Theology Club: Bob Enyart's "The Plot" is he right?

Right Divider

Body part
In my last post I asked you one question, and that one question was about the following verse:
"For if their having been cast aside has carried with it the reconciliation of the world, what will their being accepted again be but Life out of death? (Ro.11:15; WNT).​

Who has been cast aside?

I take it by your question above that your answer is that it was Israel which was cast aside.

Is that true? You now realize that Israel was indeed cast aside?
I've never denied that Israel was cast aside. I'm apposing your strange ideas about what that means.

So... AGAIN... when did the body of Christ BEGIN and WHO was the FIRST member?

To answer your question, since Israel was cast aside, the Twelve and the rest of the believing Jews were made members of the Body of Christ. And according to Paul there were others in the Body of Christ before he was (Ro.16:7) so it is evident that the believing Jews were those who were in the Body before Paul. And the following words of Paul prove that they were indeed made members of the Body of Christ.
COME CLEAN.... WHEN did the BODY OF CHRIST BEGIN and WHO was the FIRST MEMBER?

Was John the baptizer in the body of Christ?

And where do you get the scripture that says that the TWELVE are in the body BUT UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES?

Another question.... why is Paul SILENT when other "members of the body of Christ" were zealous of the law in Acts 21:20?
 

Jerry Shugart

New member
COME CLEAN.... WHEN did the BODY OF CHRIST BEGIN and WHO was the FIRST MEMBER?

If you will go back to post #594 on this thread I have already answered. I said that Israel was temporarily cast aside at Acts 7 at the stoning of Stephen and at that time all of the Jewish believers were made members of the Body of Christ. And Paul's following words prove that the believing Jews were made members of the Body of Christ:

"But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby" (Eph.2:13-16).​

Here Paul speaks of two different groups of believers--the believing Jews and the believing Gentiles. Despite that fact you say that the Twelve weren't included in the group of Jews. But you haven't given any evidence which supports your assertion. I have already addressed Paul's words where he spoke of others being in Christ before he was at the Mid Acts Theology Club but you have not answered what I said there. So I wll repeat what I said in the hope that you will respond to it:

Let us look at the following verse which the MAD's on this forum have not made a response on this thread:

"Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me" (Ro.16:7).​

Paul Sadler, the past President of the Berean Bible Society, says that the words "in Christ" in that verse means redeemed "in Christ.":

https://www.godtube.com/watch/?v=JFM2FMNU

The problem wit this is no one is "redeemed" in Christ because the Scriptures reveal that people are redeemed "through" His blood:

"In whom we have redemption through (dia) his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace" (Eph.1:7).​

The Greek word dia means: "of the Means or Instrument by which anything is effected; because what is done by means of a person or thing seems to pass as it were 'through' the same" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

Now let us look at the following verse again:

"Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in (en) Christ before me" (Ro.16:7).​

The primary meaning of the Greek word en is "in the interior of some whole" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

That matches perfectly with the idea of being in the Body of Christ, being "in Christ." It does not express the idea of anyone being redeemed through the blood of Christ Jesus.

At another place, Paul makes it plain that when the words "in Christ" are used it is in regard to the Body of Christ:

"So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another" (Ro.12:5).​

Now it is your time to tell us exactly what the words "in Christ" in the following verse mean:

"Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me" (Ro.16:7).​
 

Right Divider

Body part
If you will go back to post #594 on this thread I have already answered. I said that Israel was temporarily cast aside at Acts 7 at the stoning of Stephen and at that time all of the Jewish believers were made members of the Body of Christ. And Paul's following words prove that the believing Jews were made members of the Body of Christ:
"But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby" (Eph.2:13-16).​
So... even though Paul declares that he is the pattern to be followed for those that hereafter believe.... the others were before him? Why aren't they the pattern?

Was John the baptizer in the body of Christ?

Here Paul speaks of two different groups of believers--the believing Jews and the believing Gentiles. Despite that fact you say that the Twelve weren't included in the group of Jews.
This is strange, since you say that the TWELVE are included in SOME way, but NOT in others! Why are they "in but differently"?

Why are THEY excluded, and ONLY THEM, from the judgment making capacity that you say that ALL OTHER members of the body of Christ have?

Why is there still some kind of the division between Jewish members of the "body of Christ" and the Gentiles in Acts 21:20?

