Rightly Dividing and Dispensational Theology

[Jerry]

Taken from Abraham Offered Isaac:

In Genesis 15:6, we had the declaration that Abraham "believed in the Lord; and he (the Lord) counted it to him for righteousness." Abraham was justified before God by believing His promises, especially about the coming Messiah and Redeemer who would one day die for his sins (see also Genesis 3:15). Now here we have the passage that explains what many would try to state is a contradiction in the Word of God and which religious groups have always sought to twist:

James 2:20-23 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

Rightly divided, this passage is teaching that Abraham was justified before men by acting upon his faith. You see, man cannot see what is in the heart of another man - only the Lord can. We see the proof, the evidence, the fruit of someone's salvation, by how they live - we see the evidence of their faith by how they live it out on a day to day basis, on the works that they do because of their faith. That is the evidence that their salvation was real in the first place. This is what Jesus meant when He said, "Ye shall know them by their fruits." What is on the inside, what is in the heart, will come out eventually. What is the evidence showing in your life? If you have trusted the Lord Jesus Christ alone for salvation, believing that He paid the complete penalty for your sins, when He died in your place, there will be evidence to the world around you. Can they see your faith?

[Jerry]

The prophecy to Eve was mentioned - then her misunderstanding of the prophecy was pointed out as if that had some bearing on the issue of salvation by faith alone. Eve knew the Redeemer would come through her - God did not tell her when. Just because she might have thought God was fulfilling that promise right away through her first son does not invalidate her faith. Peter indicates that many of the OT saints and prophets did not understand the prophecies. God opens them up to us - because now we are at the other end of them and seeing their fulfillment.

[Guest Guest]

Very interesting, but has some holes in it.

Is this coming from the same person that keeps saying he believes because he has studied, and no one should be saying he is following a man??? Look past teachers LOL. sorry, this is not something big, I just had to point it out.

Your reply makes no sense whatsoever. I'd like to see an explanation for that; I'm throughly confused.

There were a few exceptions, as Kathie pointed out, including David and men like Sampson. However, the burden of proof is on you, since God's requirement was CLEARLY laid out, which was the keeping of the Levitical Law. Heaven was a vague concept in the Old Testament, not an eternal reward. Find a passage promising Heaven to someone, in the Old Testament.

[Guest Guest]

Here is a verse from James 2 that dispells the theory that this book was meant only for Jews and it teaches them to work for their salvation.
James 2:10"For whosoever shall keep the whole law,and yet offend in one point,he is guilty of all."
That verse alone tells them that breaking one point is the same as breaking all of it,who can be saved (Jew or gentile) by trying to do works if anyone (Jew or gentile) is considered to have broken ALL of the law if they have sinned once?So in God's eyes,if we have sinned,just once,we have broken all,Jew or gentile in any dispensation.
Further in James 2 we see that everyone was correct in saying that the works being talked about are a justification brfore man.Basically,if you have the real thing,people will notice your saved,in James chapter 2.......

You must look at the 6 S's in these scriptures starting in verse 14 "What doth it profit my bretheren,though a man Say he hath faith,and not have works?can that faith save him?"

The first s is in the word *say*.James is giving the case of someone SAYING they have faith,not HAVING saving faith.Why?Becasue James states that if a person SAYS they have faith and they dont have works,they dont have faith at all..

verse 17 backs this up by saying"Even so faith,if it hath not works,is dead,being alone."False faith if no friut,or works if you prefer.

The second,third and fourth s is in verse 18"Yea,a man may Say,Thou hast faith,and I have works:Shew me thy faith and I will Shew thee my faith by my works."

Again the 2nd,3rd and 4th s words are teaching us about showing our salvation to men.The second s again points out a person who is Professing salvation,not possesing it.Hence the word *say*.A truely saved person will *shew* their salvation to men,th 3rd and 4th words *shew* ,point to this fact.

