The Rule of faith and practice is not scripture "alone"

[LoveofTruth]

Have a nice day.

I will

consider what I say and I pray the Lord reveal all things to you

 

[LoveofTruth]

That’s close but may be more Prima Scriptura.

The Scriptures are the only infallible authority.

Understanding Sola Scriptura

Scripture in the hands of those led by the Spirit becomes authoritative to the measure they walk in the truth.

here’s what I mean.

If the Pharisees used scripture to try and correct Jesus, they were wrong. But Paul, using scriptures to Correct the Pharisees is right as he is led by the Spirit.

 

[LoveofTruth]

As I suspected, there does not appear to be any basis for your assertion. It is false.

The Church derives her authority from Christ and the apostles, through the laying on of hands throughout the centuries. This is explained at paragraphs 19-21 of Lumen Gentium.

Remember Paul did not get his call or authority in Christ from men or by men etc as he said,

Galatians 1:1. Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead )”

and God gave gifts to men such as apostles, prophets, evangelist, pastors and teachers (Ephesians 4:11)

and the Holy Ghist made them overseers

Acts 20:28. Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.”

 

[Swag365]

Remember Paul did not get his call or authority in Christ from men or by men etc as he said,

Galatians 1:1. Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead )”

and God gave gifts to men such as apostles, prophets, evangelist, pastors and teachers (Ephesians 4:11)

and the Holy Ghist made them overseers

Acts 20:28. Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.”

That's nice. Nobody has asserted that our Lord or the Holy Spirit has not ordained people directly.

Timothy was ordained through the laying on of hands, just as St. Paul wrote. You can dispute that all you like but it is right there in your KJV.

Have a nice day.

 

[LoveofTruth]

that.

So, for example, when a Baptist says that only a believer's baptism is valid vs a Lutheran who affirms infant baptism, and both believe in baptismal regeneration whereas a modern evangelical may reject that altogether, all can argue reasonably well, on a matter of soteriology, from a strictly Scriptural perspective.

Just a side note. many do not see the book of Acts right. I have talked often with some who see water baptism in Acts done by the Jewish believers and they say if it is in Acts we should do it also. But they don't see the transition in Acts for the Jews from the Old to the New covenant. Peter in Acts 2 was going to the temple. In the temple they still fif animal sacrifices and all the Law and customs of the Jews. This went on all through the book of Acts. Even in Acts 21 we see the Jewish believers stressing that Paul go into the temple and do sacrifice. This shows that many of the Jews took time to understand the reformation of the old to the new and some never did. The water baptism that we see in Acts I believe was done by many of the Jews who still were in some sense under the law and sacrifices all through Acts. They followed either Johns (old testament water baptism that was part of the diverse washings) or the Halakah law customs for the Jews to Gentiles and each other when going into a differing sect. But Jesus told them at the beginning of Acts that John indeed baptized ( past tense) with water but they should be baptized (future tense) with the Holy Ghost. Jesus told them before he died that he had many things to say and to judge of them, but at that time they were not able to bear it. But when the Holy Ghost came He would guide them into all truth.

 

[LoveofTruth]

That's nice. Nobody has asserted that our Lord or the Holy Spirit has not ordained people directly.

Timothy was ordained through the laying on of hands, just as St. Paul wrote. You can dispute that all you like but it is right there in your KJV.

Have a nice day.

Timothy was called by God directly, not by men, the verse about laying hands on him that was to receive spiritual gifts. Read the text

and then read 1 John 2:27 (KJV)

"Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery."(1 Timothy 4:14)

"Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands."(2 Timothy 2:6 KJV)

yes elders can recognize another for oversight as well and lay hands on them in prayer. But there are specific things that happen when this is done. God however calls all men inwardly to ministry. If any hear His voice they respond to that call.

2 Timothy 1:9
Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,"

1 Corinthians 7:20 | View whole chapter | See verse in context
Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called.

 

[Swag365]

Timothy was called by God directly, not by men, the verse about laying hands on him that was to receive spiritual gifts. Read the text

and then read 1 John 2:27 (KJV)

"Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery."(1 Timothy 4:14)

"Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands."(2 Timothy 2:6 KJV)

yes elders can recognize another for oversight as well and lay hands on them in prayer. But there are specific things that happen when this is done. God however calls all men inwardly to ministry. If any hear His voice they respond to that call.

2 Timothy 1:9
Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,"

1 Corinthians 7:20 | View whole chapter | See verse in context
Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called.

1 And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration.

2 Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables.

3 Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.

4 But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word.

5 And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas a proselyte of Antioch:

6 Whom they set before the apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them.

7 And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.

8 And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and miracles among the people.

 

[LoveofTruth]

1 And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration.

2 Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables.

3 Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.

