My Gospel by Paul

[Clare73]

For the people he was writing to, maybe; not for us.

Or maybe the word of God is for all the sons of God 2 Tim 3:16-17. . .

 

[Strong in Him]

Or maybe the word of God is for all the sons of God 2 Tim 3:16-17. . .

Or maybe it isn't.

Jewish hygiene laws are in the word of God.
Personal and pastoral advice to 1st century churches is in the word of God.

Or are you Amish - not using cars, computers, phones, credit cards, microwaves and other mod cons because they are not mentioned in the word of God?

I notice you haven't addressed the questions I asked.

 

[Clare73]

Or maybe it isn't.

Jewish hygiene laws are in the word of God.

Seems there are gaping holes in Biblical knowledge and understanding here which are screaming for some serious Bible study.

Personal and pastoral advice to 1st century churches is in the word of God.

Or are you Amish - not using cars, computers, phones, credit cards, microwaves and other mod cons because they are
not mentioned in the word of God?

Not sure what "not mentioned in the word of God" has to do with me.
Do you have me confused with someone else?

I notice you haven't addressed the questions I asked.

If you are truly interested in Biblical understanding, please do me the kindness of repeating those questions.

 

[Strong in Him]

Seems there are gaping holes in Biblical knowledge and understanding here which are screaming for some serious Bible study.

Or some gaping holes in reading ability.
You said:

Or maybe the word of God is for all the sons of God 2 Tim 3:16-17. . .

The book of Leviticus containing Jewish hygiene laws; is it or is it not in the word of God?
So taking your own words "maybe the word of God is for all the sons of God", are the Jewish food and hygiene laws for the sons of God, or not?

I know perfectly well that they're in the old covenant, which Hebrews says is obsolete - and I know perfectly well that Jesus said he had come to fulfil the law.
I was just responding to your own words.
My whole point is that not all of the Bible is for us - there are verses/passages/books in there that we do not follow at all. They were left in there by those who put the Bible together because all Scripture is useful for teaching, correction etc.
We can learn from Jewish hygiene laws. We don't follow them - yet they are still in the word of God.

Not sure what "not mentioned in the word of God" has to do with me.
Do you have me confused with someone else?

No. My thinking was that if you follow all things that are written in the word of God, logic suggests that if it's not written, you don't follow/observe/apply it.

If you are truly interested in Biblical understanding, please do me the kindness of repeating those questions.

They're in post #540, it's not that far back - but ok.

For example, one of the verses you quoted appears to suggest that Paul had a problem with women speaking in church.
If by that he meant that women should learn in silence and not interrupt, fair enough; that goes for men too.
If you interpret that to mean that no woman should speak in a service - as some do - then you have to explain why Paul taught that women may pray and prophesy. Or why Paul had several, valued female co-workers. Or why he trusted Phoebe to take, and read, his letter to the church at Rome. Or why he called Junias "outstanding among the apostles." If women can't teach, why did Paul not say that the gifts of the Spirit, which include Pastors and teachers, should only be men?

Either it was "Apostolic teaching" that women can't speak/teach in church, or it is Apostolic teaching that the gifts of the Spirit - teaching, evangelism, prophecy are available to all and that God can raise up whoever he wants to serve him in whatever way he chooses - just as he raised Deborah up to be judge over all Israel.


I'm sure that when Paul wrote to people to say they should treat their slaves well, those words were sincere; even inspired by God.
We don't have slaves today - and I think the church played a part in getting slavery abolished. So how do we apply that "apostolic teaching", not to mention all the other examples I have given, today?

And are you really saying that if there was a young widow who had lost her husband in war and who came to your church for help, you would all turn her away because Paul says that widows under 60 deserve no help and are gossiping busybodies?

 

[Palmfever]

Twice Paul said my Gospel in Rom2v16 and 16v25.
This is our Gospel, of Grace by Faith, that we have had for the last 2000yrs. No one has been saved by the 1st Gospel of the Kingdom, found in Matt, Mark, Luke and John, since all those years ago.
This was because it was for the Jews only, as a Gospel of works, where by they have to endure to the end to be saved.
We don’t have works, just Grace by Faith, which is the free gift of God.
Unfortunately all denominations and non denominations are man made, dating back to Emperor Constantine, who to appease the Goths, Huns and Vandals, who were attacking Rome, allowed their paganism into the Church, and all subsequent churches and religions. They all mix the 2 Gospels together, making them void.
Church is ekklesia in the Greek, meaning called out ones, so for most going along with your particular brand of Christianity, along with adherence to all the rules, and rituals, think again!
His Grace is sufficient, nothing added. Eph2v8, God’s free gift to us.
The whole bible was written for us, but only Paul’s 13 Epistles were written to us!

