ECT Two Bodies of Believers in the NT
- Thread starter heir
- Start date
heir
TOL Subscriber
:doh: Round and round we go. When will you stop playing these word games? Nobody knows. Paul's gospel is not the gospel of the kingdom! Paul's gospel was a mystery in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John (Romans 16:25-26 KJV) and the Bible tells us why (1 Corinthians 2:6-8 KJV). How many times have we been over this?
heir
TOL Subscriber
Yeppeth!
Right Divider
Body part
Please feel free to quote ANY scripture where Paul uses the phrase "gospel of the kingdom".
heir
TOL Subscriber
There isn't a group in all of Christendom that has been/has met your, unfortunately made "pie in the sky" assertion, made so by the following reality, regardless of the sect or faction within Christianity...
Some decades ago, one Mid-Acts group not only cut off another Mid-Acts group, but in a very ugly manner, to the condemnation of their true heart before the world in the sight of God.
This, even as both groups asserted your above words as the key to unity.
Over the years, this pattern has continued within all groups out there, including within Mid-Acts, as different understandings of one thing or another have been allowed by some to be cause for personal animosity which is then disguised as obedience to some passage or another.
I recall one assembly I visited once. One faction within their small assembly held that "Paul wrote Hebrews." Another faction within their same assembly did not. And both had issue with one another over this. A third group held that both those two groups were members of the Body and so, had no issue with either of those two.
All within the same assembly.
Afterwards, they had a potluck supper. Sure enough, members of those first two factions sat with their "own," their third group - having to - do likewise.
I love stirring things up when I find that kind of my way or the highway. Some issue with unright authority, or another, on my part, I'm sure, lol.
So I mingled with all three at one point or another.
Sure enough, the first two focused on where I might stand on Hebrews, lol
The third group asked me about how I came to know the Lord, had I had enough to eat, and so on.
I was then still relatively new to Mid-Acts.
Admittedly, I found that experience fascinating. I'd been in the world for some time just prior to that, and found it fascinating that the same kinds of issues one finds in the world might not always be left at the door to "assembly" life.
In this, I sincerely doubt that all who post their particular understanding of one thing or another do so out of malicious intent or for money or what have you.
The simple fact is that people approach their studies of one thing or another according to how they have figured out how to do so, or have been taught to, together with their particular level of experience at it over time.
On TOL alone, there are not only many groups represented, but factions within those groups are also obviously represented.
As a result, there are bound to be differences over differences in understanding and this is more a matter of personal manners in general then "well, we can talk this way, hang with this one, shun that one, because we alone represent the truth - and here are verses to prove it!"
Nonsense is what that is.
Some have even posted that Paul wrote to no one today.
More nonsense. Fact is; the much he'd had to say about this very foolishness is obviously just as relevent today in Blue Jeans, as it had been way back when, in Togas, or what have you.
Thus, desire all the fictional Mayberry, N.C. (fictional town on The Andy Griffith Show) you might, STP, the reality is ever more a cross between the incompetence of Deputy Fifth on one end, the rock throwing of Earnest T. Bass on the other, and the well intended but often cluelessness of Aunt Bee in the middle.
The unity that was Andy remains the fiction that was/is that much beloved little town to this very day, thus why it still airs...
What we all long for, we all get in the way of...
Yours always, Otis...
Now where did I put that bottle...
Paul doesn't use the phrase "gospel of the kingdom" but Jesus does. How about Jesus' gospel?
But Jesus' gospel was so plain and simple that even I can understand it.
Paul's gospel was primarily to those of the Jewish faith to whom Paul explained that salvation is by grace and is not attainable through the keeping of the law.
Paul also explained that there is no difference between Jew and Gentile with regard to salvation.
You've just inspired that line from Lethal Weapon 2, I believe it was - Joe Peschi's "Uhkay, uhkay, uhkay, my turn!"
Yuh ready Jamie - here; have another :doh:
Lol
genuineoriginal
New member
Someone should travel back in time and let Paul know that he shouldn't preach the gospel of the kingdom.
Acts 28:23 23 And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening. |
The narrative there goes on to reveal that even the word "persuading" as used there, is obviously not to be understood in the sense that one might take that word today...
Acts 28:24 And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not.
Words often mean one thing in one place that they do not mean somewhere else.
The OP even illustrated this when it used the word "bodies" in two of its different senses within the same paragraph.
Get with the program, GO.
genuineoriginal
New member
No, the word "persuading" means what it says, unlike the mistranslated phrase "rightly dividing".
But, I see you are now agreeing with me that sixth grade modern English is not sufficient for understanding the KJV.
:wave2:
Don't hold your breath on that one.
It is a Basic 6th Grade Elementary School Rule of Reading that allowed me to see this distinction you missed.
Contrasts...
Contrasts...
Contrasts...
genuineoriginal
New member
FTFY, and you are welcome.
I would appreciate if you leave my words as I posted them.
Not only do I not do that to your words, but I continue to exchange with you a bit more respectfully towards you then some others have.
I expect as much in kind.
genuineoriginal
New member
I will remember that in the future.
Fair enough.
Right Divider
Body part
And your point is??????
musterion
Well-known member
Bumpeth. Why dost thou non-MADs avoideth this query? I'm sure we've very interested in your non-MAD hermeneutic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For those who say MAD is wrong,
1. What parts of the Bible do you say apply to all of us today?
1a. If you say "Some parts," how do you know which parts do and which do not?
1b. If you say "All parts," how do you know that, and what do you do with the parts that cannot both be obeyed without them contradicting each other?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For those who say MAD is wrong,
1. What parts of the Bible do you say apply to all of us today?
1a. If you say "Some parts," how do you know which parts do and which do not?
1b. If you say "All parts," how do you know that, and what do you do with the parts that cannot both be obeyed without them contradicting each other?
Interplanner
Well-known member
It is not a matter of sorting parts, but of seeing that all past parts before Christ had only typological shadow function to them until the reality came which is in Christ, Gal 4, Hebrews.