4 But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word.

5 And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas a proselyte of Antioch:

6 Whom they set before the apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them.

7 And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.

8 And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and miracles among the people.

I was talking about Timothy not Stephen. But if you notice clearly he was filled with the Holy Ghost. They being also in the spirit could be led by God to make such decisions and recognize gifted brethren.
I am not against spirit led believers ordaining or recognizing those whom the Holy Ghost calls out or makes overseers

 

[Swag365]

I was talking about Timothy not Stephen. But if you notice clearly he was filled with the Holy Ghost. They being also in the spirit could be led by God to make such decisions and recognize gifted brethren.
I am not against spirit led believers ordaining or recognizing those whom the Holy Ghost calls out or makes overseers

You can only lead a horse to water.

So how is it that all of these spirit filled ordained overseers in the many different Protestant groups teach opposing doctrines? The Holy Ghost inspires one overseer to teach that baptism is necessary and the next day the Holy Ghost inspires another to teach that it is not? One day He inspires one overseer to teach that salvation can be lost, and the next day he inspires another overseer to teach once saved always saved? The Holy Ghost is calling Protestants to teach different things, apparently. Is He the author of confusion?

Let me guess, only the overseers who teach what you believe were called by the Holy Ghost to teach, and everyone who teaches the opposite of you are just pretenders?

 

[LoveofTruth]

You can only lead a horse to water.

A horse will drink water by its nature. It is created to drink water. Every believer has a new nature in Christ and we do the work of God as we are a new creation in Christ, we are created unto good works. God works in us to will and to do and to make us perfect unto every good work as we abide in faith and continue in the grace of God.

So how is it that all of these spirit filled ordained overseers in the many different Protestant groups teach opposing doctrines?

The Holy Ghost does not teach all these groups. Although many men in such groups may be taught by God and some being led away from falsehood and doctrinal error etc. Most false doctrine comes by men who do not listen to the Spirit and who go off after their own carnal reasonings, the flesh and man made traditions and the devil doctrines etc.

The Holy Ghost inspires one overseer to teach that baptism is necessary and the next day the Holy Ghost inspires another to teach that it is not?

No the Holy Ghost makes overseers as we read

"Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood."(Acts 20:28 KJV)

and men have to have a inward desire by God (Hebrews 13:20,21) for God makes us perfect unto every good work working in us, through Jesus Christ, and God works in us to will and to do etc) to be an overseer as we read,

"This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work."(1 Timothy 3:1 KJV)

and they can also be ordain or recognized by the body in such a work, as the others see God work through them and know them, as scripture teaches. But in all God works in us to will and to do and to make us perfect unto every good work.

"And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you;"( 1 Thess 5:12 KJV)

"Let me guess, only the overseers who teach what you believe were called by the Holy Ghost to teach, and everyone who teaches the opposite of you are just pretenders?

Well, I do not say that I have every doctrine understood fully, nor do i think many others do.We are all learning and growing if we are in Christ. But as i said all false doctrine comes from anyone who does not listen to the Spirit. And as all claim, we must still walk in the leading of the Spirit, use the scriptures that were inspired by the Spirit, and consider the multitude of believers in the body.

But as far as walking in what we know and believe i merely quote John again. Imagine if you were in a gathering with John and he said this to all the body there. How would you respond to John. Remember John was also exposing the heretics and deceivers among them.

"They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us....But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things....These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. 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.
"(1 John 2:20,27 KJV)

 

[Swag365]

Just a side note. many do not see the book of Acts right. I have talked often with some who see water baptism in Acts done by the Jewish believers and they say if it is in Acts we should do it also. But they don't see the transition in Acts for the Jews from the Old to the New covenant. Peter in Acts 2 was going to the temple. In the temple they still fif animal sacrifices and all the Law and customs of the Jews. This went on all through the book of Acts. Even in Acts 21 we see the Jewish believers stressing that Paul go into the temple and do sacrifice. This shows that many of the Jews took time to understand the reformation of the old to the new and some never did. The water baptism that we see in Acts I believe was done by many of the Jews who still were in some sense under the law and sacrifices all through Acts. They followed either Johns (old testament water baptism that was part of the diverse washings) or the Halakah law customs for the Jews to Gentiles and each other when going into a differing sect. But Jesus told them at the beginning of Acts that John indeed baptized ( past tense) with water but they should be baptized (future tense) with the Holy Ghost. Jesus told them before he died that he had many things to say and to judge of them, but at that time they were not able to bear it. But when the Holy Ghost came He would guide them into all truth.

Yeah this seems like a whole lot of speculation to me. How do you explain the water baptism of Cornelius and the other gentiles in Acts, after they were filled with the Holy Ghost?

“Oh, you see, the apostle Peter did not actually know what he was doing and baptized gentiles just to impress the Jews, because he was still in ‘transition’ at that point you see”.

Work some more magic.

 

[LoveofTruth]

Yeah this seems like a whole lot of speculation to me. How do you explain the water baptism of Cornelius and the other gentiles in Acts, after they were filled with the Holy Ghost?

“Oh, you see, the apostle Peter did not actually know what he was doing and baptized gentiles just to impress the Jews, because he was still in ‘transition’ at that point you see”.

Work some more magic.

