Gospel versus Law in Salvation

[bgamall]

The sin of unbelief is a greater sin than are the sins of adultery, drunkenness, homosexuality, and even murder. All sins continued in are worthy of eternal punishment. And this is contrary to the Catholic teaching that some sins are venial or not worthy of eternal damnation. They have a complicated code to rival any of the Protestants'.

Nevertheless, unbelief and its manifestations are root sins. To murder Christ is not an ordinary murder. It is a manifestation of unbelief. As we see in Romans chapter one, homosexuality is a result of the root sin of idol worship. We must, to escape false doctrine, understand the dfference between root sins and resulting sins.

The Protestant religion, by utilizing natural conscience, Old Covenant Law, and a false view of repentance, has required men to repent of the results of unbelief rather than from the manifestations or root sins of unbelief. In Acts 2:22-39, we see that the Jews are convicted of not just an ordinary of a worldly person, but the muder of Christ!

Natural conscience would convict of the murder of a worldly one, but natural conscience does not bring anybody closer to Christ. The Protestants have failed, by teaching that repentance from all or any sin would bring people into the kingdom of Christ. They sought to awaken sinners by law preaching in order to then preach the gospel. They are the new Pharisees being more concerned with lesser sins rather than the weighty matters of the gospel.

This use of law was absolutely a false use of the law of Moses, and a rejection of the law of Christ, the gospel of liberty. Once a person is in the kingdom of God through faith, that person begins to separate himself from adultery, homosexuality, murder etc. But the law of Moses and natural conscience has no power to bring anyone to holiness, and will cause one who believes to fall into bondage. The law on stone only stirs up sin, while the gospel convicts and then keeps the believer to the end. Christians are not sinless, but they do fulfill the Law of the New Covenant through faith. No one could fulfill the Law of the Old Covenant.

The bulk of the Jews, who sought to establish righteousness through the Law of Moses were lost. (Rom 10:2-3, Rom 11:4-10) The gospel alone is the tool of God for salvation. (Heb 4:2, Acts 3:12-19, 5:42, 7:52, 8:5, 9:5, 10:34-43, 17:23-34)

[Skeuos Eleos]

Just so that I can understand the practical implications of what you are saying: if you found yourself preaching to a group of convicted murderers, presumably you would not refer to their crimes against man but their rebellion against almighty God?

However, I am not sure I see either sufficient evidence or scriptural warrant to speak of differentiating between "the results of unbelief rather than from the manifestations or root sins of unbelief" and why must we "understand the dfference between root sins and resulting sins"??

Martin

[whs1]

Bgmall, said:

"They sought to awaken sinners by law preaching in order to then preach the gospel. They are the new Pharisees being more concerned with lesser sins rather than the weighty matters of the gospel."


Well, Bgmall, I do not know how else someone is "awakened" to the fact that they are a sinner because : "sin is the transgression of the law". Further more, you are saying that the "gospel" is a "weightier" matter than the law. What defines sin? The gospel? or the Law?


If you say the "gospel"; then the law, what was it's function all that time?

Bill

[whs1]

If there were no law, there could be no "gospel". Before the law sin still existed. What good is the gospel if the law is of no use???



That is what you are saying, isn't it???

[Skeuos Eleos]

The Protestant religion, by utilizing natural conscience, Old Covenant Law, and a false view of repentance, has required men to repent of the results of unbelief rather than from the manifestations or root sins of unbelief. In Acts 2:22-39, we see that the Jews are convicted of not just an ordinary of a worldly person, but the muder of Christ!

What is "natural conscience" and where do you see it being defined as something different within scripture?

What is this "false view of repentance" that you refer to here?

Where do you find justification for saying that it is wrong to require men to repent of the results of unbelief?

How does Paul's discourse with Felix fit with your doctrine where Paul discussed "righteousness, self-control and the judgement to come"? Isn't lack of self-control a 'secondary' sin in your doctrine? How do you define what is a root cause or manifestation of a root cause vs. what is a result of unbelief?

As regards the conviction by the Holy Spirit of the Jews for the murder of Christ but wouldn't there have been people in the crowd who really were among those who shouted for the crucification of Jesus? You need more than this to hang your doctrine off.

Martin

[Skeuos Eleos]

The Protestants have failed, by teaching that repentance from all or any sin would bring people into the kingdom of Christ.

You need to clarify what you mean here since I would hope that you are not saying that repentance of unbelief is not necessary.

Martin

[bgamall]

No, my point is that repentance from unbelief or from those root sins associated with unbelief is essential.

[bgamall]

"What is "natural conscience" and where do you see it being defined as something different within scripture?

What is this "false view of repentance" that you refer to here?

Where do you find justification for saying that it is wrong to require men to repent of the results of unbelief?"

Skeous, it is not wrong for an unbeliever to repent of the results of unbelief, but it won't save him!

Regarding natural conscience, Paul says that even men without the law of Moses have consciences that accuse them or excuse them. Point is, everyone has a natural conscience and everyone can feel guilt of that conscience. But this is not the power of the gospel and is not the conviction that leads to salvation.

WS1 you have stated: "If there were no law, there could be no "gospel". Before the law sin still existed. What good is the gospel if the law is of no use???"

The law, as Paul said, makes sin exceedingly sinful. The law, in effect stirs up sin. In Rom 7 the unbeliever mentally agrees with the righteousness of the law, but in his members he continually breaks that law, and becomes miserable in doing so. That is why Paul said that all that came before his gospel conversion was DUNG.

My point is that the law stirs up sin. The gospel convicts of the root sins of unbelief to the salvation of the soul. Also, Paul has argued that faith, ie the gospel of the future Messiah, came BEFORE the law even was introduced. Abraham was saved by faith before the law of Moses was even revealed.