Hi and you know that you are as wrong as Danoh !!
OIKOS means House !
NOMOS means rule !!
OIKONOMIA then means House rule !!
You have to know the rules of the House , the MYSTERY , Eph 3:9 and Col 1:25-27 !!
dan p
ECT 3 Questions for my MAD and YEC friends
- Thread starter patman
- Start date
Hi and you know that you are as wrong as Danoh !!
OIKOS means House !
NOMOS means rule !!
OIKONOMIA then means House rule !!
You have to know the rules of the House , the MYSTERY , Eph 3:9 and Col 1:25-27 !!
dan p
Ah. OK.
way 2 go
Well-known member
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
do you not understand that the words "house rule" can be referring to a stewardship?
I quoted a Greek expert who said that the word means "the management of a householdor of household affairs; specifically the management, oversight, administration, of other’s property; the office of a manager or overseer, stewardship" (Thayer’s Greek English Lexicon).
Here is another Greek expert who says that the word "primarily signifies "the management of a household or of household affairs... then the management or administration of the property of others, and so "a stewardship" (Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words).
I will take the meaning provided by the two recognized Greek experts every time. Besides that the translators of many different versions of the bible also translated the Greek word as "stewardship" here:
"There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods. And he called him, and said unto him, How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer steward. Then the steward said within himself, What shall I do? for my lord taketh away from me the stewardship: I cannot dig; to beg I am ashamed. I am resolved what to do, that, when I am put out of the stewardship, they may receive me into their houses" (Lk. 16: 1-4).
Can you not see that the words "house rule" is referring to a stewardship? Let us put the word "house rule" in the place of "stewardship" in one of the verses which I just quoted and we can understand that the Greek word does indeed mean "stewardship":
"And he called him, and said unto him, How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy house rule."
patman
Active member
:wave2:
patman
Active member
Nothing is impossible... that said, my answer is I don't think the author of Hebrews was teaching a "grace-only-path" to salvation. More on that in the answer to your next question.
Thanks, by the way, for sharing the passages you did. Still, I do not think Jesus was teaching another way into the "body" through works. I'll go into why in the answer below...
You see any saved person as one belonging to the body, but I think there are more groups than the body. Young children who died before they could sin wouldn't need to be saved from sin upon death. They wouldn't be in the Body as I understand it. A person who lived a righteous life prior to Christ could be saved, such as David, but he did not belong to the Body. Likewise, anyone who followed whatever revelation God provided would belong to a different group. The group Paul designates as "the body" are the ones who received Christ through his revelation.
Jesus taught Peter how to reach others. He taught Peter that people needed faith, the follow the law and to repent before they could be saved.
Jesus told John to write:
Jesus was speaking to onetime christians who fell and warned them to repent, or else...
Peter, who knew Jesus' teachings well said:
These teachings are requiring the work of repentance to receive and maintain salvation. This is something taught by Paul to do, but not for salvations sake, because salvation comes by faith alone.
With these passages in mind, it sounds as though anyone under the law needed to keep it, and repent when they did not, to maintain or find salvation.
There are many passages like this that indicate not following the law, or even stopping would lead directly to doom. The following of the law also involved faith in God... so righteousness was made possible. Like you pointed out, once you sinned under the law, you were soon found guilty of not loving God and breaking all laws.
I think the evidence in the bible designates people in this system as the "bride" and they are a different group from the "body" though both are saved because of Jesus.
patman
Active member
Great points!
So far, no one is giving examples from scripture that says specifically there would be no death at all before the fall. And by extension there could have been meat eating going on. Also, as I mentioned in another post even Abel seemed born ready to eat meat as he was raising fattened livestock, and he was born right after the fall - leaving little time to adapt. Seems like eating meat was somehow always a part of the longterm plan?
patman
Active member
Hi Stripe,
Its not that I disagree with what you are proposing as possibilities. But is there a concrete verse that nails down the idea even in a non-fallen world death and eating meat, etc, were a "no go?"
Without that, I am not going to tell others who listen to my YEC teachings that all animals were supposed to be vegetarians. I'll gladly say some think so, but as i say that I'll also point out it's very debatable.
patman
Active member
Don't worry. Evolutionists will use the notion as a way to mock you. It pays to know what you believe and have a reasonable explanation for it.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Patman, I asked you:
Evidently you do because you said the following about those who lived under the law:
You do not understand the meaning of the verses which you cited. After all, we read the following about "whosoever" believes:
According to this anyone who believes has salvation. But your idea contradict this because according to you the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved apart from works. Besides that, Paul says that those who lived under the law are saved by grace through faith:
Of course if it is of works then it cannot be said that it is of grace (Ro.4:4).
Again the Scriptures contradict your idea that the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved apart from works.
Now please address these two verses which I quoted. Next, I will address this verse which you quoted:
First of all, before anyone could be baptized with water they had to first believe (Acts 8:36-37). By the time a person believed he was already saved (Jn.3:16).
Those who had already believed had already had their sins forgiven for salvation (Acts 10:43). The forgiveness of sins which come as a result of being baptized with water is in regard to " fellowship" and not salvation. In the Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society David R. Anderson writes:
The gift of the Holy Spirit spoken of at Acts 2:38 is a gift bestowed by the Holy Spirit. The "gift" spoken of in that verse is the ability to speak in tongues:
Those who submitted to the rite of water baptism on the day of Pentecost received a gift bestowed by the Holy Spirit--the ability to speak in tongues.
So we can see that those who were baptized with water were saved before a drop of water even touched them. Now I await your interpretation of the meaning of John 3:16 and Romans 4:16.
Do you believe like those in the Neo-MAD camp that the Jews who lived under the Law could not be saved apart from works?
Evidently you do because you said the following about those who lived under the law:
You do not understand the meaning of the verses which you cited. After all, we read the following about "whosoever" believes:
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (Jn.3:16).
According to this anyone who believes has salvation. But your idea contradict this because according to you the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved apart from works. Besides that, Paul says that those who lived under the law are saved by grace through faith:
"Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham" (Ro.4:16).
Of course if it is of works then it cannot be said that it is of grace (Ro.4:4).
Again the Scriptures contradict your idea that the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved apart from works.
Now please address these two verses which I quoted. Next, I will address this verse which you quoted:
First of all, before anyone could be baptized with water they had to first believe (Acts 8:36-37). By the time a person believed he was already saved (Jn.3:16).
Those who had already believed had already had their sins forgiven for salvation (Acts 10:43). The forgiveness of sins which come as a result of being baptized with water is in regard to " fellowship" and not salvation. In the Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society David R. Anderson writes:
"We are suggesting that John the Baptist, Jesus, and Peter had dual ministries. One was to call the nation of Israel back into fellowship with Yahweh. The covenant relationship had long since been established. The nation of Israel did not need a new relationship with God. But they were sorely lacking in fellowship...John the Baptist, Jesus, and Peter were all trying to persuade Israel to repentance and turning that would bring them back to a refreshing fellowship with God...Now as a nation they needed to repent and turn (Acts 3:19) in order to have fellowship with God" [emphasis added] (Anderson, "The National Repentance of Israel," Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society, Autumn 1998, Volume 11:21).
The gift of the Holy Spirit spoken of at Acts 2:38 is a gift bestowed by the Holy Spirit. The "gift" spoken of in that verse is the ability to speak in tongues:
"...no one can say, 'Jesus is Lord,' except by the Holy Spirit. There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit distributes them. To one there is given through the Spirit a message of wisdom, to another a message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues. All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he distributes them to each one, just as he determines" (1 Cor.12:3-4, 8-11).
Those who submitted to the rite of water baptism on the day of Pentecost received a gift bestowed by the Holy Spirit--the ability to speak in tongues.
So we can see that those who were baptized with water were saved before a drop of water even touched them. Now I await your interpretation of the meaning of John 3:16 and Romans 4:16.
Last edited:
Lol - then the three of us are wrong - because I completely agree with your post #78.
I just don't like how you two approach these issues - especially against our own brethren.
Its time you two both realize that just because some of us refuse to get into these issues with you that does not mean we do not understand them.
I know, that I don't care for how you two need to hound others about them - again; especially against our own brethren.
Again, it does not mean we are clueless - that is just your conclusion.
A conclusion on both your parts very much within the nature of you two legalists - you and Jerry - that you might glory in flesh in another's agreement with you.
I've said my piece and will respond when I feel like it - you two have no right to impose your neurotic compulsion on anyone.
You have both been at this for decades now.
1 Corinthians 6:
12. All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.
So, back to your little power play in the flesh, you two.
Jerry S, meet Dan P... Dan P, meet Jerry S...
Hi and I have not attacked any dispensationlist here that I know of !
I like what Paul wrote in Gal 1:10 , For just now do I persuade man or God ? Or do I seek to PLEASE men ? Fot if I ( Paul ) was still PLEASING man , I could not be a slave of Christ !!
I write what I believe to be true and let the chips where they fall and I know that Jerry S , does not agree with every thing that I write , so what 11
I said this to one elder in our assembly , and he is like you , OFFENDED , tough !!
Most quote 1 Cor 13:1 where Paul wrote that if you speak in GLOSSA of man and angels , but not have love , I have become as ( like ) sounding brass or a clanging cymbal , just to beat you to it !!
Will you explain why many call them self Mid-Acts ??
dan p
Last edited:
6days
New member
themuzicman said:
It amazes me how evolutionists so eagerly believe a fish can evolve into a philosopher...yet reject that a vegetarian cat could 'evolve' to become a carnivore.*
(There are modern big cats that survived as vegetarian)
Pre-sin diet...
"And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground--everything that has the breath of life in it--I give every green plant for food." And it was so."Gen. 1:30
Post-sin / post flood
"The fear and dread of you will fall on all the beasts of the earth, and on all the birds in the sky, on every creature that moves along the ground, and on all the fish in the sea; they are given into your hands.
Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything." Gen. 9:2,3
6days
New member
Did physical death exist before Adam sinned?
After Adam sinned, God pronounced a curse upon His creation. Part of that curse was death to humans and vertebrates (nepesh chayyah 'living creatures')
But Hugh Ross and other theistic evolutionists seem to think that physical death already existed before sin.*
The following comment from another thread, a TOL member reasons..."The "death" God spoke of was not a physical death. He tells Adam that he will die the day he eats from the tree, but Adam does so, and lives on physically for many years after. If God is always truthful, the death that the Fall brought to us, was not physical."
However..... If you believe physical death was part of God's "very good" creation (Gen.1:31), then I would argue the Gospel is compromised, if not destroyed. Or...is there merit in the above comment from a TOL member?*
I will start with reasons why physical death was part of the curse... and why the comment from a TOLer is unbiblical.
1. Genesis 2:17 in the KJV reads*"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die"
Well... Adam did eat of the tree, and he did not physical die that day. So is the verse only referring to spiritual death / separation from God? No... The Hebrew actually suggests a dying process. A more literal translation would be "dying you shall die" or less literally "for as soon as you eat of it, you shall be doomed to die".http://www.accuracyingenesis.com/die.html
A few examples from other translations...
Young's Literal Translation
and of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou dost not eat of it, for in the day of thine eating of it -- dying thou dost die.'
New International Version
but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die."
New Living Translation
except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If you eat its fruit, you are sure to die."
2. The Bible attributes physical death to sin...specifically referring to Adam. And here is the Gospel....
1Cor. 15: 21 "For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive"Also see Rom. 5:12-19
3. The Bible refers to death as evil... it is the enemy.
1 Cor. 15:26 "The last enemy to be destroyed is death."
So... if physical death is evil... its hard to rationalize that with*Genesis 1:31 where God calls His creation " very good". Obviously physical death did not exist until sin entered the world.
(Sad side note... The story of Charles Templeton...amazing evangelist...but he compromised on the matter death before sin, and he eventually turned away from God)
4. If physical death already existed before sin... then why did Christ need to physically die and be resurrected? If the curse in Genesis 2 was only a spiritual death to Adam, then Christ only need to rise, or defeat, spiritual death. Clearly, in*1 Cor. 15:26, physical death was part of the curse which Christ conquers.
5. To imagine that Genesis 2:17*is not referring to physical death, is refuted in Genesis 3:19*(Using KJV again) "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."
Physical death ...returning to dust, IS part of the curse. It is something that Christ has defeated and we can join Him in the resurrection. "He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death' or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away." Rev. 21:4
Re animals. ....Imagine watching a nature show where lions are chasing a baby elephant. The mother tries in vain to protect her young. As the lions sink their teeth into the still live Baby, the mother watches helplessly, whole hearing her baby cry. Who doesn't feel that tug at our heart strings? We were created in the image of God, and I can't imagine our Creator calling that scene "very good". Doesn't scripture paint paradise as the lion laying with the lamb?
Evolutionism and old earth beliefs compromise the Gospel making Christ's physical death needless. ÌE. Jesus wouldn't have needed to physically die...and conquer the grave if death was part of God's "very good" creation.
6days
New member
Do you agree that they had never eaten of this tree? But, that at some point it might have been ..... uh... perhaps something like taking sacrements? That it would be symbolic of being part of the body? It would be like us being given a new nature in heaven ...where we basically have permanently rejected sin?
Not sure I thought that all through correctly, but what say you?
Last edited:
way 2 go
Well-known member
the fall happend a few weeks after creation so you are not
going to have much history of what it was like before the fall
Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "You may surely eat of every tree of the garden,
does not say ,and animals
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
You are wrong. For example, the Greek word oikonomia is translated "stewardship" at Luke 16:2.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
We are not told and I refuse to speculate.