We see in Acts the Jewish believers still attached to the old covenant for a while and the temple, animal sacrifices, circumcision, the law and customs of the Jews. Peter also was connected to it for a while. He had been use to water baptizing while Jesus was on earth following John’s water baptism. When Cornelius was obviously a saved person and filled eith the Spirit, Peter seemed troubled a bit and questioned why they should not be baptized as the Jews were. But we see in the next chapter when Peter was rehearsing the situation he was reminded by Jesus that John baptized with water but they should be baptized with the Holy Ghost. Peter it seems was still under the law and attached to the temple and Jewish customs. He was following Johns Old Testament diverse washings (Hebrews 9) which were types snd shadows. Just as he abs other Jews would for a long time go into the temple snd sacrifice animals and circumcision.
Peter may also have been following the Jewish custom of Halakah law and that would have a Gentile water baptized, and circumcised etc. We know that at this time the Jewish church in Jerusalem had not yet decided if the Gentiles can come in and if they should keep the law and be circumcised. There was a big discussion in Acts 15 about this.

we do know that in chapter 10 of Acts we see a hint of Peter following the Halakah law or oral tradition of the Jews when he said it is not lawful for a Jew to eat with a Gentile. Apparently that was not part of the law in the Old Testament but rather a Jewish tradition and custom of the Halakah law .
Anyway, there is so much that could be said here.

Also check Acts 21 and see the Jewish believers and Paul still under the law snd customs and going into the temple for animal sacrifice .
If we say, (as some do) that if we see the believers doing it in Acts then we should to, then we all should sacrifice animals circumcision, keep the ehe law, and customs of the Jews. But even as a progression of knowledge came through the Spirit, it was said that the Gentiles had to observe no such thing.

And this is not magic to understand these things, but it is all seen in the scriptures by the spirit.

 

[Swag365]

A horse will drink water by its nature. It is created to drink water. Every believer has a new nature in Christ and we do the work of God as we are a new creation in Christ, we are created unto good works. God works in us to will and to do and to make us perfect unto every good work as we abide in faith and continue in the grace of God.

That's nice, but a horse will drink poisoned water. And believers still sin and err, often gravely.

The Holy Ghost does not teach all these groups. Although many men in such groups may be taught by God and some being led away from falsehood and doctrinal error etc. Most false doctrine comes by men who do not listen to the Spirit and who go off after their own carnal reasonings, the flesh and man made traditions and the devil doctrines etc.

Yeah I thought so. The Holy Ghost leads "me" into all truth. Anybody who disagrees with "me", not so much. Isn't that convenient?

No the Holy Ghost makes overseers as we read

"Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood."(Acts 20:28 KJV)

The "you" in that verse refers to a specific group of Ephesian Elders. You were not among that group. Do you also think that God has appointed you as one of the 12 apostles?

and men have to have a inward desire by God (Hebrews 13:20,21) for God makes us perfect unto every good work working in us, through Jesus Christ, and God works in us to will and to do etc) to be an overseer as we read,

"This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work."(1 Timothy 3:1 KJV)

Well obviously God calls people to become bishops. It's not merely a human act.

and they can also be ordain or recognized by the body in such a work, as the others see God work through them and know them, as scripture teaches. But in all God works in us to will and to do and to make us perfect unto every good work.

And what "body" is that, specifically? The group of Christians that attend your Church? A body consisting of you, your friend Steve, and your buddy Mike sitting at home on your sofa with a Bible? The group of Christians that attend the Church next door to you, and that teach fundamental doctrines contrary to what are taught at your church? They all get to "recognize" the overseer who teaches what they believe, while not "recognizing" the teachers who teach something different than what they believe, no? You end up with this comical situation with 3 different churches on the same street teaching 3 different doctrines, with all of them claiming to be led by the Holy Spirit into all truth, and 3 different pastors all claiming to have been directly called by God into the ministry. Friend, this is not a recipe for Christians to be led to the truth. It is a recipe for charlatans to prosper, for every Tom, Dick, and Harry to get on a pulpit and teach whatever he feels like teaching on that day.

Yet, among all of that, the Holy Spirit only leads YOU and your group into truth, and anybody who disagrees with you is being led by men. Did it ever occur to you that YOU could be the one who has deceived himself into believing this nonsense?

Well, I do not say that I have every doctrine understood fully, nor do i think many others do.We are all learning and growing if we are in Christ. But as i said all false doctrine comes from anyone who does not listen to the Spirit. And as all claim, we must still walk in the leading of the Spirit, use the scriptures that were inspired by the Spirit, and consider the multitude of believers in the body.

But as far as walking in what we know and believe i merely quote John again. Imagine if you were in a gathering with John and he said this to all the body there. How would you respond to John. Remember John was also exposing the heretics and deceivers among them.

"They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us....But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things....These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. 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.
"(1 John 2:20,27 KJV)

Well for one its unclear if the text states "ye know all things." Some of the Greek manuscripts translate "you all have knowledge" and some of them translate "ye know all things". I could just as easily give you a reputable translation that states "you all have knowledge".

