SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Seems to make sense to me, Bro!
One verse says "a voice" while the other verse says "the voice of Him (the Lord)".
For Sincere Inquisitors ONLY: MAD Explained
- Thread starter chickenman
- Start date
Seems to make sense to me, Bro!
One verse says "a voice" while the other verse says "the voice of Him (the Lord)".
Thanks, STP!
RA
RA
An interesting thought concerning Acts 8:20. Simon had just been baptized after believing the preaching of phillip concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ. But Peter, who has the power to bind and loose is about to condemn him to hell because he thought the gift of God and its supernatural power could be bought with money. Simons salvation was very precarious. He was not defiantly rejecting Christ. Thats the only thing that can make you lose your salvation according to godrulz.
Hi, V.
Simon believed the message he heard, it appears. But it looks to me like he did it to sort of get with the in-crowd, so to speak. He was a great man in Samaria...someone of whom the people said "this man is the great power of God." And Peter discerned the guy's heart, that he was "poisoned by bitterness and bound by iniquity". I think the guy had his thunder stolen by Philip, and then even more so by Peter and John, and he wanted to see how he could get in on the action. So I'm not sure his so-called belief was all that genuine. What do you think?
RA
_
"And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man." Acts 9:7
"And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me." Acts 22:9
10/4-They heard some kind of sound/voice in Acts 9:7, but they did not understand it, the words, per Acts 22:9.
Compare to:
"Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again.The people therefore, that stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered: others said, An angel spake to him." Jn. 12:28,29
Randy, i think simon truly believed that Jesus was the Christ. I think this passage shows that salvation was conditional if it was the kingdom gospel. He asked for forgiveness and i think he received it. If he had been baptized with the Spirit, he would not have had the bitterness or been bound by iniquity.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
The VoLtenaTeuR!
'm gng t strt pstng wtht vwls frm nw n, n n ttmpt t sv rth's prcs rsrcs.
I thought a "re-post" might be appropriate, given the subject of the thread.
Some thoughts on Acts 13-did you ever notice?:
Barnabas has preeminence, then Saul(bold is my emphasis):
"Which also they did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul." Acts 11:30
"And Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerusalem, when they had fulfilled their ministry, and took with them John, whose surname was Mark." Acts 12:25
"Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them." Acts 13:1, 2
"..Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them."
The LORD God again separates/divides(2 Tim. 2:15).
"Which was with the deputy of the country, Sergius Paulus, a prudent man; who called for Barnabas and Saul, and desired to hear the word of God." Acts 13:7
Now, notice the shift: Saul becomes Paul, and Paul is scripturally named before Barnabas hereafter most of the time(2 exceptions-Acts 15:12. 15:25): Acts 13:43, 13:46, 13:50, 14:12("...Paul... he was the chief speaker..."), 14:14, 15:2, 15:22, 15:35, 15:36.
Saul becomes Paul per Acts 13:9, and his name is changed at the time of his first miracle=his Hebrew name vanishes/Saul becoming/"changing to " Paul was one of the greatest displays, one of the greatest "miracles",by the LORD God, i.e., a pattern of our salvation! . Yes, Paul, a murderer, became a "miracle" of the LORD God's grace.
And notice the parallels/differences vs. Peter's first miracle:
Peter: "And Peter, fastening his eyes upon him with John, said, Look on us." Acts 3:4
Paul: "Then Saul, (who also is called Paul,) filled with the Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him." Acts 13:9
Peter, "fastening his eyes" upon the lame man, a Jew, pronounced a blessing. Paul, "set his eyes" on a Jew, Barjesus("son of salvation"), and pronounced his doom! Peter's first miracle references/depicts the restoration of Israel, while Paul's first miracle references/depicts the rejection of Israel, and the reconciliation of the Gentiles, due to Israel's blindness:
"And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season. And immediately there fell on him a mist and a darkness(diminishing of the eyes-my note); and he went about seeking some to lead him by the hand." Acts 13:11
"Then the deputy, when he saw what was done, believed, being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord." Acts 13:12
"For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in." Romans 11:25
Thus, the "son of salvation" is blinded for a season-typical of the nation of Israel. Perhaps Acts 13 marks the start of her blindness. And notice that the deputy in Acts 13:12, a Gentile, responds to the doctrine(reconciliation of Gentiles), and is shown mercy, while a Jew is blinded.