Why is Paul SILENT when told that so many Jews (which you say are members of the body of Christ) were all zealous of the law?
 

Jerry Shugart

New member
So... even though Paul declares that he is the pattern to be followed for those that hereafter believe.... the others were before him? Why aren't they the pattern?

Paul was a pattern to demonstate the Lord's lonsuffering. At the time he was saved he was the worst enemy of the churches which were in Christ. The Lord wants everyone to know that since His worse enemy could be saved then even the worse of sinners can be saved. And that demonstrates the Lord's longsuffering.

Here is the answer provided by Ricky Kurth of the Berean Bible Society, who also believes that Paul was the first person in the Body of Christ:

Before he was saved, Paul was a pretty moral man (Phil.3:6) so why would he call himself “the chief of sinners” (v.15)? He certainly felt like the worst sinner (ICor.15:9 cf. Eph.3:8), but even when he was killing God’s people he was doing it “ignorantly” (v.13). No, the word “chief” means most prominent, as when the Bible speaks of “chief priests” and “chief rulers” and “chief singers.” The word also has the idea of leadership. The chief man on the island where Paul was shipwrecked (Acts 28:7) was probably the leader of those natives, and Satan was certainly the leader of all devils (Lu.11:15). Thus as the leader of the world’s rebellion against God, Saul was certainly the most prominent sinner.

So why’d God save him? To show His longsuffering in him (v.16). Notice he didn’t say he “was” the chief of sinners, he was still the most prominent sinner in the world, albeit now saved by grace. But as the most prominent sinner saved by grace he was an example of God’s longsuffering.

But if Saul began persecuting in Acts 7 and got saved shortly after in Acts 9, how did he show God’s longsuffering? Ah, God showed His longsuffering with mankind in saving Saul. He showed some longsuffering in Noah’s day (IPe.3:20) when he spared Noah and raised up the Gentile nations from his sons. Then when they rebelled at Babel He showed longsuffering to His favored nation 1500 more years. When they crucified His Son and stoned His prophet, God was supposed to give us the worst judgment ever (Mt.24:21) but showed “all longsuffering” instead.

God showed this longsuffering “for a pattern” to those who would believe on Him after Saul (Tit.3:3,4). But Paul is more than our pattern in salvation. There is a pattern of three more “faithful saying”s that show the fullness of how Paul is our pattern. He is our pattern in being godly (ITim. 4:8,9) because we are saved, not in order to get saved, as the pattern God gave thru Moses in the Law. He is our pattern in suffering for Christ and reigning with Him (IITim.2:11,12) and maintaining good works (Tit.3:8). How well should we maintain good works? Paul is our pattern, but he’s not here, so we should be a pattern (Ti.2:7)


Ricky Kurth said nothing about Paul being the first member of the Body of Christ. In fact, he said that Paul was saved to show the Lord's longsuffering.

In other words, the Lord Jesus picked Paul first in order to demonstate his longsuffering to mankind because that proves that if Paul could be saved at that time then the Lord's longsuffering excludes no one.

I am still waiting for any evidence from the Scriptures which prove that Paul was the first member of the Body of Christ.
 

Right Divider

Body part
Paul was a pattern to demonstate the Lord's lonsuffering. At the time he was saved he was the worst enemy of the churches which were in Christ. The Lord wants everyone to know that since His worse enemy could be saved then even the worse of sinners can be saved. And that demonstrates the Lord's longsuffering.
Indeed, Paul is the pattern for the body of Christ. The pattern always precedes the things that are modeled on the pattern.

I am still waiting for any evidence from the Scriptures which prove that Paul was the first member of the Body of Christ.
You claim that there were others in the body of Christ before Paul. I think that you owe us all this information first.

Was John the baptizer in the body of Christ?
 

Jerry Shugart

New member
Indeed, Paul is the pattern for the body of Christ.

If you will believe Paul he was saved as a pattern to demonstrate the Lord's longsuffering. The Lord wants everyone to know that He saved His worse enemy, Paul, in order to demonstrate that the worse of sinners can be saved.

You claim that there were others in the body of Christ before Paul. I think that you owe us all this information first.

Yes, and unlike you I have plenty of evidence that others were in the Body of Christ before Paul was. After all, he wrote of other Christians who were "in Christ" before he was.