Regardless, you obviously believe that you have received an anointing by the Holy Spirit to be an overseer. Why is it then that you do not know all things? You just admitted above that you do not fully understand every doctrine, so obviously you don't know "all things"? Why is that?

You seem to want the text to mean that "the Holy Spirit prompts every single born-again Christian on the planet Earth into truth directly from God himself, without the need of any teacher." Why have any teachers in the first place, then? Why have bishops, and priests, and deacons, "overseers" or "elders" if that is what you want to call them, to teach the Christian faithful, when each Christian already knows "all things" and has no need of a teacher because he has a direct line to true doctrine from the Holy Spirit himself? Does that make any sense?

You seem to want to read into the text some sort of magical ability for every baptized Christian to pick up the Bible and come to a full knowledge of the truth by himself, but I think that you are forgetting that their knowledge was gained within the context of the Church led by the apostles and others (the apostles, bishops, priests, and deacons mentioned in the Bible), ordained men given the specific task to lead other men and having spiritual authority over them. All of the men who were part of that community received the teaching from the ordained men, which contributed to the "knowledge" that is mentioned in the verses. When you see people just picking up the Bible, proclaiming "the Holy Spirit leads me to know everything" and then interpreting on their own outside of the context of the Church you end up with what we have today - thousands of charlatans, tons of misled people, and many, many different groups all teaching different things. Chaos.

 

[Swag365]

We see in Acts the Jewish believers still attached to the old covenant for a while and the temple, animal sacrifices, circumcision, the law and customs of the Jews. Peter also was connected to it for a while. He had been use to water baptizing while Jesus was on earth following John’s water baptism. When Cornelius was obviously a saved person and filled eith the Spirit, Peter seemed troubled a bit and questioned why they should not be baptized as the Jews were. But we see in the next chapter when Peter was rehearsing the situation he was reminded by Jesus that John baptized with water but they should be baptized with the Holy Ghost. Peter it seems was still under the law and attached to the temple and Jewish customs. He was following Johns Old Testament diverse washings (Hebrews 9) which were types snd shadows. Just as he abs other Jews would for a long time go into the temple snd sacrifice animals and circumcision.
Peter may also have been following the Jewish custom of Halakah law and that round have a Gentile water baptized, snd circumcised etc. We know that at this time the Jewish church in Jerusalem had not yet decided if the Gentiles can come in and if they should keep the law and br circumcised. There was a big discussion in Acts 15 about this.

we do know that in chapter 10 of Acts we see a hint of Peter following the Halakah law or oral tradition of the Jews when he said it is not lawful got a Jew to eat with a Gentile. Apparently that was not part of the law in the Old Testament but rather a Jewish tradition and custom of the Halakah law .
Anyway, there is so much that could be said here.

Ho check Acts 21 and see the Jewish believers and Paul still under the law snd customs and going into the temple for animal sacrifice .
If we say, (as some do) that if we see the believers doing it in Acts then we should to, then we all should sacrifice animals circumcision, keep the ehe law, and customs of the Jews. But even as a progression of knowledge came through the Spirit, it was said that the Gentiles had to observe no such thing.

And this is not magic to understand these things, but it is all seen in the scriptures by the spirit.

Pure speculation. Sorry. Look, all of this comes down to "Peter did not know what he was doing." The leader (or one of the top 2/3 leaders depending on one's view) of the early Christian Church was all confused and just botching things up. He just randomly felt like applying a Jewish Tevilah ritual to gentiles that had received the Holy Spirit, threw in the name "Jesus" at the end just for kicks, and poof, magically we have the baptism of Cornelius in Acts ten.

It had absolutely nothing with the fact that our Lord commanded his disciples to go out to preach the gospel to people of all nations and to baptize them.

It's a tough sell buddy. Have a nice day.

 

[LoveofTruth]

Pure speculation.

No its not, not one bit. It is all seen in scripture and understanding given by God. I back all I say up with scripture given by the Spirit.

Sorry.

You should be and humility is a good thing

Look,

I seek to look upon the things that are unseen, with spiritual eyes, not with mans reasoning and dull vision.

all of this comes down to "Peter did not know what he was doing." The leader (or one of the top 2/3 leaders depending on one's view) of the early Christian Church was all confused and just botching things up.

No, I don't see Peter as just "botching things up", God knew that Peter and the other apostles had many things to still be said and judged of and taught to them and of them
. But they would have to grow in the revelation of the Spirit as the Holy Ghost led them along. At that time and for a time after they were not able to bear some things as we see in scripture in the following time before and after Christ death.

