ECT Moment of Salvation Compared to Water Baptism

[turbosixx]

Since you think that Paul, the apostle of the gentiles, and the 12 apostles for the 12 tribes of Israel preached exactly the same thing.... Show us where anyone BUT Paul said anything that would make you think that.

Is this your way of avoiding the question?

The proof is in the pudding. Paul and the 12 taught the same thing, Christ.

Addressing Israel
Peter: 22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words;
Paul: 16 Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand said, Men of Israel,

Christ descended from David
Peter: 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
Paul: 23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Savior, Jesus:

Christ died
Peter: 23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
Paul: 28 And though they found no cause of death in him, yet desired they Pilate that he should be slain.

David saw decay
Peter: 29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.
Paul: 36 For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption:

Christ did not see decay
Peter: 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
Paul: 37 But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption.


Jesus resurrected
Peter: 32 This Jesus hath God raised up,
Paul: 30 But God raised him from the dead:

People witnessed the resurrection
Peter: 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
Paul: 31 And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people.

Forgiveness of sins through Jesus
Peter: 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Paul: 38 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:

Jesus is Israel’s savior
Peter: 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Paul: 23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Savior, Jesus:

 

[Right Divider]

Is this your way of avoiding the question?

The proof is in the pudding. Paul and the 12 taught the same thing, Christ.

Addressing Israel
Peter: 22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words;
Paul: 16 Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand said, Men of Israel,

Christ descended from David
Peter: 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
Paul: 23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Savior, Jesus:

Christ died
Peter: 23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
Paul: 28 And though they found no cause of death in him, yet desired they Pilate that he should be slain.

David saw decay
Peter: 29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.
Paul: 36 For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption:

Christ did not see decay
Peter: 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
Paul: 37 But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption.


Jesus resurrected
Peter: 32 This Jesus hath God raised up,
Paul: 30 But God raised him from the dead:

People witnessed the resurrection
Peter: 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
Paul: 31 And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people.

Forgiveness of sins through Jesus
Peter: 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Paul: 38 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:

Jesus is Israel’s savior
Peter: 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Paul: 23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Savior, Jesus:

Mid-Acts Dispensationalists do NOT deny that they both taught SOME things in common. Paul did NOT receive revelation that contradicted what came BEFORE and he 100% CONFIRMED it.

But Paul was given ADDITIONAL revelation that Churchianity has attempted to MASH into being "all the same" and that is your problem.

 

[turbosixx]

No, you don't.


That's a lie.


You mean Greek translated into English, correct? I agree.



That is further evidence yu DON"T believe the KJV, "face value" by insinuating it is poor grammar.



Neither does my Yak shepherd friend in lower Siberia who reveals his love to God from a pure heart plus nothing.

I have Strongs and other qualified helps that don't seek to cast a shadow on what has been accepted for humdreds of years if not, thousands of years as the truth of it all.



Only in your elitist, prideful, heart.

I'm sorry but just because I don't believe you doesn't mean I don't believe God's word. You have not shown me using the context that the 120 were baptized with the Holy Spirit. PLEASE use the context to show me where I've gone astray. All you have given me is you're opinion.

Let's try this. Here is what you propose looks like.

Acts 1:1 In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach, 2 until the day when he was taken up, after he had given commands through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. 3 He presented himself alive to them (apostles) after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.
13 And when they (apostles) had entered, they (apostles) went up to the upper room, where they (apostles) were staying, Peter and John and James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot and Judas the son of James. 14 All these (apostles) with one accord were devoting themselves (apostles) to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers. 15 In those days Peter stood up among the brothers (the company of persons was in all about 120) and said,
So now we see the 120 mentioned. Based on what YOU say, the pronouns following are now the 120.

16 “Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. 17 For he was numbered among us (120) and was allotted his share in this ministry.”
There were 120 chosen? Not according to verse 2.

18 (Now this man acquired a field with the reward of his wickedness, and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out. 19 And it became known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the field was called in their own language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.) 20 “For it is written in the Book of Psalms,
“‘May his camp become desolate,
and let there be no one to dwell in it’;
and
“‘Let another take his office.’
21 So one of the men who have accompanied us (120) during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us (120) , 22 beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us (120) —one of these men must become with us (120) a witness to his resurrection.”
If the 120 are chosen and numbered, why would they chose from the 120 to add to the 120?
23 And they (120) put forward two, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was also called Justus, and Matthias. 24 And they (120) prayed and said, “You, Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which one of these two you have chosen 25 to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place.”
Apostleship, there were 120 apostles?