All men are/were saved by the sacrifice of Christ. Christ was sacrificed before the foundation of the earth, before the event was fulfilled in the natural world. Rev 13:5 The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise its authority for forty-two months. 6 It opened its mouth to blaspheme God, and to slander his name and his dwelling place and those who live in heaven. 7 It was given power to wage war against God’s holy people and to conquer them. And it was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. 8 All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written in the Lamb’s book of life, the Lamb who was slain from the creation of the world.

God an Christ were in agreement before the creation of earth. In heaven it was done. In the natural world it needed to be fulfilled in a natural body to overcome death. In Genesis, 2:17 we read, “but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

No just physical death, the curse of eternal death

Hebrews 2:14 Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil.



All men are saved by faith in God's Grace.

11 Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.

3 By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.

4 By faith Abel brought God a better offering than Cain did. By faith he was commended as righteous, when God spoke well of his offerings. And by faith Abel still speaks, even though he is dead.

5 By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death: “He could not be found, because God had taken him away.”[a] For before he was taken, he was commended as one who pleased God. 6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.

7 By faith Noah, when warned about things not yet seen, in holy fear built an ark to save his family. By his faith he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness that is in keeping with faith.

8 By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going. 9 By faith he made his home in the promised land like a stranger in a foreign country; he lived in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise. 10 For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God. 11 And by faith even Sarah, who was past childbearing age, was enabled to bear children because she considered him faithful who had made the promise. 12 And so from this one man, and he as good as dead, came descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as countless as the sand on the seashore.

13 All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance, admitting that they were foreigners and strangers on earth. 14 People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own. 15 If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 Instead, they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.

17 By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had embraced the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son, 18 even though God had said to him, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.”[c] 19 Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead, and so in a manner of speaking he did receive Isaac back from death.

20 By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau in regard to their future.

21 By faith Jacob, when he was dying, blessed each of Joseph’s sons, and worshiped as he leaned on the top of his staff.

22 By faith Joseph, when his end was near, spoke about the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt and gave instructions concerning the burial of his bones.

23 By faith Moses’ parents hid him for three months after he was born, because they saw he was no ordinary child, and they were not afraid of the king’s edict.

24 By faith Moses, when he had grown up, refused to be known as the son of Pharaoh’s daughter. 25 He chose to be mistreated along with the people of God rather than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin. 26 He regarded disgrace for the sake of Christ as of greater value than the treasures of Egypt, because he was looking ahead to his reward. 27 By faith he left Egypt, not fearing the king’s anger; he persevered because he saw him who is invisible. 28 By faith he kept the Passover and the application of blood, so that the destroyer of the firstborn would not touch the firstborn of Israel.

29 By faith the people passed through the Red Sea as on dry land; but when the Egyptians tried to do so, they were drowned.

30 By faith the walls of Jericho fell, after the army had marched around them for seven days.

31 By faith the prostitute Rahab, because she welcomed the spies, was not killed with those who were disobedient.[d]

32 And what more shall I say? I do not have time to tell about Gideon, Barak, Samson and Jephthah, about David and Samuel and the prophets, 33 who through faith conquered kingdoms, administered justice, and gained what was promised; who shut the mouths of lions, 34 quenched the fury of the flames, and escaped the edge of the sword; whose weakness was turned to strength; and who became powerful in battle and routed foreign armies. 35 Women received back their dead, raised to life again. There were others who were tortured, refusing to be released so that they might gain an even better resurrection. 36 Some faced jeers and flogging, and even chains and imprisonment. 37 They were put to death by stoning;[e] they were sawed in two; they were killed by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated— 38 the world was not worthy of them. They wandered in deserts and mountains, living in caves and in holes in the ground.

39 These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised, 40 since God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.



And yes, faith bears fruit, and it propels us to good works.