"...I have many things to say and to judge of you:"(John 8:26 KJV)

"I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come."(John 16:12,13 KJV)

We see this transition and reformation throughout the book of Acts. But at that time in Acts 2, Peter, said the right words, it's just how some understand to be immersed "in the name of Jesus Christ", or immersed (baptized) "into the name", or immersed, "into Jesus Christ" etc.
Peter also did not have understanding of the decrease of the old covenant and the temple and the sacrifices. So he could only act on the faith he had at that time. Peter was told by Jesus in Acts 1 that John baptized with water but they would be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. There is a reason Jesus spoke that John "baptized:, past tense ministry. But we also know that Jesus told all of the apostles to go and teach all nations...but Peter didn't seem to get this until a vision from heaven came and God directed him to the gentiles. Even then, Peter argued with God and didn't seem to want to go to the Gentiles. He said who was he that he could resist God. There was some resistance in peter, and he would have been wrong to resist.

But we read some of this here,

"And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. 14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. 15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.Acts 10:13-15 KJV)

Here we see that Peter was not correct and was in some way arguing with God. He was also still under the law of the Old Covenant and dietary laws etc.

Also as far as baptism goes, Peter was still following Johns water baptism and perhaps the Halakah law of the Jews and their customs concerning Gentile converts. All of which was not needed in the new covenant and especially for a gentile. But Acts 15 hadn't even happened yet. Thats =where they argued if the gentiles had to keep the law of Moses and be circumcised to be saved. They did not have to do this.

He just randomly felt like applying a Jewish Tevilah ritual to gentiles that had received the Holy Spirit, threw in the name "Jesus" at the end just for kicks, and poof, magically we have the baptism of Cornelius in Acts ten.

No thats not at all what would have happened. It can be shown very clearly that Peter was still under the law and following old testament law and customs and Johns water baptism. The Jews would have a ritual baptism, full submersion and circumcision for any Gentile convert. Peter would have followed that as well. But in this case the prime example Peter was following was Johns water baptism. Jesus already told them that Johns water baptism was past in Acts 1. Peter was reminded of this when seeking to baptize the Gentiles. As we read.

"Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. 17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?"(Acts 11:16-17 KJV)

Besides Paul said Christ sent him not to baptize but to preach the gospel. The gospel is 1 Cor 15:1-4 and no water is mentioned there.Paul was the apostle t the gentiles and so it made sense that since they were not required to keep the Moses law and customs of the Jews and the old Covenant. That God would not bring them under it and then have to bring them out again when they understood that Ot was not for today anymore. The time of reformation was a slow process it seems (Hebrews 9)

It had absolutely nothing with the fact that our Lord commanded his disciples to go out to preach the gospel to people of all nations and to baptize them.

Peter did not fully understand the scope of that command to teach all nations, as we see when he needed a vision and further direction to go to the gentiles. So if Peter needed more info to go to all nations in that command. He also needed more info for the immersing into the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. I don't see that as water baptism Jesus doesn't mention water here.. To be immersed into a name is a different issue. Jesus while he was on Earth said he kept the disciples in the name of the Father and he revealed the Fathers name. What dies it mean to you to be kept in the name of the Father.

"I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word."(John 17:6 KJV)

"While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled."(John 17:12 KJV)

He manifested ( revealed) the name and kept them in the name. The name of the Lord is a high tower, the righteous run into it and are safe.

It's a tough sell buddy. Have a nice day.

I'm not selling anything, freely ye have received freely give.

 

[Swag365]

No its not, not one bit. It is all seen in scripture and understanding given by God. O back all I say up with scripture given by the Spirit.



You should be and humility is a good thing



I seek to look upon the things that are unseen, with spiritual eyes, not with mans reasoning and dull vision.



No, I don't see Peter as just "botching things up", God knew that Peter and the other apostles had many things to still be said and judged of and taught to them and of them
. But they would have to grow in the revelation of the Spirit as the Holy Ghost led them along. At that time and for a time after they were not able to bear some things as we see in scripture in the following time before and after Christ death.

"...I have many things to say and to judge of you:"(John 8:26 KJV)

"I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come."(John 16:12,13 KJV)

We see this transition and reformation throughout the book of Acts. But at that time in Acts 2, Peter, said the right words, it's just how some understand to be immersed "in the name of Jesus Christ", or immersed (baptized) "into the name", or immersed, "into Jesus Christ" etc.
Peter also did not have understanding of the decrease of the old covenant and the temple and the sacrifices. So he could only act on the faith he had at that time. Peter was told by Jesus in Acts 1 that John baptized with water but they would be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. There is a reason Jesus spoke that John "baptized:, past tense ministry. But we also know that Jesus told all of the apostles to go and teach all nations...but Peter didn't seem to get this until a vision from heaven came and God directed him to the gentiles. Even then, Peter argued with God and didn't seem to want to go to the Gentiles. He said who was he that he could resist God. There was some resistance in peter, and he would have been wrong to resist.

But we read some of this here,

"And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. 14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. 15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.Acts 10:13-15 KJV)

Here we see that Peter was not correct and was in some way arguing with God. He was also still under the law of the Old Covenant and dietary laws etc.

Also as far as baptism goes, Peter was still following Johns water baptism and perhaps the Halakah law of the Jews and their customs concerning Gentile converts. All of which was not needed in the new covenant and especially for a gentile. But Acts 15 hadn't even happened yet. Thats =where they argued if the gentiles had to keep the law of Moses and be circumcised to be saved. They did not have to do this.



