Comments on: The ‘Works of the Law’ and Our Salvation http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/ "Shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you...” Thu, 24 Jun 2010 19:19:27 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Nathan White http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/comment-page-1/#comment-3506 Nathan White Fri, 05 Jun 2009 23:07:58 +0000 http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/#comment-3506 OK- here’s the deal: this conversation has drifted off-topic and I believe it is no longer profitable.

I’m going to close the comments here.

I will do one thing first: I will answer Erik’s first question, since it is on-topic and related to what I wrote in my post. And Erik, if you’d like to respond, you may shoot me an email with a follow-up question: nathan at shepherdtheflock.com

Erik asked:

Is not ‘works’ intrinsically related to our sanctification, but not our justification? I believe it is clear that the law is in no way involved in our forensic justification.

What I meant was, the scriptures quoted above (Matt 19, Rom 2, Matt 5), DO INDEED tie in the works and/or righteousness of the Mosaic Law directly into our salvation/justification. However, of course, it is not OUR works that is involved in our justification; instead, it is Christ’s works that are intrinsically related to our justification.

And if you were to ask me further, I would affirm that the same law that plays a role in our justification (Christ’s imputation by faith), is the same law that plays a role in our sanctification (Christ-likeness, here on earth, post-regeneration). Some (but not all) forms of NCT/Dispensationalism actually say that yes the Mosaic Law plays some role in our justification (via Christ’s fulfillment), but that there is a now a new and different law that plays a role in our sanctification post-conversion. I say that sound exegesis does in no way allow us to be justified by a different law than what we are sanctified to.

]]> By: James Kime http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/comment-page-1/#comment-3505 James Kime Fri, 05 Jun 2009 23:06:31 +0000 http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/#comment-3505 <blockquote>My question to you is where does the Bible ever explicitly speak of any individual being saved under an Old Covenant experience as spoken of by Paul or any New Testament author?</blockquote> Erik, I am not entirely sure we mean the same thing by "Old Covenant". I define it the way scripture does, the mosaic covenant. If that is what you mean, then people were certainly saved during that time period the same way we are saved now, by faith alone in the God who justifies the ungodly (Romans 4:5). The example of course would be David in that same reference and following. Abraham prelaw, David during the law, and we who are not under the law. We are all saved the exact same way. Did that answer your question or did you mean something else?

My question to you is where does the Bible ever explicitly speak of any individual being saved under an Old Covenant experience as spoken of by Paul or any New Testament author?

Erik, I am not entirely sure we mean the same thing by “Old Covenant”. I define it the way scripture does, the mosaic covenant. If that is what you mean, then people were certainly saved during that time period the same way we are saved now, by faith alone in the God who justifies the ungodly (Romans 4:5). The example of course would be David in that same reference and following. Abraham prelaw, David during the law, and we who are not under the law. We are all saved the exact same way.

Did that answer your question or did you mean something else?

]]> By: Erik http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/comment-page-1/#comment-3504 Erik Fri, 05 Jun 2009 20:41:23 +0000 http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/#comment-3504 James, Your comments are enlightening and you add greatly to the discussion. You wrote; "Not only does the Bible not speak of one covenant, ever unfolding, but the writer of scripture go out their way to compare, contrast, and separate the covenants." My question to you is where does the Bible ever explicitly speak of any individual being saved under an Old Covenant experience as spoken of by Paul or any New Testament author? It seems to me that NCT have also relied on some "good and necessary inference" material as well. James,

Your comments are enlightening and you add greatly to the discussion. You wrote; “Not only does the Bible not speak of one covenant, ever unfolding, but the writer of scripture go out their way to compare, contrast, and separate the covenants.” My question to you is where does the Bible ever explicitly speak of any individual being saved under an Old Covenant experience as spoken of by Paul or any New Testament author? It seems to me that NCT have also relied on some “good and necessary inference” material as well.

]]> By: Erik http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/comment-page-1/#comment-3503 Erik Fri, 05 Jun 2009 20:32:50 +0000 http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/#comment-3503 Nathan,

Always enjoy reading your work. Just a question on the following Quote. “I emphasize this need for ‘works’ because there is an intrinsic connection between the law of God in our justification that is often lost or undermined in our day.” Is not ‘works’ intrinsically related to our sanctification, but not our justification? I believe it is clear that the law is in no way involved in our forensic justification. I’m I correct in thinking that way or am I missing something?

