 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > Pretrib Rapture and Mystery stuff ... | Forum Quick Jump
|
 | 
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 6/11/2004 1:47 AM (GMT -6) |   | Larris,
quote:
Larris: For when you are put out of the Church you are put out to Satan, who then has the authority to torment you, and eventually cause your all out death, if you do not repent.
But the verse says Paul delivered him over to "all out death" THAT HIS SPIRIT MIGHT BE SAVED!! You are ignoring the plain grammatical meaning of that sentence. The death IS the discipline, just like in 1 Cor. 11. So the fact that the contexts are different is irrelevant. Both passages confirm that God will, in some cases, KILL us to discipline us, lest we be condemned with the world.
Furthermore, the passage in 2nd Cor. says "if ANY..." Thus, it is not referring to THE MAN in 1 Cor. 5. Again, you are ignoring the plain grammatical meaning of the word "ANY."
wjs | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/11/2004 7:06 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
(1way states:): The reason why the Jerusalem council ever even met, was because of doctrinal differences between the circumcision and the uncircumcision.
The reason why the Jerusalem council ever even met, was because of doctrinal differences between the circumcision and the uncircumcision. Paul even summed up his defense argumentation as being that gospel that he preaches. If they taught the same exact gospel then it is not remotely reasonable to have needed to even entertain such a dispute. You should not invalidate one teaching with another.
I understand why you think this since the term "circumcision" is used in THREE DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT WAYS in the Word.
FIRST it is used regarding the ACT of circumcision itself.
SECOND it is used as referring to all the Jews as a whole.
And THIRD it is used AFTER the establishment of the NEW COVENANT, to refer only to those JEWS who had believed yet INSISTED that along with believing on him you MUST ALSO 1. Keep the entire Law of Moses i.e. the sacrifices et. and 2. BE CIRCUMCISED.
In the quote above the mistake regards taking what is DIFFERENT and MAKING IT ALL THE SAME. And then taking what is the same and making it different something commonly practiced in Dispensational theology.
Those present at the Jerusalem council were all the SAME in that they were all JEWS who were circumcised. Therefore they were of the circumcision.
But they were divided in that aspect of their circumcision in that the argument was not brought about by ALL the JEWS present but by a specific group from the Pharisees that had believed who were teaching the Gentiles they must be circumcized. One has to make the carful distinction of exactly which circumcision is being spoken of.
It's much the same mistake I addressed in an earlier post in which those not understanding or having an accurate knowledge of the history of "Israel" do not realize the different usages of the term "Israel" in the Word of God.
Not understanding the three distinct usages of the term 'circumcision' can cause one to wrongly divide the word of truth.
Acts 15 gives us the first recorded record of when this THIRD usage of referring to believing Jews adding circumcison to the gospel when they endeavord to get the believing Gentiles to accept it. These were at first just a small minority of the Jewish believers, out of the sect of the Pharisees.
Acts 15
1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.
And being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren. And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them.
But there rose up CERTAIN (MEN) of the SECT OF THE PHARISEES WHICH BELIEVED saying, THAT IT WAS NEEDFUL TO CIRCUMCISE THEM, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
These "certain men" who had come down to where Paul and Barnabas were preaching the gospel, were NOT SENT by the APOSTLES and elders in Jerusalem, but went of their own accord and began preaching ANOTHER GOSPEL that ADDED the requirement of CIRCUMCISION as a MUST for salvation. In the letter after the dispute on this issue the Apostles and elders of THE CHURCH, NOT of the unbelieving Jews specifically stated they had NOT SENT THESE MEN.
15:23 And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia.
Forasmuch as we have heard, certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:
Those believers in Christ who were of the sect of the PHARISEES were not sent by the Apostles and Elders of the Church in Jerusalem, who themselves ALL clearly knew that Jesus did not teach "circumcision" but taught to THE CIRCUMCISION (Jews) and to THE GENTILES that the ONLY requirement for one to be saved was to believe in Him and the ONE Gospel he preached.
Under the covenant of the LAW of MOSES, before the NEW COVENANT in CHRIST, Physical circumcision was an absolute requirement for every Jew, and for ANY GENTILE who wanted to be saved, by joining themselves to ISRAEL. ONLY the act of circumcision gave any Gentile EQUAL standing with Israel as one born in the Land and of the seed of Abraham.
For a circumcised Jew to go into the house of or eat with an uncircumcised Gentile was considered a very grave SIN. For an uncircumcised Gentile to enter into the place of worship in the Temple was forbidden in the Law of Moses. But under the New Covenant in the "Law of Christ" the temple made with hands was no longer the place of worship, but each believer in Jesus Christ be he physically circumcised Jew or physically Uncircumcised Gentile collectively and equally together formed the NEW TEMPLE where God was worshipped in the hearts of each.
HOWEVER there were "some" certain men of the sect of the Pharisees that believed who without approval from the apostles and elders who knew these things, began to ADD circumcision which was in keeping with the Law of Moses NOT the gospel of Christ. They were endeavoring to bring not only Gentiles but the believing Jews also BACK UNDER THE OLD COVENANT. This group was not the main body of Pharisees who had not believed, nor was it neither the Sadducees, nor the Scribes nor of the Sanhedrin the ruling body of UNBELIEVING JEWS in Jerusalem. But ONLY those out of the sect of the Pharisees that had believed, who like all the other believers in Christ at this time were being spoken against by the Unbelieving secular and religious leaders of Jerusalem.
Because of the threat of PERSECUTION those who had believed of the sect of the Pharisees endeavored to bring back and institute the law of circumcision among the Gentiles, so that they could still go and worship in the temple without being considered UNCLEAN by the other non believing Jews.
It was the Jerusalem Council of Apostles and Elders NOT of the Jews, but of the Church in Christ, that settled the matter
6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. 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. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the LORD Jesus Christ we shall be saved, EVEN AS they.
This clearly shows that Peter preached the SAME GOSPEL as Paul and that PETER was the FIRST ONE SENT TO PREACH IT. It was Peter that finally settled the matter among them. It was at this time that the realization of the MYSTERY, that the Gentiles would be fellowheirs with the Jews through Chrsit and not through the Law of circumcision. was coming to it's fulfilment by FIRST being made known to Peter and the rest of the apostles then in Paul.
The reason it is confusing is because of the Jews that endeavored to add both the Law of Moses and circumcision either did not realize the Gentiles did not have to be circumcised or they puposely becasue of greed and envy sought to add the burden on the Gentiles.
Jesus did not send the apostle just to the JEWS, he sent the apostles to BOTH the Jews and the GENTILES equally. This understanding of Jesus gospel was opened up to them BEFORE Paul was ever converted, and was the mission he gave them immediately before he arose into heaven.
Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: AND that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name AMONG ALL NATIONS, beginning at Jerusalem.
Mark 16:14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature (NOT JUST THE JEWS). He (weather Jew or Gentile) that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he (be he circumcised Jew or UNcircumcised Gentile) that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; (which BOTH those of the "circumcision" did in Acts 2 and then those of the UNcircumcision did in Acts 10 by the mouth of PETER.)
Matt. 28:18 ALL power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach ALL NATIONS (ethnos, all ethnic populations, GENTILES)...teaching them to observe ALL things whatsoever I have commanded you.
SEARCH AND SEE, that Jesus NEVER commanded any form of physical CIRCUMCISION whatsoever. NOT to the Jews and NOT to the Gentiles. Yet MOSES had commanded circumcision, and by it MANY in Israel in the days of Jesus MADE THEIR LIVING. This is why certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed started trying to introduce circumcision into the gospel of Christ, among the MULTITUDE of Gentiles which believed, FOR THE MONEY! Do you think "circumcision was FREE"? Paul flatly states that they came around both before and AFTER the matter was settled for the specific purpose of FILTHY LUCRE, MONEY!
Titus 1:3 9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers. For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake.
HEY, preaching the gospel was FREE, until CIRCUMCISION was ADDED to it, and then you had to PAY FOR THAT. As the multitudes of Gentiles were added to the Church all the circumcision boys could see was a $100-dollar bill pasted right to the top of every foreskin they could chop off. ALL of the Pharisees were trained in CIRCUMCISION and they CHARGED for it. THAT was why they wanted to ADD it as a requirement for salvation.
After Peter speaks of how the Gentiles received the gospel and were saved BEFORE they were ever circumcised, the debate over the issue was pretty much settled.
12 Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them.
And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me: Simeon 9PETER) hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.
Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.
James makes it clear that they are not there to teach nor to enforce the Law of Moses, "For Moses of old time hath in every city THEM THAT PREACH HIM." THEY the apostles, elders and disciples of the Lord DID NOT PREACH MOSES, they preached and taught CHRIST alone! However time upon time it is said that they preached and reason of Christ out of the law and the Prophets. The apostles knew how to correctly and rightily divide the Word of God regarding the gospel of Christ out of the scriptures, ONLY CERTAIN MEN out from among those who believed the gospel they all preached, took it upon themselves to them PREACH MOSES and especally circumcision, as an ADDED requirement for the salvation in Christ for the purpose of making MONEY.
22 Then pleased it the apostles and elders with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas and Silas, chief men among the brethren: AND they wrote letters by them after this manner;
(Dear Gentiles,)
The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia.
Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment: It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth. (and confirm what Paul and Barnabas had taught them all along. So that they would know that ALL the apostles taught the VERY SAME GOSPEL.) For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
(Lot's of Love XXXOOO, Peter, james, John, Matthew, Thomas etc. etc.)
30 So when they were dismissed, they came to Antioch: and when they had gathered the multitude together, they delivered the epistle:
Which when they had read, they rejoiced for the consolation.
And Judas and Silas, being prophets also themselves, exhorted the brethren with many words, and confirmed them.
And after they had tarried there a space, they were let go in peace from the brethren unto the apostles. Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still. Paul also AND BARNABAS continued in Antioch, teaching and preaching the word of the Lord, with many others also.
I am sorry but I am not the one that is taking this event out of context and trying to prove that Paul received some special mystery Gospel that he taught all by himself to the Gentiles, that was TOTALLY DIFFERENT than anything all the other apostles, elders and disciples of the Lord taught.
You are taking the actions of a FEW certain men out of the SECT of the Pharisees that believed and reading it onto ALL the apostles, elders and disciples of the Lord EXCEPT Paul. Dispensational interpretaton make Paul into something he NEVER WAS, and produces a GOSPEL he did not preach, while falsely proclaiming that those apostles before him, preached a different gospel to the JEWS entirely.
In essence it makes of THREE different gospels first by ignoring the FIRST REAL gospel, then by giving Paul a special mysterious Gospel, and making it different from the other perverted form of the gospel that it says all the other apostles preached to the Jews. When they did not even just preach THE PERVERSION TO BEGIN WITH.
They ALL taught the EXACT SAME GOSPEL, the preached Jesus and the resurrection, they did not PREACH MOSES, nor the Law. But as time went on those who believed of the sect of the Pharisees who insisted that the Gentiles must be circumcised and keep the law INCREASED in power and number over the apostles and Elders so that by the time Paul returned to Jerusalem, they had stirred up all the people, and were beginning again to have the power to persecute those of Christ who did not teach the gentiles they must be circumcised.
Acts 21:15 (many years AFTER the meeting in Acts 15) And after those days we took up our carriages, and went up to Jerusalem. There went with us also certain of the disciples of Caesarea, and brought with them one Mnason of Cyprus, an old disciple, with whom we should lodge. And when we were come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly.
And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present. And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry. And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law: And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.
These believing Jews were not upset because Paul taught a different gospel than any of the other apostles, they were upset because they had been LIED TO about what Paul was preaching. Paul NEVER taught the Jews that they did not have to keep the law of Moses nor circumcise their children nor walk after their customs. Yet Paul taught MANY JEWS that were out there among the Gentiles he taught. And he taught the SAME gospel, the same mystery and preached the same Christ, that all the other apostles preached. But because Paul did not teach the observances of the Law, and did not teach circumcision, they FALSELY accused him of actually teaching AGAINST IT, which he NEVER DID.
Because Paul observed all the requirements of the Law of Moses when he was with the Jews teaching and preaching Christ to them. And he observed ALL the requirements of the Law of CHRIST when he was with the Gentiles teaching and preaching to them.
1 Cor. 9:16 For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel! For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me, what is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel. For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more. And unto the Jews I BECAME AS A JEW, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law,(HE BECAME) as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law. To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.
When Paul was with the Jews, he BECAME as a Jew under the Law, that he might preach Christ among them without offending them. All of the apostles and disciples of the Lord that taught the gospel did the exact same thing. When they were with the unbelieving Jews, or the believing Jews that were "weak" in the faith, they observed the Law of Moses regarding what you could eat and NOT eat, and they circumcised their own children. They observed ALL the Jewish laws and customs when they were with unbelieving Jews, or newly converted believing Jews, so as not to offend them and turn them away from hearing the gospel, that they might win some of them to Christ.
Anywhere the apostles and disciples of the Lord went among the nations to preach the gospel of the Kingdom of God, a.k.a. the gospel of Christ, a.k.a. the gospel of Grace, a.k.a. the gospel of God, a.k.a. to Paul "his" or "my Gospel when he preached it, THEY ALL observed and respected the various customs of those to whom they went so as not to offend people, so as to win them to Christ. With the nation of Jews they became exactly like the Jews in ALL of their customs and Laws. When with the Gentiles they became like the Gentiles in the observance of their customs and laws whenever and wherever it was possible to do WITHOUT breaking the general Law of God that was applicable both under the Old and New Covenants, in that they did not bow down and serve other GODS, just to win the Gentiles.
ONE area where Paul himself choose not to partake of the Gentile customs was in the area of EATING. When among the Gentiles Paul kept all the same requirements of the Law regarding FOOD that was taught in the Law of Moses. This he did so as not to take ANY CHANCE WHATSOEVER, of offending any Jews who might accidentally see him eating a PORK SANDWICH, become offended and then not be able to hear what he had to say concerning Christ, SO THAT THEY TOO would someday be able to eat bacon and eggs without thinking they would rot in hell for it.
1 Cor. 8:8 But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse. But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to them that are weak. For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols; And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ.
Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.
Another area that would have been BIG BUCKS $$$, besides getting a crisp hundred dollar bill for every Gentile foreskin, would have been selling the Gentiles KOSHER FOOD, which was something else the Pharisees were involved in that made them $$FILTHY LUCRE$$. The LOVE OF MONEY was why they went about to accuse Paul of teaching the Jews not to observe the laws of circumcision and the dietary laws. Yet Paul kept both, even taking Timothy who was half Jew and and half Greek and circumcising him, due to the Jewish, belief and custom of which anyone who was born of a Jewish woman WAS A JEW considered 100% Jewish, even if the father was a GENTILE. Therefore since Timothy was a JEW in the eyes of the JEWS Paul took him and circumcised him.
This shows clearly that Paul taught the same gospel all the other Apostles taught in that he did not teach the Law of Moses, but he did not teach AGAINST the Law of Moses, and observed all of it's customs, EXCEPT when it came to keeping company with Gentiles. However to the Gentiles he did teach against the Law of Moses in that he taught them they did not have to be circumcised.
Acts 16
1 Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek: Which was well reported of by the brethren that were at Lystra and Iconium. Him would Paul have to go forth with him;and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek. And as they went through the cities, (WHAT DID PAUL DO?) they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem.
All of these actions on the part of Paul would NOT be in keeping with the supposed new secret mystery Gospel claimed by many today that he preached ONLY to the Gentiles. The truth is that Paul became all things to all men that he might by all means save some of them.
1 Cor 16:16 For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel! For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me, what is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel. For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more. And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; to them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.
Since Paul became as a Jew when with the Jews, and became as a Gentile when with the Gentiles, then WHY did Paul think he had the right to confront Peter for doing what seems to be the SAME thing?
Gal. 2:14 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?
We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
WHY did Paul live as a Jew when with the Jews, and as a Gentile when with the Gentiles and then get all over Peter for doing the same thing? The answer lies in the REST OF THE STORY.
Gal 2:11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. 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.
It’s a simple as a clear-cut case here of “FOLLOW THE LEADER”.
Contined in next post because I can't seem to get the bold black letters to OBEY me....
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/11/2004 7:13 PM (GMT -6) | | As we left off,
Paul had been going all over the place showing the Jews that he was observing the Law, and then when he was with the Gentiles living as they did? The answer lies in the REST OF THE STORY.
Gal 2:11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. 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.
It’s a simple as a clear-cut case here of “FOLLOW THE LEADER”.
