Theology Club: Why Will No One in the Neo-MAD Camp Address John 3:16?

[Danoh]

I can understand what Paul is saying at 1 Corinthians 1:2 and 12:13.

Evidently you cannot and that is why you refuse to address those verses!

Are you sure you can understand what Paul is saying in those passages? Why he wrote them to begin with?

1 Corinthians 12:

13. 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.
14. For the body is not one member, but many.
15. If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
16. And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

23. And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.
24. For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked.
25. That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.
26. And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.
27. Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

30. Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
31. But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

No, but each wanted to outdo the other.

1 Corinthians 13:

1. Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
2. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.
3. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Are you sure you can understand what Paul is saying in those passages?

If anything which I said about 1 Corinthians 1:2 and 12:13 is in error then tell me exactly what I said that is in error.

Show me that you actually want an honest discussion about these two verses.

 

[Danoh]

If anything which I said about 1 Corinthians 1:2 and 12:13 is in error then tell me exactly what I said that is in error.

Show me that you actually want an honest discussion about these two verses.

Your failure to practice the spirit of 1 Corinthians 12 towards those you claim you only want to explore verse 13 with...is in error.

And you are so drunk in your pride that even pointing it out to you, you are unable to see it.

 

[Danoh]

Paul Sadler, the President of the Berean Bible Society and one of the chief spokesmen of the Neo-MAD view, says that salvation according to the gospel of circumcision could not be achieved apart from "works":

"We should add that the gospel of the circumcision and the gospel of the kingdom are inseparably bound together. Both are based upon a 'performance system.' It is this program and message that James was laboring under when he wrote his epistle...How often James must have heard one of his countrymen say, 'I believe in God.' But James observed that there were no fruits in his life that substantiated his claim, which was essential under the gospel of the circumcision" [emphasis added] (Sadler, "Studies in the Epistle of James", The Berean Searchlight, January, 2006, p.8-9).​

Pastor Sadler continues, writing that "According to James, Abraham served as a 'pattern' to the circumcision that faith and works were 'required' for salvation under their program" [emphasis added] (Ibid., p.10).

Hoow can that be said since we read here that those who believe are saved:

"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 Neo-MADs on this forum are absolutely convinced that the Jews who lived under the Law could not be saved apart from works. How can they be certain of that with John 3:16 in view.

That verse says that all who "believe" are saved but those in the Neo-MAD camp say the the Jews who lived under the Law could have "faith" but they are not saved unless they do works.

Every time I bring John 3:16 up to the Neo-MADs I never get an answer. They refuse to give their interpretation of the meaning of that verse.

They say that they follow Paul but the certainly do not follow him when he says that he "kept back nothing that was profitable unto you" and "I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God" (Acts 20:20, 27).

Will they continue to run and hide from John 3:16 or will they finally give their interpretation of the meaning of the verse?:

"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).​

Jerry, who that you known of, of those more well known within Mid-Acts has held to the above?

O'Hair?

Baker?

Stam, or any of his people?

Jordan, or any of his people?

Brock?

Blades, or any of his people?

Feldick?

Others?

Who specifically do you mean by this Neo-Mid Acts label of yours?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

And you are so drunk in your pride that even pointing it out to you, you are unable to see it.

It is you who is prideful because you think that you know more about the salvation of the Jews who lived under the law than the Savior himself. He said this to the Jews who lived under the law:

"Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life" (Jn.5:24).​

He told those Jews that if they "believe" that they will be saved. But you say that He was wrong because those Jews could not possibly be saved unless they believed and were baptized with water.

You think that you know more about this subject than the Lord Jesus and only a very, very prideful person could think that.

 

[Danoh]

Paul Sadler, the President of the Berean Bible Society and one of the chief spokesmen of the Neo-MAD view, says that salvation according to the gospel of circumcision could not be achieved apart from "works":

"We should add that the gospel of the circumcision and the gospel of the kingdom are inseparably bound together. Both are based upon a 'performance system.' It is this program and message that James was laboring under when he wrote his epistle...How often James must have heard one of his countrymen say, 'I believe in God.' But James observed that there were no fruits in his life that substantiated his claim, which was essential under the gospel of the circumcision" [emphasis added] (Sadler, "Studies in the Epistle of James", The Berean Searchlight, January, 2006, p.8-9).​

Pastor Sadler continues, writing that "According to James, Abraham served as a 'pattern' to the circumcision that faith and works were 'required' for salvation under their program" [emphasis added] (Ibid., p.10).

