Have you ever noticed...

[musterion]

...those who believe someone can be "saved" but lose their salvation and go to Hell -- either by sinning it away, failing to persevere during the Tribulation, or simply choosing to walk away from Christ -- desperately want to convince those who don't believe salvation can be lost? Ever notice how, when the topic comes up, it seems to be their main purpose in life?

Do you know why this is? If you aren't sure, here's a clue.

It's the same reason that the vaccine Nazis who got the jab(s) still insist everyone else get it too, EVEN AS they learn that unpredictable but damaging or fatal reactions are possible.

Same reason that mask Nazis still insist everyone else wear rags on their faces, EVEN AS it's now admitted that masks did and do nothing.

Also same as those who insist on endless lockdowns and restrictions on everyone, EVEN THOUGH it's now admitted the lockdowns had nothing but negative effects on people's lives.

Is it because they're convinced that they can't be wrong? Maybe, but there's more to it than that. There's also a huge emotional component at work here, driving both the Branch Covidians and the works probationists.

I'll let you figure out the connection from there, but it's a three-syllable word starting with M.

 

[nikolai_42]

Is this verse an automatic for a believer :

For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
Romans 8:13

Remembering this :

For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
Galatians 6:8

And this :

Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
I Cor 15:50

In other words, if - having the Spirit - we rather sow to the flesh, how shall we inherit eternal life?

 

[Right Divider]

Is this verse an automatic for a believer :

For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
Romans 8:13

Remembering this :

For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
Galatians 6:8

And this :

Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
I Cor 15:50

In other words, if - having the Spirit - we rather sow to the flesh, how shall we inherit eternal life?

So Christ did not die for all of our sins?

 

[nikolai_42]

So Christ did not die for all of our sins?

Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.
2 Timothy 2:19

This was said in response to Paul's warning about the "canker" of Hymenaeus and Philetus teaching that the resurrection had past. His response wasn't that the Lord knows His own and it doesn't matter what they do, their sins are forgiven.

And a direct response to the question of Christ dying for all of our sins might be whether or not he died for "the sin unto death":

If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.
All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.
We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.
I John 5:16-18

Did Christ die for that sin?

Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:
And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.
Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.
James 5:14-16

James isn't saying that if you are sick, it's because you have sinned - but if sin brings sickness, then healing of that particular sickness implies forgiveness. Thus, the healing he mentions in v16 carries the implication of forgiveness being tied to healing. We are all familiar with what forgiveness does to us internally - likewise there is a physical analogy. But if there is a sin unto death that we are NOT to pray for, can we dogmatically say that there is forgiveness for THAT sin (whatever it may be - and whether it be spiritual or physical death)?

I am not averse to the final conclusion that those that are His will ultimately depart iniquity (the security of salvation) and that we don't necessarily know who is saved, but the amount of damage that has been done in the name of "I'm forgiven every sin" is, especially of late, extensive and very serious. It's not that I don't believe (and possibly even those who believe you can lose your salvation don't believe) that the blood of Christ is sufficient to cover every sin - but salvation is declared as having a past, present and future component to it. The emphasis on the past component ("I've been saved so I'm covered") has been so over-emphasized that I believe it has become the (or a top) prevailing deception of the church today. So that while those that are saved will always mourn over their sin and not seek to continue in it - and seek repentance (because of the Spirit of God), the overflow of iniquity that is in the churches today has so evicted the Spirit of God that even those who believe are affected. When Jesus warned that the love of many would grow cold because iniquity would increase, that iniquity need not be our own to dampen that love - none of us are spiritual islands.

So my point is ultimately that we have been largely inured from the deadly effects of sin by something that amounts to spiritual anaesthetic. We have lost the fear of God (first and foremost) and secondarily have lost the fear of the effects of sin.

 

[Right Divider]

Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.
2 Timothy 2:19

"Departing from iniquity" says nothing about salvation.