Ill of course quote the verse that Catholics,Campbellites,JW's mormons and I guess Hyper-dispansationalists quote to prove a works salvation.Verse 21" Was not Abraham our father jutified by works,when he had offered Isaac his son upon the alter?"Does the bible contradict itself here?We know that Paul states that Abraham was justified by faith..without works. Well God is not the author of confusion,and he cannot lie,if these passages mean two totaly diiferent things then God contradicts himself.But we know that God could NEVER do that.So lets rightly divide the word as we are comanded to do.The answer comes to us in the very next verse..

The 5th S
verse 22 "Seest thou how faith wrought with his works,and by works was faith made perfect?"
The 5th S *SEEst*...God tells us that we could actuallt see Abrahams faith..because of his works why?Lets read the very next verse.....

23"And the scripture was fullfilled which saith,Abraham BELIVED God and it was IMPUTED unto him for righeousness and he was called a friend of God".
See he was justified by his faith and he has shown us..his faith by his works..
The last 6th and last s closes the matter ..in verse 24...
24"Ye See then how that by works a man is justified,and not by faith only.

We actuallt *SEE* peoples real faith,the last S word,thus showing their justification before men...Faith only.. (WITHOUT HOLY SPIRIT LED WORKS)is a PROFESSION and not a POSSESION

So God dos indeed teach us in James 2 that jutification before men is clearly taught.

You're grasping at straws to make the book say what you want it to say. I have never taught a works-based Salvation; I show from the Bible how in other dispensations, works were required (and you can't honestly disagree, if you believe the Bible), but I've never said that works were required for you at all.

Again, read my Justification/Sanctification post; Paul, in Romans, states that Abraham was SANCTIFIED (imputed righteousness), not justified. James CLEARLY states that Abraham was JUSTIFIED by his works, and no amount of hoping or crossing your fingers is going to make the Bible agree with you.

[Guest Guest]

First, we have to understand that just like Sanctification/Justification, Salvation has not always been the way we understand it to be. David, the person who wrote of Salvation more than anyone else than Paul, begged God not to take His holy spirit from him. Why would he have done that, if he was saved just like we are? You see, they weren't sealed like we are; the Holy Spirit came and went by God's command, and just because the Spirit left someone didn't mean that they were no longer right with God.

For instance, Sampson may have lived wickedly, but the Spirit came upon him every time he used his great strength. Afterwards, It left him. So, was Sampson saved/lost/saved/lost every time that happened?

It was mentioned that Noah would have died and gone to Hell if he did not build the ark. Of course, he would have died - but he was saved long before he built the ark:

Genesis 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

Hebrews 11:7 By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.

By faith he became heir of God's righteousness - it does not say he became heir of that through his building of the ark. By faith he was moved with fear and built the ark - you cannot have godly fear without being saved.

Noah was saved before he built the ark:

2 Peter 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

Or are you going to say he got saved the moment he hammered his first nail?... Here God saved Noah, the preacher of righteousness, from the flood - through the ark he built by his faith.

Again, God's grace toward Noah was contingent upon his obedience, like Abraham (*beats dead horse again*). We're sealed; they weren't. We're saved by Grace through the faith if the Son of God, but they weren't. It's hard sometimes to see things from a different perspective than you're accustomed to, but it's vital to be able to view a situation multi-dimensionally. Otherwise, a person is liable to get stuck in a rut (which, someone once said, is a shallow grave with the ends kicked out ).

[rancher824]

I'm sorry I confused you. It seems like a very simple statement. In this thread there have been two people (you being one of them) saying over and over that it is not right for people to call them Ruckmanites. They say it puts them as believing something simply because they were told by a teacher. That they believe what they believe because of their own study of the subject. Then one of them tells the rest of us to look past teachers and books and believe strictly the Bible. Sounds to me like the same statement, that we only believe because of what we were taught, and have not studied for ourselves. I believe what I believe because the Bible is very plain on the subject that there is only one way to be saved and that is the blood of Christ. Moderator, I am sorry if I have said something I should have left out, and detracted from the thread by saying all of this.

As to your second answer to my answer, I have no idea what you are talking about. David was of the tribe of Judah, Not a proselyte. As I pointed out Nebuchadnezzar. Where is his becoming a proselyte. Where is his keeping of the Levitical law?? David though did look toward heaven. 23rd psalm, dwell in the house of the Lord forever. He looked forward to seeing his baby that died, 2 Samuel 12. We find Abraham looking for a city that had foundations not made by hands.

