Brian:
Someday it will be as easy as picking up the phone, I think. I hope when that day comes it will still be as cheap!

The problem for me is that I've started responding to you three times, but haven't felt comfortable with the way my response progressed. It's hard because there are so many smaller topics that need to be addressed on the way to seeing the Ultimate Salvation of All in the scriptures.

Ok, since I'm sending this, I'll make a few comments. I wanted to start with the scripture that Ross gave pointing to the "faith of Christ" and "work of God". These phrases are in the Genitive in Greek, and as such can be translated as "God's work" or the "work from God (to you or for you)".

That's how we deal with the Genitive based solely on grammar - we have two options. The only way to tell which is right is to look at the context of the passage, which sometimes means understanding the larger segment of a letter, if not the whole letter - like the "righteousness of God" in Romans - if we understand the 1st half of the letter, there is no way to understand that phrase as any thing other than "God's righteousness to you, as a gift, in Christ". (note, we may need to address the phrase, "in Christ" at some point - it's really foreign to the American ear, and the only way we are accustom to such a phrase is through our churches and their presentation of scripture. For a hint of where I'm going with that, look at Hebrews 7 for the discussion about Melchizedek and the tithe that the Levites paid to him - how did the Levites pay that tithe when they didn't exist yet? Let me know if you would like to discuss that) I'm not alone on my assessment of the genitive, Daniel Wallace says the same in "Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics".

So, with that said, I look at the context of your first response to my Rom 1:16-18 question.

In Gal 3:22, Ross, you seem to be making the point that it's Christ's faith that counts, but notice the rest of the verse. We see that the promise, by Christ's faith (or just as valid, "faithfulness"), is given to them that believe. I think we should also remember the rest of the context of Galatians. It wasn't written to announce the Ultimate Salvation of All, but rather to denounce legalism that had crept into the Galatians' church through the Judaizers ... like those from James who wanted them to be circumcised - though we know James was himself, at some point, opposed to putting Gentiles under law (The first council in Acts). So here Paul is emphasizing man's faith over man's works - something he does quite often. Perhaps "emphasizing" is not strong enough, for he says, in paraphrase, "cursed is anyone bringing you another gospel!" It Seems that Paul was very upset over the introduction of works for obtaining God's favor in our walk. Do you notice that he does not include "belief" or "faith" as a work? Rather, faith stands in opposition to works when it comes to gaining God's favor for this life or the next.

For Rom 3:3, we need to look through the whole book and understand the context. This is why I wanted to do voice! In short, Paul is telling the Jews that the Nations have access to Christ just as much as they themselves do, and in the same way they do - by faith, apart from works. In much of the Romans context, Paul is dealing with all the nations of the world (all the groups of people). All these Nations can be grouped into two groups. Jews and Non-Jews, or we might say Jews and Gentiles, or Jews and Greeks (since Greek was the universal language at the time). So just because some Jews do not believe the teachings that were given to them in the Old Testament, that doesn't mean God won't do what He said he was going to do. If God says He's going to do something, and man says God isn't going to do that thing, God does it regardless of what man says. Notice in Romans 3, the individual's unbelief doesn't stop God from dealing with the nation (the group of individuals). As in Romans 9:24, the vessels that God has prepared beforehand for glory are "from among" the Jews and "from among" the Gentiles. Two interesting things there... first, it's not "all" Jews and not "all" Gentiles, but only those from each group that were chosen. Secondly, Paul picks up his theme again in Chapter 9, explaining that Gentiles have the same access to the same salvation as the Jews do (Romans 6, 7, 8 are the parenthetical thoughts, not 9,10, & 11).

Your short reference to Romans 9:19 (who has resisted his will) has an answer in the next verse: "Who are you o man who answers back to God?!" The potter has a right to do what he wants with his own clay! If he wants to make "cookies to burn" that's his right! (But I believe He doesn't make cookies to burn for eternity, that he destroys those who chose not to believe. Those who were not chosen by God for salvation from His wrath are those who chose not to believe. If those who do not believe choose to believe, they will be shown to have been chosen by God - see Rom 11:23 - "if they (some Jews) do not continue in their unbelief, they will be grafted in again (to the tree of Christ) for God is able to graft them in again") Notice God is able! And He gives men the freedom to believe or not to believe.