This was said in response to Paul's warning about the "canker" of Hymenaeus and Philetus teaching that the resurrection had past. His response wasn't that the Lord knows His own and it doesn't matter what they do, their sins are forgiven.

Of course "it matters what they do", but that does not mean that they are not saved.

And a direct response to the question of Christ dying for all of our sins might be whether or not he died for "the sin unto death":

If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.
All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.
We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.
I John 5:16-18

That has nothing to do with the current dispensation.

Some of us have noted many times that trying to use scripture from a previous dispensation proves nothing.

Did Christ die for that sin?

Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:
And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.
Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.
James 5:14-16

James isn't saying that if you are sick, it's because you have sinned - but if sin brings sickness, then healing of that particular sickness implies forgiveness. Thus, the healing he mentions in v16 carries the implication of forgiveness being tied to healing. We are all familiar with what forgiveness does to us internally - likewise there is a physical analogy. But if there is a sin unto death that we are NOT to pray for, can we dogmatically say that there is forgiveness for THAT sin (whatever it may be - and whether it be spiritual or physical death)?

Again, WRONG dispensation.

 

[nikolai_42]

"Departing from iniquity" says nothing about salvation.

Of course "it matters what they do", but that does not mean that they are not saved.

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
I Cor 6:9-10

Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.
What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.
Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.
What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
I Cor 6:15-19

Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.
I Cor 3:16-17

That has nothing to do with the current dispensation.

Some of us have noted many times that trying to use scripture from a previous dispensation proves nothing.

Again, WRONG dispensation.

Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.
Luke 11:52

 

[Right Divider]

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
I Cor 6:9-10

Again, it's dishonest to STOP at verse 10. Read the VERY NEXT VERSE.

1Cor 6:11 (AKJV/PCE)
(6:11) And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.
What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.
Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.
What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
I Cor 6:15-19

Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.
I Cor 3:16-17

Again, this does not prove your point.

Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.
Luke 11:52

Wrong DISPENSATION! AGAIN!!

 

[Skeeter]

Cognitive dissonance plagues us all and we would be wise to take measures to safeguard against it.

 

[nikolai_42]

Again, it's dishonest to STOP at verse 10. Read the VERY NEXT VERSE.

The reason I didn't quote it is that it doesn't address the sin issue. I agree that those who are in Christ are washed, sanctified and justified. The question is not of what happens to one when one is put in Christ, it is a question of the ongoing life. These very same people Paul goes on to address with the other scriptures I quoted. All to the same people and all in the same letter. The very question is one of moving forward and upward. But there are ample warnings even then :

For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.
2 Peter 2:20-22

And this letter is not to any specific subset of Christianity :

Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ
2 Peter 2:1

Again, this does not prove your point.

That verse about being joined to a harlot was only to show that a physical act results in spiritual effects. Twinned with the warning about God destroying him who defiles the temple of God....that should be a very fearful warning.

Wrong DISPENSATION! AGAIN!!

And my point is that you are picking and choosing from scripture by hyper-contextualizing. For all intents and purposes (as far as the conscience of the reader is concerned), you tear out whole sections of scripture by labeling the dispensation. Rather :

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
I Timothy 3:16-17

Timothy is even mentioned at the beginning of the letter to the Corinthians. I believe he also was involved in the Thessalonian, Philippian and Ephesian churches. The man (or young man) was not sent to minister to the Jewish believers. And the scriptures mentioned in the above verses were from an entirely different dispensation - yet they were committed to a preacher in the churches as not only scripture, but useful for teaching, correction and establishing doctrine. There was no question of dispensation here. So to assert that something doesn't apply because it's a "different dispensation" is - as far as I can see - similar to a Papal decree that something should or should not bind the conscience of the reader. I'm not ready to give an exhaustive defense of my position, but that scripture was Jesus talking about the Pharisees who - also as far as I can see - were doing something similar. Except, instead of saying "you don't have to worry about that - it isn't for you" they added to what was commanded. Adding to and taking away from scripture is very serious. And while you may say you aren't doing anything to scripture itself, neither did Jesus say that to the Lawyers of His day. But He did say they took away the "key of knowledge". Something critical that would open the eyes of the understanding of the hearers. And when certain scriptures are treated so differently than others under the guise of different dispensations, I can't see any other way to characterize it than I do above. All you have to do to invalidate an argument is take away the validity of a scripture from a specific use - and you are at risk of having taken away the key of knowledge applying to that scripture.