Was the keeping of the law necessary??? Yes,and any trespass against was worthy of death. No one was able to keep it. Everyone who has ever tried, has failed misserably. James 2:10 tells us they are guilty of every point. Thus worthy of death. How can you believe anyone could get to heaven by works that are worthy of death???

Did you understand 100% of what was going on when you were saved? Did you understand the depths of Christ??? No one in this or any age has gotten to the point of total understanding. I have given examples of pre-ressurrection saints looking forward to heaven. Abraham told Issac God would provide himself a sacrifice. Did he totaly understand??? No. That is called faith. We even today, have to do many things that we know God will see us through, that we cannot see how. Does that mean they are done by our works, no, by Faith.

Why would God give Enoch a messsage to prophecy that was not at all understood, and then just vaguely mention it 4000 years later??? Yes he did give daniel prophesy that was not understood, but he went into great details about it. You have to make it that there was no understanding to even come close to making your doctrine fit, but the Bible bears out that the information was there, though vague, it was there.

Giberish, incoherent nonsence. Who in their right mind thinks. Sound like a good argument against christians as a whole!! some might say "Who in thier right mind would believe some old book about a God coming when they have never seen him." It is the same argument. They believed in a promised Mesiah. Whether they understood completely makes no differance. They had faith!!!

And yes, I did read you post, and I whole heartily disagree with it.

[Guest Guest]

Hey Rancher,

You didn't quote any Scripture in your whole post, so you really have no point. All you have is your view of the Bible, from your own mind, with no Scripture to back it up. That's called an opinion, not doctrine.

It would take a lot of ignorance to believe that anyone in the Old Testament knew that Christ would die on a cross, be buried, and then be resurrected. They were looking for a Messiah that would come and set up a kingdom! (That's why a lot of Jews are still mixed-up today, they don't accept the NT, so based on OT doctrine they're still waiting for a Messiah... that's why they're going to be deceived in the Tribulation)

When I got saved, I knew about Christ's death, burial, and resurrection. I didn't need to understand the Bible, I just needed to understand the Gospel. The people in the Old Testament couldn't understand the same Gospel we understand, because it hadn't been taught yet! (Helloooo... Christ hadn't even died on the cross yet!!)

I already explained that even though no one could totally keep the whole Law, God still knew what was in their hearts. There's a difference between someone who wants to do right and someone who wants to be wicked. They just had no promise of eternal security like we do today (if you think they did, prove it with Scripture!!). If a Christian today decides to live a worldly life and do wicked, he won't lose his salvation. He'll just miss out on the blessings of God and God may have to chastise him.

[rancher824]

Hey Rancher,

You didn't quote any Scripture in your whole post, so you really have no point. All you have is your view of the Bible, from your own mind, with no Scripture to back it up. That's called an opinion, not doctrine.

It would take a lot of ignorance to believe that anyone in the Old Testament knew that Christ would die on a cross, be buried, and then be resurrected. They were looking for a Messiah that would come and set up a kingdom! (That's why a lot of Jews are still mixed-up today, they don't accept the NT, so based on OT doctrine they're still waiting for a Messiah... that's why they're going to be deceived in the Tribulation)

When I got saved, I knew about Christ's death, burial, and resurrection. I didn't need to understand the Bible, I just needed to understand the Gospel. The people in the Old Testament couldn't understand the same Gospel we understand, because it hadn't been taught yet! (Helloooo... Christ hadn't even died on the cross yet!!)

I already explained that even though no one could totally keep the whole Law, God still knew what was in their hearts. There's a difference between someone who wants to do right and someone who wants to be wicked. They just had no promise of eternal security like we do today (if you think they did, prove it with Scripture!!). If a Christian today decides to live a worldly life and do wicked, he won't lose his salvation. He'll just miss out on the blessings of God and God may have to chastise him.

Excuse me, but where was the quotes in that post??? Did it have no point LOL. Why, you did not even give any refrances. If you will go back and look at my post I Gave refrances.