Now we can focus all of our time on God's Choice vs. Man's Free Will, but I think that will be fruitless; people have been wasting their time on that one for centuries. Some people like to do that! They like to sit around and ask each other, "which came first, the Chicken or the Egg?" But I'm not one - I see both man's freedom and God's choice in scripture. I see them so close to one another in the same letters, that it seems to me that Paul never even considered that they may be opposed to each other. If he did consider it, he didn't address it very well! But I will say this, if a man claims to be saved by faith, that claim is not necessarily one of human pride. There are those who make that claim and believe that faith works in accord with grace. It's by God's grace we are given righteousness (which is what we need to avoid His wrath). We are given righteousness by His grace, and we receive it by faith. If I send you a gift via UPS, and the UPS man comes to your door with the gift, and you say, "I don't believe in free gifts! I didn't pay for whatever is in that box! Why are you only giving me one box Mr. UPS man?... ad infinitum" - if you respond like that, the UPS man is going to get back in his truck and leave you gift-less. I sent the gift requiring your signature. I did not require you to pay for the gift in the box, only that you sign for it. You can't pay for it, because you don't have the resources to pay for it. It's not burdensome to sign for it is it? What kind of man receives a box with a check in it for $9,999,999,999,999,999.00 and says it's not proper to sign for that gift? IF he really wanted to give me all this money for free, Brian wouldn't have required me to sign for the package. What a hypocrite Brian is - telling me that I will get a free gift from him then making me sign for it! Sheesh!

I'd better stop there, or I'll run out of time... if we can do voice, let me know, but I'm not really interested in real-time chat programs - that won't save any time or any keystrokes.

Thanks siblings! Have a good memorial day!

Brian

From Kenneth B Visscher visscher@telus.net

Brian;
I read with interest your last off topic email, sorry I took so long
to get to it, but we have had some things to take care of around here which limited my time on the computer the last few days.

You said: "(But I believe He doesn't make cookies to burn for eternity, that he destroys those who chose not to believe. Those who were not chosen by God for salvation from His wrath are those who chose not to believe. If those who do not believe choose to believe, they will be shown to have been chosen by God - see Rom 11:23 - "if they (some Jews) do not continue in their unbelief, they will be grafted in again (to the tree of Christ) for God is able to graft them in again") Notice God is able! And He gives men the freedom to believe or not to believe.

Now let me see if I understand this Brian. You are saying 3 things here that make me shudder brother.

1) That God has chosen those who will be saved and those who will not be saved.

2) That the ones God chooses to burn as "cookies" will be destroyed, or come into non-existence.

3) That God gives man the "freedom" to choose whether or not to believe or not believe.

Also, I cannot quite fathom how Romans 11:23 speaks of being destroyed? Read verses 25 and 26! They are in BLINDNESS AND UNBELIEF for a REASON! And that reason is for the fullness (not partness or partly burnt "cookies") of the GENTILES be brought in! Who is exempt from salvation in verse 26?

So I will more particularly answer these three things I see in your paragraph, the three things I have listed, and will do so in their numbered order.

1) That God has chosen those who will be saved and those who will not be saved.
HOGWASH. That is Calvanism brother, and it shows a God who is a respecter of persons. It also reveals a God who cannot cross the boundary of man's will to "choose" (as if man could). To believe that, you must throw out all the verses of God's conclusions. He concludes ALL in unbelief. He concludes ALL in unrighteousness and in ungodliness. SO HE CAN HAVE MERCY ON ALL. If God chose you, and not me, that would mean you are better than me, and that is not how God views His creatures!

2) That the ones God choosed to burn as "cookies" will be destroyed, or come into non-existence.
Again, this is ERROR. Our creator will not forsake anything or anyone of His creation. Impossible. Everything in Creation comes into a HIGHER place, not a LESSER place. Hang on to your boot straps Brian. Hell is AN ADVANCEMENT, NOT A LESSER PLACE. It is part of God's SPIRITUAL PROGRESSION FOR HIS CREATED PEOPLES. In other words. When an ungodly person is cast into hell, they are not taken to a state of eternal nothingness. They are actually advancing towards full restoration and salvation in every part of their created beings, nothing being left undone. Right now, those in hell, are LONGING for the lake that burns with fire and brimstone. They pray for it, they hope for it, they look forward to it and long for the day that they will be cast into it! Why? Because DEATH WILL DIE! That which is still part of their separation will be REMOVED. Brian, God ALONE is responsible for the fall of creation and the bondage of sin and iniquity that is on mankind! God ALONE bore that burden. He DID NOT put that on Adam! He put that on HIMSELF. HE DID IT! He subjected all of creation to futility, not to annihalate them into non existance, but to bring them to that place of perfection in pure spirit form - NONE EXEMPT. And one more thing before I leave 2). God has chosen that EVERYONE WILL BURN!. No one at all, not one person, is exempted from the fires of burning. No one, not one person will not taste of that brimstone. (divinity - gk. Strongs 164). We have all been destined to be these burnt cookies you speak of. Rev 21:7 But He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.