No thats not at all what would have happened. It can be shown very clearly that Peter was still under the law and following old testament law and customs and Johns water baptism. The Jews would have a ritual baptism, full submersion and circumcision for any Gentile convert. Peter would have followed that as well. But in this case the prime example Peter was following was Johns water baptism. Jesus already told them that Johns water baptism was past in Acts 1. Peter was reminded of this when seeking to baptize the Gentiles. As we read.

"Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. 17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?"(Acts 11:16-17 KJV)

Besides Paul said Christ sent him not to baptize but to preach the gospel. The gospel is 1 Cor 15:1-4 and no water is mentioned there.Paul was the apostle t the gentiles and so it made sense that since they were not required to keep the Moses law and customs of the Jews and the old Covenant. That God would not bring them under it and then have to bring them out again when they understood that Ot was not for today anymore. The time of reformation was a slow process it seems (Hebrews 9)



Peter did not fully understand the scope of that command to teach all nations, as we see when he needed a vision and further direction to go to the gentiles. So if Peter needed more info to go to all nations in that command. He also needed more info for the immersing into the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. I don't see that as water baptism Jesus doesn't mention water here.. To be immersed into a name is a different issue. Jesus while he was on Earth said he kept the disciples in the name of the Father and he revealed the Fathers name. What dies it mean to you to be kept in the name of the Father.

"I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word."(John 17:6 KJV)

"While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled."(John 17:12 KJV)

He manifested ( revealed) the name and kept them in the name. The name of the Lord is a high tower, the righteous run into it and are safe.



I'm not selling anything, freely ye have received freely give.

That was quite a post. One part psychoanalysis, one part cherry picking, and one part eisegesis, to form a trinity of falsehood. This is exactly what happens when a person is left alone to pick up the Bible and interpret it alone, entirely divorced from the tradition and authority structure of the Church that our Lord Jesus founded himself. Your entire argument again comes down to "Peter had no idea what he was doing but I do." I don't buy it. And let's not even pretend that water baptism all of a sudden stopped at Acts 15. Both you and I know that from a historical perspective water baptism has been a constant within the Christian church from the time our Lord's resurrection up until the present day. Peter himself refers to water baptism in 1 Peter 3, and that was written near the end of his life by most historical accounts, many years after what took place in Acts. I suppose that Peter was also confused on his deathbed?

Yet a random person on the internet has found the truth that has eluded all of Christendom for 2000 years. Water baptism has no place in the Christian Church. It's not the Holy Ghost that is teaching you that.

Have a nice day.

 

[LoveofTruth]

Yeah I thought so. The Holy Ghost leads "me" into all truth. Anybody who disagrees with "me", not so much. Isn't that convenient?

No I'm not saying or did I say that everyone else is wrong and doesn't hear from God. I speak of individual revelation and in a body of believers. For example all may still prophesy as 1 Cor 14 shows in the commands to the church order. But even if they prophesy all is to be judged b=y others.

The "you" in that verse refers to a specific group of Ephesian Elders.

when we see the Holy Ghost making overseers among the Ephesian church, we can safely assume that God is not the authour of confusion and will do the same work among other churches. This is a sound principle in scripture.

You were not among that group.

Obviously no one today was. But the making of overseers is still by God throughout all time. For it is God that works in us to make us perfect unto every good work. He that desires such a work desires a good work as Paul wrote to Timothy. Just as some today may call themselves, apostles, prophets, evangelist, pastors and teachers based on Ephesians 4. We can also safely assume that such gifts are for the entire church today even though they were spoken of only in the church of Ephesis. In fact the word Pastor (KJV) is only found once in the entire New testament in Ephesians 4. So for others to call themselves pastors today they would have to assume that such a gift is among all the saints of all time.

But Do you also think that God has appointed you as one of the 12 apostles?

I am not one of the twelve, obviously there was a specific work for them. We read of the apostles in Acts and when they replaced Judas. Such a ministry they had was to observe the entire ministry of jesus from John to the resurrection. They were indeed eye witnesses to these things and a specific calling as sent ones in that. BUt we also read of apostles after the resurrection that were given to the church. Men such as Paul, Barnabas, Timotheous, Silvanus, were apostles clearly in scripture. So I consider my apostolic call in the same type of call after the resurrection.

Some verses to show this and to disprove all the churches today that deny apostles and prophets were for the church then ( after the resurrection) and for today,

"Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead"(Galatians 1:1 KJV)

"Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out,"(Acts 14:14 KJV)

"Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians ...Nor of men sought we glory, neither of you, nor yet of others, when we might have been burdensome, as the apostles of Christ.1 Thess 1:1, 2:6 KJV)

And what "body" is that, specifically? The group of Christians that attend your Church?