As to your second answer to my answer, I have no idea what you are talking about. David was of the tribe of Judah, Not a proselyte. As I pointed out Nebuchadnezzar. Where is his becoming a proselyte. Where is his keeping of the Levitical law?? David though did look toward heaven. 23rd psalm, dwell in the house of the Lord forever. He looked forward to seeing his baby that died, 2 Samuel 12. We find Abraham looking for a city that had foundations not made by hands.

Was the keeping of the law necessary??? Yes,and any trespass against was worthy of death. No one was able to keep it. Everyone who has ever tried, has failed misserably. James 2:10 tells us they are guilty of every point. Thus worthy of death. How can you believe anyone could get to heaven by works that are worthy of death???
Why would God give Enoch a messsage to prophecy that was not at all understood, and then just vaguely mention it 4000 years later??? Yes he did give daniel prophesy that was not understood, but he went into great details about it.

Not a complete reposting. But you will notice that I gave refrances!! I will admit I forgot to put in that Abraham looking for the city is found in Hebrews 11, and Enoch is found in Jude. I have also given verses (as have others) that you two twist so badly that it realy makes it questionable if we are reading the same Bible. Such as James 1:1 says it is to the twelve tribes scattered abroad. You say this has to be during the tribulation,( when the tribes are gathered in jerusalem, and then moved as a groop to a place God has prepared). It cannot be the tribulation, but must be during the church age. That is one of the signs that the tribulation is getting close. The tribes have been scattered since 70 A.D. They are now coming together into a nation, the scattering abroad is coming to an end, thus James cannot, did I say cannot, be during the tribulation.

As to you having already explained no one could totally keep the law, I already answered that in the post I quoted no scripture in. I gave the reforance of James 2:10. For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. There is that better, you do not have to look it up lol.

The people in the Old Testament couldn't understand the same Gospel we understand, because it hadn't been taught yet! (Helloooo... Christ hadn't even died on the cross yet!!)

Helloooooo, The tribulation has not happened yet, so I guess we really do not believe it. All we realy have is a bunch of pictures. And how about eternity. Don't even try to tell me that you know what that will be like. The bueties of heaven totaly surpass human understanding, so I guess we do not believe that either. It hasn't even happened yet LOL.

edited for punctuation

[Bro.Johnny Mac]

You're grasping at straws to make the book say what you want it to say. I have never taught a works-based Salvation; I show from the Bible how in other dispensations, works were required (and you can't honestly disagree, if you believe the Bible), but I've never said that works were required for you at all.

Again, read my Justification/Sanctification post; Paul, in Romans, states that Abraham was SANCTIFIED (imputed righteousness), not justified. James CLEARLY states that Abraham was JUSTIFIED by his works, and no amount of hoping or crossing your fingers is going to make the Bible agree with you.

I 100% disagree.What a shock!

But anyway,the bible is clear in James 2,it does not teach works to get salvation,its just not there.Justified means imputed righteousness. Abraham needed imputed righteousness and so do we.I dont think Paul told us that Abraham was justified without works,and then James says the exact opposite,that works are required for salvation.Because IT ISNT THERE.James clearly staes that Abraham was justified by faith,no matter what hoops you try to jump through or how many scriptures are twisted.
God does'nt contradict Himself,salvation is, has been ,always will be by grace through faith.Why? Because everyone has sinned,from Adam to us,so our righteousness(as well as every person from Adam to us) needs God's imputed righteouness for justification. But I Im glad you didnt call me dude,this time. :Bleh :thumb Just a little joke.
but I could post all the scripture in the world that disproves a works salvation(and there are lots of 'em),you would'nt listen.So I hope that others have had their faith in God's word strengthened and now know beyond a doubt that salvation is,was and always will be a gift by His grace,and not something anyone can obtain by works.The meat has been consantly spit out,Im done...

[Guest Guest]

but I could post all the scripture in the world that disproves a works salvation(and there are lots of 'em),you would'nt listen.So I hope that others have had their faith in God's word strengthened and now know beyond a doubt that salvation is,was and always will be a gift by His grace,and not something anyone can obtain by works.The meat has been consantly spit out,Im done...

Hey, slow down there brother... :smile

We still believe that salvation IS by grace through faith, a gift of God, not of works... just like you believe.