Hoow can that be said since we read here that those who believe are saved:

"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 Neo-MADs on this forum are absolutely convinced that the Jews who lived under the Law could not be saved apart from works. How can they be certain of that with John 3:16 in view.

That verse says that all who "believe" are saved but those in the Neo-MAD camp say the the Jews who lived under the Law could have "faith" but they are not saved unless they do works.

Every time I bring John 3:16 up to the Neo-MADs I never get an answer. They refuse to give their interpretation of the meaning of that verse.

They say that they follow Paul but the certainly do not follow him when he says that he "kept back nothing that was profitable unto you" and "I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God" (Acts 20:20, 27).

Will they continue to run and hide from John 3:16 or will they finally give their interpretation of the meaning of the verse?:

"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).​

Jerry, who that you known of, of those more well known within Mid-Acts has held to the above?

O'Hair?

Baker?

Stam, or any of his people?

Jordan, or any of his people?

Brock?

Blades, or any of his people?

Feldick?

Others?

Who specifically do you mean by this Neo-Mid Acts label of yours?

 

[Brother Vinny]

Was referred by patrick jane to give mid-Acts theology (another) try, so I'm trying to be open.

What are the ramifications to the gospel of grace if Jerry is right?

What are they if he's wrong?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Was referred by patrick jane to give mid-Acts theology (another) try, so I'm trying to be open.

What are the ramifications to the gospel of grace if Jerry is right?

What are they if he's wrong?

Those in the Neo-MAD camp say that the Jews who lived under the law, including the Twelve, were saved when they believed and did works. So according to them their salvation was not on the basis of grace. But the Bible tells another story:

"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.4:15-16).​

Those in the Neo-MAD camp argue that the gospel of grace was not preached to those who received the Hebrew epistles (Hebrews through Jude). However, Peter said that those to whom he wrote his first epistle were born again by a gospel which bears a strong resemblance to the gospel of grace:

"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.1:18-19).​

"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" (1 Pet.2:24).​

"For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit" (1 Pet.3:18).​

 

[Brother Vinny]

Those in the Neo-MAD camp say that the Jews who lived under the law, including the Twelve, were saved when they believed and did works. So according to them their salvation was not on the basis of grace. But the Bible tells another story:

"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.4:15-16).​

Those in the Neo-MAD camp argue that the gospel of grace was not preached to those who received the Hebrew epistles (Hebrews through Jude). However, Peter said that those to whom he wrote his first epistle were born again by a gospel which bears a strong resemblance to the gospel of grace:

"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.1:18-19).​

"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" (1 Pet.2:24).​

"For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit" (1 Pet.3:18).​

Thanks for the prompt response, but my question isn't quite answered. What does your premise mean to mid-Acts soteriology? What does the opposite premise entail?

 

[Clete]

Matthew 19:16 Now behold, one came and said to Him, “Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?” 17 So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

John14:15 “If you love Me, keep My commandments."

Luke 6:46 “But why do you call Me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and not do the things which I say? 47 Whoever comes to Me, and hears My sayings and does them, I will show you whom he is like: 48 He is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid the foundation on the rock. And when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently against that house, and could not shake it, for it was founded on the rock. 49 But he who heard and did nothing is like a man who built a house on the earth without a foundation, against which the stream beat vehemently; and immediately it fell. And the ruin of that house was great.”

Matthew 3:10 And even now the ax is laid to the root of the trees. Therefore every tree which does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

John 15:5 “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing. 6 If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned. 7 If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, you will ask what you desire, and it shall be done for you. 8 By this My Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit; so you will be My disciples.
9 “As the Father loved Me, I also have loved you; abide in My love. 10 If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love.

Romans 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law13 (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; ​

And it wasn't just Sadler who said it, it was James!

James 2:14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

18 But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your[d] works, and I will show you my faith by my[e] works. 19 You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! 20 But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?[f] 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 22 Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? 23 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”[g] And he was called the friend of God. 24 You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.

25 Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?

26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.​

James also said this...

Acts 21:17 And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. 18 On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. 19 When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. 20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, “You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; 21 but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs.​

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Pierac]

I have a question to all who have posted here... What does the term "Works" mean?

It's obvious... In the later Act 15, Luke speaks of one single debate, at one time in Jerusalem, with one result, complete harmony on both that first original subject (no to circumcision traditions for pagan male converts). Then in the earlier Galatians 2, Paul, on the other hand, speaks of two debates come at two times in Jerusalem (2:1-10) and Antioch (2:11-16), and with harmonious consensus on the first subject but severe discord on the second one. :think:


Paul

 

[Danoh]

I have a question to all who have posted here... What does the term "Works" mean?

It's obvious... In the later Act 15, Luke speaks of one single debate, at one time in Jerusalem, with one result, complete harmony on both that first original subject (no to circumcision traditions for pagan male converts). Then in the earlier Galatians 2, Paul, on the other hand, speaks of two debates come at two times in Jerusalem (2:1-10) and Antioch (2:11-16), and with harmonious consensus on the first subject but severe discord on the second one. :think:


Paul

Your post kind of reads like the assertions of a person on the Exclusive and the Religion forum on TOL who goes by the name of God's Truth.

She asserts that the works being addressed in those debates were circumcision and various cleansing ritual's under the Law.

But the real issue as to "works" is exemplified in what the issue as to "neither circumcision, nor uncircumcision" actually is about.

Neither works, not no works, "but faith, which worketh by love" Gal. 5:6.

In other words, under Grace, works are motivated by Grace.

Grace is meant to inspire a grace attitude, or gratitude.

By faith empowered by the love of Christ - by the gratitude His love for you at Calvary is meant to empower you, to live "by the faith of the Son of God" - note - "who loved me and gave Himself for me," Gal. 2:20.

This issue - "the faith of Christ" is the issue of He so loved me, that He gave Himself for me. Note His faithfulness to His mission in Matthew 26:

37. And he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy.
38. Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me.
39. And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.

The faith of Christ, Who loved me so, that He gave Himself for me - nevertheless not as I will, but as Thou wilt.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

[ “You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; 21 but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs.[/INDENT]

Yes, and even though they were all zealous of the law every one of these people were 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; who is the father of us all" (Ro.4:15-16).​

Anyone who has truly believed the gospel of grace knows that "works" and "grace" are mutually exclusive.

You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.

You obviously overlooked what James said in the first chapter which proves that the justification spoken of the verse you quoted is not justification before God:

"Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures" (Jas.1:18).​

A person is "born of God" and therefore saved by faith and faith alone.

Matthew 19:16 Now behold, one came and said to Him, “Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?” 17 So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

That is one way whereby a Jew who lived under the law could inherit eternal life. However, if a Jew broke just one of the commandments he was guilty of all (Jas.2:10). Since all men have sinned it is obvious that no Jew was saved in this way. However, there is another way that they can be said, as witnessed by the following words of the Lord Jesus spoken to the Jews who lived under the law:

"Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life" (Jn.5:24).​

I have answered three of the verses which you quoted so now it is your turn to answer the three verses which I quoted.

 

[Clete]

I have a question to all who have posted here... What does the term "Works" mean?

It's obvious... In the later Act 15, Luke speaks of one single debate, at one time in Jerusalem, with one result, complete harmony on both that first original subject (no to circumcision traditions for pagan male converts). Then in the earlier Galatians 2, Paul, on the other hand, speaks of two debates come at two times in Jerusalem (2:1-10) and Antioch (2:11-16), and with harmonious consensus on the first subject but severe discord on the second one. :think:


Paul

"Works" is defined as good things people do. If you do something good, that's a work.

The issue isn't whether we should do good works, its why we should do them. If you do or don't do something because there is a rule somewhere that says so then that is a work of the flesh and will profit you nothing in this dispensation of grace. If on the other hand you do or don't do something because you love God or your neighbor (or both) then that is faith working through love which is pleasing to God.