The only other thing I would add is that I recognize that there is context. We don't obey the law for salvation - but the Law is just as valid today as it was in the day of Moses. Thou shalt not covet is still as valid a command as it was in Moses' day. But if we are in Christ, then we have been freed from that. Not that it no longer matters if we covet or not, but that in Christ we are actually freed from the bondage to sin. So if we are slaves to sin, we are showing that we are not slaves to Christ. No man can serve two masters. Either he will love the one and hate the other or he will hold to the other and despise the one. Yes - I realize Jesus was talking about serving God or Mammon, but the essence of the point He was making is the same whether it's God vs. Mammon or God vs. Self. The righteousness that is of the Law is self-righteousness. But if the righteousness of Christ is made ours, we will be changed. The working out may take time - but we should be no less haters of sin because we are freed from the Law. In fact, we should hate it more now that we are freed from its clutches.

 

[Right Divider]

The reason I didn't quote it is that it doesn't address the sin issue.

What is "the sin issue"?

With regards to salvation, the Lord Jesus Christ dealt with all sin at the cross.

 

[nikolai_42]

What is "the sin issue"?

With regards to salvation, the Lord Jesus Christ dealt with all sin at the cross.

Then Paul shouldn't even mention it, right?

 

[Jefferson]

...those who believe someone can be "saved" but lose their salvation and go to Hell -- either by sinning it away, failing to persevere during the Tribulation, or simply choosing to walk away from Christ -- desperately want to convince those who don't believe salvation can be lost? Ever notice how, when the topic comes up, it seems to be their main purpose in life?

Do you know why this is? If you aren't sure, here's a clue.

It's the same reason that the vaccine Nazis who got the jab(s) still insist everyone else get it too, EVEN AS they learn that unpredictable but damaging or fatal reactions are possible.

Same reason that mask Nazis still insist everyone else wear rags on their faces, EVEN AS it's now admitted that masks did and do nothing.

Also same as those who insist on endless lockdowns and restrictions on everyone, EVEN THOUGH it's now admitted the lockdowns had nothing but negative effects on people's lives.

Is it because they're convinced that they can't be wrong? Maybe, but there's more to it than that. There's also a huge emotional component at work here, driving both the Branch Covidians and the works probationists.

I'll let you figure out the connection from there, but it's a three-syllable word starting with M.

Is the answer, "mysery loves company?"

 

[Right Divider]

Then Paul shouldn't even mention it, right?

You're confusing two different things.

 

[musterion]

Is the answer, "mysery loves company?"

Bingo

 

[nikolai_42]

You're confusing two different things.

You've taken the letters of James and John and dismissed their relevance to the situation because of dispensations. Both of them deal with sin in the church (ostensibly believers involved). They clearly say sin affects the believer. There are straightforward statements that say (such as the one in Romans 8 that was at the heart of my response) that sin kills. What do you think I'm confusing?

 

[Right Divider]

You've taken the letters of James and John and dismissed their relevance to the situation because of dispensations.

Only because they are not doctrine for the body of Christ.
We are not under the law. We are not a nation. etc. etc. etc.

Both of them deal with sin in the church (ostensibly believers involved).

Which church? Not the church which is His body (i.e., the body of Christ).

They clearly say sin affects the believer.

I said nothing against that. But a believer in the body cannot be "cut off" from the body.

A believer in the nation of Israel CAN be cut off from that nation.