 

[Palmfever]

Twice Paul said my Gospel in Rom2v16 and 16v25.
This is our Gospel, of Grace by Faith, that we have had for the last 2000yrs. No one has been saved by the 1st Gospel of the Kingdom, found in Matt, Mark, Luke and John, since all those years ago.
This was because it was for the Jews only, as a Gospel of works, where by they have to endure to the end to be saved.
We don’t have works, just Grace by Faith, which is the free gift of God.
Unfortunately all denominations and non denominations are man made, dating back to Emperor Constantine, who to appease the Goths, Huns and Vandals, who were attacking Rome, allowed their paganism into the Church, and all subsequent churches and religions. They all mix the 2 Gospels together, making them void.
Church is ekklesia in the Greek, meaning called out ones, so for most going along with your particular brand of Christianity, along with adherence to all the rules, and rituals, think again!
His Grace is sufficient, nothing added. Eph2v8, God’s free gift to us.
The whole bible was written for us, but only Paul’s 13 Epistles were written to us!

The new covenant was written in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ. He was the salvation of the Jew and the Gentile.

He was the fulfillment of prophesy.
He was not recognized by all.
He came to save the Jews first, for they were His chosen. There is order with God.
He did not then institute salvation by faith nor do away with it. He fulfilled the mission for all, past and future.

Luke, 19:5 When Jesus reached the spot, he looked up and said to him, “Zacchaeus, come down immediately. I must stay at your house today.” 6 So he came down at once and welcomed him gladly.
7 All the people saw this and began to mutter, “He has gone to be the guest of a sinner.”
8 But Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, “Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount.”
9 Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham. 10 For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”

The thief on the cross was yet under the old covenant when Christ saved him. Today you will be with me in Paradise. Could go on...

 

[Clare73]

Or some gaping holes in reading ability.
You said:

The book of Leviticus containing Jewish hygiene laws; is it or is it not in the word of God?
So taking your own words "maybe the word of God is for all the sons of God", are the Jewish food and hygiene laws for the sons of God, or not?

Their meaning is most definitely for the sons of God.
I find the defilement laws and their cleansing remedies to be a good picture of the nature of the spiritual defilement of sin and its absolute necessity of cleansing in repentance and confession for fellowship with God (1 Jn 1:8-10).

I find Leviticus most informative in its pattern of substitutionary atonement, giving me correct understanding of Jesus' atonement.

I know perfectly well that they're in the old covenant, which Hebrews says is obsolete - and I know perfectly well that Jesus said he had come to fulfil the law.
I was just responding to your own words.
My whole point is that not all of the Bible is for us

Once again, it seems the apostle Paul, who received his teaching from Jesus personally (Gal 1:11-12) is in disagreement with you (2 Tim 3:16). . ."All Scripture is God-breathed and useful. . ."

- there are verses/passages/books in there that we do not follow at all. They were left in there by those who put the Bible together because all Scripture is useful for teaching, correction etc.
We can learn from Jewish hygiene laws. We don't follow them - yet they are still in the word of God.

No. My thinking was that if you follow all things that are written in the word of God,
logic suggests that if it's not written, you don't follow/observe/apply it.

That is not a divine inference from human logic, that is a human assumption from ignorance of Scripture.

The Bible presents divine truths that are not specific theological statements, as in the sovereignty of God and the divine Trinity of one God.

They're in post #540, it's not that far back - but ok.

I'll give them a look. . .

 

[Clare73]

Answers to your questions in post #540:

For the people he was writing to, maybe; not for us.

Some of Paul's churches were writing to him with specific questions, or there were things going on in that church that Paul needed to address.
It is not Apostolic teaching, for example, that women shouldn't wear gold. And it's certainly not upheld today - or women wouldn't have gold wedding rings in church. It is not Apostolic teaching that women cannot braid their hair, or have to cover their heads.

Is the issue gold, braids, and expensive clothes, or is the issue ostentatiousness vs. modesty, decency and propriety?

What is ostentatious changes with the culture, but modesty, decency and propriety still remain the guideline.

Then of what relevance is it that none of the other apostles wrote to the Gentile churches presenting the regulations Paul presented to them?

Because the others were not apostles to the Gentiles, only Paul was.

DId I say that?
Of course they're not. But if there were a specific doctrine, especially one of importance, you'd expect all the Apostles to teach it to all their churches. And not just have it "taught" by one person in a personal letter - which was one of the last that he ever wrote

Do we know that the problems in Gentile churches likewise existed in the Jewish Christian churches?
I would think the problems among former pagans in the Gentile Christian churches would be of somewhat different nature than those in the churches of the Jews.
Perhaps a broader understanding of the situations in those times is in order.

Teaching, yes.
Personal greetings, advice or answering specific problems in certain churches, no.