3) That God gives man the "freedom" to choose whether or not to believe or not believe.
HOGWASH! No SUCH THING. Choose you this day! says the word, but balance it brother! We must be brought to Christ BY FATHER, who leads us to Him for salvation. And if God gives you belief to believe, you can't NOT believe.

And if God does not give you belief to believe you CAN'T believe.! Each man in his own order, when God wills it, will come to believe. Free will or man as a free moral agent does not play into this scenario. That is one of the biggest deceptions in modern christendom today, that we gotta "choose". You can't choose if God doesn't give you the ability to do so. And if you do, your choice won't last if God didn't ordain you to make that choice! There is no freedom in man! We are slaves, either to truth and righteousness, or sin and death. In fact, we have a duality here that is giving us confusion at times. We have a flesh man that can't do right, and a spirit man that can't do wrong. The two are as separate the one from the other so that we cannot reconcile them or give them peace. That is why God promises us a "spiritual body". In fact, your spirit already has a body! That is the one Paul longed to be continually/progressively clothed with. Such a statement of giving us the choice to believe or not believe is not fair to nations which have never known of God of Jesus.

I will add one thing to all three sentences above. And that is this Brian. God HAS CHOSEN WHO WILL AND WHO WON'T BE SAVED IN THIS WORLD. But He has chosen that in the next, that ALL would know Him.

Be careful what you write Brian, cause as a student of the Word of God, I am careful with what I read.

Bless you as you continue to seek truth.

Ken

ps. I want to ask you some questions Brian. The fire that Christ baptises His people with - Acts 2:4. and the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone. Is there any difference? What about the pillar of fire that kept Israel during their wilderness sojourn? That pillar of fire originally ignited the Altar of Insence and the Brazen Altar, and burned for 1500 years (albeit faggots of wood were added by the Levites to give it fuel). Are the fires that were in the Old Testament Tabernacles any different than the fires of Acts 2:4 and the lake that burns with fire and brimstone?

E-Mail Conversation between {Brian} {Ken} and {Gbug (God Bless You Greatly)}

{Brian} Hi all.
I'm still here, but my wife and I have been working in the yard all week. Curse the Fall! :)
Ken,
I am careful with what I write. And, you also know by now that I too am a careful reader. I am very careful! (not boasting, just the fact). I'm not perfect with my understanding of the hereafter - just as your understanding is not perfect, unless you no longer see in a mirror dimly - but I am careful with my system of interpretation, striving always not to read what I want to see into the text, striving always to understand the context of what is written so that I don't strain gnats and swallow camels, so to speak. My use of the word "cookies" (which you seemed to pay particular attention), was an attempt to give some lightheartedness to a serious subject.

{Ken} Hello Brian, very nice to hear from you again. I love it when someone points out my own personal boastings to me, it gives me the chance to repent of any form of self-exaltation and to further humble myself before the Lord. I for one don't want to strain at words or mis conscrued comments. Suffice it to say that we may read something into each other's dialogue that may or may not be there, so we need to have the grace to give each other elbow room if need be. Thus far I don't have a problem with seeing things different. After all, we may not come to total agreement on doctrine, and may lack unity there, but we will never come to disagreement on the unity of the faith.
As for the answers to your queries above. Such things are open to a million interpetations, none better than the other. Problems arise however if one becomes "religious" about what they feel is "true" doctrine. Such religiosity will cut me off right away. I can't stand religion, and I bet you will find I am the most unreligious guy you'd ever care to know. But my love for God doesn't separate me from my fellow man either. So to leave the specific answers to your queries, I am inviting Ross and Linda and maybe even Ted to jump in here with more specific answers. Been typing alot on the computer this morning as I have joined Watchman Net's forums and have put in some replies under the handle "vissfam" there. http://pub117.ezboard.com/bwatchmannet So my fingers are tired of doing the walking for now. If I perchance get some inspiration to answer more fully, I will do so... bless you Brian...and your wife as you pull weeds under the curse. We do the same thing over here!
Ken

{Gbug} HI:

BRIAN, I WOULD VENTURE TO GUESS THAT KEN TOOK YOUR BURN COOKIES SCENARIO AS I DID, BECAUSE IT FITS IN PERFECTLY WITH WHAT ED'RS BELIEVE...THAT MAN IS DESTROYED IN ETERNAL DEATH OR IN ANNIHILATION AS SOME TERM IT. IT SURELY DOESN'T DESCRIBE THE ET SCENARIO.