Such works DO NOT make you righteous though and that is key to understand because if you are doing things (or refraining from other things) in an effort to be good then you've severely misunderstood the gospel. If you are in Christ then you are good, you are righteous! Not because of what you've done but because of what Jesus did for you. The question is whether you believe that you are righteous or not. If you accept the biblical facts concerning your imputed righteousness then good works flow not from effort but rather as a logical product of your being. This being vs doing idea is the principle difference between law vs grace.

The effort for today's Christian is not in doing good works but in believing the gospel. The good works will come but not by effort. A tomato plant does not toil to produce its fruit; it simply produces fruit by its nature. The advantage tomatoes have over us is that there is nothing in the heart of a tomato plant at war with producing good fruit. We, however, have the flesh to contend with which is at war with the Spirit that is within us. Crucifying it can only be done by faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ in whom we have died.

This whole "crucifying the flesh" idea is a concept I've heard batted around in churches my whole life practically and I never understood it. It seems like I was constantly asking, "How does one crucify their flesh?" I never understood it and I don't think I ever would have understood it until I understood the unique message and ministry of the apostle Paul and his Gospel of the Mystery. The key is not for me to crucify my flesh but that it has already been crucified in Him. All there is for me to do is believe it. The fruit, all fruit that will last, comes as a result of that belief. I have been (past tense) crucified in Christ and so it is no longer I who lives but Christ who lives His life through me and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.

This is why I always say that I am....

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Thanks for the prompt response, but my question isn't quite answered. What does your premise mean to mid-Acts soteriology? What does the opposite premise entail?

I am not sure what you want. Would you go into more detail?

 

[Clete]

You obviously overlooked what James said in the first chapter which proves that the justification spoken of the verse you quoted is not justification before God:

James 2 is about salvation, Jerry.

James 2:14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him?

His answer is clear....

James 2:24 You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.

This single verse destroys your entire premise. There's nothing more to say about it.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Jerry Shugart]

James 2 is about salvation, Jerry.

Clete, let us look at this verse which is in the first chapter of James:

"Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures" (Jas.1:18).​

Those who received the epistle of James were "born of God" and therefore saved by faith and faith alone.

James 2:14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him?

His answer is clear....

James 2:24 You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.

This single verse destroys your entire premise. There's nothing more to say about it.

You ignore the context because what James is speaking about is what a man can know about another man's faith:

"Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works" (Jas.2:18).​

As far a man knows, if another man shows no good works then that man's faith is dead or non-existent. And obviously as far as a man can tell, that kind of faith will save no one.

Sir Robert Anderson, the father of systemized Mid Acts Dispensationalism, had this to say about this subject:

"Paul's Epistle (Romans) unfolds the mind and purposes of God, revealing His righteousness and wrath. The Epistle of James addresses men upon their own ground. The one deals with justification as between the sinner and God, the other as between man and man. In the one, therefore, the word is, 'To him that worketh not, but believeth'. In the other it is, 'What is the profit if a man say he hath faith, and have not works?' Not 'If a man have faith', but 'If a man say he hath faith' proving that, in the case supposed, the individual is not dealing with God, but arguing the matter with his brethren. God, who searches the heart, does not need to judge by works, which are but the outward manifestation of faith within; but man can judge only by appearances...He (Abraham) was justified by faith when judged by God, for God knows the heart. He was justified by works when judged by his fellow men, for man can only read the life" [emphasis added] (Anderson, The Gospel and Its Ministry, [Kregel Publications, 1978], pp.160-161).​

Now I wait for you to answer this verse which proves that those to whom James wrote were saved by faith and faith alone:

"Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures" (Jas.1:18).​

“You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; 21 but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs.[/INDENT]

Yes, and even though they were all zealous of the law every one of these people were 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; who is the father of us all" (Ro.4:15-16).​

Anyone who has truly believed the gospel of grace knows that "works" and "grace" are mutually exclusive.

Matthew 19:16 Now behold, one came and said to Him, “Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?” 17 So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

That is one way whereby a Jew who lived under the law could inherit eternal life. However, if a Jew broke just one of the commandments he was guilty of all (Jas.2:10). Since all men have sinned it is obvious that no Jew was saved in this way. However, there is another way that they can be said, as witnessed by the following words of the Lord Jesus spoken to the Jews who lived under the law:

"Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life" (Jn.5:24).​

I have answered three of the verses which you quoted so now answer what I said about James 1:18 and the two other verses which I quoted.

 

[Danoh]

I call them Neo-MAD because they are the New MAD. These people have abandoned the sound teachings of both Sir Robert Anderson and J.C. O'Hair of the original Mad and have adopted many of the teachings of the Acts 28 crowd.

From - Berean Bible Society - https://www.bereanbiblesociety.org -
Part 2: Gleanings From the Book of Acts silence of God
Posted By Pastor J. C. O'Hair On October 5, 1935 @ 11:30 am In 1935.10 - Bible Study For Bereans - October 1935.

The following from that document, is by J.C. O'Hair:

According to the same Record, none of the Twelve preached the gospel of the uncircumcision. Only one message was preached by one of them to the uncircumcision, and that was the “word” which God sent to Israel. Acts 10:35 and 36. That one message was preached to the household of a Gentile, who feared God, who loved Israel, who prayed to God always and who gave much alms to Israel. He was a just, devout man. Acts 10:1 and 2 and Acts 10:22.

Concerning the Book of Acts, Sir Robert Anderson, one of God’s most gifted Bible teachers, declares, in his “Silence of God”: “My contention is that the Acts, as a whole is the record of a temporary and transitional dispensation in which blessing was again offered to the Jew and again rejected.” “The right understanding of the Acts of the Apostles . . . a Book which is primarily the record, not as commonly supposed, of the founding of the Christian Church, but of the apostasy of the favoured nation.”

Let us not consider this learned brother as final authority, or his exegesis as infallible, neither let us be prejudiced by the teaching of any other so-called “big” Bible teachers who insist that the day of Pentecost ushered in the “dispensation of the mystery” mentioned in Ephesians 3:9, but let us receive their testimonies and search the Scriptures daily. It is rather difficult to believe that the “dispensation of the mystery”, with reference to the untraceable riches of Christ among the Gentiles, began on a Jewish feast day before the Apostle to the Gentiles was converted and commissioned, even seven years before Peter was authorized, by the “sheet of unclean creatures”, to preach the gospel of the circumcision to one respectable God-fearing Gentile, who apparently was an uncircumcised proselyte.

According to your fool notions, Jerry, one of those two men would have to fall under your Neo-Mad nonsense.

And "The Silence of God" is Cessasionist.

While, O'Hair, on the other hand, had believed that Divine Intervention is still in operation in some form.

Which of those two men is Neo, you buffoon.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

According to your fool notions, Jerry, one of those two men would have to fall under your Neo-Mad nonsense..

You are the one with foolish notions because nothing which you quoted demonstrates that either men believed that "works" were necessary for salvation for the Jews who lived under the law.

And neither men believed that the doctrine found in the epistles beginning at Hebrews and ending at Jude is not for those in the Body of Christ.

In fact, O'Hair described the ideas about those epistles being taught within the Neo-MAD with the word "foolish" :

"Peter and James and ten other apostles are going to sit on twelve thrones and judge the twelve tribes of Israel. (Matthew 19:27 and 28). But I do not agree with Christians who say that the twelve apostles were not members of the Body of Christ...I make no such foolish statement...that these Epistles of Peter and James are not for this age...I use 1 Peter 3:18 in preaching the gospel of grace as frequently as I use any other verse" [emphasis mine] (O'Hair, The Accuser of the Brethren and the Brethren Concerning Bullingerism).​

I have demonstrated over and over that the teaching within the Neo-MAD community is in error when they teach that the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved unless they believed sand did works. But these words of the Lord Jesus spoken to the Jews who lived under the law proves that teaching is foolish:

"Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life" (Jn.5:24).​

Even after I have shown you this verse many times you prove that you have a heart of unbelief because you continue to insist that what the Savior said is in error because according to you it takes more than faith for those Jews to be saved.

You claim to be a believer but when put to the test you prove that you put more faith in the teaching of the Neo-MAD community that you do in what the Lord Jesus Himself said.

I have nothing but pity for you.

 

[Danoh]

All you are doing is attempting to ignore what I posted in post #218 - by your supposedly favorite writers - against you.

Good one, Jerry Sssssssssss