For example, one of the verses you quoted appears to suggest that Paul had a problem with women speaking in church.
If by that he meant that women should learn in silence and not interrupt, fair enough; that goes for men too.
If you interpret that to mean that no woman should speak in a service - as some do - then you have to explain why Paul taught that women may pray and prophesy.

You're going to have to decide if the culture determines your theology, or if the NT Scriptures determine your theology.
For me, it's a no-brainer.

So, in context, Paul is referring to teaching, authoritative to the assembly, as in a Pastor's role, not to praying and prophesying.
In God's creation order (1 Tim 2:13-14), the man is head of the woman and, therefore, the woman is not to have authority over him in the assembly (as Pastor) or in the home, she is to be his helpmeet, not his head. The husband is to be head of the wife as Christ is head of the church (Eph 5:22) and as the church submits to Christ (Eph 5:24).
Paul received his teaching from Jesus Christ personally (Gal 1:11-12, 2 Co 12:7-9), who grounded it in God's creation order regarding women in the assembly (church) and at home.
We, nor our culture, have any authority to alter that doctrine.

Or why Paul had several, valued female co-workers. Or why he trusted Phoebe to take, and read, his letter to the church at Rome. Or why he called Junias "outstanding among the apostles." If women can't teach, why did Paul not say that the gifts of the Spirit, which include Pastors and teachers, should only be men?

Strawman. . .

Women are not forbidden to serve in the church, they are supposed to serve there.
But they cannot be pastors, they cannot teach men in the assembly.

Women can teach women and children of/in the assembly.
Likewise, women can teach anyone in their home where no spiritual authority is involved, but not in the assembly in a role of spiritual authority.

Either it was "Apostolic teaching" that women can't speak/teach in church, or it is Apostolic teaching that the gifts of the Spirit - teaching, evangelism, prophecy are available to all and that God can raise up whoever he wants to serve him in whatever way he chooses -

The instructions from Paul are from God, who is telling us exactly what he chooses.

just as he raised Deborah up to be judge over all Israel.

Indeed, in dire straights there can be exceptions to the rule, as in David's men eating the showbread from the Holy Place, which eating was forbidden.
But those exceptions are not the rule.
We are talking about the rule.

No, Paul says "a man", 2 Corinthians 12:2-4 - largely thought to be referring to himself.

Precisely. . .Paul received his doctrine from the third heaven (throne of God), and no one on earth has the authority to alter it, including the doctrine on the role of women in the assembly, that theu must not be Pastors.

I'm sure that when Paul wrote to people to say they should treat their slaves well, those words were sincere; even inspired by God.

Those words weren't just "sincere," they were authoritative to the church.
The Christian is to obey all laws of the land, except any law that requires him to sin personally, for which disobedience he must then be willing to pay the penalty.

We don't have slaves today - and I think the church played a part in getting slavery abolished. So how do we apply that "apostolic teaching", not to mention all the other examples I have given, today?

We apply all apostolic teaching only to the situations to which they apply.

Slavery as ordained by God is not immoral.
Granted, it is not desirable, as poverty, sickness and disability are not desirable, but none are immoral.
Some Jews even sold themselves into slavery, and some for a lifetime, willingly becoming bond slaves.

So I would suggest that as Paul taught all masters should be good and just to their slaves, so all employers should be the same to their employees, and we are blessed to live in a country where that is the law of the land.

And are you really saying that if there was a young widow who had lost her husband in war and who came to your church for help, you would all turn her away because Paul says that widows under 60 deserve no help and are gossiping busybodies?

As much as you are claiming that Paul says that all widows over 60, everywhere in every situation, are necessarily busybodies.

 

[KingdomLeast]

Matthew 28:19.

Scholars such as F. C. Conybeare1 have claimed that the Trinitarian baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19 was not original to the text of Matthew. (F.C. Conybeare, "The Eusebian Form of the Text of Mt. 28:19," ZNW 2 (1901): 275-88.)

Here's a treatise you may want to look at: The Change of the Baptismal Formula in Matthew 28:19

A Commentary on Matthew 28:19

Here are some quotes from Eusebius

Proof of the Gospel (the Demonstratio Evangelica), 300-336 AD
Book III, Chapter 7, 136 (a-d), p. 157
“But while the disciples of Jesus were most likely either saying thus, or thinking thus, the master solved their difficulties, by the addition of one phrase, saying they should triumph “In my name.” And the power of His name being so great, that the apostle says: “God has given him a name which is above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth,” He shewed the virtue of the power in His Name concealed from the crowd when He said to His disciples: “Go, and make disciples of all the nations in my name.” He also most accurately forecasts the future when He says: “for this gospel must first be preached to all the world, for a witness to all nations.”