{Brian} So, if my confusion over the "reflection of a dim mirror" makes you shudder, then go ahead, shudder! I won't shudder at you when you claim to be a prophet or when you claim that we will be God - though I think I should shudder at both. Regarding the GENTILES, I think it's better to read this as "NATIONS".

{Gbug} EITHER WAY DOESN'T CHANGE IT. TO READ IT AS GENTILE PEOPLES, GENTILE NATIONS OR GENTILES MATTERS NOT TO UR BELIEFS.

{Brian} Aside from that, it's important to remember that Paul's theme throughout Romans is to convince the Jews that the Gentiles have the same access to salvation that they have. Both groups have the same access to the same God, by His grace, through faith. Look at 9:24. "whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among the Nations". Who does God call? Jews and Gentiles! How many from each group? Only some! Otherwise, Paul wouldn't have said, "from among" (in greek, "ek" - out of, or out from).

{Gbug} BASIC UR THEOLOGY TOTALLY AGREES IN THAT HE ONLY CALLS SOME FROM EACH GROUP & WOULD AGREE WITH YOU THAT THIS SPEAKING OF THEIR EARTHLY SOJOURN.

{Brian} I'm not going to go into the OT to look into Types. I have the NT where things are stated plainly (unless it's one of Jesus' parables). If we go to the OT, I can make those types say anything I want. For instance, why wasn't Moses allowed to go into the Promise Land? He represents the Law and the curse that comes with it - Only Jesus (Joshua), who represents grace, could take people into the Promised Land. Also, when Israel went into the Promised Land, ALL Israel went in! But didn't a whole generation die in the wilderness? So not ALL that ever existed went in, but ALL that were alive at the time of entrance went in; ALL who followed Jesus went in! Those that "came out" (of Egypt) with Moses, ALL fell in the Wilderness. These are both very good interpretations I think, but they disprove UR.

{Gbug} THEY DON'T DISPROVE UR AT ALL. THEY SHOW ONE RANK & ORDER ONLY IN GOD'S PLAN OF UNIVERSAL SALVATION. MAN DOESN'T NEED A BODY TO BE SAVED. IN ALL OF HIS EXTISTENCE HIS BODY IS ONLY FOR A FLEETING MOMENT. GOD IS PRIMARILY INTERESTED IN MAN'S SPIRIT AND SOUL. IF IT IS NOT DEALT WITH NOW WHILST IN AN EARTHLY BODY, THAT SPIRIT SOUL IS STILL JUST AS SUBJECT TO SALVATION WITHOUT A PHYSICAL BODY AS IT IS WITH ONE.

{Brian} I don't understand which came first, the Chicken or the Egg - though I could make a really good argument for the egg. So I admit plainly that I don't understand Free Will and God's Choice. But, I see both in the NT.

{Gbug} LIKE YOU BRIAN, I ALSO SEE BOTH. BUT I ALSO SEE & AGREE WITH WHAT TED SAYS ABOUT THE STRONGEST INFLUENCE ON THE WILL AT ANY GIVEN TIME. I SEE THAT INFLUENCE CAN BE DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY OF SELF, OF SATAN, OF THE HOLY SPIRT & BE AN INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL INFLUENCE. I SEE AN OPERATION CALLED FREEWILL IN THE BIBLE & I ALSO SEE A MUCH HIGHER OVERALL OPERATION THAT ENCOMPASSES THAT WILL, EITHER IN RESTRICTIVE OR PERMISSIVE INFLUENCES. OUR WILL IS ALWAYS BEING FREELY INFLUENCED BYEXTRANEOUS THINGS. IN THAT SENSE ONLY IT IS A TOTAL FREE WILL. BUT IN THE SENSE THAT WE APART FROM ANYTHING ELSE CAN EXERCISE IT FREELY IT IS NOT A FREE WILL. MAN'S WILL IS EXERCISED BY UMPTEEN THINGS IN THIS UNIVERSE AND IS ENCOMPASSED & RESTRICTED BY NOT ONLY NATURAL LAWS BUT ALSO BY GOD'S LAWS & IS RESTRICTED BY BOTH GOD AND SATAN. I DON'T SEE ANY UNEXPLAINABLE CONTRADICTION IN MAN'S CHOICES NOR GOD'S CHOICES. IF ANY WOULD CARE TO SEE HOW IT ALL COMES TOGETHER, THEY ARE INVITED TO READ MY STUDIES ONLINE ENTITLED "FOR WHO HATH RESISTED HIS WILL?" AND "GOD OMNIPONTENT REIGNETH."