Before those certain men of the sect of the Pharisees who believed (also called the circumcision, because they wanted to add circumcision to the gospel of Christ.)...before they came down to Antioch Peter was teaching and eating with the Gentiles just like Paul was. Then when the Pharisee boys showed up Peter got scared and separated himself from the Gentiles he’d been companying with and teaching the gospel. Had Peter stood strong when those certain men of the sect of the Pharisee’s came down, and stayed with the Gentiles, the other Jews who were also eating with the Gentiles would not have not have followed his lead, resulting in even Barnabas getting carried away from the truth of the gospel.
It’s just like in Braveheart where Mel Gibson as William Wallace tells Robert the Bruce that if he will stand strong and lead the Scott’s would follow him to freedom. And just like Robert the Bruce wimped out and followed the nobles loosing the advantage of NUMBERS and thus causing the Scott’s to be defeated. So also Peter out of fear of the Pharisee boys (something he’d had a problem with before.) withdrew and separated himself from the Gentile believers. Then the other Jews along with Barnabas followed with him. And what could have been nipped in the bud right then and there turned into a great big argument between Paul and the circumcision boys of the Pharisee’s, with the poor new Gentile converts to the faith standing right in the middle of the whole thing listening.
Peter in writing to the Galatians reveals details not given to the events of Acts 15. The following is a record of this event with that of Galatians in italics and Acts in regular font.
Acts 15 & Gal 2
1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
And Peter 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
When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, ;
insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.
And Paul went up by revelation,
And being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren. And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders,
Paul communicated unto them that gospel which he preached among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means he should run, or had run, in vain.
and they declared all things that God had done with them. But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses
But neither Titus, who was with Paul, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out the liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:
And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. And when there had been much disputing,
Paul saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, and 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? We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid. For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.
I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
(Pauls words reproved Peter, and he repented and once again gained the boldness in Christ to speak the truth.)
Then 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. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the LORD Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them. And after they had held their peace,
And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto Paul, they gave to Paul and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that Paul and Barnabas should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. Only they would that Paul and Barnabas should remember the poor; the same which Paul was forward to do.
And James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me: Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.
Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.
Then pleased it the apostles and elders with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas and Silas, chief men among the brethren: And they wrote letters by them after this manner;
(DEAR BELOVED BELIEVING GENTILES,)
The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia. Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment: It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth. For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;
That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
(LOVE, XXXOOO
ALL us other apostles, elders and disciples of Jesus)
So when they were dismissed, they came to Antioch: and when they had gathered the multitude together, they delivered the epistle: Which when they had read, they rejoiced for the consolation.And Judas and Silas, being prophets also themselves, exhorted the brethren with many words, and confirmed them.
But when Peter was come to Antioch, Paul withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. 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.
Paul confronted Peter twice. Once at the council in Jerusalme before all, and then later face to face over the matter. Peter however repented due to Paul's confrontation and reproof. What happened to Peter could happen to anyone, given the circumstances he was in. It is not that a person falls, but that they get back up and repent that counts in the end.
And again this is what caused the whole problem to begin with. Had Peter stood with Paul on the truth of the gospel the whole episode could have been avoided, and those of the circumcision stopped before it got out of hand as it did. Regardless, though Peter was a GREAT man of God, and taking courage from Paul’s stand repented and stood up in front of the Jerusalem council and spoke the truth. It is clear time upon time upon time, when you have enough scripture in evidence that Peter and Paul preached the EXACT SAME GOSPEL in the exact same way to both Jews and Gentiles, EVEN THOUGH their ministries were primarily directed at one group. Nevertheless it was THE SAME GOSPEL of the mystery of God, that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs with the Jews and partakers of the promises of God in Christ through the ONE Gospel.
In Christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/11/2004 10:22 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Larris: stated: For when you are put out of the Church you are put out to Satan, who then has the authority to torment you, and eventually cause your all out death, if you do not repent.
Jeff stated this: quote:
But the verse says Paul delivered him over to "all out death" THAT HIS SPIRIT MIGHT BE SAVED!! You are ignoring the plain grammatical meaning of that sentence. The death IS the discipline, just like in 1 Cor. 11. So the fact that the contexts are different is irrelevant. Both passages confirm that God will, in some cases, KILL us to discipline us, lest we be condemned with the world.
NO Jeff the verse does not say Paul delivered him over to ALL OUT DEATH, that his spirit might be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. What translation are you looking at? Or is this the interpretation you are giving it. For I do not see the interpretation you are giving it in any of the translations I list below:
KJV
In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
NIV
When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, 5hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.
AMP
In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, on the man who has committed such a deed. When you and my own spirit are met together with the power of our Lord Jesus,You are to deliver this man over to Satan for physical discipline [to destroy carnal lusts which prompted him to incest], that [his] spirit may [yet] be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
NLT
Concerning the one who has done this, I have already passed judgment in the name of the Lord Jesus. You are to call a meeting of the church,and I will be there in spirit, and the power of the Lord Jesus will be with you as you meet. Then you must cast this man out of the church and into Satan's hands, so that his sinful nature will be destroyed and he himself will be saved when the Lord returns.
NIRV
When you come together in the name of our Lord Jesus, I will be with you in spirit. The power of our Lord Jesus will also be with you.
When you come together like that, hand that man over to Satan. Then his sinful nature will be destroyed. His spirit will be saved on the day the Lord returns.
It is common knowledge that the meaning of handing someone over to Satan is to put them out of the Church. Out from the Church, out from the protection of God, out where Satan can buffet them and sift them like wheat, that PERCHANCE they will repent so that they may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. Repentance brings them BACK to Church and the Church is to welcome them with forgiving open arms.
However if they do not repent and they DIE they will be judged according to their works and most often cast into hell at the resurrection of the unjust Christian or no.
God's form of disiplin is not to KILL YOU OFF everytime you commit a grave sin. If he did that half of us wouldn't be here today. God gives us every ample opportunity to repent. And just like a human parent there might come a time with a child when he refuses to obey the rules, that he is KICKED OUT OF THE HOUSE until such a time as he can straighten up. And if he never straightens up he can be DIS-OWNED, and dis-inherited.
You also stated: Furthermore, the passage in 2nd Cor. says "if ANY..." Thus, it is not referring to THE MAN in 1 Cor. 5. Again, you are ignoring the plain grammatical meaning of the word "ANY."
No I am not ignoring the grammatical meaning of the word "any". And where are you getting the word "any" from anyway?
2 Cor. 2:6 Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many. So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him.
Read the previous context Paul's taling about the letter (1st Cor.) that he wrote to them, where he told them to put the guy OUT of the Church. The guy repented and they forgave him and welcomed him back and so did Paul.
I see where you are getting the word "any" now, from the next verses regarding THINGS not people.
9 For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things. To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;
I don't understand how you got "the man" out of "any thing"???? Since the words "any thing" refer to the SIN that the man committed and not to the man himself. Paul is simply speaking there of forgiving people for ANY THING they may do, once they repent, and alowing them back into the Church.
I don't believe it's God that kills people to disipline them. God uses no such thing in this day and time, what God does do is present them with a standard and commandments that they are to line up with. And if they do not so it they deliver themselves over to Satan. I say that today they deliver themselves over to Satan since the Churches for the most part do not walk in love to begin with, and do not know how to properly disiplin God's children for the purose of encouraging them to repent.
People more or less wind up killing themselves when they do not line there lives up with God. God isn't the one doing it. If you descide to go jump off a 10 story building and you die for it, you can't blame God because he created gravity. His laws are just as binding and ultimately can cause premature death if a person dose not repent. However the POINT of being handed over to Satan is to make you miserable enough to turn to God BEFORE you die. Once you die in your sin that's it.
If the Church kicks you out, there is another accorss the street that is glad to have you no matter what kind of sin you are locked up in. That is why today each man has the power by his actions to deliver himself over to Satan weather he is in a Church or not. In fact whole Churches are delivered over to Satan. And for the most part many do in fact wind up dead without ever having come to repentance, thinking as they do they are saved no matter what. Hence many so called spirits will NOT be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. And all because of the false gospel of grace based on verses of Paul's letters taken out of context.
In christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 6/12/2004 5:11 AM (GMT -6) | | Larris,
quote:
I see where you are getting the word "any" now, from the next verses regarding THINGS not people.
9 For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things. To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;
I don't understand how you got "the man" out of "any thing"???? Since the words "any thing" refer to the SIN that the man committed and not to the man himself. Paul is simply speaking there of forgiving people for ANY THING they may do, once they repent, and alowing them back into the Church.
Here's the passage:
2:5 But if anyone has caused sadness, he has not saddened me alone, but to some extent (not to exaggerate) he has saddened all of you as well. 2:6 This punishment on such an individual by the majority is enough for him, 2:7 so that now instead you should rather forgive and comfort him. This will keep him from being overwhelmed by excessive grief to the point of despair. 2:8 Therefore I urge you to reaffirm your love for him. 2:9 For this reason also I wrote you: to test you to see if you are obedient in everything. 2:10 If you forgive anyone for anything, I also forgive him—for indeed what I have forgiven (if I have forgiven anything) I did so for you in the presence of Christ, 2:11 so that we may not be exploited by Satan (for we are not ignorant of his schemes).
ANY person forgiven for ANYTHING does NOT = ONE MAN forgiven for ONE SPECIFIC SIN. There is no way you can get the man of 1Cor. 5 into this context without eisegesis. Indeed, Paul had actually rebuked the Corinthians for NOT being "saddened" by the man in 1 Cor. So how can you assume he's being discussed in 2 Cor.? He may have been dead already!!
quote:
I don't believe it's God that kills people to disipline them. God uses no such thing in this day and time
So if a man takes of the Lord's supper unworthily he will not be killed in this day and time as they were in 1 Cor.? Was that only during the Acts period?? 
quote:
For when you are put out of the Church you are put out to Satan, who then has the authority to torment you, and eventually cause your all out death, if you do not repent.
Are you now claiming that delivering someone to Satan for "the destruction of the flesh" can NOT mean "all out death?"
wjs | | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 6/12/2004 6:41 AM (GMT -6) | | Larris,
quote:
Acts 15
1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.
And being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren. And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them.
But there rose up CERTAIN (MEN) of the SECT OF THE PHARISEES WHICH BELIEVED saying, THAT IT WAS NEEDFUL TO CIRCUMCISE THEM, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
15:23 And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia.
Forasmuch as we have heard, certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:
There is a very simple way to understand the passages above - to wit:
God revealed to Peter that uncircumcised Gentiles could be "cleansed" by faith alone. He told the believing Jews in Jerusalem the same thing. They were SURPRISED. There is no evidence whatsoever that they (the believing Jews) concluded that THEY should cease to keep the Law - Christ had commanded them otherwise in Mat. 5. Thus, once Gentiles began to be converted, there were those who went out from Peter and gang (who were still keeping the Law in obedience to Mat.5) who, because they did not understand (YET) Paul's gospel, tried to make the Gentiles keep the Law also. Peter admitted that he knew they didn't need to, although he didn't understand why until Paul laid before him the gospel which he preached to the Gentiles. THAT'S WHAT GALATIANS SAYS! NOTHING was said at the Acts 15 council to imply that the believing Jews were to STOP keeping the Law. Indeed, as late as Acts 21, James said that ALL they had agreed to was that the Gentiles didn't have to keep the Law. It's this simple: The heavens and the earth had not passed away - thus, not one jot or tittle of the Law was to be annulled yet.
quote:
It was Peter that finally settled the matter among them.
That matter was settled at Acts 10. The Acts 15 council merely gave formal sanction to it for those in Jerusalem who were troubling the Gentile believers.
quote:
It was at this time that the realization of the MYSTERY, that the Gentiles would be fellowheirs with the Jews through Chrsit and not through the Law of circumcision. was coming to it's fulfilment by FIRST being made known to Peter and the rest of the apostles then in Paul.
As I have already said, the mere FACT that Gentiles could be saved apart from the Law cannot possibly be the mystery insomuch as THAT mere fact was not revealed to Paul first. The mystery WAS revealed to Paul first as is clearly shown by the verses 1WAY has quoted.
quote:
Jesus did not send the apostle just to the JEWS, he sent the apostles to BOTH the Jews and the GENTILES equally. This understanding of Jesus gospel was opened up to them BEFORE Paul was ever converted, and was the mission he gave them immediately before he arose into heaven.
Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: AND that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name AMONG ALL NATIONS, beginning at Jerusalem.
Mark 16:14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature (NOT JUST THE JEWS). He (weather Jew or Gentile) that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he (be he circumcised Jew or UNcircumcised Gentile) that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; (which BOTH those of the "circumcision" did in Acts 2 and then those of the UNcircumcision did in Acts 10 by the mouth of PETER.)
Matt. 28:18 ALL power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach ALL NATIONS (ethnos, all ethnic populations, GENTILES)...teaching them to observe ALL things whatsoever I have commanded you.
Not only are the verses you quoted equivocal, your intepretation of them contradicts Galatians which leaves the separate ministries of Paul (to the Gentiles) and the Apostles (to the Jews) INTACT. Moreover, Christ had "commanded" them to keep every jot and tittle of the Law til heaven and earth pass away.
quote:
SEARCH AND SEE, that Jesus NEVER commanded any form of physical CIRCUMCISION whatsoever.
Christ taught them to keep EVERY JOT AND TITTLE OF THE HEBREW BIBLE UNTIL HEAVEN AND EARTH PASSED AWAY. That pretty much includes circumcision - and James, in Acts 21, interpreted it accordingly.
quote:
Wherefore my sentence is, ... that we WRITE unto THEM, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.
James makes it clear that they are not there to teach nor to enforce the Law of Moses, "For Moses of old time hath in every city THEM THAT PREACH HIM."
Larris, you're overlooking the obvious. The apostles WROTE to "THEM" - i.e., the Gentiles. If they were concerned about the Jews knowing THEY weren't supposed to keep the Law, why didn't the apostles write to THE JEWS??????? Because the Jews had "THEM IN THE SYNAGOGUES" to teach the LAW which THEY were supposed to KEEP - because Christ TOLD THEM TO - not for justification, but for covenant-keeping!!!
quote:
These believing Jews were not upset because Paul taught a different gospel than any of the other apostles, they were upset because they had been LIED TO about what Paul was preaching. Paul NEVER taught the Jews that they did not have to keep the law of Moses nor circumcise their children nor walk after their customs. Yet Paul taught MANY JEWS that were out there among the Gentiles he taught.
Why then were the myriads of believing Jews with James zealous of the Law as late as Acts 21? Why does James say in Acts 21 that the Acts 15 council only decided that the GENTILES didn't have to keep the Law??
quote:
Gal. 2:14 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? We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
Gal 2:11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. 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.
The council had authoritatively stated that BELIEVING Gentiles were cleansed. Thus, Jews could eat with THEM without violating the Law. Their dissimulation was wrong for what it implied - namely that believing Gentiles needed to be Judaized to be clean. That incident proves NOTHING as to whether believing Jews were to keep the Law. It is Matthew 5 that proves that.
wjs | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/12/2004 8:02 AM (GMT -6) | | Hi Jeff,
You asked: Are you now claiming that delivering someone to Satan for "the destruction of the flesh" can NOT mean "all out death?"
No, I am saying that delivering someone over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh dose not have to mean all out death. It can come to that, if the person dose not repent, because the wages of sin is death. I was simply saying that it dose not mean in every case as you implied that it ABSOLUTELY means all out death.
You also stated: So if a man takes of the Lord's supper unworthily he will not be killed in this day and time as they were in 1 Cor.? Was that only during the Acts period??
Paul said that because they partook unworthily many were weak and sickly among them and many slept. There is a process that if one dose not get straightened out they become weak, sickly and yet death can result. But this can also take years, it really depends on the person, the sin, weather or not they repent and get back in right standing with God. And God’s mercy and forgivness are pretty much endless, healing is always available to those who have sinned and become weak or ill because of that sin.
James 5:14 14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.
Gal. 6:1 1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.
2 Tim 2:24 24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him FOR his will.
Even though they put that individual out of the Church it was done with GREAT CARE in a spirit of GREAT MEEKNESS, making sure to express their love towards him, but tell him the truth of what he was doing. Done in such a way that if and when the man did repent, he would be able to feel free to come back to them without over much shame. If you treat someone as if they are beneath you or with a self righteous attitude when you confront them for a sin, it can prevent them from coming to repentance, by so damaging them that they feel even God will not forgive them. God’s love and forgivness must be stressed at all times, but the truth must also be told to the person. The door must be left open for him to repent and return.
You stated: ANY person forgiven for ANYTHING does NOT = ONE MAN forgiven for ONE SPECIFIC SIN. There is no way you can get the man of 1Cor. 5 into this context without eisegesis. Indeed, Paul had actually rebuked the Corinthians for NOT being "saddened" by the man in 1 Cor. So how can you assume he's being discussed in 2 Cor.? He may have been dead already!!
Jeff I beg you to take a second look here, because sometimes we are so intent on looking at certain words that we miss others. Please look at the very scripture you gave me.
:5 But if anyone has caused sadness, he has not saddened me alone, but to some extent (not to exaggerate) he has saddened all of you as well. 2:6 This punishment on such an individual by the majority is enough for him, 2:7 so that now instead you should rather forgive and comfort him. This will keep him from being overwhelmed by excessive grief to the point of despair. 2:8 Therefore I urge you to reaffirm your love for him. 2:9 For this reason also I wrote you: to test you to see if you are obedient in everything. 2:10 If you forgive anyone for anything, I also forgive him—for indeed what I have forgiven (if I have forgiven anything) I did so for you in the presence of Christ, 2:11 so that we may not be exploited by Satan (for we are not ignorant of his schemes).
Perhaps you are so intent on concentrating on the word “anyone” that you are not seeing verses 6, 7 and 8
This punishment on such an individual by the majority is enough for him, 2:7 so that now instead you should rather forgive and comfort him. This will keep him from being overwhelmed by excessive grief to the point of despair. 2:8 Therefore I urge you to reaffirm your love for him.
Look he writes them his first letter and tells them when they are gathered together to put the man out of the Church. He writes them a second letter and praises them for obeying the first letter. For not only did they collectivly repent and mourn that the man should be removed from them, taking care of the group sin, but by their being obedient it caused the same man to repent and quit doing what he was doing. Paul is confirming to them that he forgives them and the individual in question, and he is rejoicing at how this all worked out.
One of Satan’s major devices is that you do not obey fully this whole process of discipline. You either don’t reprove someone for habitual practice of something like fornication, that everyone KNOWS he’s doing. Or you do reprove him and then when he repents you don’t forgive him. Paul was just blessed that they were obedient in ALL things. Paul dosne’t go into gross detail on the man, like
This punishment on such an individual AS GEORGE JONES by the majority is enough for him, 2:7 so that now instead you should rather forgive GEORGE JONES and comfort him. This will keep him from being overwhelmed by excessive grief to the point of despair. 2:8 Therefore I urge you to reaffirm your love for him.
Why write down some poor guys sin for all posterity, when God knew that if the church would just be obedient to do what Christ commanded that he would repent and his slate would be wiped clean. The sin of course is written but the NAME of the man is with held. Paul didn’t have to use his NAME, all the Corinthians knew exactly who it was, since it was REPORTED COMMONLY AMONG THEM, that the guy was sleeping or had married his fathers wife. This was a sin that under the old covenant was unforgivable in that you got the death penalty. But under the new covenant you can be forgiven for all things that you could not be forgiven for under the law of Moses.
Acts 13:38 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.
Jesus taught how to handle sin in the Church.
Matt 18:10 Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray? And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray. Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.
This parable explains the heart behind what he says next.
15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.
BUT if he repented you were to forgive him and not be as the next parable states.
31 So when his fellowservants saw what was done, they were very sorry, and came and told unto their lord all that was done. Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me:
Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee? And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him. So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their tresspasses.
Paul was administering these sayings and commandments of Jesus Christ to the Corinthian Church. This was the “dispensation” he received, to have complete understanding of the teachings and parables of Jesus Christ and then ad-minister them to the children of God. That is to put into practical application that which Jesus taught. What we have going with the Corinthains is the application of the Gospel of Christ.
The Corinthians KNEW all these sayings and parables of Jesus. They had been taught them, and given the understanding of them in previous teachings by Paul. Now they were in a situation where they were not being obedient as a Church and putting the man out so that perchance he would recover himself out of the snare of the devil and quit doing his will. They were in a grave sin collectively for not obeying the Gospel, and thus defrauding the man who they continually allowed amongst them.
In being obedient to do as Christ commanded considering themselves lest they also be tempted, and then forgiving him when he came back it cause Paul MUCH rejoicing that the ones who had gone astray were found. Not just the man, but the whole church.
Paul did not have a secret gospel, he simply administered the correct understanding and practical application of all Jesus taught, which is written in the gospels, and in the rest of scripture.
ALL SCRIPTURE is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof and for correction, that the man of God may be perfect throughly furnished unto all good works.
In the love of Christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/12/2004 9:11 AM (GMT -6) | | Jeff you stated: God revealed to Peter that uncircumcised Gentiles could be "cleansed" by faith alone. He told the believing Jews in Jerusalem the same thing. They were SURPRISED. There is no evidence whatsoever that they (the believing Jews) concluded that THEY should cease to keep the Law - Christ had commanded them otherwise in Mat. 5. Thus, once Gentiles began to be converted, there were those who went out from Peter and gang (who were still keeping the Law in obedience to Mat.5) who, because they did not understand (YET) Paul's gospel, tried to make the Gentiles keep the Law also.
You seem to be overlooking the fact that neither Peter not James nor any of the other elders either sent or commanded those Pharisees to go around teaching such. And that they flatly stated so in saying in the letter "to whom we gave no such commandment:"
As for the teaching of Christ in Matthew 5, that is the gospel to US today both Jews and Gentiles, in that there is not ONE THING he taught there that is not applicable to us, and that Paul did not teach to those he taught the gospel to. We are to learn it, understand it and obey all he said there. Again, there is not one thing in Jesus teaching in Matt. 5 that dose not apply to us today. And if not kept we will suffer for as being sinners and contrary to the will of God.
You stated: Moreover, Christ had "commanded" them to keep every jot and tittle of the Law til heaven and earth pass away.
NO he did not command them to keep every jot and tittle of the law till heaven and earth passed away. He specifically said:
"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall no wise pass from the Law till all be fulfilled."
I'm sorry but that just dose not say "KEEP EVERY JOT AND TITTLE OF THE LAW TILL HEAVEN AND EARTH PASS AWAY".
AND the commandments he gives next after he states this were NOT every jot and tittle of the law, but that of his NEW LAW, which summed up the law, by teachng people to love God and love their neighbors. And in the teaching he mentions NOTHING about circumcision.
In next referring to "Whosoever therefore shall break one of htese least commandments and shall teach men so.....
He is NOT referring BACK to every jot and title of the Law of Moses, but is referring forward to what he is about to teach them. WHICH along with some NEW commandments, also straightened out their thinking on some of the OLD commandments he was going to keep in the New Covenant.
The FACT is that if you learn and obey Jesus teachings in the gospels you will be doing exactly as he stated, loving God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and loving your neighbor as yourself. You will be doing exactly what Paul taught where he said "thou shalt not commmit adultery, thou shalt not steal, and if there be any other commandment it is briefly summed up in this saying "thou shalt love they neighbor as thy self."
Paul taught what is now written in the Gospels to every church he later wrote letters of reproof to, and which now Christians have taken and made into a gospel all thier own. Paul never intended for his letters to be used as such. And Christians do not follow the Lord Jesus Christ when they do not learn and do those things he commanded.
In effect when you bleieve and say things like you do, you are doing exactly what Jesus said, which is:
Whosoever shall break one of these least commandments (those he then goes on to state) and shall teach men so, he shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven;
Since you do not teach them how can you do them? Then you are open to look after woman and lust after her in your heart, which is adultery even though you do not do the act itself. NEVER in the Law of Moses were they commanded NOT to look on a woman and lust after her in their hearts, they were just commanded "Thou shalt not commit adultery", and thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife. Therefore a man could look after an unmarried woman and covet her in his heart, but still not be committing adultery as long as the ACT was not performed. Jesus made it a sin to even THINK in such a manner.
For those under the new covenant to even THINK in such a manner, to lust after a woman at all, that is not their own wife is committing adultery and fornication. Hence why pornography and adultery is so prevailent among Christian men. For the reason that the Church has not taught the specifics of Jesus doctrines.
Another NEW commandment Jesus gave here is: But I say unto you that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoeverhsall say to his brohter Raca shall be in dange rof the council, but whosoever shall say Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Christians who believe in the dispensatoinal type gospel that none of these things apply to them get angry and nasty with their brothers all the time over NOTHING. Basically JUST BECAUSE THEY THINK THEY CAN, because the false gospel of perverted grace based on Paul's letters taken out of context give them the licence to do so.
Everything Jesus said in Matt. 5 IS the GOSPEL to our time. And to not teach what he taught in his earthly ministry is to wind up sinning against him, and leading others to do the same. I am AMAZED at how Christians do not think they need to learn and do as the Lord commanded, relegating it as they do to just being "THE LAW" that they are not under, and hence opening the door to a licence to sin.
The Gospel of Christ which he peached durring his earthly ministry is the same one Paul preached and is composed of things both NEW and OLD.
In Christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
1way
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 299
| Posted 6/12/2004 12:20 PM (GMT -6) | | Larris, why did you post your ~6,700 word dual post response on both of my threads?
I would appreciate it if you would kindly erase one of the two pairs of posts. If you want to make a brief callout reference of your posts from one thread to the other, no problem.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 6/12/2004 2:58 PM (GMT -6) | | Larris,
quote:
You asked: Are you now claiming that delivering someone to Satan for "the destruction of the flesh" can NOT mean "all out death?"
No, I am saying that delivering someone over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh dose not have to mean all out death. It can come to that, if the person dose not repent, because the wages of sin is death. I was simply saying that it dose not mean in every case as you implied that it ABSOLUTELY means all out death.
But to prove your point, it must ABSOLUTELY NOT be talking about "all out death." You claim with emphatic dogmatism that 1 Cor. 5 and 1 Cor. 11 are completely unrelated contextually. If "destruction of the flesh" means "all out death," then both passages are COMPLETELY related.
quote:
You also stated: So if a man takes of the Lord's supper unworthily he will not be killed in this day and time as they were in 1 Cor.? Was that only during the Acts period??
Paul said that because they partook unworthily many were weak and sickly among them and many slept. There is a process that if one dose not get straightened out they become weak, sickly and yet death can result. But this can also take years, it really depends on the person, the sin, weather or not they repent and get back in right standing with God. And God’s mercy and forgivness are pretty much endless, healing is always available to those who have sinned and become weak or ill because of that sin.
But Paul said he had already judged such a one. He didn't seem to think there would need to be years. Besides, if a believer can live in fornication for years, your whole doctrine is refuted anyway - that makes YOU the antinomian, NOT ME!!!
Nor did I see you answer my question about the timing. Does God STILL kill people for taking the Lord's Supper unworthily in this day and time or NOT? Was that just an Acts period phenomenon?
quote:
If you treat someone as if they are beneath you or with a self righteous attitude when you confront them for a sin, it can prevent them from coming to repentance, by so damaging them that they feel even God will not forgive them.
Why then do you feel so free to insult 1WAY and me without knowing much about what we think? 1WAY and I don't even have the same dispensational theology!! Why do you imply I'm going to suffer the wrath of God without understanding what I believe? Sounds like you think I'm "beneath you." Knowledge puffeth up; Love EDIFIES!!
quote:
quote:
You stated: ANY person forgiven for ANYTHING does NOT = ONE MAN forgiven for ONE SPECIFIC SIN. There is no way you can get the man of 1Cor. 5 into this context without eisegesis. Indeed, Paul had actually rebuked the Corinthians for NOT being "saddened" by the man in 1 Cor. So how can you assume he's being discussed in 2 Cor.? He may have been dead already!!
Jeff I beg you to take a second look here, because sometimes we are so intent on looking at certain words that we miss others. Please look at the very scripture you gave me.
:5 But if anyone has caused sadness, he has not saddened me alone, but to some extent (not to exaggerate) he has saddened all of you as well. 2:6 This punishment on such an individual by the majority is enough for him, 2:7 so that now instead you should rather forgive and comfort him. This will keep him from being overwhelmed by excessive grief to the point of despair. 2:8 Therefore I urge you to reaffirm your love for him. 2:9 For this reason also I wrote you: to test you to see if you are obedient in everything. 2:10 If you forgive anyone for anything, I also forgive him—for indeed what I have forgiven (if I have forgiven anything) I did so for you in the presence of Christ, 2:11 so that we may not be exploited by Satan (for we are not ignorant of his schemes).
Perhaps you are so intent on concentrating on the word “anyone” that you are not seeing verses 6, 7 and 8
Let's see. "But if anyone hath saddened you,...This punishment on such an individual by the majority is enough for him" There is NO way that grammar equals "But if THAT man saddened you,... This punishment on THAT man by the majority is enough for him." The "him" refers to "anyone" - i.e., it is NOT SPECIFIC, it is hypothetical.
wjs | | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 6/12/2004 4:22 PM (GMT -6) | | Larris,
quote:
Jeff you stated: God revealed to Peter that uncircumcised Gentiles could be "cleansed" by faith alone. He told the believing Jews in Jerusalem the same thing. They were SURPRISED. There is no evidence whatsoever that they (the believing Jews) concluded that THEY should cease to keep the Law - Christ had commanded them otherwise in Mat. 5. Thus, once Gentiles began to be converted, there were those who went out from Peter and gang (who were still keeping the Law in obedience to Mat.5) who, because they did not understand (YET) Paul's gospel, tried to make the Gentiles keep the Law also.
You seem to be overlooking the fact that neither Peter not James nor any of the other elders either sent or commanded those Pharisees to go around teaching such.
Acts 11 shows that the believing Jews as well as Peter were SHOCKED that Gentiles could be saved without keeping the Law. And, again, there is NO evidence that they assumed they could STOP keeping the Law just because the Gentiles were NOT required to keep it. Acts 15 and 21 bear that point out emphatically. Your point above doesn't change that one iota.
quote:
You stated: Moreover, Christ had "commanded" them to keep every jot and tittle of the Law til heaven and earth pass away.
NO he did not command them to keep every jot and tittle of the law till heaven and earth passed away. He specifically said:
"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall no wise pass from the Law till all be fulfilled."
I'm sorry but that just dose not say "KEEP EVERY JOT AND TITTLE OF THE LAW TILL HEAVEN AND EARTH PASS AWAY".
AND the commandments he gives next after he states this were NOT every jot and tittle of the law, but that of his NEW LAW, which summed up the law, by teachng people to love God and love their neighbors. And in the teaching he mentions NOTHING about circumcision.
In next referring to "Whosoever therefore shall break one of htese least commandments and shall teach men so.....
He is NOT referring BACK to every jot and title of the Law of Moses, but is referring forward to what he is about to teach them. WHICH along with some NEW commandments, also straightened out their thinking on some of the OLD commandments he was going to keep in the New Covenant.
Let's see. "Whosoever THEREFORE shall break one of these least commandments and shall teach men so....." Larris are you going to honestly tell me that the word "THEREFORE" doesn't refer BACKWARD as is it's normal grammatical use???? To say it refers FORWARD is counter-intuitive. So not only are you contradicting the normal use of the word "THEREFORE," but you are also taking an interpretation that NONE of Christ's apostles took through at LEAST Acts 21.
quote:
NEVER in the Law of Moses were they commanded NOT to look on a woman and lust after her in their hearts, they were just commanded "Thou shalt not commit adultery", and thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife. Therefore a man could look after an unmarried woman and covet her in his heart, but still not be committing adultery as long as the ACT was not performed. Jesus made it a sin to even THINK in such a manner.
Larris, the OT says things to the effect that a man was to be satisfied with his own wife. That's not some new, radical idea. Christ was just pointing out how legalistic they had become, straining at gnats and swallowing camels. Paul, himself, said the Law was spiritual. It had spiritual requirements that the carnal man could not fulfill.
quote:
Christians who believe in the dispensatoinal type gospel that none of these things apply to them get angry and nasty with their brothers all the time over NOTHING. Basically JUST BECAUSE THEY THINK THEY CAN, because the false gospel of perverted grace based on Paul's letters taken out of context give them the licence to do so.
I believe the commands apply, but I believe that God will discipline me if I don't do them. Some insubordination will be disciplined by death if necessary. I know there are nutty dispensational theologians who teach EXTREME, RADICAL grace ideas. But I'm not one of them. For me, the grace promised is God's promise to discipline us if necessary. So you can STOP preaching at me about this any minute now!
quote:
I am AMAZED at how Christians do not think they need to learn and do as the Lord commanded, relegating it as they do to just being "THE LAW" that they are not under, and hence opening the door to a licence to sin.
Me too, but I'm not arguing that.
wjs | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 6/15/2004 9:11 PM (GMT -6) | | THIS IS WHAT WAS POSTED FOR 1-WAY.
quote:
Originally posted by PotOnWheel
THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS TO BE FOUND w i t h i n LOVE.
If you seem to not understand what I say above, perhaps you might recall the verse: "If I have all knowledge, but do not have love, it profits me nothing?" (or something like that).
The crux is what "within Love" means. (Its not the satire you responded with!!!)
Paul can speak for himself. We just have to listen. | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/16/2004 7:45 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
quote:
Jeff you stated: God revealed to Peter that uncircumcised Gentiles could be "cleansed" by faith alone. He told the believing Jews in Jerusalem the same thing. They were SURPRISED. There is no evidence whatsoever that they (the believing Jews) concluded that THEY should cease to keep the Law - Christ had commanded them otherwise in Mat. 5. Thus, once Gentiles began to be converted, there were those who went out from Peter and gang (who were still keeping the Law in obedience to Mat.5) who, because they did not understand (YET) Paul's gospel, tried to make the Gentiles keep the Law also.
You seem to be overlooking the fact that neither Peter not James nor any of the other elders either sent or commanded those Pharisees to go around teaching such.
Acts 11 shows that the believing Jews as well as Peter were SHOCKED that Gentiles could be saved without keeping the Law. And, again, there is NO evidence that they assumed they could STOP keeping the Law just because the Gentiles were NOT required to keep it. Acts 15 and 21 bear that point out emphatically. Your point above doesn't change that one iota.
In all that you just said there Jeff, you are not following the TIME LINE of events. You are jumping straight from the initial outpouring of the spirit that Peter and those with him saw in chapter 10 to the events of chapter 15 and overlooking what took place in chapter 11 as soon as Peter returned to Jerusalem.
Acts 10:45 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on them that heard the word.
AND (then) 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.
Then in chapter 11 Peter goes BACK to Jerusalem and tells the other apostles and brethren of what took place.
11:1 And the apostles and brethren that were in Judea heard that the Gentillee had also received the Word of God.
[They did not hear the WHOLE story, just that the Gentiles had received the Word of God. They heard this BEFORE Peter got there. For it then states:]
AND WHEN PETER WAS COME UP TO JERUSALEM.....
[See they heard about it before Peter got there to tell them. Who did they hear it from?]
....THEY of the Circumcision contended with him (Peter when he came back to Jerusalem.) Saying, Thou wentest in to men UNCIRCUMCISED, and didst EAT WITH THEM.
[Of course those there were all of the circumcision, in that they were all Jews who still believed that in order for a Jew to eat with a Gentile, that Gentile must not only keep the Law of Moses, he must be literally and physically circumcsised.
The Lord had not shown nor told to them what he had shown and told Peter before he ever went to Corneilus’s house, in verses 10:9-17. And immediately after receiving the vision and hearing the Lord say “What God has cleansed , call not thou common (unclean to the Jews), while he’s wondering what this means, the three men from Corneilus show up at the door.
Before he even knows they are there, God tells him “Behold three men seek thee. Arise therefore, and get thee down and go with them, doubting nothing for I have sent them.” He didn’t know if they ere Jews or Gentiles, just three men. But when he gets to the door he finds three uncircumcised Gentiles asking him to come to another uncircumcised Gentiles house. Something that Jews don’t do. Yet God had already shown him and told him to go DOUBTING NOTHING.
The NEXT DAY Peter went with them and it says “CERTAIN BRETHREN FROM JOPPA” accompanied them. These men were not shown the vision, nor dose it even say that Peter told them he’d had the vision. They get to the house of Corneilius and the FIRST thing Peter says when he began to preach was:
10:34 OF a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of person: But in EVERY NATION he that fears him, and works righteousness is accepted with him.
This was totally NEW to a circumcised Jews understanding of the purpose of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Peter then preaches and they hear the word and receive the holy spirit while YET UNCIRCUMCISED.
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost feel on all them which heard the word. And THEY OF THE CIRCUMCISION which believed, as man as CAME WITH PETER (those certain brethren from Joppa who accompanied Peter.) were astonished, because that on the Gentiles ALSO was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God.
Then Peter stayed there for a certain number of days with Corneilus, and then by the time he had gone back to Jerusalem, someone had already run up there and told the apostles and brethren what happened. That is THEIR VERSION OF IT.
So when Peter gets back to Jerusalem, who confronts him about the whole issue?
11: 2 And when Peter was come back to Jerusalem THEY THAT WERE OF THE CIRCUMCISION contended with Peter, saying Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised and did eat with them.
Now Peter tells the WHOLE STORY and reveals to everyone there the same truth that God had revealed to him, along with the whole story and facts of the matter ending with telling them;
10:17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, what was I that I could withstand God? WHEN they heard these things they head there peach and said THEN has God ALSO granted to the Gentiles (while they are yet uncircumcised) repentance unto life. And THEY HELD THEIR PEACE.
Right here the whole matter was settled as far as the Apostles and Elders were concerned, and this is clear back in chapter 11. BUT by the time we get to chapter 15, you have NOT the apostles and elders such as Peter and James telling anyone to go down and teach the Gentile brethren that along with believing the gospel , receiving the Holy Ghost and speaking in tongues, that they must be ALSO be circumcised, you now have CERTAIN BRETHREN taking it UPON THEMSELVES to start going around and teaching this.
After the debate on the issure which was settled by Paul AND Peter in the letter written to the Gentiles they state:
15:24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that CERTAIN BRETHREN which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls saying You must be circumcised, and keep the law: TO WHOM WE GAVE NO SUCH COMMANDMENT:
The matter had already been settled as far as those who really were in authority were concerned clear back when Peter first returned from Jerusalem and told them the first time. But there were “CERTAIN BRETHREN” who just didn’t want to accept that and took it upon themselves to go and teach the Gentiles that they must now also be circumcised.
Another thing is here Jeff, that when you read Acts, you are reading a writing done by someone who is writing this long after all these events transpired. Luke having traveled with Paul extensively and gone through all he did with Paul, is writing this from the perspective of knowing all things after the fact and then looking back and using certain terms as they had come to mean.
Luke was with Paul durring most of the times those same “certain brethren” continued to follow Paul around everywhere he went and try and teach the Gentiles that they must ALSO be circumcised. Even though the Jerusalem council of Apostles and Elders settled the matter, these “certain men”, presumtious and self willed continued to teach the very thing the council ordered not to be taught to the Gentiles.
And in plaguing Paul all through his ministry became know by the term “they of the circumcision”, meaning to those who experienced these things believing Jews, of the sect of the Pharisees who against the authority of the Apostles taught things they ought not for filthy lucres sake.
This term “they of the circumcision” was a NEW meaning coined by Paul to describe those of the sect of the Pharisees that believed, who continued without authority to preach circumcision to the Gentiles as a requirement for salvation. Luke having traveled with Paul extensively picked the term up and is using it here in Acts long after the fact, to describe a certain “sect” that had already arisen in Christianity.
Again to reiterate what I said at the first, you have to follow the time line of events, to see that the matter as far as the apostles and elders in Jerusalem was settled by the end of Acts 11:18. By the time you get to Acts 15, you are dealing with an entirely different set of circumstances, where “certain brethern, those believing Jews of the sect of the Pharisees, called “they of the circumcision” a term later coined by Paul and used here in Acts to describe them, went out and taught without the authority of the apostles and elders in Jerusalem.
All you have in Jerusalem again by Acts 15, is that the situation get’s out of hand without their knowledge and then winds back up in their lap. At which time the matter is again settled as far as the apostles and elders are concerned. But again NOT SETTLED as far as those believing Jews of the sect of the Pharisee’s are concerned who CONTINUED against the entire will of the council to send men out to preach the very same things.
In Christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 6/16/2004 8:04 AM (GMT -6) | | | But when Mark was written it included all those evidences that this was God's design all along -- those that had faith so as to astound were not Jews. And Christ's lineage was not all Jewish either. The evidence could be seen in retrospect. | | Back to Top | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 6/18/2004 5:10 PM (GMT -6) | | Jeff you stated: Did I not already agree that "THE MATTER" had been settled in Acts 11?? Yes I DID! But you misunderstand what "THE MATTER" IS. It is NOT that ALL believers are free from the covenantal obligation to keep the Law - but that the GENTILES were not to be held to it. Re-examine the time line. I'm not aware of ONE verse that says the Jews EVER concluded that THEY need not keep the Law.
However perhaps you are not aware of the fact that the whole concept that the BOTH the Jews and the Gentiles were FREE from the covenantal oblication to keep the law, was not something that any of them new at first. It was something that was made plane to the apostles as the came to understand the fullness of the gospel that Jesus Christ preached.
Then those Jews who came to understand that they quit keeping those covenantal obligations, EXCEPT under certain conditions in order to be able to be around their brethren so as to over time teach them the fullness of the gospel of Christ and the New Covenant.
Yes, you are right in saying "I'm not aware of ONE verse that says the Jews EVER concluded that THEY need not keep the Law.”
This conclusion of theirs began as simple ignorance of the truth of the Gospel, but once the fullness of the gospel was revealed it became all out unbelief and rebellion against the truth.
Paul Catigoized people in the THREE basic groups.
1 Cor 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:
These THREE groups were:
1. Unbelieving Jews.
2. Unbelieving Gentiles.
3. The Church of God which was conposed of:
a. BELIEVING JEWS and
b. BELIEVING GENTILES
At first ALL the believing Jews were under the impression that they must KEEP THE LAW. But as time went by and the fullness of the Gospel was revealed to the Apostles, beginning with Peter in Acts 10, and later to Paul, it became clear that the LAW of Moses was no longer in force in the SAME MANNER that it was under the OLD Covenant.
This then divided the BELIEVING JEWS of the Church of God, into TWO cattigories.
3. The Church of God became composed of:
a. Believing Jews that had concluded from the new covenant and gospel of Christ, that they were no longer under any obligation to keep the Law, if they had believed on Christ. This was a NEW revelation and not quickly accepted by the believing Jews.
b. Believing Jews that had not heard enough of the faith of the NEW covenant in Christ, and therefore could not conclude they were no longer under any obligation to keep the Law.
c. And of course believing Gentiles.
After this became known the believing Jews once again divided up into two groups.
1. Those who had heard enough of the fullness of the gospel to conclude they were no longer under any obligation to keep the Law.
2. Those who had heard enough of the fullness of the gospel to conclude they were not longer under any obligation to keep the Law, AND INSISTED THAT IT MUST BE KEPT ANYWAY.
Hence these “believing Jews”, who after hearing the truth that the Jews were no longer under any obligation to keep the Law, by refusing to believe that aspect of the fullness of the Gospel, the NEW Covenant in Christ, became “UNBELIEVING - BELIEVING” JEWS”. For the reason that they did not believe the WHOLE gospel.
Those Jews who believed in Christ, but did either not understand enough of the truth, or refused to accept the truth that the covenant of the Law of Moses was no longer in force, in the end far out numbered those Jews who believed, knew and accepted the truth of the new covenant in Christ. These believing Jews were called by Paul “the REMNANT”.
By believing in Christ and not continuing in his Word to a FULL knowledge of the truth, those Jews that remained trying to keep the ordinances of the Law in reality then ADDED to the Gospel. Either adding something or taking away something from the Gospel that Christ preached, of which the fullness of it became understood AFTER his asention, made that gospel then ANOTHER GOSPEL. Believing ANOTHER Gospel, such as one with THE LAW added for the JEWS, they made the true gospel of NO EFFECT to those who believed on Christ, and made them null and void from the promises in Christ.
One of the first things Christ said to the Jews that believed on him was:
John 8:31 If you CONTINUE in my word, you shall be my disciples indeed and you shall know the truth and the truth shall made you free.
Those disciples that continued in his word came to know the truth that they were FREE FROM THE LAW OF MOSES, and all of it’s ritualistic covenantal obligations, such as circumcision, feast days, sacrificial requirements for sin, and dietary laws. ANY THING else regarding the love of one’s neighbor, thou previously written in that same law, were however still in force since Christ kept those requirements in his own personal Gospel. As well as those standards that were not in the Law that Christ ADDED to his “law”, i.e. “The Law of Christ”, were also in force.
Hence they were not to be LAWLESS, in that there was no standards no laws whatsoever in the gospel of Christ, but they were no longer under all the righteous requirements of the Old Covenant in the observance of religious ritualistic practices, which made the Old Covenant the a covenant.
And this is what Paul constantly battled and why he wrote so much in his epistles about the Law and WHY neither the Jew nor the Gentile was under any obligation to keep the Law.
HOWEVER in obeying and following the teachings of Jesus Christ, who’s WORDS as he spoke them were SPIRIT and they were life, the very righteousness of the Law of the Old Covennant was fulfilled in those who obeyed him. As it was written by Moses “ A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you, like unto me, him shall you hear (understand and obey) in all things whatsoever he says unto you. And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall not hear (understand and obey) that prophet shall be destroyed from among the people.
To say and teach that the Jews are still under the Law of the Old Covenant along with the Gospel of Christ, and that the Gentiles which believe are not under the law of the Old covenant, and only under the gospel of Christ, is to present the exact same FALSE GOSPEL that those UNBELIEVING - BELIEVING Jews of the sect of the Pharisees eventually wound up leading the main part of Israel into in the first century.
For it makes TWO Gospels one to the Jews and another to the Gentiles, and it SEPARATES WHAT GOD HAS JOINED TOGETHER! There is ONE GOSPEL, one faith, one spirit, one baptism, one God and one LORD over both Jew and Gentile who is rich to all that call upon him in THE TRUTH.
So what would you two tell a Jew today if he were to ask you about Christ? What kind of “gospel” would you feed him? What if he was a unreligious Jew who had never even been taught the Law? What then? What are you going to tell him? Are you going to tell him of Christ and the gospel of grace and then say “But now you have to also go learn the Law of Moses and keep it.” Have you actually stopped to even considdered the actual implications of what you teach.
And what if you were to witness to an orthodox Jew fully trained in the Law and practices of Juedaism? What then? Are you going to tell him of Christ and then tell him to go and keep the Law ALSO? Because every Jew knows that until there is a TEMPLE built there is no way they can go and KEEP THE LAW in it’s fullness.
So what then will you be like the Jews, who even though they have no temple, no sacrifices et. will just make it up as best they can, and pick and choose what they can do and what they can’t do out of the Law?
And if the Jews are still under that Law, then of course they must also do the sacrifices and keep ALL the dietary requirements or the law becomes of no effect to them.
Again all you are espousing is that same corruption of the Gospel Paul constantly battled where the Jews endeavored to ADD the keeping of the Law to it, for the Gentiles and then insisted on keeping ahold of it themselves even AFTER the truth was revealed to them.
In the end here WHY IN THE WORLD, would God go to all the trouble of having Christ do what he did and then making TWO Gosples (which you think is one) one, in which the Jews must keep BOTH the words of Christ AND the LAW, and another one in which the Gentiles must only keep whatever it is that you think they are supposed to keep?
In christ,
larris
PS. However even IF the Jews do at some time in the future rebuild a temple so they can actually institute the Law, they will still be without Christ, regardless of weather they beleive IN Christ or not. Christ was the END, the fulfillment of the Law to all who believe in him both Jew and Gentile.
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 6/19/2004 4:07 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by jefscott
POW,
quote:
But when Mark was written it included all those evidences that this was God's design all along -- those that had faith so as to astound were not Jews. And Christ's lineage was not all Jewish either. The evidence could be seen in retrospect.
Exactly, it was God's design ALL ALONG (until Paul, that is) that ISRAEL was to be the head and not the tail, and that the Gentiles were to be blessed via Israel (In THY seed shall ALL nations BE BLESSED), although in a subordinate position to Israel - the position of dogs getting crumbs from Israel's table. To read into the Mark passage that Gentiles were to SIT AT THE TABLE is eisegesis.
Jeff, seems you think I'm mentioning something that is not in my mind.
I was refering (guessing that Mark would be a good representation) to where Jesus found more faith in the Gentiles than in the Jews. The Faith was the important thing in making one an "descendent of Abraham" (as it also is in the Epistles) rather than blood relations. After all, even the stones could become so if necessary. | | Back to Top | | |
| 128 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 4:55 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|