Book III, Chapter 6, 132 (a), p. 152
With one word and voice He said to His disciples: “Go, and make disciples of all the nations in my name, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you,” …
Book III, Chapter 7, 138 (c), p. 159
I am irresistibly forced to retrace my steps, and search for their cause, and to confess that they could only have succeeded in their daring venture, by a power more divine, and more strong than man’s and by the co-operation of Him Who said to them; “Make disciples of all the nations in my name.”

Book IX, Chapter 11, 445 (c), p. 175
And He bids His own disciples after their rejection, “Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in my name.”

Here are some Bible Footnotes and References Regarding Matthew 28:19

The Jerusalem Bible, 1966
It may be that this formula, so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the liturgical usage established later in the primitive community. It will be remembered that the Acts speak of baptizing “in the name of Jesus.”

New Revised Standard Version
Modern critics claim this formula is falsely ascribed to Jesus and that it represents later (Catholic) church tradition, for nowhere in the book of Acts (or any other book of the Bible) is baptism performed with the name of the Trinity…
James Moffett’s New Testament Translation
It may be that this (Trinitarian) formula, so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the (Catholic) liturgical usage established later in the primitive (Catholic) community, It will be remembered that Acts speaks of baptizing “in the name of Jesus.”

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, page 2637
“Matthew 28:19 in particular only canonizes a later ecclesiastical situation, that its universalism is contrary to the facts of early Christian history, and its Trinitarian formula (is) foreign to the mouth of Jesus.”
The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, page 275
“It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but…a later liturgical addition.”
A Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels, J. Hastings, 1906, page 170
It is doubted whether the explicit injunction of Matt. 28:19 can be accepted as uttered by Jesus. …But the Trinitarian formula in the mouth of Jesus is certainly unexpected.
Britannica Encyclopedia, 11th Edition, Volume 3, page 365
“Baptism was changed from the name of Jesus to words Father, Son & Holy Ghost in 2nd Century.”

The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 1, 1992, page 585
“The historical riddle is not solved by Matthew 28:19, since, according to a wide scholarly consensus, it is not an authentic saying of Jesus”

The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible, 1962, page 351
Matthew 28:19 “… has been disputed on textual grounds, but in the opinion of many scholars, the words may still be regarded as part of the true text of Matthew. There is, however, grave doubt whether thy may be the ipsissima verba of Jesus. The evidence of Acts 2:38; 10:48 (cf. 8:16; 19:5), supported by Gal. 3:27; Rom 6:3, suggest that baptism in early Christianity was administered, not in the threefold name, but “in the name of Jesus Christ” or “in the name of the Lord Jesus.” This is difficult to reconcile with the specific instructions of the verse at the end of Matthew.”

The Dictionary of the Bible, 1947, page 83
“It has been customary to trace the institution of the practice (of baptism) to the words of Christ recorded in Matthew 28:19. But the authenticity of this passage has been challenged on historical as well as on textual grounds. It must be acknowledged that the formula of the threefold name, which is here enjoined, does not appear to have been employed by the primitive Church”.

 

[Guojing]

Paul was referring to the same gospel. He did not bring a different gospel, had he done so he would of been a false teacher whom he severely chastised in his letters.

In Galatians 1:8-9. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God's curse! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God's curse!

Paul preached the same gospel he received. If he didn't he would be a hypocrite and contradict his own words.

Who do you think were the "you" he was referring to, in the light of Galatians 2:7-9?

Are they the "circumcised little flock"?
or the "heathen"?

 

[Sorn]

If Jesus’ gospel of the kingdom was only intended for the Jews why did Jesus say that it must be preached to the whole world, to all nations if it was only intended for one nation? Every other nation other than Israel is a Gentile nation.

“This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭24‬:‭14‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

According to this the gospel of the kingdom was not exclusively intended for the Jews.

The idea behind that as presented by the video, is that before God had instituted church age (at Saul's conversion) by offering salvation directly to Gentiles, a person could only be save by becoming a proselyte, a convert to Judasim, though in this case Judasism that also accepted that Jesus Christ was & is the Jewish Messiah & King, which is what Jews currently reject.

So according to this theologians view, after the rapture & the church age is over then that same gospel ie 'the Gospel of the Kingdom' will again be preached as the way to be saved.