{Brian} Jesus (we believe He is God incarnate, right?) said of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling. "Behold, your house is being left to you desolate! For I say to you, from now on you will not see me until you say, "Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!" You see here that the whole group of people but not all of the individuals rejected their Messiah. God was "willing" to gather them together. But they were "unwilling". Then, they suffer the consequence of "their" unwillingness. So, I guess man does have some freedom to choose his own way? And I guess man pays the price for his choice.

{Gbug} I SEE THIS IN CONTEXT WITH GOD'S OWN STIFF NECKED, REBELLIOUS
PEOPLE - EX.32:9. NOT UNBELIEVERS. THIS SCRIPTURE TO ME ACTUALLY CONFIRMS THAT FALLACY OF ABSOLUTE FREE WILL, FOR ALL ISRAEL SHALL YET RECEIVE CHRIST AND BE SAVED - RO.11:26; ISA.66;13.

{Brian} Don't you think that Free Will and God's Choice are possibly both true, and that the understanding of it is perhaps a little above us? After all, don't we now see dimly, as in a mirror? Remember, their mirrors in those days weren't nice like the one's we have today.

{Gbug} PERSONALLY, I NO LONGER SEE FREE WILL AND GOD'S CHOICE BEING TOO HARD TO UNDERSTAND AT ALL. NOT THAT I CAN SEE EVERY ASPECT OF IT BUT ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT IT MAKES UR EASIER TO GRASP ONCE THE SOVEREIGN WILL OF GOD IS MADE PLAIN ENOUGH TO SEE.

{Brian} Isn't God "just" in sending His Son to the cross? He judges sin there on the cross. And in that, He also is the Justifier, the One who makes right, those who are of the faith of Jesus.

{Gbug} UR THEOLOGY TENDS TO GIVE GOD ALL THE GLORY FOR MAKING IT RIGHT SO TO SPEAK. HIS JUSTICE STEMS FROM HIS JUDGING
SIN ON THE CROSS TO MAKE AMMENDS FOR THAT WHICH SEEMS UNJUST IN INVOLVING MANKIND IN HIS PLAN OF CREATION THAT INVOLVES LIFE COMING OUT OF DEATH. THE CROSS IS A FORM OF DIVINE APOLOGY TO MAN FOR HAVING SUBJECTED HIM TO THE VANITY OF SIN AND DEATH (RO.8:20) BEFORE THE HOPE OF ETERNAL LIFE.

{Brian} The UR camp makes a big deal out of
the phrase "the faith of Jesus". Here (in Romans 3:26) it says He is the Justifer of the one who is *of* the faith of Jesus. That's the Greek way to say it, and the English way is to say it is like this, "the one who has the faith of Jesus". Now concerning "faith of Jesus", the UR camp says this is Jesus' faith - not ours. I won't address the context now, which I believe plainly shows that to be false, but I will look only at the grammatical construction for the moment. Look in Romans 4:16
Romans 4:16 For this reason it is by faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, Here is the same grammatical construction - of the faith of Abraham. So my question is this: Is it Christ's faith or Abraham's faith that saves us? -. This is the sort of quagmire we get ourselves into when we strain gnats try to force our theology into the text.

