SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
See Opportunities to Serve with SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Did Peter remain saved during his denial??

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 Next Page )
PosterThread
Christinyou
Member



Joined: 2005/11/2
Posts: 3708
Ca.

 Re:

Quote:

"Yes Peter was regenerated at the Pentecost and got to know the power of the Holy Spirit in his preaching and through his acts (see Acts chap 2ff) The deeper meanings and implications of being born anew he might have learned from Paul (however we can not be too sure though; Peter seems to have known a lot of the workings of the Holys Spirit as witnessed in Acts"



Peter was filled with the Spirit at Pentecoat, this is understandable, He heard Christ say that the Holy Spirit was with them and soon would be in them. Peter did not know that the Person of Jesus Christ was birthed in Him at that time, Sealed by the Holy Spirit. Paul was the only one that got this revelation, the only one in the whole world. That is why God allow Paul to call it his gospel. This is what Peter is speaking of in the last epistle he wrote, "hard thing to understand" The mystery Paul speaks about abundantly, even hid form all previous knowledge offered by God. Paul was the only one that received it, "that is Christ in you the Hope of Glory.

2 Peter 3:15-18 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.

If like Paul, Peter knew full well who this Chrsit was that was birthed in Him, would it not be your final words as with Paul, "to Know Him", as in all of Paul's writing the most important impression he wanted to leave in all his writing was "Christ in you" and "you in Christ", new birth, new life, Rom 5:17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

Rom 5:21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

Rom 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

The statement "in Christ" is mentioned 224 times, all from Paul. Not once for Peter.

The statement "Christ in" you" Christ in: 224 times, all from Paul. Not once for Peter.

In Christ and Christ are the same, and all mentioned by Paul.

God used Peter mightely to the Jew, but God used Paul singularly to preach this new life in Christ being our only life.

And still with all the revelation to Paul, Paul said all the wanted was "to know Him More".

I am not trying to take away from Peter, for God used him mightly. But, I see Paul's admonition of follow me and do as I do in Christ being much the greater life of Christ in the believer in his offering.

1Cr 11:1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also [am] of Christ.

The powerful speaking of Paul of the revelation he received is the greatest single tone of the New testament. "In Christ"

Gal 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught [it], but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Rom 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

Eph 1:17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:

Eph 3:3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,

1Pe 1:13 Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ; NOW, not future, but future also.


In Christ: Phillip


_________________
Phillip

 2007/8/25 20:42Profile
Mangan
Member



Joined: 2007/4/19
Posts: 161
Sweden (Northern Europe)

 Re:

Ok, Im with you in part.

Sure Paul had his unique and mystical experience that resulted in his plenty use of the word Christ in you. No one disputes that Paul is the theologian par excellens of the early church. But as Paul admits:

"I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles, just as Peter had been to the Jews. For God who was at work in the ministry of Peter as an apostle to the Jews was also at work in my ministry as an apostle."

Summa: Different callings but working for the same God in the same Spirit!

Peter being a fisherman (and if written by him 1 Peter, does not have the same elegance and deepness as the epistles of Paul; 2 Peter, is most likely not written by Peter at all i.e. a late epistle probably around 150-160 AD) and Paul being an ex-Pharisee might explain some of the differences.

We do not know to much about Peter; but we know that he was born again at the pentecost and was filled by the Spirit time and time again; and did mighty deeds through the power of the Holy Spirit (which Acts tells us about).

Just because we have no explicit (except from 1 Peter 3:16 but again we are not sure that this letter stems from him; if so probably dictated) evidence that Peter had an In-Christ-expericence does not mean that he did'nt.

On the contrary he was regenerated and was operating in the power of the Holy Spirit; a Spirit which in fellowship with, draws you nearer and nearer to Christ.

We must assume even though not articulated that Peter had Christ in him even if he never (or just once) used that expression.

The question that started these conversations was: Peter's denial.

1. the saved/regenerated Peter would (probably even could not) not have denied Jesus Christ which he did'nt;

2. the unsaved and ungenerated Peter did and could deny Jesus Christ and because of this conditions he also could repent after Christ had risen.

Magnus
:-D


_________________
Magnus Nordlund

 2007/8/26 7:03Profile
Christinyou
Member



Joined: 2005/11/2
Posts: 3708
Ca.

 Re:

Act 10:25 And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped [him].

Act 10:26 But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.

Act 10:32 Send therefore to Joppa, and call hither Simon, whose surname is Peter; he is lodged in the house of [one] Simon a tanner by the sea side: who, when he cometh, shall speak unto thee.

Act 10:34 Then Peter opened [his] mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:

Act 10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.

Act 10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Act 10:46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

Act 11:2 And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him,

Act 11:4 But Peter rehearsed [the matter] from the beginning, and expounded [it] by order unto them, saying,

Act 11:7 And I heard a voice saying unto me, Arise, Peter; slay and eat.