There are straightforward statements that say (such as the one in Romans 8 that was at the heart of my response) that sin kills. What do you think I'm confusing?

You are confusing sin and salvation.

 

[nikolai_42]

Only because they are not doctrine for the body of Christ.
We are not under the law. We are not a nation. etc. etc. etc.

Which church? Not the church which is His body (i.e., the body of Christ).

These above two are just bare assertions. John certainly was ministering to the church at large and while James' letter does say to the twelve tribes scattered abroad, there is no indication this is anything other than to those in Christ. There is no Jew and Greek in Christ and He has broken down the wall of partition between Jew and Gentile to make of the two one new man. There is only one body. So to cast James away is just as foolhardy.

But again, you've just dispensed with James and John in 2 sentences.

I said nothing against that. But a believer in the body cannot be "cut off" from the body.

A believer in the nation of Israel CAN be cut off from that nation.

And to respond to both those points :

And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.
For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?
Romans 11:17-24

I expect you've anticipated this passage, but I would love to hear how you can say it doesn't support a believer being cut off from the body. Your first statement about a believer was of a spiritual nature. The second one was of natural Israel. Spiritually, believers are all one body (Ephesians 2:12-18)

You are confusing sin and salvation.

Be specific. How?

 

[Right Divider]

These above two are just bare assertions.

No, they're not.

John as ONE of the TWELVE apostles that will sit on TWELVE thrones judging the TWELVE tribes of Israel. That provides some CONTEXT to what he wrote.

James makes his target audience that abundantly clear in the FIRST verse of the book that he wrote.

Jas 1:1 (AKJV/PCE)
(1:1) James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.

John certainly was ministering to the church at large

What is "the church at large"? That is YOU making "just bare assertions".

John's "church" was the nation of Israel (over which he is ONE of the TWELVE judges).

and while James' letter does say to the twelve tribes scattered abroad, there is no indication this is anything other than to those in Christ.

Writing explicitly to the TWELVE TRIBES indicates that James is NOT writing the gentiles.

Note that in the BODY OF CHRIST there is NEITHER Jew NOR Greek.

There is no Jew and Greek in Christ

Those "in Christ" before Paul were not in the body of Christ as it had Paul as its first member.

and He has broken down the wall of partition between Jew and Gentile to make of the two one new man.

The ONE NEW MAN is not Israel and proselyte gentiles.

There is only one body.

There is the body of Christ and there is the nation of Israel. They are not the same thing.

So to cast James away is just as foolhardy.

Nobody is "casting James away". We need to understand James IN CONTEXT. You are NOT doing that.

But again, you've just dispensed with James and John in 2 sentences.

I "dispense" with neither... I understand them IN THE PROPER CONTEXT.

And to respond to both those points :

And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.
For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?
Romans 11:17-24

Romans 11 is NOT talking about the BODY OF CHRIST where there is NEITHER Jew NOR Greek.

Romans 11 explains that God has blinded Israel FOR A TIME and that THEY will be RESTORED in the future.

Rom 11:11-12 (AKJV/PCE)
(11:11) I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but [rather] through their fall salvation [is come] unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. (11:12) Now if the fall of them [be] the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?

I expect you've anticipated this passage, but I would love to hear how you can say it doesn't support a believer being cut off from the body. Your first statement about a believer was of a spiritual nature. The second one was of natural Israel. Spiritually, believers are all one body (Ephesians 2:12-18)

You are trying to apply the CURRENT body in this dispensation to all time. That is simply wrong.

Be specific. How?

Christ dealt with sin at the cross. Sin is no longer a barrier to salvation. But it is still wrong and should be avoided by living by the Spirit and not the flesh.

 

[nikolai_42]

John as ONE of the TWELVE apostles that will sit on TWELVE thrones judging the TWELVE tribes of Israel. That provides some CONTEXT to what he wrote.