{Gbug} THERE'S NO REAL QUAGMIRE HERE. THE SCRIPTURES REVEAL VERY CLEARLY THAT JESUS ALONE, NOT US, NOR ABRAHAM, IS BOTH THE AUTHOR & FINISHER OF OUR FAITH. PRIMARILY, SAVING FAITH MUST COME FROM JESUS FIRST IN ODER TO BECOME KNOWN AS "OUR FAITH." Only when His faith is imputed to us shall the justified live by "HIS FAITH" (Habk.2:4) & not by any faith that originated out from their own fallen, ungodly, unjustified psyches in order that we might have "THE FAITH OF GOD." [LIT.GRK. MRK.11:22). "SHALL OUR UNBELIEF (ABSENCE OF PERFECT FAITH) MAKE THE FAITH OF GOD OF NON EFFECT?" RO.3:3.

{Brian} If we look more broadly at the text, we are forced to see that the context shows "of the faith of Jesus" to mean "those who have faith in Jesus".

{Gbug} THE SCRIPTURAL FACTS ARE BRIAN, ONLY THOSE WHO HAVE FAITH IN JESUS CAN HAVE THAT FAITH BECAUSE HE IS THE AUTHOR OF IT. AND THOSE WHO YET HAVE ONLY THEIR OWN FAITH APART FROM THAT FAITH WHICH JESUS AUTHORS & IMPARTS, CANNOT POSSIBLY HAVE FAITH IN JESUS!

{Brian} Those who are "of the faith of Abraham" means those who believe the promise, like Abraham believed the promise God made to him, and "those who believe" are from all nations, not just the Jewish people - therefore, Abraham is the father of us. He's definitely not the father of everyone who ever existed - for the context doesn't allow that. He's the father of those who believe, those who have faith, just like he had faith. The operation of faith was different in Abraham's day and even in Christ's time before His ascension,
when natural belief with obedient works and sacrifices according to law "counted for righteousness." Ro.4:1-4; Jas.2:22. Imperfect human works and imperfect human faith along with numerous substitutionary blood sacrifices by the priesthood--earned Israel favour and forgiveness with God.

Now, in this new dispensation, under the auspices of grace, only perfect obedience in perfect human works and in perfect faith---executed by our most High Priest who gave Himself as a substitutionary sacrifice once and for all mankind-earned all men the favour of saving grace from God. The fact now is, "the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise BY FAITH OF JESUS CHRISTmight be given to them that believe." Gal.3:22. It doesn't say by us having faith in Jesus Christ..it says by the faith of or from Jesus Christ. The perfect faith that the Father had in the shed blood of His Son, was imputed as a propitiatory shelter for the sins of the Old Testament saints in a display of His sovereign righteousness and mercy - Ro.3:23 [Concord. Lit]. Now, unlike the dispensation under the law, we ourselves can obtain faith and acceptable righteousness only through "that righteousness which is THROUGH THE FAITH OF CHRIST, the righteousness which is OF GOD BY [remember..His, not our] FAITH" (Phil.3:9; Ro.10:6), "even THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD which is BY [comes by the] FAITH OF JESUS CHRIST UNTO all and UPON all them [that are given the power of grace through His faith to] believe." Ro.3:22. However, under the old covenant, "before [this kind of] faith came, we were kept under the law, shut
up unto THE FAITH WHICH SHOULD AFTERWARD BE REVEALED. Wherefore the law was our [natural earthly] schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by [a different kind of faith, even Christ's] faith. But [now] after THAT FAITH [even "the promise of the Spirit through faith" Gal.3:14] IS COME we are no longer under a schoolmaster." Gal.3:23-25. We are under the N.T. "law of faith." Ro.3:27.
Sadly, many brethren are still under that old carnal mind subject to "the law of sin and death" and to its dependence on natural faith and law. Know ye not that ye are no longer under the old law and its workings concerning faith. Rather, we are under the much more highly magnified (Isa.43:21) working of a higher spiritual law namely that of new covenant grace - Ro.6:14,15. Now we become "the children of God by [the] faith in Christ Jesus" (Gal.3:26) but only when His faith is imputed unto our knowledge by the Spirit. The faith that is dwelling in Christ becomes ours also when He chooses to
reveal Himself in and to us. So, even while looking at the phrase "of the faith of Abraham" we are forced also to see that "all" does not mean everyone that ever existed. "All" means "all believers", and the reason Paul uses the word is to stress to the Jewish mindset that salvation is for people of all nations, not just the Jews.

{Gbug} DOES IT MEAN also WHEN IT SAYS "THAT GOD MAY BE ALL IN ALL." (1COR.15:28)
THAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT ALL BELIEVERS? HARDLY...HE IS ALREADY IN ALL
BELIEVERS AT ANY GIVEN POINT OF TIME.
GBUG