 

[Strong in Him]

Scholars such as F. C. Conybeare1 have claimed that the Trinitarian baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19 was not original to the text of Matthew. (F.C. Conybeare, "The Eusebian Form of the Text of Mt. 28:19," ZNW 2 (1901): 275-88.)

Here's a treatise you may want to look at: The Change of the Baptismal Formula in Matthew 28:19

That's all very interesting.
But the point is that this verse is in Scripture, and you asked me where, in Scripture, does it say to baptise in the name of the Trinity.

 

[Strong in Him]

Their meaning is most definitely for the sons of God.

Ah, but not the words or laws themselves.
So there ARE some teachings in the word of God which are not for us. We can read and learn from them, but we don't follow them.

I find the defilement laws and their cleansing remedies to be a good picture of the nature of the spiritual defilement of sin and its absolute necessity of cleansing in repentance and confession for fellowship with God (1 Jn 1:8-10).

I find Leviticus most informative in its pattern of substitutionary atonement, giving me correct understanding of Jesus' atonement.

Yes, so do I. But we do not obey, or literally apply, those laws and teachings today.
So there are things in God's word which are not for us. WE were not the people rescued from slavery in Egypt and led to Sinai to receive God's holy law and covenant. WE do not become unclean once a month, become doubly unclean if we give birth to a girl or have to isolate ourselves at such times. WE are not told that we cannot marry people outside of Israel etc.

We can learn from Leviticus, certainly.
But these words, laws and commands were not written to us in the Western world in the year 2024.
That is my whole point. Yes, they are useful and interesting - though it took me years to even read Leviticus. But they were not written to us and we don't observe them today. (I'm not sure that Jews even observe them today as they have no animal sacrifices and no temple.)
They are still in God's word - those compiling the Bible could easily have said "these are not relevant to Christians" and left them out. But they didn't.

Once again, it seems the apostle Paul, who received his teaching from Jesus personally (Gal 1:11-12) is in disagreement with you (2 Tim 3:16). . ."All Scripture is God-breathed and useful. . ."

Useful, yes - applying to us and have to be obeyed, no.

 

[Rose_bud]

Who do you think were the "you" he was referring to, in the light of Galatians 2:7-9?

Are they the "circumcised little flock"?
or the "heathen"?

Who do you think it is?

 

[Strong in Him]

Answers to your questions in post #540:

Is the issue gold, braids, and expensive clothes, or is the issue ostentatiousness vs. modesty, decency and propriety?

So you're not insisting that the words of the Bible all literally apply to us but are looking beyond them for the meaning.
Good.

What is ostentatious changes with the culture, but modesty, decency and propriety still remain the guideline.

Of course.
But previously you said that as Paul was an apostle of the Lord, ALL his words are for us; God's people.
It seems that you, yourself, do not believe that literally because when I quoted a verse about women not wearing gold you said that those verses are all about not being ostentatious.
So some words of Paul are to be received, obeyed and applied literally because he was an apostle of the Lord. But in others, it's the meaning, or underlying teaching, that's important?

Because the others were not apostles to the Gentiles, only Paul was.

Ok, so now we have to discern the people that Paul was writing to, the context and their circumstances.
Good; we're getting somewhere.
(You realise that you quoted, and answered, yourself there?)

You're going to have to decide if the culture determines your theology, or if the NT Scriptures determine your theology.
For me, it's a no-brainer.

So you would say that women are second-class citizens; not able to learn, needing a man to look after us, able to be divorced for any reason, unclean at certain times of the month and after giving birth? That was the culture of the NT.
You would say that we should have slaves today; not "employees", slaves. People who have been bought in the market place, who are owned by the man who bought them and who can only get their freedom if they have enough money? That was the culture of the NT.
You would say that only Jews - formally Hebrew slaves who had been rescued by God and given his law - are God's people? That Gentiles - non-Jews - are unclean, "dogs", outside of God's promises and not his people? That was the culture of the OT and much of the NT.
You would say that everyone should wear robes and sandals and speak Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic? That was the culture of the Bible. Maybe we should all have flat roofs on our houses also, so we can climb up there to pray or meditate?

Cultures changed, even within the Bible.
Even Jews today don't offer animal sacrifices. We don't have to go to find a prophet to discover what God is saying to us. We don't believe that he lives in a temple.
Anyone saying that only a certain group of people belong to God and everyone else is an unclean, Gentile dog who has to convert if they want God to bless them, would be accused of racism.

So, in context, Paul is referring to teaching, authoritative to the assembly, as in a Pastor's role, not to praying and prophesying.