Act 11:13 And he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter;

Act 12:3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)

Act 12:5 Peter therefore was kept in prison: but prayer was made without ceasing of the church unto God for him.

Act 12:6 And when Herod would have brought him forth, the same night Peter was sleeping between two soldiers, bound with two chains: and the keepers before the door kept the prison.

Act 12:7 And, behold, the angel of the Lord came upon [him], and a light shined in the prison: and he smote Peter on the side, and raised him up, saying, Arise up quickly. And his chains fell off from [his] hands.

Act 12:11 And when Peter was come to himself, he said, Now I know of a surety, that the Lord hath sent his angel, and hath delivered me out of the hand of Herod, and [from] all the expectation of the people of the Jews.

Act 12:13 And as Peter knocked at the door of the gate, a damsel came to hearken, named Rhoda.

Act 12:14 And when she knew Peter's voice, she opened not the gate for gladness, but ran in, and told how Peter stood before the gate.

Act 12:16 But Peter continued knocking: and when they had opened [the door], and saw him, they were astonished.

Act 12:18 Now as soon as it was day, there was no small stir among the soldiers, what was become of Peter.

Act 15:7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men [and] brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.

Gal 1:18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.

Gal 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as [the gospel] of the circumcision [was] unto Peter;

Gal 2:8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)

Gal 2:11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.

This is just a small overview of what Peter contended with from the circumcision. Peter mistakenly saying he was to go to the Gentiles when Paul met with him Paul got it straight. Paul wanted to go to his brethren also but he finally gave up and gave the revelation of Jesus Christ to the Gentile nations, even in Rome. Check out Paul's trip through The Acts of the Apostles also and you will see when Paul gave up.

Acts 28:25-28 And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that Paul had spoken one word, Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers, Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive: For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.

Then Paul only preached to those that were sent to Him, for two years.

Acts 28:30-31 And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him, Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him.

What was Peter preaching? Repent and be baptized and you will be saved. What was Paul preaching? Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved and The Christ that would be birthed in them.

Do you see the difference? I don't want to be contentious but Peter did not preach "Christ in you the Hope of Glory". Approaching it, Yes, but not fully understanding it or preaching it like Paul to the Gentiles.

Peter's understanding and coming close: 1 Peter 1:22-25 Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.

Paul: Colossians 1:27-28 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:

Colossians 3:1-4 If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God. When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory.

Paul making it plain to Peter, he was wrong and needed to speak the same Gospel which later Peter said, "which some things are hard to understand."

Galatians 2:12-14 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. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. 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?

This was the bus from Jerusalem which was the circumcision, being James, John and others to spy out the freedom that the Gentiles had in Christ and Peter defected back to them for fear of them, that is why Paul confronted him bring him back to the task at hand, Preaching the final Gospel of Paul that fulfilled the word of God. Colossians 1:22-25 In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister; Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church: Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

That is "Christ in you the Hope of Glory". This is the Gospel. Amen

In Christ: Phillip




_________________
Phillip

 2007/8/26 17:39Profile
Mangan
Member



Joined: 2007/4/19
Posts: 161
Sweden (Northern Europe)

 Re:

Brother, youre killing me with the amount of words! :-P. However I should make a go of it myself, so hold on, here it comes:

Im not sure that there are any substantial differences between Paul and Peter (just different use of words about the same reality), rather an accordance except for a dispute concerning Peter's hypocrisy concerning table-fellowship.

What was Peter's calling according to the Lord Jesus, let us see:

i. Lk. 24:46-49. He (i.e. Jesus) told them: "This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise form the dead on the third day, and repentance and forgiveness for sins will be preached in his name to all nations (i.e. Jews and Gentiles), beginning at Jerusalem. You are witness of these things. I am going to send you what my Father has promised: but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high".

ii. The Apostolic Council of Jerusalem (Chap 15).
vv.7-12. After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. God who knows the heart, showed that he acccepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the diciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.

iii. Paul writes in Roman 8:9 that: [...] if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.

Peter and the Jews and Gentile that resulted from Peter's missions was both repented, baptized and regenerated and would in Paul's vocabulary be partakers in/of the Spirit of Christ (do you see??)

iv. Again the dispute in Galatians is between the Apostolic Church and the Galatians; not between Peter and Paul they are in accordance after a minor dispute. The dispute and agreement between Paul and Peter which Paul is talking about in Galatians is
a. not about the Apostolic Council, and
b. must be of a later agreement between the parties that Paul should be the apostle of the Gentiles and Peter (and the other apostles) equivalent to the Jews.

If above is not the case either Luke is wrong or Paul. But this is the word of God so we have to harmonize these contradictions.

v. Acts is the only example we have of Paul's preaching to the gentiles (and hold fast your seatbelt) and is lacking his teaching of "Christ in you" because that teaching developed in his letters written to the congregations which he addressed (i.e. teaching to already Christians: Jews and Gentiles).

vi. Peter on the other hand, probably did'nt write any letter personally. He was no theologian but he had the Spirit of God with him and in him and in that case the Spirit of Christ.
We can be most sure that Peter had an intimate relation with the Lord Jesus Christ even if he does not give any such statement in paulinic words.

Magnus :-D


_________________
Magnus Nordlund

 2007/8/26 19:41Profile
Christinyou
Member



Joined: 2005/11/2
Posts: 3708
Ca.

 Re:

What do we do with this? Gal 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught [it], but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Expanded: Galatians 1:11-18 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers. But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus. Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.

Why did he see Peter? Reveal the revelation to him? If so did Peter understand? It is clear that in the short space of two weeks Paul could not have very extensively taught Peter the nature of the Christian religion that had been revealed to him and probably the time is mentioned here to show that he had not been under the teaching of the apostles which he clearly states, it was not revealed to him by man, but only by revelation by Jesus Christ.

Yes God had a very close relationship with Peter, saving him from being sifted by Satan and showing him forgiveness, "Peter do you love me?"
Feed my sheep, who were the Lords sheep? "The lost sheep of the House of Israel.

John 21:15-17 So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

Three times for the roosters crow. Forgiveness?
Complete.



In Christ: Phillip


_________________
Phillip

 2007/8/27 2:58Profile
Mangan
Member



Joined: 2007/4/19
Posts: 161
Sweden (Northern Europe)

 Re:

i. "Why did he see Peter? Reveal the revelation to him?"

*Answer: Yes! The revelation which the Lord Jesus Christ gave to him i.e. about the Gentiles as partakers in the faith and the new covenant.

ii. If so did Peter understand?

*Answer: Yes! we can see that he did that in Acts Chap 15.

iii. It is clear that in the short space of two weeks Paul could not have very extensively taught Peter the nature of the Christian religion that had been revealed to him and probably the time is mentioned here to show that he had not been under the teaching of the apostles which he clearly states, it was not revealed to him by man, but only by revelation by Jesus Christ".

*Answer:
Yes Paul's revelation was a true encounter with the risen Christ to/or in him (depending how you interpret the greek preposition). Yes, Paul's calling and gospel did not come from any human being ( just as the Apostles calling was not from a human being but from the risen Lord to preach the gospel to the world: there is only one gospel which is the same for jews aswell as gentiles). Paul did not get this revelation (i.e. the same revelation as Peter and the rest of the Apostles) from any human encounter, which gives him the authority and status as an apostle (which all have met with the risen Christ).

What did happen the two weeks in Jerusalem. Probably, that Paul shared his message with the twelve and they gave him the authority to carry on with his mission. Paul states in Gal. 1:9:

"James, Peter and John those reputed to be the pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of felllowship, when they recognised the grace given to me".

* The keywords: "they recognised the grace given to me" is significant. I.e. There was no difference in what Paul had experienced in content from what Peter and the rest had experienced with the Holy Spirit and the risen Christ.

*Again I state: the teaching of Paul about the nature of the new birth is a later development and only in his letters to already Christians.
In that, it is possible that Peter later took part in the depths of the pauline thoughts on the matter; however we can not be too sure (1 and 2 Peter is not consider to stem from the hand of the apostle himself).

Pax et bonum
Magnus ;-)


_________________
Magnus Nordlund

 2007/8/27 5:01Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re: Did Peter remain saved during his denial??

This is another example of Finney/Morrell reductionism. It also presumes that there is no difference between 'being saved' whatever that means and 'regeneration'.

Quote:
Peter needed to be converted after this incident: Luke 22:32


Here is a list of times that the NT uses the word [b][url=http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1994&Version=kjv]epistrepho[/url][/b] which is translated 'converted' in Luke 22:32...

If you follow the reductionism of Jesse you will make the astonishing discovery that Jesus had to be 'converted',demons could be 'converted' and that Paul was 'converted' just before he cast the demon out of the clairvoyant woman in Philippi. The point is that although the word can mean convert in our usual evangelical sense it is the usual word for 'turning around'. To build an argument that Peter was not yet 'converted' on this simple word is a serious error.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2007/8/27 16:08Profile
Mangan
Member



Joined: 2007/4/19
Posts: 161
Sweden (Northern Europe)

 Re:

Which one are you addressing? Me or someone else?

Quote: To build an argument that Peter was not yet 'converted' on this simple word is a serious error.

Who builds what on what? The question is not the greek verb which always should be interpret according to its context (such as you described it). However the verb seems from viewpoint of the context in Luke to imply a meaning close to metanioa.

Rather the question is: Could Peter deny Jesus Christ after his regeneration?
My view is that he could'nt or would'nt. But before he was regenerated he could and did!

The next question is of immense importance:
Is it even possible to call an ungenerated man saved?

Why is the question of Peter's denial so important in connection to his salvation? Well, if he was saved during his denying of Christ, then all the martyrs in the history of the Church died in vain (or atleast throwed away their life) for their Lord while Peter's denial was somehow ok because he was already saved!

These following words must be taken into consideration concerning this topic:

*Lk. 12:4-5. "I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body has power to throw you into hell, Yes I tell you, fear him.

*Lk. 12:8. I tell you, whoever acknowledges me before men, the Son of Man will also acknowledge him before the angels of God. But he who disowns me before men will be disowned before the angels of God.

Denying Jesus Christ (if you know anything of the history of the early martyrs) meant for the martyrs - apostacy and resulted in hellfire.

The regenerated Peter had according to the tradition a chance to prove this later on by choosing rather to die as martyr than to deny his saviour. We should therfore follow his example.

Lastly: It is wrong to to say that Peter was unsaved (from Gods perspective of time) when he denied Jesus the first time. However it is right to say from the perspective of the storyline that he was not yet bound for heaven because Jesus had not yet died and risen and Peter had not yet received the Holy Spirit. But again, from Gods perspectiv Peter was saved; from our perspective Peter was in the process of reaching it.

Magnus :-(


_________________
Magnus Nordlund

 2007/8/27 18:31Profile
Christinyou
Member



Joined: 2005/11/2
Posts: 3708
Ca.

 Re:

Quote:

Magnus wrote,

"The regenerated Peter had according to the tradition a chance to prove this later on by choosing rather to die as martyr than to deny his saviour. We should therfore follow his example."

"Lastly: It is wrong to to say that Peter was unsaved (from Gods perspective of time) when he denied Jesus the first time. However it is right to say from the perspective of the storyline that he was not yet bound for heaven because Jesus had not yet died and risen and Peter had not yet received the Holy Spirit. But again, from Gods perspectiv Peter was saved; from our perspective Peter was in the process of reaching it."

This pretty much shows where Peter was even before God the Father gave them to Jesus and Jesus "Kept them", Jesus said, "I have kept them that thou has given me," in thy name. Peter was already given to Jesus, even in the mind of God before it was manifest in the world.

Ephesians 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

This is Peters legacy, Matthew 16:17-18 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Not that Peters is the Rock but that the revelation of Father is what Jesus will build his church upon. The gates of hell will not and are not prevailing against His church, we are living proof.

Was Peter save before or after he denied the Lord three times. It really does not matter. But, in the words of Christ and Pentecost, He was and also it was revealed to Peter that Christ was his life and Paul revealed the mystery to him that even Christ was in Him, birthed by the Father, kept by the Holy Spirit's seal and the truth of the Incorruptable Seed of the Father Peter speaks of. 1 Peter 1:23

Text proof;

John 17:11-26 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are. While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled. And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves. I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth. Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me. And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.

"I in them", greatest Word I have ever heard. Who is the Word? John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

In Christ: Phillip


_________________
Phillip

 2007/8/28 2:59Profile
Mangan
Member



Joined: 2007/4/19
Posts: 161
Sweden (Northern Europe)

 Re:

Quote: Was Peter save before or after he denied the Lord three times. It really does not matter. But, in the words of Christ and Pentecost, He was and also it was revealed to Peter that Christ was his life and Paul revealed the mystery to him that even Christ was in Him, birthed by the Father, kept by the Holy Spirit's seal and the truth of the Incorruptable Seed of the Father Peter speaks of. 1 Peter 1:23

Yes I pretty much agree with you, except that
a. To deny Christ is to be denied at the judgement day before the angels (look at my last contribution). As ungenerated Peter could, and did deny Christ; as regenerated Peter would'nt and did'nt deny Christ (just like all the martyrs in history - who rather choose to be burned at the stake than to suffer eternal hellfire)

b. It was only Paul who had a revelation of Jesus Christ in him and has left a written account for it. We don't know whether Peter had been taught the theology of Saint Paul (2 Peter is a late account written in his name 150-160 ad), or if he had a similar experience by his own (though the biblical material is on your side, no doubt about it).

However it seems to me, that it is impossible to be a Christian without having Christ in you; given the fact that the function of the Holy Spirit is to reveal the presence of Jesus inside of us - and so likwise with Peter. With or without Pauls teaching about Christ in you Peter would surely had an similiar experience.

Magnus ;-)


_________________
Magnus Nordlund

 2007/8/28 5:10Profile





©2002-2021 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy