The speaker said that "A person is justified based upon the faith of Jesus Christ, that Jesus Christ trusted the Father." This is a common ‘mid-Acts’ doctrine, built upon the preposition ‘of’ which does not even appear in the Greek text. The KJV is not wrong. The KJV is right, as the word is needed to make a complete sentence. However, for ‘mid-Acts-ers’ to build a doctrine about ‘the faith OF Christ’ in this verse, is not correct. I am not educated in Greek, neither was I a good student in English class, but I do know how to look at words and compare them. I am certainly NOT trying to change the English, nor the meaning of anything. When I was a ‘mid-Acts-er’ I was taught I never needed to "go to the Greek", but now that I am no longer a ‘mid-Acts-er’, I find it interesting to observe it.
Shown below is Gal 2:16, with the Greek words directly AFTER the English translation.
Notice that the 2 places the word ‘OF’ appears directly in front of ‘Jesus’, only His name is in the Greek.
Also notice that when the verse is talking about our ‘belief’ (faith) ‘IN’ Jesus Christ, there IS a Greek word for the preposition ‘in’.
Also notice the 5 times the Greek word [dikaioo] appears and how it was translated:
Gal 2:16 Knowing [eido] that [hoti] a man [anthropos] is [dikaioo] not [ou] justified [dikaioo] by [ek] the works [ergon] of the law [nomos], but [ean me] by [dia] the faith [pistis] of Jesus [Iesous] Christ [Christos], even [kai] we [hemeis] have believed [pisteuo] in [eis] Jesus [Iesous] Christ [Christos], that [hina] we might be justified [dikaioo] by [ek] the faith [pistis] of Christ [Christos], and [kai] not [ou] by [ek] the works [ergon] of the law [nomos]: for [dioti] by [ek] the works [ergon] of the law [nomos] shall [dikaioo] no [ou] [pas] flesh [sarx] be justified [dikaioo].
I thought it was unusual for the speaker to use an example from Jer 2:11-13, to show that Christ is our life.
If I heard the speaker correctly, I think he said that "Jesus Christ didn’t see the records in heaven. Jesus Christ went to the cross trusting the Father, that He would accept His sacrifice and would raise Him from the dead. He trusted -- but He didn’t know for sure -- IF there was a mark (sin) against Him." The Son of God being unsure of His pure, sinless life, that guaranteed His resurrection? This could not possibly be true! Jesus absolutely knew that He would rise again:
John 2:19-22 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
21 But he spake of the temple of his body.
22 When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.
I expect this concept the speaker presented goes along with their doctrine that Jesus -- while He was on earth -- was "another Jesus" (2 Cor 11:4) from the "risen, glorified Lord" that appeared to Saul in Acts 9. ‘Mid-Acts-ers’ DIVIDING Jesus into 2 Jesus’. THAT is also outrageous!
This is David Dowell, saying, "Think about it!"
