Hi All,
What about one of your favorite (though perhaps less obvious) passages that support the importance of the cross / resurrection, etc., as necessary content of 'saving faith'? Please explain why. This could be a huge help.
Grace,
FRL
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi Fred,
ReplyDeleteGREAT topic idea. I should have thought of this.
2 Cor 5:14-21
This clearly tells me that the "word of reconciliation" is the word of Christ having died for us.
He did not impute the sin on us, but on Himself. Now we have the word of this reconciliation to preach, as though God were pleading through us, because He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us that we might have His righteousness.
Kev
Kev,
ReplyDeleteInteresting.
FRL
Antonio's Invite
ReplyDeleteAll,
Antonio posted the following (I don't know how yet to replicate the link). I just wanted a verse or two to be in the first spots to stay on target.
Thanks,
FRL
Antonio said...
To all,
Since the dialogue on Fred's opening post on his open letter was cut off, I invite you to come to my blog and finish whatever matters you had wished to discuss with me. I personally want to continue to answer the questions that you may still have, or respond to any points you make.
Dialogue Continued warmly,
Antonio da Rosa
Free Grace Theology Blog
http://free-grace.blogspot.com/2009/04/dialogue-continued.html
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteKev, I really like your 2 Cor 5 passage, v 20 seems to sum it up very nicely as I read and reread it just now.
ReplyDeleteFred, as you mentioned elsewhere, I find 1 Cor 1:17ff very compelling for the case that belief in Christ's atoning sacrifice is required. Specifically, that "... God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe [that 'foolishness']." Paul definitely didn't include that because it was "psychologically helpful" or "persuasive", it was in fact a known "stumbling block" and "foolishness" -- yet Paul preached it anyway. Why preach something that isn't required if you know it's a turn off?
Anyway, 1 Cor 1:17ff is definitely one of my top passages, if not the topmost.
Fred:
ReplyDelete“For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ be made of none effect,” (1 Cor. 1:17).
What does the Word of God say about the “gospel?” The “gospel” is “the message of the cross” according to God’s Word and the lost must “believe” in Christ’s “work” on the cross and in His resurrection so as not to “perish.”
When a man comes along and actively says lost people DON’T have to believe in the very content that God says they must believe, how is that NOT “preaching a false gospel” or “heresy?”
Lou
What?! Only one?! Oh dear! I don't think I can pick. There are so many qualified contenders.
ReplyDeleteHow about Galatians 3:1-2? It is a little less obvious, but it implies that the Galatians received the Holy Spirit upon responding in faith to the news of Christ crucified.
There are quite a few more. If no one else mentions them maybe I'll mention them later.
JanH
Jan I was thinking about that same passage. :)
ReplyDeleteKev
Hey...thanks...keep 'em coming!
ReplyDeleteHey, If I'm allowed more I'll borrow one of Jan's that she posted about elsewhere and that I think she made an excellent point with -- John 6:54, and I'd lump 6:51 in with that as well. These passages, right on the heals of the (in)famous 6:47 passage, clarify that belief in the atoning work of Christ is what's in view in this context.
ReplyDeleteAre we just allowed have one passage?
ReplyDeleteI get the idea he meant more like "one at a time" so as to keep the comments terse and spread the participation around a bit. But I've been wrong before... once or twice. ;-)
ReplyDeleteBesides, I've posted more than one and I've not been banned or rebuked yet. Join me... or I'll look bad... and I hate it when that happens.
Cool Stephen, I got your back buddy!
ReplyDeleteOK some may claim "foul" on this but go with me.
Hebrews 11:1
If we look at the Greek, it means that the Faith has substance a foundation. This doesn't directly support that the Gospel includes the Cross, but it does state that faith is more than believing a promise.
Kev
There is a Brother who has been greatly compromised who had put together a great chart of references to the Death, Burial and Resurrection of Christ as defining the Gospel.
ReplyDeleteI'm posting verses that are not an easy "search for the word Gospel" types because I think these are much more interesting for discussion.
Also, I think it would be a great way for this weaker Brother to return to conversation.
Kev
Naz,
ReplyDeleteI'd like apologize for being vague and a little short on friendliness, back in the blog post which is now closed. Can you forgive me?
Thanks, Michele
Sorry...Had to reload this---
ReplyDeleteRomans 10:9-10
I'll throw in a brief summary from my Open Letter Post:
In any event, I want to point out a passage someone mentioned to me over the phone:
"...because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved." (Romans 10:9-10, ESV)
I know this is a challenging passage and likely refers (in the overall context) to discipleship / sanctification. However, it is striking that believing in the resurrection for justification is clearly stated in the passage (justification is accepted by virtually everyone as a technical---single meaning---term in the book of Romans; forensic, declared righteous. It may have imputed overtones, but that doesn't help because the resurrection is still required as an object of faith).