Also notice that in this chapter, 13:28-30, Paul puts forth the "outline" of 1 Cor. 15:1-4-the death, burial, and resurrection::
Verse 13:28:"And though they found no cause of death in him, yet desired they Pilate that he should be slain." = the death of the Lord Jesus Christ
Verse 29: "And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre."=the burial of the Lord Jesus Christ
Verse 30: "But God raised him from the dead:..." =the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ
Some thoughts on Acts 13-did you ever notice?:
Barnabas has preeminence, then Saul(bold is my emphasis):
"Which also they did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul." Acts 11:30
"And Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerusalem, when they had fulfilled their ministry, and took with them John, whose surname was Mark." Acts 12:25
"Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them." Acts 13:1, 2
"..Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them."
The LORD God again separates/divides(2 Tim. 2:15).
"Which was with the deputy of the country, Sergius Paulus, a prudent man; who called for Barnabas and Saul, and desired to hear the word of God." Acts 13:7
Now, notice the shift: Saul becomes Paul, and Paul is scripturally named before Barnabas hereafter most of the time(2 exceptions-Acts 15:12. 15:25): Acts 13:43, 13:46, 13:50, 14:12("...Paul... he was the chief speaker..."), 14:14, 15:2, 15:22, 15:35, 15:36.
Saul becomes Paul per Acts 13:9, and his name is changed at the time of his first miracle=his Hebrew name vanishes/Saul becoming/"changing to " Paul was one of the greatest displays, one of the greatest "miracles",by the LORD God, i.e., a pattern of our salvation! . Yes, Paul, a murderer, became a "miracle" of the LORD God's grace.
And notice the parallels/differences vs. Peter's first miracle:
Peter: "And Peter, fastening his eyes upon him with John, said, Look on us." Acts 3:4
Paul: "Then Saul, (who also is called Paul,) filled with the Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him." Acts 13:9
Peter, "fastening his eyes" upon the lame man, a Jew, pronounced a blessing. Paul, "set his eyes" on a Jew, Barjesus("son of salvation"), and pronounced his doom! Peter's first miracle references/depicts the restoration of Israel, while Paul's first miracle references/depicts the rejection of Israel, and the reconciliation of the Gentiles, due to Israel's blindness:
"And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season. And immediately there fell on him a mist and a darkness(diminishing of the eyes-my note); and he went about seeking some to lead him by the hand." Acts 13:11
"Then the deputy, when he saw what was done, believed, being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord." Acts 13:12
"For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in." Romans 11:25
Thus, the "son of salvation" is blinded for a season-typical of the nation of Israel. Perhaps Acts 13 marks the start of her blindness. And notice that the deputy in Acts 13:12, a Gentile, responds to the doctrine(reconciliation of Gentiles), and is shown mercy, while a Jew is blinded.
Also notice that in this chapter, 13:28-30, Paul puts forth the "outline" of 1 Cor. 15:1-4-the death, burial, and resurrection::
Verse 13:28:"And though they found no cause of death in him, yet desired they Pilate that he should be slain." = the death of the Lord Jesus Christ
Verse 29: "And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre."=the burial of the Lord Jesus Christ
Verse 30: "But God raised him from the dead:..." =the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ
Tico
New member
This passage has always interested me. Simon believed and was baptized. He was obviously didn't do everything he needed to do nor did he continue in his faith. This is great evidence of the fact that the Kingdom gospel was still being preached.
Definitely, Tico. Excellent point!
John, thanks for that great post. Those little details can be hard to see sometimes. But they're always interesting and can be very revealing. It'll be worthy of posting again, for sure.
Thanks,
RA
John, thanks for that great post. Those little details can be hard to see sometimes. But they're always interesting and can be very revealing. It'll be worthy of posting again, for sure.
Thanks,
RA
Moving along through Acts, just hitting points that might be significant in seeing the basis for the MidActs position...
Saul is converted in Acts 9 and begins preaching the gospel of God (that Jesus is the Son of God, testified by His resurrection) in the synagogues. This is the message he preaches first everywhere he goes in Acts. It is a message that was foretold by the prophets of old. So though Paul teaches some things in his epistles that were never before revealed, the gospel of God is not one of those things (Rom. 1:1-4). Peter preached the gospel of God, Philip preached the gospel of God to the Samaritans. After the resurrection, this message would become the foundation of any gospel message from then on (including today). During Acts, for those who believe this message, Paul will then expound upon it. We'll see that later.
According to Gal. 1:18, it looks like 3 years go by from Saul's conversion until he goes to Jerusalem in Acts 9:26. He was in Arabia for much of that time (Gal. 1:17), undoubtedly being taught by the Lord Himself.
It's important that Paul noted that he didn't immediately go to Jerusalem...that he waited so long before going. To the Galatians, Paul puts forth great effort to distance himself and his teaching from any man, specifically the Jerusalem apostles. He says:
This raises important questions: If Paul taught the exact same message as the Twelve before him, then why does Paul go through such effort to make it crystal clear that he didn't get his message from Peter? And why does he even REALLY, REALLY want the Galatians to know that Peter, James, and John - men of reputation - meant nothing to him? Would Philip have said something like this to the people of Samaria?
Nope.
Though the Acts narrative doesn't announce that anything has changed, we're certainly clued in to there being a shift away from the expected unfolding of the prophetic timeline...a shift to something different.
Chapter 9 concludes with a switch back to Peter, seeing him visiting the saints in the region, healing people and even resurrecting Dorcas in Joppa where he remains to set the stage for Chapter 10.
What are your thoughts on this? Remember, the intent of this thread is to allow interested observers to see how we MidActs'ers arrive at our position. And it will also allow us to sharpen and learn from one another. So any and all comments are valuable.
Thanks,
Randy
Saul is converted in Acts 9 and begins preaching the gospel of God (that Jesus is the Son of God, testified by His resurrection) in the synagogues. This is the message he preaches first everywhere he goes in Acts. It is a message that was foretold by the prophets of old. So though Paul teaches some things in his epistles that were never before revealed, the gospel of God is not one of those things (Rom. 1:1-4). Peter preached the gospel of God, Philip preached the gospel of God to the Samaritans. After the resurrection, this message would become the foundation of any gospel message from then on (including today). During Acts, for those who believe this message, Paul will then expound upon it. We'll see that later.
According to Gal. 1:18, it looks like 3 years go by from Saul's conversion until he goes to Jerusalem in Acts 9:26. He was in Arabia for much of that time (Gal. 1:17), undoubtedly being taught by the Lord Himself.
It's important that Paul noted that he didn't immediately go to Jerusalem...that he waited so long before going. To the Galatians, Paul puts forth great effort to distance himself and his teaching from any man, specifically the Jerusalem apostles. He says:
- the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man (Ga. 1:11)
- I neither received it from man, nor was taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ (Gal. 1:12)
- I did not immediately confer with flesh and blood (Gal. 1:16)
- nor did I go to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me (Gal. 1:17)
- I saw none of the other apostles except James (Gal. 1:19; and Peter 1:18)
- from those who seemed to be something - whatever they were, it makes no difference to me (Gal. 2:6)
- those who seemed to be something added nothting to me (Gal. 2:6)
This raises important questions: If Paul taught the exact same message as the Twelve before him, then why does Paul go through such effort to make it crystal clear that he didn't get his message from Peter? And why does he even REALLY, REALLY want the Galatians to know that Peter, James, and John - men of reputation - meant nothing to him? Would Philip have said something like this to the people of Samaria?
Nope.
Though the Acts narrative doesn't announce that anything has changed, we're certainly clued in to there being a shift away from the expected unfolding of the prophetic timeline...a shift to something different.
Chapter 9 concludes with a switch back to Peter, seeing him visiting the saints in the region, healing people and even resurrecting Dorcas in Joppa where he remains to set the stage for Chapter 10.
What are your thoughts on this? Remember, the intent of this thread is to allow interested observers to see how we MidActs'ers arrive at our position. And it will also allow us to sharpen and learn from one another. So any and all comments are valuable.
Thanks,
Randy
As I have stated, I believe God chose Saul of Tarsus for this "mission to the gentiles(which was planned from the beginning) because he loved the Lord God with all of his heart, mind and soul. He was a zealot! His understanding of the Lord God was of judgment and punishment for infractions of The Law. But he had the zeal and tenacity and loving potential that God required for the fulfillment of this mission. Can you imagine the stupifaction Saul must have felt when God spoke to him and said "Why are you persecuting me?". I can imagine Saul saying "But I love you so much and live to your service! How can you say such a thing to me?" And then Jesus the Christ revealed himself to Saul in all of his love and mercy and forgiveness and glory! That Epiphany which transformed Saul to Paul began the journey to the gentiles. Saul would never have even considered such a thing without this complete God-ordained transformation. I believe it was Saul's capacity to love God that made him a worthy vessel. To me, the important and telling attribute which makes one worthy before God is love. First God the Creator of life loves us and then God the Savior of life loves us and then we, through grace, love our God. Paul was, as he claimed, "aslave to Christ". While Jesus is our Redeemer, I've come to realize that it is through the mission of Paul that we, today, realize who we are called to be. I've probably rambled all over the place. Forgive me for that. But, Thanks be to God!, I have"suffered a sea change into something rich and strange!". I believe that I finally have a glimmer of understanding of what Paul was called to do. blessings to all, bybee
Tico
New member
Regarding the law, salvation and the forgiveness of sins, here is what the 12 preached throughout the first 10 chapters of Acts:
Acts 2:38 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.
Acts 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
Acts 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
Acts 5:31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. 32And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.
Acts 6:12 And they stirred up the people, and the elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and caught him, and brought him to the council, 13And set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place, and the law: 14For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us. 15And all that sat in the council, looking stedfastly on him, saw his face as it had been the face of an angel.
The opposite was true.
Acts 7:52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which showed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: 53Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.
After having been baptized and having believed, Peter says to Simon: Acts 8:22 Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.
Acts 10:35But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.
Much different from what Paul preached:
Acts 13:38 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: 39And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.
If Paul had gotten his gospel from Peter he wouldn't have preached the words of Acts 13:38-39.
Acts 2:38 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.
Acts 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
Acts 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
Acts 5:31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. 32And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.
Acts 6:12 And they stirred up the people, and the elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and caught him, and brought him to the council, 13And set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place, and the law: 14For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us. 15And all that sat in the council, looking stedfastly on him, saw his face as it had been the face of an angel.
The opposite was true.
Acts 7:52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which showed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: 53Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.
After having been baptized and having believed, Peter says to Simon: Acts 8:22 Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.
Acts 10:35But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.
Much different from what Paul preached:
Acts 13:38 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: 39And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.
If Paul had gotten his gospel from Peter he wouldn't have preached the words of Acts 13:38-39.
Randy. From galatians, it seems impossible that the gospel paul learned by revelation could be identical to that of the 12. Why would God show paul the same gospel as the 12 by special revelation? What possible harm could come from going to jerusalem to confer with the 12? Why wait 3 years? Up until Acts 9:26, it seems that Christ only revealed the gospel of God to paul. He also seems to have gained better understanding of how the OT shows that Jesus was the son of God. see Acts9:22. Am i fulfilling the purpose of the thread?
I agree, bybee, that it was Saul's zeal that made him the perfect candidate. Good post!
Amen! It's so obvious, isn't it, that Peter and Paul were not teaching the same thing.
I'm with you, voltaire. Paul leaves no doubt that his message was very different from the Twelve.
Absolutely!!! Thanks so much for your comments!
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
:up::up::up:
very important distinction, the gospel of God, a transdispensational message!