And I have provided much evidence that when Paul uses that term he is speaking about the Body of Christ:

"So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another" (Ro.12:5).​

You have not provided any evidence that the words "in Christ" mean anything else than the Body of Christ being "in Christ."

Your theology is bankrupt!
 

Right Divider

Body part
If you will believe Paul he was saved as a pattern to demonstrate the Lord's longsuffering. The Lord wants everyone to know that He saved His worse enemy, Paul, in order to demonstrate that the worse of sinners can be saved.
Indeed, Paul is the PATTERN for those that should HEREAFTER believe on Him to life everlasting. Notice the clear TIME reference there? Probably not.

Yes, and unlike you I have plenty of evidence that others were in the Body of Christ before Paul was. After all, he wrote of other Christians who were "in Christ" before he was.
You keep repeating this and yet will not tell us WHEN THE BODY OF CHRIST BEGAN. It is impossible to know when such an important even occurred?

Was John the baptizer in the body of Christ?
 

Jerry Shugart

New member
WITH the nation of Israel?.... no, they ARE the nation of Israel. The REMNANT (remainder) of Israel scattered abroad and not terminated.

Your notion of the "setting aside" is your problem.

Before you said that Israel still existed. But when I proved that it had been cast aside you play like you never denied that Israel was cast aside:

I've never denied that Israel was cast aside. I'm apposing your strange ideas about what that means.

You don't know how to rightly divide the Scriptures because you put more faith in what some people say about the Scriptures than you do in what they actually say.
 
Last edited:

Boomer

Administrator
Staff member
I had to hide two posts in this discussion because of accusations of lying. Personal attacks are not allowed in this section. Address the post not the TOL member.
 

Jerry Shugart

New member
I've never denied that Israel was cast aside.

When Israel was cast aside what happened to the remnant of which Paul speaks of here?:

"Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded" (Ro.11:5-7).​

It is obvious that Paul is speaking of that remnant in the following passage and it is equally evident that they were made members of the Body of Christ:

"But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby" (Eph.2:13-16).​

There can be no doubt that these words of Paul are speaking of the believing remnant and the believing Gentiles being reconciled unto God in one Body, the Body of Christ.

There was ONE believing remnant in the first century.

Do you deny that one of the groups of believers of whom Paul speaks of at Ephesians 2:13-16 is the believing remnant?

If your answer is "yes" then please tell us your reason for believing that. And if you are able please provide the Scriptual evidence which you think supports your answer.

If your answer is "no" then it should become evident to you that the Twelve are members of the Body of Christ.
 
Last edited:

JudgeRightly

Super Moderator
Staff member
When Israel was cast aside what happened to the remnant of which Paul speaks of here?:

What happened to the remnant?

They died out, as after Paul was saved, no one could enter1 into a relationship with God through the New Covenaant. One could only come to God through faith in Christ.

Do you deny that one of the groups of believers of whom Paul speaks of at Ephesians 2:13-16 is the believing remnant?

Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands—that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation,having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace,and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near.For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father. - Ephesians 2:11-18 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians2:11-18&version=NKJV

The group of believers Paul is speaking to at Ephesus he calls "uncircumcision."

People in the New covenant (and in the old) are called "circumcision.

No, this passage is not talking about the Twelve. Not even close.

If your answer is "yes" then please tell us your reason for believing that. And if you are able please provide the Scriptual evidence which you think supports your answer.

Um, how about Ephesians 1:1...

If your answer is "no" then it should become evident to you that the Twelve are members of the Body of Christ.
 

Jerry Shugart

New member
What happened to the remnant?

They died out...

Here Paul speaks of two different and distinct groups being members of the Body of Christ:

"But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby" (Eph.2:13-16).​

If one of those groups is not the remnant then who are they?

If the Jews mentioned in the following passage were not of the remnant where did they come from?:

"For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit"
(1 Cor.12:13).​

The Jews who made up the remnant were once under the law and the Jews Paul addressed in the following passage were once under the law:

"But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster"
(Gal.3:23-25).​

There can be no doubt whatsoever that these people were at one time under the law of Moses and therefore were citizens of the commonwealth of Israel. They were also a part of the remnant.

When Paul wrote that epistle they were members of the Body of Christ so common sense dictates that the remnant became members of the Body of Christ.
 

JudgeRightly

Super Moderator
Staff member
Here Paul speaks of two different and distinct groups being members of the Body of Christ:

Yes, the Jews and the Gentiles are both part of the Body of Christ.

Your mistake is that you think that ALL JEWS are the REMNANT. This is your error.

If one of those groups is not the remnant then who are they?

They're Jews.

If the Jews mentioned in the following passage were not of the remnant where did they come from?:

"For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit"
(1 Cor.12:13).​

They were probably Jews who got saved AFTER Paul did.

The Jews who made up the remnant were once under the law and the Jews Paul addressed in the following passage were once under the law:

"But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster"
(Gal.3:23-25).​

Duh.

There can be no doubt whatsoever that these people were at one time under the law of Moses and therefore were citizens of the commonwealth of Israel.

Duh.

They were also a part of the remnant.

No, they weren't. :yawn:

When Paul wrote that epistle they were members of the Body of Christ

Jews in the Remnant were still Jews.

Jews in the Body of Christ are no longer Jews, because there is no distinction between Jew or Gentile.

Jews who were part of the Remnant did not become part of the Body of Christ, otherwise there would have been no "Remnant."

so common sense dictates that the remnant became members of the Body of Christ.

No, it doesn't. See just above.
 

Jerry Shugart

New member
They were probably Jews who got saved AFTER Paul did.

Probably?

Paul himself said that other Christians were in the Body of Christ before he was:

"Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me"
(Ro.16:7).​

It is not difficult to understand that when Paul uses the words "in Christ" he is referring to being in the Body of Christ, as witnessed what he said here:

"For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office: So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another" (Ro.12:4-5).​

We can also know that when Paul speaks of others being "in Christ" the term "in Christ" always means the same thing:

"Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new"
(2 Cor.5:16-17).​

Of course the "new creation" is the New Man, the Body of Christ which Paul speaks of here:

"For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby" (Eph.2:14-16).​

Cornelius Stam, the founder of the Berean Bible Society, wrote the following about the words "new creation":

"This 'new creation,' this 'one new man,' this 'joint body,' formed of Jews and Gentiles made one in Christ, is called 'His body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all' (Eph. 1:23)" (Stam, True Spirituality [Berean Literature Foundation, 1984], 48,50).​

Therefore, we can understand that there is evidence that other Christians were baptized into the Body of Christ before Paul was and those Christians had to be Jewish believers such as the Twelve.
 

JudgeRightly

Super Moderator
Staff member
Probably?

Paul himself said that other Christians were in the Body of Christ before he was:

"Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me"
(Ro.16:7).​

Uh, no. As I've told you before, "in Christ" does not necessarily mean "in the Body of Christ." This is a hasty generalization.

It is not difficult to understand that when Paul uses the words "in Christ" he is referring to being in the Body of Christ, as witnessed what he said here:

"For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office: So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another" (Ro.12:4-5).​

Jerry, it's not that I don't see the argument you're making. I get it. You see "in Christ" and think "Body of Christ" because those in the Body of Christ are "in Christ."

But again, that's a hasty generalization.

Here's what's happening with your argument:

All A are a subset of B, but not all B are A.

All [members of the Body of Christ] are a subset of [people who are "in Christ"], but not all [people who are "in Christ"] are [members of the Body of Christ].

We can also know that when Paul speaks of others being "in Christ" the term "in Christ" always means the same thing:

It always means "in Christ." As in, "This person is a believer."

But it DOES NOT ALWAYS MEAN "This person is a member of the Body of Christ.


"Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new"
(2 Cor.5:16-17).​

Of course the "new creation" is the New Man, the Body of Christ which Paul speaks of here:

"For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby" (Eph.2:14-16).​

Cornelius Stam, the founder of the Berean Bible Society, wrote the following about the words "new creation":

"This 'new creation,' this 'one new man,' this 'joint body,' formed of Jews and Gentiles made one in Christ, is called 'His body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all' (Eph. 1:23)" (Stam, True Spirituality [Berean Literature Foundation, 1984], 48,50).​

I'm going to stick with the plain reading of scripture over some historical person's interpretation of it.