It hasn't always been, and won't always be that way, but that's the way it is for us in the church age. Vince and I have posted countless Scripture verses to prove what we believe, and I think Jerry is the only one who disagrees with us that posted a good amount of Scripture. Most people here have just given a few references or paraphrased Scripture (said it in their own words, but never quoted exact Scripture). Oh, and just about everyone has used his own logic, that wasn't even based on the Bible, thinking it disproves the Bible somehow.

I'll give you an example.

Human logic: Salvation has always been attained the same way throughout every dispensation in the Bible. (Scripture and verse to back it up, please!!)

Bible: God has dealt with people in different dispensations in a different way, including his requirements for them to obtain salvation. (this is proven through all the Scripture Vince and I have posted, and lots more...)

It all really boils down to what you believe the theme of the Bible is. It's plain and clear that the theme of the Bible is "The Kingdom" (Jesus Christ is the King of Kings, and at the end, He will rule the Earth). Many Fundamentalists believe the theme of the Bible would be Christ's love for us, mainly his death, burial, and resurrection.

In order to believe that Christ's death, burial, and resurrection is the theme of the Bible, you'd have to believe God's original intention was for man to sin and need a Saviour. That would glorify sin, because it's a means to an end... it makes us NEED Christ. (and amen, we do need Him!!) That wasn't God's original intention in creating man, though. Man was created to have fellowship with God, and to serve God in His Kingdom. (remember, God was already starting to set that up.. in the Garden, He gave Adam dominion over the other creatures.)

(Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Genesis 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.)

It's sad how Fundamentalists who claim to believe this Book are scared to find out what it's really saying.

[Jerry]

We still believe that salvation IS by grace through faith' date=' a gift of God, not of works... just like you believe.[/quote']

How do you get around the fact that the Bible states there is only one Gospel of salvation, and any other gospel is a false one? Yet, somehow, if you teach another gospel in other dispensations, it is supposed to be okay. I don't see THAT in the Bible.



All you have shown is that there are different "house rules" (which is exactly what dispensation means) - different ways that salvation plays out (ie. as part of the OT covenant, they were required to follow the OT ceremonial and civil laws, which the NT church is not bound by) - that is not the same thing as different ways of salvation.



The theme of the whole Bible IS salvation in Christ - seen from Genesis 3 on to Revelation 22.



That doesn't follow at all. God created man, knowing He would sin and need a Saviour - therefore He set His plan of salvation in motion before man even sinned. The Bible is God's story of the redemption of fallen man.

The whole Bible testifies of Jesus Christ and the salvation that is found in Him:

Revelation 19:10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

Acts 10:43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.

Luke 24:25-27 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

Romans 3:21-22 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

1 Peter 1:10-12 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.

Hebrews 10:7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.

Psalms 40:7 Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me,

[rancher824]

[quote="rancher824"]Here is a interesting passage for the discussion. Galations chapter 2

[quote][11] But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
[12] For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
[13] And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
[14] But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
[15] We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,
[16] Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
[17] But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.
[18] For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.
[19] For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.
[20] I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
[21] I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
[/quote]

We find Peter, who is Peter. The quick answer would be an apostle, but there is more to him as Paul points out. He is a jew. When did he grow up? He grew up before the death of Christ. He grew up during the time you say men were saved through there works. Paul even points out that Peter is not a sinner of the gentiles. But then he says that man is not justified by the works of the law. He then even puts it plainer. He says "for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." Does it say in the church age? NO. It even uses the word shall. Future tense (the tribulation is in the future). Then he explains your points about faith and works. If we say we trust in Christ, but live in sin, it is not a reflection of Christ, but a sign we need to be saved for we never have been. Then the last verse shoots holes in the dispensational salvation theary. If anyone could be saved by the keeping of the law, meaning be good enough to get to heaven, CHRIST DIED IN VAIN. If there was any other way to God, other than the Blood of Christ, he would not have had to die!!!! Also, it has been said (maybe not word for word, but this is my understanding) that those in the old testament did not understand Christ's coming, so they could not be saved by looking to him. The old testament is stuffed full of Christ coming. Philip showed the eunich how that Christ was pictured. The serpent was told in front of Adam and EVE that he would bruse his heal, and he would bruse the serpents head. David looked forward to seeing his baby that had died (shows a looking to heaven not just the physical). It is said that Abraham looked only to the physical. What do we see in Hebrews 11 about that??