26 And they (120) cast lots for them, and the lot fell on Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

Using the 120 doesn't make sense.

 

[turbosixx]

Mid-Acts Dispensationalists do NOT deny that they both taught SOME things in common. Paul did NOT receive revelation that contradicted what came BEFORE and he 100% CONFIRMED it.

But Paul was given ADDITIONAL revelation that Churchianity has attempted to MASH into being "all the same" and that is your problem.

Please point out the additional. I see no additional.

 

[Right Divider]

Please point out the additional. I see no additional.

Of course you don't. You already have your story and you're going to stick to it no matter what.

That you cannot understand the difference of Christ choosing 12 on earth when He was ministering to Israel and choosing one after His ascension when Israel was blinded in part is par for the course with Churchianity.

God is not through with Israel (Romans 11). The dispensation of the grace of God is a limited time offer.

 

[turbosixx]

Of course you don't. You already have your story and you're going to stick to it no matter what.

That you cannot understand the difference of Christ choosing 12 on earth when He was ministering to Israel and choosing one after His ascension when Israel was blinded in part is par for the course with Churchianity.

God is not through with Israel (Romans 11). The dispensation of the grace of God is a limited time offer.

Did Jesus nail the old covenant to the cross?

 

[Right Divider]

Did Jesus nail the old covenant to the cross?

You don't even read what I write. You're just so anxious to get back to your Churchianity.

 

[turbosixx]

You don't even read what I write. You're just so anxious to get back to your Churchianity.

I read it but sometimes it takes us away from what we're talking about.

You said,

Pentecost was a continuation of God's dealing with Israel. It was a lawfully required feast day, after which they continued to keep the law.

So based on this reply, I can better understand you if I know what your stance is on did Jesus nail the old covenant to the cross.

 

[Cross Reference]

I'm sorry but just because I don't believe you doesn't mean I don't believe God's word. You have not shown me using the context that the 120 were baptized with the Holy Spirit. PLEASE use the context to show me where I've gone astray. All you have given me is you're opinion.

Let's try this. Here is what you propose looks like.

Acts 1:1 In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach, 2 until the day when he was taken up, after he had given commands through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. 3 He presented himself alive to them (apostles) after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.
13 And when they (apostles) had entered, they (apostles) went up to the upper room, where they (apostles) were staying, Peter and John and James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot and Judas the son of James. 14 All these (apostles) with one accord were devoting themselves (apostles) to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers. 15 In those days Peter stood up among the brothers (the company of persons was in all about 120) and said,
So now we see the 120 mentioned. Based on what YOU say, the pronouns following are now the 120.

16 “Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. 17 For he was numbered among us (120) and was allotted his share in this ministry.”
There were 120 chosen? Not according to verse 2.

18 (Now this man acquired a field with the reward of his wickedness, and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out. 19 And it became known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the field was called in their own language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.) 20 “For it is written in the Book of Psalms,
“‘May his camp become desolate,
and let there be no one to dwell in it’;
and
“‘Let another take his office.’
21 So one of the men who have accompanied us (120) during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us (120) , 22 beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us (120) —one of these men must become with us (120) a witness to his resurrection.”
If the 120 are chosen and numbered, why would they chose from the 120 to add to the 120?
23 And they (120) put forward two, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was also called Justus, and Matthias. 24 And they (120) prayed and said, “You, Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which one of these two you have chosen 25 to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place.”
Apostleship, there were 120 apostles?

26 And they (120) cast lots for them, and the lot fell on Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

Using the 120 doesn't make sense.

Seek to be born again and you will see that it does make sense. Mathias is irrelevant. We might suppose Christ had Paul in mind and the 12 acted presumptiusly. Your Greek would never suggest such a thing. However, The Holy Spirit might and we have every reason to believe for Paul instead of Mathias.

 

[turbosixx]

Seek to be born again and you will see that it does make sense.

I would go into what it means to be born again but I'm sure you wouldn't use the context of God's word there either.

Thanks for talking with me

 

[Cross Reference]

I would go into what it means to be born again but I'm sure you wouldn't use the context of God's word there either.

Thanks for talking with me

Wrong. I probably, no doubt, would not accept your understanding. That is intended for you understand I probably would not receive anything you have say because it is devoid of anointed knowledge and can only be sans the new birth from above..

 

[turbosixx]

Wrong. I probably, no doubt, would not accept your understanding. That is intended for you understand I probably would not receive anything you have say because it is devoid of anointed knowledge and can only be sans the new birth from above..

You don't use scripture to understand truth. Therefore all you offer is opinions and I'm not gonna trust my eternal soul to someone's opinion. I see now why RD calls you the peanut gallery.

You have proven that you really don't know God's word and therefore I place zero value on what you have to say. I'm sorry.

 

[Cross Reference]

You don't use scripture to understand truth. Therefore all you offer is opinions and I'm not gonna trust my eternal soul to someone's opinion. I see now why RD calls you the peanut gallery.

You have proven that you really don't know God's word and therefore I place zero value on what you have to say. I'm sorry.

And you do know it? Believing as you do? Now that is rich.


I don't pretend to have proven anything to you or to RD. However, you have repeatedly revealed the reason why. That, keeps me. Seek the new birth as was told Nicodemus. At present I would say you need to pray much re your "eternal soul".

 

[Right Divider]

I read it but sometimes it takes us away from what we're talking about.

No, actually ... it does not. I try to put the bigger picture in context for you, but you want to quickly direct everything back to your Churchianity "talking points".

You said,

So based on this reply, I can better understand you if I know what your stance is on did Jesus nail the old covenant to the cross.

If that was the case, nobody knew about it until MANY years later. Please show us were Peter (or any of the twelve) said this before the LORD Jesus Christ appeared to and called Paul.

Peter's speeches in the early parts of the book of Acts show no sign of anything but a continuation of what the LORD was doing to and through Israel.

 

[turbosixx]

If that was the case, nobody knew about it until MANY years later. Please show us were Peter (or any of the twelve) said this before the LORD Jesus Christ appeared to and called Paul.

The proof is in the pudding. Peter did not teach the law or instruct anyone to follow it.

Peter's speeches in the early parts of the book of Acts show no sign of anything but a continuation of what the LORD was doing to and through Israel.

Wasn't Israel the ones to have the gospel proclaimed to them first?

What happened in early Acts has zero to do with the old covenant. It has no laws on people being baptized into Jesus' name. It can't forgive sins and so on. It was nailed to the cross and from that time no longer in effect. There is nothing there to do with the old covenant. The promise yes, old law no.

 

[Right Divider]

The proof is in the pudding. Peter did not teach the law or instruct anyone to follow it.

How do you figure that? Where did the LORD release them from the law?

Right before the LORD ascended into the clouds, He told them to teach all nations the law.

Matt 28:19-20 (AKJV/PCE)​

(28:19) ¶ Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: (28:20) Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen.

​

Matt 23:1-3 (AKJV/PCE)​

(23:1) Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, (23:2) Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: (23:3) All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, [that] observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. ​

How can you ignore this clear teaching in the Bible?

Wasn't Israel the ones to have the gospel proclaimed to them first?

Not the gospel of the grace of God. Nobody knew that until the LORD gave it to Paul to give to us.

What happened in early Acts has zero to do with the old covenant.

The day of Pentecost was REQUIRED in the LAW.

It has no laws on people being baptized into Jesus' name. It can't forgive sins and so on. It was nailed to the cross and from that time no longer in effect. There is nothing there to do with the old covenant. The promise yes, old law no.

Col 2:16-17 (AKJV/PCE)​

(2:16) Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath [days]: (2:17) Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body [is] of Christ. ​

Notice how Paul says that those thing ARE A SHADOW OF THING TO COME.... then he contrasts THAT with the body of Christ.... note the BUT.

Note that ARE A SHADOW is PRESENT TENSE and TO COME is FUTURE TENSE.

 

[turbosixx]

How do you figure that? Where did the LORD release them from the law?

Right before the LORD ascended into the clouds, He told them to teach all nations the law.

Matt 28:19-20 (AKJV/PCE)​

(28:19) ¶ Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: (28:20) Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen. ​

Jesus didn't teach the law.
Matt. 5:21 “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ 22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.
Hell fire is not a punishment of the old law.

​

Matt 23:1-3 (AKJV/PCE)​

(23:1) Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, (23:2) Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: (23:3) All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, [that] observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. ​

This was before the cross. They were still under the old law.

Not the gospel of the grace of God. Nobody knew that until the LORD gave it to Paul to give to us.

There's only one gospel taught from Matt-Rev.

The day of Pentecost was REQUIRED in the LAW.

Yep. Pentecost was the first time men heard the gospel.

Luke 24:45 Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, 46 and said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, 47 and that repentance for the forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.
This is something new, not the old law.

If the 12 taught the old law, it should be easy to point to a verse.

 

[Right Divider]

Jesus didn't teach the law.
Matt. 5:21 “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ 22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.
Hell fire is not a punishment of the old law.

Jesus was not talking about abolishing the law. That is just something that you or someone else has invented.

This was before the cross. They were still under the old law.

Matt 28:19-20 (AKJV/PCE)
(28:19) ¶ Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: (28:20) Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen.​

THIS was AFTER the cross.... Jesus was STILL telling them to teach the law to all nations.

Do you really believe that ALL THINGS WHATSOEVER I HAVE COMMAND YOU does NOT include Matthew 23?

There's only one gospel taught from Matt-Rev.

There are MANY "good news'" in the Bible. That you want to try to force the all to be identical is your problem.

Yep. Pentecost was the first time men heard the gospel.

Matt 4:23 (AKJV/PCE)​

(4:23) ¶ And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.
​

You're just plain wrong and should start speaking the truth.

If the 12 taught the old law, it should be easy to point to a verse.

You claim that they had been released from the law at the cross. YOU are the one that needs to support YOUR argument.

Acts 21:18-21 (AKJV/PCE)​

(21:18) And the [day] following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present. (21:19) And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry. (21:20) 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: (21:21) 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. ​

Notice that there is nothing said about this being zealous of the law as wrong and it's thousands of Jews.

P.S. Why is James talking about "Jews among Gentiles" if there is neither Jew NOR Greek in the body of Christ?

 

[turbosixx]

Jesus was not talking about abolishing the law. That is just something that you or someone else has invented.

You're right because it will happen at the cross but he IS NOT teaching the law.
Matt. 5:27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
The law has nothing to do with the heart but the gospel does.

Matt 28:19-20 (AKJV/PCE)
(28:19) ¶ Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: (28:20) Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen.​

THIS was AFTER the cross.... Jesus was STILL telling them to teach the law to all nations.

Do you really believe that ALL THINGS WHATSOEVER I HAVE COMMAND YOU does NOT include Matthew 23?

You say he told them to teach the law, but you are wrong. If they did, all you have to do is point to a verse.

There are MANY "good news'" in the Bible. That you want to try to force the all to be identical is your problem.

Matt 4:23 (AKJV/PCE)​

(4:23) ¶ And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.
​

Diversion tactic.

You claim that they had been released from the law at the cross. YOU are the one that needs to support YOUR argument.

Rom. 7:6 But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.
Again, if they taught the law you should be able to give chapter and verse.

Acts 21:18-21 (AKJV/PCE)​

(21:18) And the [day] following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present. (21:19) And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry. (21:20) 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: (21:21) 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. ​

Notice that there is nothing said about this being zealous of the law as wrong and it's thousands of Jews.

Paul didn't say following the law was wrong. He described it as weak in faith, Rom. 14. Now if someone is seeking to be justified by the law, that is absolutely wrong.

P.S. Why is James talking about "Jews among Gentiles" if there is neither Jew NOR Greek in the body of Christ?

There's neither male nor female but why does the bible have roles in the body for each?

 

[Right Divider]

Diversion tactic.

Now I KNOW that you are being completely DISHONEST!

Yep. Pentecost was the first time men heard the gospel.

THAT is what YOU said.... and I showed you that you are COMPLETELY WRONG by quoting a verse that showed the Jesus was preaching the gospel of the kingdom LONG before the day of Pentecost! And YOU call that a "diversion tactic"?

Matt 4:23 (AKJV/PCE)​

(4:23) ¶ And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people. ​

YOU claim that there is ONE gospel and that that ONE gospel was first preached on the day of Pentecost.

YOU made the FALSE claim and I showed you the TRUTH.

You are completely DISHONEST to make the FALSE claim that this is a "diversion tactic".