However, for this reason I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might show all longsuffering, as a pattern to those who are going to believe on Him for everlasting life. - 1 Timothy 1:16 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1Timothy1:16&version=NKJV

But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter(for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles),and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. - Galatians 2:7-9 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians2:7-9&version=NKJV

Therefore, we can understand that there is evidence that other Christians were baptized into the Body of Christ before Paul was and those Christians had to be Jewish believers such as the Twelve.

:blabla:

Begging the question is a logical fallacy.
 

Jerry Shugart

New member
But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter(for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles),and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. - Galatians 2:7-9

Peter's commission was changed after Israel was temporarily set aside because in his first epistle he is no longer preaching the gospel of the kingdom. Instead, he was preaching the gospel which Paul referred to as "the preaching of the Cross":

"Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed...Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot" (1 Pet.2:24, 1:18-19).​

That is not the same gospel which the Twelve preached at Luke 9:6 because at that time they didn't even know the Lord Jesus was going to die (Lk.18:33-34).

Are you now going to argue that the gospel which the Twelve preached at Luke 6:9 is the same one which Peter spoke of in his first epistle?
 

glorydaz

New member
I have listened to Bob Enyart's The Plot series & I am reading the book.
He settles a bunch of doctrinal debates like:

are believers under the law?
is baptism necessary ?
does salvation by faith require works ?
can believers lose their salvation ?
must believers keep the sabbath ?
is the rapture before the tribulation ?
is there a rapture ?

the post I have read against Mid Acts Disp have not even dented this doctrine nor can they settle these debates once and for all like The Plot has for me.
I keep waiting for some one to prove it wrong but mostly
I get the fact that people don't understand "The Plot"
:think:
"The Plot" \ Mid Acts Disp makes exegesis simple.

the question is :

can you show how your exegesis is correct
and that Mid Acts Disp exegesis is wrong ?

This needs to start over now that I have the book, The Plot.

One point Bob made that really intrigued me was concerning the men named Ananias, and how they were figures of Israel, and what God was doing with Israel. What an incredible book the Bible is, and Bob does such a good job finding these tidbits that didn't seem to have much meaning in and of themselves.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
This needs to start over now that I have the book, The Plot.

One point Bob made that really intrigued me was concerning the men named Ananias, and how they were figures of Israel, and what God was doing with Israel. What an incredible book the Bible is, and Bob does such a good job finding these tidbits that didn't seem to have much meaning in and of themselves.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?
Stripe was generous enough to mail me a copy of the book a few years ago.
It does a good job of making a lot of things clear, and it only scratches the surface!
Volumes could be written.


Now that more here have The Plot book on hand, we could do a thread study chapter by chapter if there is enough interest to do so.


Another book called Things That Differ by C.F. Stam came out years earlier and it was very easy to read and follow how Paul's new ministry was different from the apostle's previous ministry and how the BOC is different from Israel.
You can read it online: http://www.faithcomethbyhearing.net/uploads/3/8/9/5/38955381/stam_things_that_differ.pdf
 

Jerry Shugart

New member
Another book called Things That Differ by C.F. Stam came out years earlier and it was very easy to read and follow how Paul's new ministry was different from the apostle's previous ministry and how the BOC is different from Israel.

Pastor Stam wrote the following:

"Note carefully that while God refuses works for salvation today, He required them under other dispensations."
(Cornelius Stam, Things That Differ, [Berean Literature Foundation, Twelfth Printing, 1985], 21).​

However, the following words of the Lord Jesus spoken to the Jews who lived under the law makes it abundantly clear that the only requirement for them to be saved was "faith" and faith alone.

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life"
(Jn.6:47).​

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life" (Jn.5:24).​

"I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die"
(Jn.11:25-26).​

Now let us look at what is written here:

"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).​

The word "whosoever" in this verse must include not only the Gentile believers as well as the Jews who lived under the law. So all people who believe in the Lord Jesus have in their possession everlasting life and they shall never perish. Besides that, the previous three verses which come straight from the lips of the Lord Jesus Christ and the only requirement which He mentioned for anyone to receive those spiritual blessings is believing. So there can be no doubt that the Jews who lived under the law were saved by grace through faith apart from works. The following words are from the pen of the Apostle Paul:

"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; who is the father of us all"
(Ro.4:16).​
 
Top