]]> By: Patti Blount http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/comment-page-1/#comment-3502 Patti Blount Fri, 05 Jun 2009 19:32:54 +0000 http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/#comment-3502 I'm going to jump in here again, even though my last comments weren't acknowledged. I am pressing into this, because as I said, even as soon as yesterday, I had another very intense disagreement with a loved one about this very subject. For some reason, either we are misjudging each other's stance, or the enemy is getting between us and causing strife here. It has affected our relationship. I find it could possibly be happening because of the timeline of eternity we are in.( or could be) What I mean is this: When Jesus said that in the endtimes, even the enemies would be of one's household, I am wondering if that is what is happening in our situation. It is scary, I'll tell you that. I really feel he has fallen into a doctrine of demons, as the word also talks about. He doesn't know I think this, but I do. He recently read, Joseph Princes book, "Destined to reign," which goes into this "grace doctrine." It sounds so right, but there is some indiscernable thing that is so wrong with all of it-probably the 10% the enemy has mixed it with. Whenever we talk about it, (the grace he thinks he has discovered) strife results. I am fully persuaded now that whenever he comes to our home and starts to proselytisizes this new grace teaching, I am to go in another room, as I can't seem not to try and "defend the truth," whenever he does talk about it. You know, kind of like, if your right arm offends you, cut it off. What do any of you think about this book if you have read it? This loved one, yesterday, said I was full of judgementalism. I have opened myself up to the searchlight of the Holy Spirit to examine me on this, if it is so. I don't think it is, but only that he has found this freedom in Christ, as he calls it, and he's compromizing by doing things he didn't use to do, and I believe he feels convicted, and won't rest (even though he says he is in so much rest as never before) until we (my husband and I ) see the light, and begin to do as he does. I’m going to jump in here again, even though my last comments weren’t acknowledged. I am pressing into this, because as I said, even as soon as yesterday, I had another very intense disagreement with a loved one about this very subject. For some reason, either we are misjudging each other’s stance, or the enemy is getting between us and causing strife here. It has affected our relationship. I find it could possibly be happening because of the timeline of eternity we are in.( or could be) What I mean is this: When Jesus said that in the endtimes, even the enemies would be of one’s household, I am wondering if that is what is happening in our situation. It is scary, I’ll tell you that. I really feel he has fallen into a doctrine of demons, as the word also talks about. He doesn’t know I think this, but I do. He recently read, Joseph Princes book, “Destined to reign,” which goes into this “grace doctrine.” It sounds so right, but there is some indiscernable thing that is so wrong with all of it-probably the 10% the enemy has mixed it with. Whenever we talk about it, (the grace he thinks he has discovered) strife results. I am fully persuaded now that whenever he comes to our home and starts to proselytisizes this new grace teaching, I am to go in another room, as I can’t seem not to try and “defend the truth,” whenever he does talk about it. You know, kind of like, if your right arm offends you, cut it off. What do any of you think about this book if you have read it? This loved one, yesterday, said I was full of judgementalism. I have opened myself up to the searchlight of the Holy Spirit to examine me on this, if it is so. I don’t think it is, but only that he has found this freedom in Christ, as he calls it, and he’s compromizing by doing things he didn’t use to do, and I believe he feels convicted, and won’t rest (even though he says he is in so much rest as never before) until we (my husband and I ) see the light, and begin to do as he does.

]]> By: Phil http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/comment-page-1/#comment-3501 Phil Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:43:04 +0000 http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/#comment-3501 I receive the correction and deeply apologize for the harsh words. DT is not able to separate children of God from their Father. It is, however, a very dark wood to be led out of. Please accept my repentance. I receive the correction and deeply apologize for the harsh words. DT is not able to separate children of God from their Father. It is, however, a very dark wood to be led out of. Please accept my repentance.

]]> By: Davide http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/comment-page-1/#comment-3500 Davide Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:23:48 +0000 http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/#comment-3500 Phil, I can see how you come to the conclusion that dispensationalism seems to purport a very low view of God, and thus implicating the view as "heresy," "pagan," and "humanistic." However, as much as I loathe dispensational thought for the same reason, I would be more careful employ such harsh language, just because most dispensationals, like free-will advocates, don't fully understand the theological implications and ramifications of what they believe. Phil, I can see how you come to the conclusion that dispensationalism seems to purport a very low view of God, and thus implicating the view as “heresy,” “pagan,” and “humanistic.”

