I know that to say that grace is NOT unmerited favour, flies in the face of popular Christian doctrine, but let’s examine this for a moment. The Scriptures state (Ps 138:6 NKJ) that, Though the Lord is on high, Yet He regards the lowly; But the proud He knows from afar. And again, (Prov 3:34 NKJ) Surely He scorns the scornful, But gives grace to the humble.
James quotes this Scripture in James 4:6 … “God resists the proud, But gives grace to the humble.”
Peter also quotes this Scripture in 1Pet 5:5 NKJ … for “God resists the proud, But gives grace to the humble.”
Problem; If grace is unmerited favour, then why do ONLY the humble get it while it is denied to the proud.
Clearly something does not make sense IF we hold to the false premise that grace is unmerited favour. It is clearly not unmerited while ever some do not merit it.
If the cross changed nothing, could it have changed this? Could it be that this is how God dealt with humanity before the cross and somehow James and Peter got were still teaching Old Covenant practices?
We do know that James was not very educated. After all, it was James, who in the Bible book named after him, says that God tempts no man neither can he be tempted. And yet when we read Genesis 22:1 we see that God most certainly does tempt man, and when it comes to God not being temptable, was Jesus God when he was tempted of the Devil in the wilderness??? James is really not all that reliable. By the way, Christianity loves to squirm out of the Genesis 22 reference by saying that God TESTED Abraham but never TEMPTED. Such crap! They have clearly not read the Septuagint version of the Old Testament (written by Jewish scholars fluent in Greek, and writing for Greek consumption 250 years before Christ and almost always quoted by Jesus and His Apostles),in which the very same Greek word that is used in Genesis 22:1 is used by James. Oh well! facts are such messy things, aren’t they.
But back on topic now! Proverbs, James and Peter, are in total agreement. They are all teaching old covenant truths, which are ALWAYS based on dualism. But the cross changed all that, and now UNITY reigns.
Hi, as I have always seen it, Abraham was TESTED and not TEMPTED. I have never been fortunate enough to examine the Greek version, so I do not know ehat the translation is. Could you please post the translation so we can all be educated?. Thank you.
Clearly the Greek word is the same for tempt (entice to commit sin) or test (evaluate ones character) and can mean either depending on the context. There is a big difference between God trying to induce a person to sin and Him testing their Character.
This is a nice article but the writter did not give room for contextual meaning or evaluation, I completely agree with Austin Haygood view, yes the Greek word for ‘tempt’ is the same, yet it could mean different things depending on usage, this is where context comes in, which the writter of this article didn’t consider in his submission…
In classical Greek the verb πειράζω is used, first in the sense of “to attempt,” and then in the meaning of “to try, to test,” but not in the meaning of “to tempt” to evil; yet the latter connotation is common in the Greek of the Septuagint and the New Testament.
Temptation (in the Bible) | Encyclopedia.com
https://www.encyclopedia.com/religion/encyclopedias-almanacs…and…/temptation-bible