First of all a man made building of brick and mortar is not a "church". The church is the body of Christ. Each called out assembly is autonomus before God, self governing. With consensus type government as we see in scripture. Yes, God did send itinerant workers, such as apostles, prophets and evangelist to visit such gatherings to help them along to set in order things that are wanting. This order was given to Pau l and other apostle workers and they would do such work also of visiting and helping to correct, teach admonish etc many churches. That we would all speak the same things and have the same judgement as we walk in the Spirit and are led by God to do so. It is God working in each of the members in their specific office that makes up a functioning church. It is not a dictator or Lord over the flock that dominates all and directs his own will. We see warnings of such men is scripture. yet sadly today we see this one man pastor or priest show everywhere. The body can not function and edify one another as Christ works in them all.

I consider all gatherings that have the foundation of the gospel and the foundations paid to be a church. but if they hinder the functioning of one another to edify eachother. then the spirit is often quenched and a single man or a few men can set up their false doctrines over all and there is no room for correction among the body. There is so much that could be said here but I wont go too long here.

A body consisting of you, your friend Steve, and your buddy Mike sitting at home on your sofa with a Bible?

First of all i do not mock a small gathering. Even in a prison two or three may gather in Jesus name and he is there in the midst. And they do not always have a bible in some places. But they have the Spirit of God working in them.

The group of Christians that attend the Church next door to you, and that teach fundamental doctrines contrary to what are taught at your church?

There are many gatherings today that are dominated by one man or a mans ideas contrary to scripture. And Jesus warned of many false Christ in the last days. John said we are to try the spirits for many false prophets have gone out onto the world. I would say that all the body must be able to edify eachother and correct eachother according to scripture. if this is allowed then God can send in ministers to help them as well. But if they resist, then they will face their own sin.

I have met many believers in all sorts of denominations that i do not agree with their doctrines. I have even met those believe are believers in the Catholic church and other ritualistic gatherings. I do not agree with many of their doctrines and have great issue with many, but I have met tender spirits in those places. I myself came out of the Roman Catholic church and God directly led me out.

They all get to "recognize" the overseer who teaches what they believe, while not "recognizing" the teachers who teach something different than what they believe, no? You end up with this comical situation with 3 different churches on the same street teaching 3 different doctrines, with all of them claiming to be led by the Holy Spirit into all truth, and 3 different pastors all claiming to have been directly called by God into the ministry.

If they had the proper foundation laid and allowed the body to edify itself and accept itinerant workers from God, at least to hear them out, many of the problems could be addressed. But as i said usually there is a diotrephes type person over all Lording over all who loves the pre eminance and wont receive the brethren.

There are so many issues to talk of here it is beyond the scope here.

Friend, this is not a recipe for Christians to be led to the truth.

The order of God for the churches is clearly commanded in scripture. usually those doing the apostolic work will see them more often. The order is not for every man to just do what they want. But to wait on the Lord for ministry and gifts and all things. Again, hours of discussion here.

It is a recipe for charlatans to prosper, for every Tom, Dick, and Harry to get on a pulpit and teach whatever he feels like teaching on that day.

If they teach and speak whatever they feel then that would not be in God's order. But we do read that all may have a revelation doctrine prophecy etc. But let the other judge. I have planted and seen such meetings for a long time they are wonderful.Even if we have some disagreements they are far preferred than a one man show that follows a man made program and forms of godliness but deny the power.

Yet, among all of that, the Holy Spirit only leads YOU and your group into truth, and anybody who disagrees with you is being led by men. Did it ever occur to you that YOU could be the one who has deceived himself into believing this nonsense?

No, if someone disagrees with me I will hear them and their reason. I will search the scriptures if they are true. If i can be shown to be in error i would thank the Lord and change whatever was needed. But sadly the opposite is not true in many gatherings. No one is allowed to question the pastor or priest as they gather or to share anything usually. There is a tight control of man over them and a quenching of the spirit often. Yes all must be tested and judged and proved. But in the multitude of believers there is more safety.

Regardless, you obviously believe that you have received an anointing by the Holy Spirit to be an overseer. Why is it then that you do not know all things? You just admitted above that you do not fully understand every doctrine, so obviously you don't know "all things"? Why is that?

A believer has the Spirit o teach all things as needed and understood. Some things Peter said are hard to be understood and every part of the body has their own gifts and they grow as they walk with Christ. But this doesn't mean that one person has all that is needed for everyone. The entire body edifies eachother, every part is needed. So the unction teaches us all things that are needed for such a work as we wait on the Lord. It is a promise to be led by the Spirit into all truth, so why not simply believe it and wait and let God show all things?

You seem to want the text to mean that "the Holy Spirit prompts every single born-again Christian on the planet Earth into truth directly from God himself, without the need of any teacher."

No teachers are spiritual gifts in the body. But even a teacher must learn what he does from the spirit. He may not speak immediately as a prophet but they still must have all things revealed by God. We don't so much listen to the teacher as the leading of God in them. There will often be a witness and a scriptural witness as well, were we can say "amen".

Why have any teachers in the first place, then? Why have bishops, and priests, and deacons, "overseers" or "elders" if that is what you want to call them, to teach the Christian faithful, when each Christian already knows "all things" and has no need of a teacher because he has a direct line to true doctrine from the Holy Spirit himself? Does that make any sense?