"I get the idea he meant more like "one at a time" so as to keep the comments terse and spread the participation around a bit. But I've been wrong before... once or twice. ;-)"Hey! I like that, Stephen.
ReplyDeleteI say we collectively decide you are right this time. ;)
And since Dr. Fred has not said you are wrong.... :)
JanH
How about Hebrews 12:22-24?
ReplyDelete"You have come to Mount Zion...to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel."
JanH
Dear Michele,
ReplyDeleteThanks, I was kind of taken aback… but life is that way.
I forgive you and thanks for asking for my forgiveness.
I do love the ministry of Duluth Bible Church and in particular Dennis Rokser. He and I have ministered together many times in the country of El Salvador.
BTW the church where I pastor, Harlingen Bible Church, is a non-denominational church with no affiliations with any other church. The church has existed since the early 1960’s (predating DBC by many years) and the constitution has been revised many times since then as it was originally a Methodist Church (Parkwood Memorial Methodist Church).
The first paragraph that you quoted and the article were both part of the constitution when I arrived as pastor. I cannot tell you when they were added.
FYI, until the year 2000 I was a missionary in Venezuela and did not even know the church in Duluth existed back then, but I was sure glad when they found me and asked me to be an interpreter for their missions’ endeavors.
One thing for sure-we both preach, without apology, the Gospel of Christ crucified for our sins and resurrected. We ask sinners to believe that message. GES would call that a checklist, I simply call it the Gospel.
The word Gospel means “good news” and news is normally about events that have taken place in the past (near or distant). The Gospel is the “good news” concerning what happened on a particular weekend in History. It was the event of when Christ Jesus our Lord, the Son of God, laid down His life for our sins, and though He was buried, He gloriously resurrected on Sunday morning. I trust in that Person and His sacrifice for me. That news is not that complicated. It doesn’t require a checklist. Just hear it and believe it.
All the best and many thanks for your apology! That makes an impression on me about you!
Bret Nazworth
Hey Fred,
ReplyDeleteAs a side discussion, I actually do think that verse is about Eternal Salvation, because it is part of Paul's presentation about and to Israel. Israel must acknowledge that Christ is the LORD. Not "Lord of my life" but "Lord of the universe." So must we, but this is the stumbling block for the Jew exactly, because they were not expecting Messiah to be like He was.
As so many do, I've struggled with this passage for a long time. This is my current understanding - I will not say it is the "correct" understanding because I'm not resolved that my understanding is absolutely true yet.
It is what makes sense to me however.
Kev
I know the following verse has nothing to do with the cross or the ressurection but I wonder how folks synthesize it into the content of saving faith: Keeping in mind that the verse I am about to consider comes from John chapter 5, beginning in verse 19 and ending in verse 47. These verses give us a glimpes into the union between the Father and the Son (a peak at the Trinity?). Verse 24 - Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My Word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life. NKJV
ReplyDeleteI wish you peace
Mark Pierson
Hey Kev,
ReplyDeleteThanks...good wrestling. I've tended to see Rom. 10 as a discipleship passage (in its application). As I've talked with a few folks offline, I realize that I need to clarify something.
People are assuming I'm looking for a verse that unmistakable proves our (Classical Free Grace)view. The truth is that we are fiddling with developing a theology (clarity on the pattern). The Bible was not written with this one-verse-proves-and-explains-everything approach.
Of course, this was Zane's great flaw with his "verse washes up on an island" articles. It doesn't come together that way.
What we are doing here is looking for the ways in which the pattern is explained.
And too...1 Cor 15 still is quite powerful as an overall passage. I know the GES folks think they have an answer...but thinking you have an answer and having one are two different things.
God bless,
FRL
Michele,
ReplyDeleteCool.
FRL
Mark,
ReplyDeleteI get your question about John 5:24. Basically, they tie the oneness of the Father and Son together (I and the Father are one)...so that it is clearly seen that believing in the Father necessarily includes believing in the Son as the answer to the sin issue.
It does present an issue for the GES Gospel because it requires further definition of exactly WHO this particular Jesus is...which is where the rub is.
This Jesus needs more definition of His person and work than the GES Gospel seems to want to admit.
God bless,
FRL
Dr. Lybrand,
ReplyDeleteI'm honored that you took the time to answer my question. Thank you.
Peace!
Mark
Mark, while you're honoured to have him answer your question I feel slighted that he even lets you post here. :)
ReplyDeletehehehe I'm just joking.
Looking forward to chatting with regard to your last at Lou's.
Kev
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete