Monday, April 10, 2006
Follow Jesus?
Thank you all for your prayers for me. God has been faithful to answer and give me relief.
Does Jesus call people to follow Him as a condition to have eternal life or is the call to follow Him made after a person is converted? I think a close look at what happened to Peter will make this clear to everyone who has an open mind to biblical truth.
First, the account of Jesus telling Peter to “follow Him” must include all the statements made to this fact by Luke and Mark and Matthew and John. If we only read Matthew and Mark then it seems that Jesus clearly said to follow Him when He first met Peter, but that is not what happened, even though many evangelistic calls to have eternal life give this message. Let’s look at what Luke has to say and then Matthew’s and Mark’s account is made clearer.
After Peter had learned of Jesus from his brother Andrew, Andrew brought Peter to Jesus and Jesus told Peter that he would be called Peter instead of Simon (John 1:40-42). Then after a few days with Jesus, Peter had seen the Lord heal his mother-in-law (Luke 4:38,39).
Then they apparently left Jesus and went back to work and Jesus came to where they were coming in from fishing one morning (they had caught nothing) and asked them to put one of the boats out in the water to give Him room to give a speech to those who were crowding around Him. (Luke 5:1-11)
After He finished teaching He said to Peter, put out your nets again for a catch. After Peter saw the nets breaking because of all the fish, he, Peter saw Jesus for the first time as God and was converted. It was after this revelation and their conversion that Jesus then said I will make you fishers of men or follow Me and they, Peter, James, and John and probably Andrew & Philip followed Him.
The lordship group should look at this aspect of the actual account of the first disciples calling instead of saying that Jesus said to follow Him as a condition to have eternal life before a person sees who He is and is converted by convicting faith... which I think is proof that Jesus never asked anyone to follow Him without them first being converted or born again to everlasting life.
The bottom line is that simply telling someone to follow Jesus does not save them, also telling them they must follow Him as a condition to be saved is not biblical either and is a false gospel. Many so-called Christian religions preach and teach this or some other works implied gospel, but heresy abounds in such organizations. John 3:16, John 5:24, John 6:27-29, John 6:47, John 11:25,26 are clear truths to what God has said in His word is required for everlasting life.
So if this is clear biblical truth doesn’t this relieve the tension between the gospel accounts of Matthew, Mark and Luke against John’s account of a person simply believing in Jesus to have everlasting life apart from discipleship calling? I think it does.
Does Jesus call people to follow Him as a condition to have eternal life or is the call to follow Him made after a person is converted? I think a close look at what happened to Peter will make this clear to everyone who has an open mind to biblical truth.
First, the account of Jesus telling Peter to “follow Him” must include all the statements made to this fact by Luke and Mark and Matthew and John. If we only read Matthew and Mark then it seems that Jesus clearly said to follow Him when He first met Peter, but that is not what happened, even though many evangelistic calls to have eternal life give this message. Let’s look at what Luke has to say and then Matthew’s and Mark’s account is made clearer.
After Peter had learned of Jesus from his brother Andrew, Andrew brought Peter to Jesus and Jesus told Peter that he would be called Peter instead of Simon (John 1:40-42). Then after a few days with Jesus, Peter had seen the Lord heal his mother-in-law (Luke 4:38,39).
Then they apparently left Jesus and went back to work and Jesus came to where they were coming in from fishing one morning (they had caught nothing) and asked them to put one of the boats out in the water to give Him room to give a speech to those who were crowding around Him. (Luke 5:1-11)
After He finished teaching He said to Peter, put out your nets again for a catch. After Peter saw the nets breaking because of all the fish, he, Peter saw Jesus for the first time as God and was converted. It was after this revelation and their conversion that Jesus then said I will make you fishers of men or follow Me and they, Peter, James, and John and probably Andrew & Philip followed Him.
The lordship group should look at this aspect of the actual account of the first disciples calling instead of saying that Jesus said to follow Him as a condition to have eternal life before a person sees who He is and is converted by convicting faith... which I think is proof that Jesus never asked anyone to follow Him without them first being converted or born again to everlasting life.
The bottom line is that simply telling someone to follow Jesus does not save them, also telling them they must follow Him as a condition to be saved is not biblical either and is a false gospel. Many so-called Christian religions preach and teach this or some other works implied gospel, but heresy abounds in such organizations. John 3:16, John 5:24, John 6:27-29, John 6:47, John 11:25,26 are clear truths to what God has said in His word is required for everlasting life.
So if this is clear biblical truth doesn’t this relieve the tension between the gospel accounts of Matthew, Mark and Luke against John’s account of a person simply believing in Jesus to have everlasting life apart from discipleship calling? I think it does.
Comments:
<< Home
Be fair my friend. Most of us would not say that following Jesus is a condition of eternal life, but that it is a necessary by-product. A fig tree mustn't produce figs to be an fig tree, but if it does not produce figs, it is probably not one; as all fig trees (with few exceptions) produce figs. If you'll remember, Jesus cursed the fig tree that did not produce figs (Mat. 21:19).
No, one mustn't follow Jesus completely to be justified, they must only believe. Yet, if they are not living in obedience to Christ, one must wonder why God is not 'finishing the good work' He started (Phi. 1:6).
No, one mustn't follow Jesus completely to be justified, they must only believe. Yet, if they are not living in obedience to Christ, one must wonder why God is not 'finishing the good work' He started (Phi. 1:6).
Thanks for your comments guys.
Adam,
The problem is that some, and that some is increasing more, very specifically preach following Jesus, giving up possesions, or some time of repentent "work" as a condition to receive everlasting life. Everlasting life is a gift in which I know that you agree completely with.
But when this is preached then the clear message of everlasting life being a gift is confused and many stumble over it because of it(Romans 9:32,33).
The message of simply believing in the Christ alone for everlasting life is the message that we must preach for the Holy Spirit to accomplish His job for those who would hear the word (John 16:9)and be convicted for conversion to be effective. Adding any qualifiers only muddles up the GOOD NEWS of grace thru faith.
I understand your concern about "why God is not 'finishing the good work' He started".
But I see no reason to change the saving message of God to mankind because of those who seem to not be continuing in the good works they were created for.
In fact I would say that maybe those who are not continuing the good work may not have had their eyes opened by the Spirit to the clear message of believing in Christ alone because they have never actually heard the clear message without it being adulterated by a foolish qualifier added to the message. What say you?
Kc, its amazing that many doctrines hang on out of context scripture or not taking clear passages literally to try to interpret the unclear.
I don't think the Holy Spirit inspired gospel according to John and Pauls letters would leave out following Jesus as a condition for everlasting life if following Jesus was a condition. In fact Paul makes it clear that following Jesus is only after a person is born again, Romans 12:1 is certain to be talking to "brethren" BEFORE he urges them to present there bodies to follow God, not before and not during a call to salvation.
Adam,
The problem is that some, and that some is increasing more, very specifically preach following Jesus, giving up possesions, or some time of repentent "work" as a condition to receive everlasting life. Everlasting life is a gift in which I know that you agree completely with.
But when this is preached then the clear message of everlasting life being a gift is confused and many stumble over it because of it(Romans 9:32,33).
The message of simply believing in the Christ alone for everlasting life is the message that we must preach for the Holy Spirit to accomplish His job for those who would hear the word (John 16:9)and be convicted for conversion to be effective. Adding any qualifiers only muddles up the GOOD NEWS of grace thru faith.
I understand your concern about "why God is not 'finishing the good work' He started".
But I see no reason to change the saving message of God to mankind because of those who seem to not be continuing in the good works they were created for.
In fact I would say that maybe those who are not continuing the good work may not have had their eyes opened by the Spirit to the clear message of believing in Christ alone because they have never actually heard the clear message without it being adulterated by a foolish qualifier added to the message. What say you?
Kc, its amazing that many doctrines hang on out of context scripture or not taking clear passages literally to try to interpret the unclear.
I don't think the Holy Spirit inspired gospel according to John and Pauls letters would leave out following Jesus as a condition for everlasting life if following Jesus was a condition. In fact Paul makes it clear that following Jesus is only after a person is born again, Romans 12:1 is certain to be talking to "brethren" BEFORE he urges them to present there bodies to follow God, not before and not during a call to salvation.
Making the message clear does not necessarily mean making it simple.
I could say that Kris went to Starbucks and ordered a venti soy chai latte. This is a clear message.
I could also say that Kris went. This is the same message, but simpler.
Both express the exact same idea, that Kris went, however the first explains fully and with more clarity exactly what happened.
Perhaps the same is true with the gospel message. We could give the simple version: 'believe and receive'. And then we would have the countless walk the aisle and 'believe'.
OR we could give the more clear message: 'believe in the LORD, the Savior of humanity, and He will give you eternal life and will come into your life and forever make you other.' This is the clearer message of what truly transpires.
We LORDship are asking for a clearer message. We understand that we can abbreviate the message and make is simple. 'Turn or burn'. But with such confusion that is associated with the abbreviated and simple version, we would opt for the more clearer message so that we can assure that people are not 'believing' and yet having no clue as to what this belief entails.
Does that make sense?
I think I have an entry idea. Keep up the good work. So far you have given me two ideas. :)
I could say that Kris went to Starbucks and ordered a venti soy chai latte. This is a clear message.
I could also say that Kris went. This is the same message, but simpler.
Both express the exact same idea, that Kris went, however the first explains fully and with more clarity exactly what happened.
Perhaps the same is true with the gospel message. We could give the simple version: 'believe and receive'. And then we would have the countless walk the aisle and 'believe'.
OR we could give the more clear message: 'believe in the LORD, the Savior of humanity, and He will give you eternal life and will come into your life and forever make you other.' This is the clearer message of what truly transpires.
We LORDship are asking for a clearer message. We understand that we can abbreviate the message and make is simple. 'Turn or burn'. But with such confusion that is associated with the abbreviated and simple version, we would opt for the more clearer message so that we can assure that people are not 'believing' and yet having no clue as to what this belief entails.
Does that make sense?
I think I have an entry idea. Keep up the good work. So far you have given me two ideas. :)
"That if you confess with your mouth, 'Jesus is Lord,' and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." (Rom. 10:9)
I agree that following Christ is not a condition for being saved, but the result. Perhaps the reason more people aren't maturing is that they've been convinced that they have no part in the process, so they go about their business, relying on God to complete the work by Himself.
I agree that following Christ is not a condition for being saved, but the result. Perhaps the reason more people aren't maturing is that they've been convinced that they have no part in the process, so they go about their business, relying on God to complete the work by Himself.
Hi Kris!
You said this in your comments:
maybe those who are not continuing the good work may not have had their eyes opened by the Spirit to the clear message of believing in Christ alone because they have never actually heard the clear message without it being adulterated by a foolish qualifier added to the message.
This was very well put. I appreciated the post as well. Keep on!
Post a Comment
You said this in your comments:
maybe those who are not continuing the good work may not have had their eyes opened by the Spirit to the clear message of believing in Christ alone because they have never actually heard the clear message without it being adulterated by a foolish qualifier added to the message.
This was very well put. I appreciated the post as well. Keep on!
<< Home
