully accept Christ, and come to him with simple and unfeigned faith, resting upon him as all their salvation and all their desire. Reader, have you thus come to Jesus?

We have two instances in the Bible where believers were not baptized by the Holy Spirit and therefore their belief was invalid. In acts 8:9-25, we read the story of Simon the magician. The Bible tells us Simon did believe however he had not been baptized by the Holy Spirit and was not truly saved. Simon's belief was so strong that he actually fooled Philip. The other story was also from acts 19:1-7, where some disciples believed and experience the baptism of John the Baptist however they had never heard of the Holy Ghost. Now their are baptism of the Holy Ghost came with the laying on of hands from Paul, unlike those that received the Holy Ghost at Pentecost.

Both John the Baptist and Jesus made the promise of baptism of the Holy Ghost, but it is obvious that some can believe and still not receive the promise of that baptism. And if one does not receive that baptism is belief is not valid. At first look of this it appears confusing but when you consider that Satan himself believes as do all the fallen Angels by his side, it begins to make more sense.

Some of you are probably asking right now how can one know if he has received the Holy Spirit if someone that believes can be without the Holy Spirit.

If you look at the two instances where those that were described as believers were without the Spirit you see that they were either not aware of the existence of the Holy Ghost, or did not believe in the existence of the Holy Ghost. This is in-line with what both Jesus and Paul passed down to us:(John 14:17 ; Rom. 8:14) So I think this is really a moot question or an unneeded concern to those who believe in the Trinity and baptism in the name of the Father the Son and Holy Ghost.

Ask yourself this question would Christ promise something to those who believe in him and love him and seek his guidance and then not deliver on that promise?

JB

The Conflict of Two Natures

Romans 7:14 For we know that the Law is spiritual, but I am of flesh, sold into bondage to sin. 15 For what I am doing, I do not understand ; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate. 16 But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good. 17 So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh ; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. 19 For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want. 20 But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. 21 I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wants to do good. 22 For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, 23 but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. 24 Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death ? 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord ! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.

I've read on some of these forums that once a person is saved by accepting Christ he can not sin again. Paul is saying, It an't so Bubba.

A sin is not all that you do, but it is also about what you think and desire. It is the same like you go to Church but do not believe in God. Your actions and thoughts should be pure, it's only then we can say that we are free of sins.

How true, only God knows the heart.

Law and Grace - Rom 5:20 - C H Spurgeon

http://www.motionbox.com/videos/a498d2b91e1de4c52c

A sin is not all that you do, but it is also about what you think and desire. It is the same like you go to Church but do not believe in God. Your actions and thoughts should be pure, it's only then we can say that we are free of sins.