However, as much as I loathe dispensational thought for the same reason, I would be more careful employ such harsh language, just because most dispensationals, like free-will advocates, don’t fully understand the theological implications and ramifications of what they believe.

]]> By: James Kime http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/comment-page-1/#comment-3499 James Kime Fri, 05 Jun 2009 13:29:19 +0000 http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/#comment-3499 Nathan, there is no rotten attitude on my part or childishness. All I did was point out that the "good and necessary inference" is the same thing the paedos say about infant baptism. If you adopt that as a driving force of interpretation, you lose credibility on the baptism issue. The same could be true of the pretrib issue except that I am not sure DT advocates would ever say, "good and necessary inference" on anything. I also responded point by point to Phil ridiculous charge of paganism and gameshow kinda god that non CTers use. I have always tried to engage you strictly on what Scripture says. Even outside observers can recognize that. If you call that childish, so be it. Nathan, there is no rotten attitude on my part or childishness.

All I did was point out that the “good and necessary inference” is the same thing the paedos say about infant baptism. If you adopt that as a driving force of interpretation, you lose credibility on the baptism issue. The same could be true of the pretrib issue except that I am not sure DT advocates would ever say, “good and necessary inference” on anything.

I also responded point by point to Phil ridiculous charge of paganism and gameshow kinda god that non CTers use.

I have always tried to engage you strictly on what Scripture says. Even outside observers can recognize that. If you call that childish, so be it.

]]> By: Nathan White http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/comment-page-1/#comment-3498 Nathan White Fri, 05 Jun 2009 11:32:50 +0000 http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/#comment-3498 <blockquote>Very strong reply Nathan.</blockquote> My comment was a joke in hopes of diffusing a conversation which clearly had turned volatile on your behalf. Frankly James, I'm tired of your childishness and your rotten attitude. I don't care what theology you profess, I want nothing to do with it if this is the kind of attitude it leads to. You should be ashamed of yourself. Please take your comments somewhere else; this blog is not the place for such things, even among those who strongly disagree. Thank you

Very strong reply Nathan.

My comment was a joke in hopes of diffusing a conversation which clearly had turned volatile on your behalf.

Frankly James, I’m tired of your childishness and your rotten attitude. I don’t care what theology you profess, I want nothing to do with it if this is the kind of attitude it leads to. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Please take your comments somewhere else; this blog is not the place for such things, even among those who strongly disagree.

Thank you

]]> By: James Kime http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/comment-page-1/#comment-3497 James Kime Fri, 05 Jun 2009 06:15:00 +0000 http://shepherdtheflock.com/2009/05/12/the-works-of-the-law-and-our-salvation/#comment-3497 Phil, if you are going to comment on something, please do your best to be informed so these basic mistakes do not happen anymore.

1. “One covenant, ever unfolding”

Not only does the Bible not speak of one covenant, ever unfolding, but the writer of scripture go out their way to compare, contrast, and separate the covenants (not mythical and/or mystical administrations of one covenant).

2. “I can’t read Scripture as an epic game show where God places “tests” before men who possess “prevenient grace” to pass or fail (in the case of the latter, plan “B” is presented). ”

Wow, I couldn’t read scripture that way either. Yet somehow I manage to fall in the grid of CT. Careful with those strawmen, they burn easy.

3. “The god of Dispensationalism is not the God of Scripture.”

I don’t have to defend this at all. I am curious though, is John MacArthur an idolator?

4. “He is not omniscient, nor is this god sovereign over the affairs of men and nations and demonic principalities. ”

Again, this isn’t my fight, but which dispensationalist denies this?

5. “I will be so bold as to call it what it is- paganism. I am unapologetic in this stance, because the heresy so subtle and pervasive and damaging.”

You can critique DT all you want, but now this is just sad. Paganism? Really? So only the CTers of the world are the true believers, the faithful. I gotta be honest, I didn’t see that one coming.

6. “It is man-centered man-worship. Humanism with a pretty little Bible label on it.”

Oh wait, are you accusing me of DT? You read how I reject the selfimposed grid of CT upon scripture and naturally assume I am DT? My friend, ignorance is not a virtue. This is exactly why the scripture admonishes us to study them. Your knowledge of your system has led you to conclude that any variance must be DT I suppose. Stick with the Word of God Phil.

]]>