[quote]By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.
[9] By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:
[10] For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.[/quote]

He was looking for a city built by God. That is why he was so content in sojourning in a strange land. He was seeing the place his decindants would get, True. But he believed God so much he did not care for the physical, but rather looked forward to eternity. In the case of offering Issac, Abraham told Issac

[quote] And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together[/quote]

He may not have completely understood, but knew God would provided a lamb. That is Jesus. The ram was a picture of Christ taking our place. Those in the old testament knew enough about Christ to accept him and be saved.[/quote]


KJB Princes, You say that no one is giving scripture except Jerry. But this post was never answered. You never really answered to James 1:1, I guess I did not post what it said, you had done that already. It says
[quote] James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
[/quote]
The address says that they are scattered abroad, not gathered in jerusalem. We see the nation gathering back together today, getting ready for the tribulation. So this book is not to tribulation jews, but church age jews.

So, I guess it is you cannot answer these points, so tou have to say I will not give scripture to get me off your back.

[Guest Guest]

I'm sorry Rancher. I didn't ignore your post, it was just one of those questions that I planned to answer later. I've been pretty busy over the past couple days and I'm getting ready to leave for church now, but hopefully I'll have time soon.

[John81]

Wow! I've been away from OB for a few days and y'all posted a lot!!

That was a lot of reading, but with there being a fair amount of Scripture in many of the posts, it was very interesting reading and I appreciated the thought-provoking aspects.

[rancher824]

I hope it is alright for me to bring this back to the top. I have thought a lot about this topic, and during last sundays sermon some passages clicked.

No one, until after Christ's resurrection, had any clue of what was going on. The only thing that gave any hint whatsoever was Psalm 22, Isaiah 53, and Daniel 9, which were vague, seemingly contradictory, prophecies that wouldn't have made any sense to someone before the crucifixion and resurrection. Again, your burden of proof to find a pre-resurrection individual who actually understood what the Messiah was going to do, in what order. They thought Him a king, not a martyr.

Whether or not I can prove anyone actually understood the order is not relavant. The question should be what did God require them to understand. What do I mean?? Well first off what do you need to know to be saved. You need to understand Christ died for your sins, and that through him alone is salvation possible. You must understand that you must be born again. I do not believe anyone here disagrees about that for today. But when did this supposed change take place. From the quote I gave I would assume that it must have changed at the resurrection, right. Well then I have a question. Did Jesus ever ask a meaningless or dumb question??? Of course the answer has to be NO. Every question Jesus asked had a purpose. Let's look at John 3. This chapter is a conversation between Jesus and a pharasee named Nichodemus. I figure almost if not all of us can quote verse 16 from memory. But what leads up to verse 16? Is it not Jesus telling how that we must be born again? Verse 3 says

Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Verse 5

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God

He is very clearly speaking about salvation. But it realy gets interesting with verse 10.

Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

Now why would Jesus ask this question. He has been explaining how that a person must be saved to go to heaven. Now if those before the resurrection were not saved as we are, the things that Jesus was saying should have sounded crazy, as I believe they did to Nicodemus. But Jesus asked why a leader of the jews would not know about this. If there was no understanding pre resurrection Jesus question would be out of place.

But was there any understanding of the things Jesus would do?? Let's ask a well known source. Let's ask the apostle Peter. Acts 2:29-31

Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

He mentions that David is dead and buried. That they could see the sepulchre. This is pointing out David lived before Christ was born, died, and rose again. He points out that David was a prophet who knew that God swore of his seed to raise up Christ to sit on his throne. This is all that David knew, right?? Wrong!!! He then points out that seeing this David spoke of the resurrection. I know the general answer will be that he did not understand. But prove that!!! Peter said he seeing, spake of the resurrection. So it seems to me to say that no one knew that Christ would be crucified needs to be arguing the point with Peter, and the word of God.