The epistle is abundantly clear that he is writing to those whose faith is in Christ.

That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.
John 1:3

If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
John 1:6,7

My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
John 2:1

Do you not have an advocate with the Father as a believer in Christ?

He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.
I John 2:4-6

No matter who it is, anyone who abides in Him ought also to walk, even as He walked. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female in Christ.

James makes his target audience that abundantly clear in the FIRST verse of the book that he wrote.



What is "the church at large"? What is YOU making "just bare assertions".

All those in Christ. To limit any of the NT to only a certain group - without clear warrant - is to make a line of demarcation where scripture makes none.

John's "church" was the nation of Israel (over which he is ONE of the TWELVE judges).

Writing explicitly to the TWELVE TRIBES indicates that James is NOT writing the gentiles.

Jesus also told the disciples that they would judge angels. Is what they write to Jews and angels but not believers?

Note that in the BODY OF CHRIST there is NEITHER Jew NOR Greek.

Those "in Christ" before Paul were not in the body of Christ was had Paul as its first member.

Where do you see that?

The ONE NEW MAN is not Israel and proselyte gentiles.

And you say that why?

There is the body of Christ and there is the nation of Israel. They are not the same thing.

There is only one spiritual body, yes. The nation of Israel is strictly a national entity. Those in Christ are no different in spiritual terms, whether of the nation of Israel or not.

Nobody is "casting James away". We need to understand James IN CONTEXT. You are NOT doing that.

I "dispense" we neither... I understand them IN THE PROPER CONTEXT.

Okay....which is?

Romans 11 is NOT talking about the BODY OF CHRIST where there is NEITHER Jew NOR Greek.

Romans 11 explains that God has blinded Israel FOR A TIME and that THEY will be RESTORED in the future.

National Israel has been blinded, yes. But the Body of Christ is composed of Israelites and non-Israelites and those that are in Christ are not distinguished by national boundaries. Therefore, the teaching for an Israelite is the same as that for of a non-Israelite.

You are trying to apply the CURRENT body in this dispensation to all time. That is simply wrong.

The Olive tree is not a national identity, it is a spiritual identity. It is the one body of Ephesians. Neither the Gentile (wild olive tree) nor the Israelite (good olive tree)utterly loses their identity as Gentile or Israelite when they are in Christ. Rather, their identity in spiritual terms is in Christ. Israel after the flesh had the blessings of the Old covenant, but they are still Israelites after the flesh when cut off. They are, however, cut off from the spiritual identity as Israel. Likewise, the Gentile believer becomes part of that same body (spiritual Israel) when grafted in. That's why ALL Israel shall be saved. Because they are not all Israel which are of Israel (Romans 9:6). There is no dispensational division. You have the burden of proving that there is.

Christ dealt with sin at the cross. Sin is no longer a barrier to salvation. But it is still wrong and should be avoided by living by the Spirit and not the flesh.

I don't know that sin was ever an insurmountable barrier to salvation since Christ was slain from the foundations of the world - so those who were saved that were alive before Christ appeared were still saved by faith. But the times of ignorance God winked at, and now commands everyone everywhere to repent.

 

[Right Divider]

The epistle is abundantly clear that he is writing to those whose faith is in Christ.

Faith in Christ is common to Israel and the body of Christ.

Do you not have an advocate with the Father as a believer in Christ?

I have a Savior in Christ.

He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.
I John 2:4-6

I'm not under the law. Therefore, "commandment keeping" is not a "thing" for the body of Christ.

No matter who it is, anyone who abides in Him ought also to walk, even as He walked. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female in Christ.

Yes, in THIS dispensation in the body of Christ.

All those in Christ. To limit any of the NT to only a certain group - without clear warrant - is to make a line of demarcation where scripture makes none.

The NEW COVENANT is between God and Israel. That's what scripture says.

I can see that you are stuck in your belief and cannot rightly divide the word of truth. Most of Churchianity is like that.