He doesn't say that.
Nowhere does Paul say that women cannot be pastors.

In God's creation order (1 Tim 2:13-14), the man is head of the woman and, therefore, the woman is not to have authority over him in the assembly (as Pastor) or in the home, she is to be his helpmeet, not his head.

You're talking about 2 different things.
Several translations note that the word "woman" in these verses can also be translated as "wife." That is what the Adam-Eve reference is about - they were married. A husband is not the same as a Pastor; they are different roles.
So to say that a woman (who may be single) cannot teach men in the assembly, because she cannot have authority over her husband, makes no sense.
Neither does it address the fact that a) God once told Abraham to listen to his wife, b) Pontius Pilate would have been better off if he had listened to his, c) Deborah, who was married, was head of all Israel and d) husbands are to love their wives as Christ loves his church - not belittling, or lording it over, them. That was the culture of the OT - men are in charge, you do as I say and have no right to answer back.
The culture today says that any man trying to control his wife, dictate what she should do, cut her off from her friends, and do what he wants, demanding her unquestioning obedience is abusive and guilty of coercive control.

The husband is to be head of the wife as Christ is head of the church (Eph 5:22) and as the church submits to Christ (Eph 5:24).

And you have just shown that you are talking about husband and wife - not whether or not a woman may take up the role of Pastor (a calling, but also a job) because God calls her to.

We, nor our culture, have any authority to alter that doctrine.

This isn't a Christian doctrine, it's church practice.
Ordain women or not, let us preach, or not - it doesn't affect, or negate, salvation. Don't like something that one church does, or agree with their understanding of a certain Scripture? Find another one. Both will still be Christian, be practicing the Christian faith and be children of God.

The instructions from Paul are from God, who is telling us exactly what he chooses.

Yet he does not say they are a command from the Lord.
Jesus, God himself, said nothing about "who God chooses". He showed us what God thinks of women, by healing and teaching them, letting them follow, and financially support, him and choosing one to be the first witness to his resurrection.

Today God is showing us who he chooses. We have female pastors/priests - and they are trained by men.

Precisely. . .Paul received his doctrine from the third heaven (throne of God),

First of all you claimed that it was a council which was transported to the 3rd heaven, now you are agreeing that it was Paul, and that when he was in that place, that's where he received his doctrine.

We apply all apostolic teaching only to the situations to which they apply.

So not all the words of the apostles are for all of us today because there are some situations in which they don't apply?
Good - that's called discernment.

Slavery as ordained by God is not immoral.

Which is why there was a huge campaign to abolish it, I suppose.
Slavery, as practised in the Scriptures, is not legal - but I guess culture is not important, hey?

So I would suggest that as Paul taught all masters should be good and just to their slaves, so all employers should be the same to their employees,

I'm talking about slaves.
You said that God's word is more important than culture.
In Bible times, they had slaves - men and women who had been bought from the marketplace. Slaves had no rights, they were ruled by their masters. In OT times, a master was to pierce a slave's ear through the doorpost of his house, to show that the man belonged to him, Exodus 21:6
If a male slave married, his wife, and any future children, belonged to his master. A person could sell themselves into slavery - if they were poor, needed work or were in debt (their master to pay the debts in return for the man's loyalty, commitment and service.) A master could allow his slaves to have, or buy, their freedom.

Today, in our culture, we don't have that.
A person chooses to apply for a job, which may mean working under the authority of his boss (and that boss can be female, by the way.) A wise boss will listen to his staff, he/she may ask for their advice or input. Employees have the right to make suggestions, ask for a promotion, or pay rise and the freedom to look for another job if they wish. It has been known for employees to complain about their boss, or even take them to court.
An employee today is not the same as a slave in NT times.
But Scripture is more important than culture, right?

 

[BNR32FAN]

The idea behind that as presented by the video, is that before God had instituted church age (at Saul's conversion) by offering salvation directly to Gentiles, a person could only be save by becoming a proselyte, a convert to Judasim, though in this case Judasism that also accepted that Jesus Christ was & is the Jewish Messiah & King, which is what Jews currently reject.

So according to this theologians view, after the rapture & the church age is over then that same gospel ie 'the Gospel of the Kingdom' will again be preached as the way to be saved.

Yeah I completely disagree with this idea because it means that salvation will go back to obedience to the law but the problem is that salvation was never about obedience to the law, it’s always been about faith. The author of the video fails to realize that. I think he needs to read Romans 4 again because Paul made it clear that Abraham was not saved by obedience but by faith. His idea of the gospel of obedience and the gospel of the law are contradictory to Paul’s lesson in Romans 4 concerning how Abraham was saved. He’s struggling with trying to reconcile reformed theology with the scriptures because it’s a false theology and as a result he is forced to eliminate the teachings of Christ during His ministry in order to make his theology work.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The idea behind that as presented by the video, is that before God had instituted church age (at Saul's conversion) by offering salvation directly to Gentiles, a person could only be save by becoming a proselyte, a convert to Judasim, though in this case Judasism that also accepted that Jesus Christ was & is the Jewish Messiah & King, which is what Jews currently reject.

So according to this theologians view, after the rapture & the church age is over then that same gospel ie 'the Gospel of the Kingdom' will again be preached as the way to be saved.

Paul specifically tells us what “my gospel” is in Romans 2. It’s the same exact gospel that Christ preached during His ministry. Everyone will be judged according to their deeds and it’s not the hearers of the law who will be justified but the doers of the law who will be justified. Paul specifically stated in Romans 2 that this “according to my gospel”.

“Therefore you have no excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things. And we know that the judgment of God rightly falls upon those who practice such things. But do you suppose this, O man, when you pass judgment on those who practice such things and do the same yourself, that you will escape the judgment of God? Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance? But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who will render to each person according to his deeds: to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life; but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation. There will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek, but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no partiality with God. For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law; for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified. For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭2‬:‭1‬-‭16‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Everything Paul said in the above passage is exactly the same thing Christ taught during His ministry and the fact that Paul specifically states that this is his gospel proves that the author of the video is incorrect.

 

[LoveofTruth]

HUH?

Acts 1: 5. For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.”

John was part of the Old Testament and the many diverse washings (baptismos in Greek) that we’re to be done away and we’re imposed upon the Jews until the time of reformation.

But the Jewish believers needed time to come out of the old. They still were following the whole law zealously, going into the temple with the sacrifices abd priests and circumcision, Andy kept all the customs (Halakah law oral traditions as well). As we see in scripture. Read Acts 15 and 21. ,

This was all told long ago in scripture but many seem to have missed these truths for centuries . Even though they are right there in the text .

Acts 21: 17. And when we were come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. 18. And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present. 19. And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry. 20. And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law: 21. And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs. 22. What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come. 23. Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them; 24. Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law. 25. As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication. 26. Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purifcation, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them.”

So when we see a Jewish believer in Acts water baptizing or sacrificing animals or circumcision as Paul did to Timothy (Acts 26), we can understand that that was a transition for the Jews who were in a time of reformation. Not for all people (themselves or Gentiles). God is patient and gave a time for this.

Hebrews 9: 9. Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; 10. Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.”

The word “washings” is

baptismos- from 907; ablution (ceremonial or Christian):--baptism, washing

 

[LoveofTruth]

You asked, "who made that rule?"
I was trying to establish what rule you meant.

The rule is here first…

Galatians 6: 15, 16 “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. 16. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.”

1 John 2: 20. 21,27 “But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. 21. I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth…27. But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.”

 

[Yarddog]

Twice Paul said my Gospel in Rom2v16 and 16v25.
This is our Gospel, of Grace by Faith, that we have had for the last 2000yrs. No one has been saved by the 1st Gospel of the Kingdom, found in Matt, Mark, Luke and John, since all those years ago.
This was because it was for the Jews only, as a Gospel of works, where by they have to endure to the end to be saved.
We don’t have works, just Grace by Faith, which is the free gift of God.
Unfortunately all denominations and non denominations are man made, dating back to Emperor Constantine, who to appease the Goths, Huns and Vandals, who were attacking Rome, allowed their paganism into the Church, and all subsequent churches and religions. They all mix the 2 Gospels together, making them void.
Church is ekklesia in the Greek, meaning called out ones, so for most going along with your particular brand of Christianity, along with adherence to all the rules, and rituals, think again!
His Grace is sufficient, nothing added. Eph2v8, God’s free gift to us.
The whole bible was written for us, but only Paul’s 13 Epistles were written to us!

We are saved through faith in the works of our Lord Jesus Christ. All scripture is God breathed and profitable to man. This is true wether it is Genesis, Revelation or anywhere in between.


Paul didn't speak his Gospel, he spoke the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Paul was sent to the Gentiles who were not under the Law. The Jews were but salvation doesn't come through works of the Law. It comes through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, wether Gentile or Jew.