If believers listen to their spirit led believers, who may be teachers or apostles etc. They are listening to body of Christ. But John wrote about those who would seduce them into error and lies and other things. This men spoke as some do who acted like the believers needed them and their teaching and set themselves up as Lords dominating over them, in self ego and praise of men etc and bind them with law and traditions of men, carnal doctrines and devil doctrines. But they were false and not in the truth. So John directs them to hear from God and walk in the light and in the anointing. God is faithful to teach them the truth.

You seem to want to read into the text some sort of magical ability for every baptized Christian to pick up the Bible and come to a full knowledge of the truth by himself, but I think that you are forgetting that their knowledge was gained within the context of the Church led by the apostles and others (the apostles, bishops, priests, and deacons mentioned in the Bible), ordained men given the specific task to lead other men and having spiritual authority over them. All of the men who were part of that community received the teaching from the ordained men, which contributed to the "knowledge" that is mentioned in the verses. When you see people just picking up the Bible, proclaiming "the Holy Spirit leads me to know everything" and then interpreting on their own outside of the context of the Church you end up with what we have today - thousands of charlatans, tons of misled people, and many, many different groups all teaching different things. Chaos.

I never speak of some "magical " ability. The power of the Spirit leading believers is where we got all the scriptures and the body ministry to one another. This is where the source of all truth comes from and is confirmed in the inner witness, scripture and the body of believers as ai have said in the beginning of this post.

I don't speak of men being in authority over others. Jesus warned of this also

"But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. 26 But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; 27 And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:"(Matthew 20-25-27)

and consider,

"For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. 31 Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears."(Acts 20:29-31 KJV)

"For ye suffer fools gladly, seeing ye yourselves are wise. 20 For ye suffer, if a man bring you into bondage, if a man devour you, if a man take of you, if a man exalt himself, if a man smite you on the face."(2 Cor 11:19,20 KJV)

"I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not. 10 Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church."(3rd John 9,10 KJV)

 

[LoveofTruth]

Your entire argument again comes down to "Peter had no idea what he was doing but I do." I don't buy it. .

Did you read what I said i did not say Peter was acting intentially wrong etc. He was walking in the light he had.If you believe the scriptures. Peter was to be blamed at times, and did not always see aright.

consider

"But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. 12For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. 13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. 14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?"(Galatians 2:11-14 KJV)

and

"Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. 23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men."

Yet a random person on the internet has found the truth that has eluded all of Christendom for 2000 years. Water baptism has no place in the Christian Church. It's not the Holy Ghost that is teaching you that.

This is your weakness you think just because I one simple person does not agree with centuries of mans tradition that I must be wrong. That snot right. Others have also disagreed with water baptism for today all through history.

But Paul himself did say that Christ d=sent him not to baptize. He went to the gentiles and preached the gospel. In the gospel we do not see any water baptism, or the Lords supper for salvation or circumcision, or the sabbath etc.

read 1 Cor 15:1-5, and consider that that is the gospel.

and if we use your thinking then jesus Paul and all early believers were wrong because they went against the majority.

 

[Swag365]

No I'm not saying or did I say that everyone else is wrong and doesn't hear from God. I speak of individual revelation and in a body of believers. For example all may still prophesy as 1 Cor 14 shows in the commands to the church order. But even if they prophesy all is to be judged b=y others.

Well let's clarify a few things before we continue the discussion.

1) What is your exact definition of "the church" or "the body of believers"? I would like to know precisely who is in it, and who is not, according to you.

2) Does the body of believers include the 1% (roughly speaking) of professing Christians who hold that water baptism and the Lord's Supper are to be rejected?

3) Does the body of believers include the 99% (roughly speaking) of professing Christians who hold that water baptism and the Lord's super are to be participated in by modern Christians?

4) What, specifically, must a person believe, do, or have received, to be a part of the body?

 

[Swag365]

First of all a man made building of brick and mortar is not a "church".

Semantics. When people say "I'm going to church" they are not implying that the Christian church consists of a building. You know that plenty well.

The church is the body of Christ. Each called out assembly is autonomus before God, self governing. With consensus type government as we see in scripture. Yes, God did send itinerant workers, such as apostles, prophets and evangelist to visit such gatherings to help them along to set in order things that are wanting. This order was given to Pau l and other apostle workers and they would do such work also of visiting and helping to correct, teach admonish etc many churches. That we would all speak the same things and have the same judgement as we walk in the Spirit and are led by God to do so. It is God working in each of the members in their specific office that makes up a functioning church. It is not a dictator or Lord over the flock that dominates all and directs his own will. We see warnings of such men is scripture. yet sadly today we see this one man pastor or priest show everywhere. The body can not function and edify one another as Christ works in them all.

So to clarify your view:
1) There is no such thing as "the Church". There is no "one" Christian Church, but only numerous "autonomous assemblies," each of them free to disagree with the others with respect to doctrine. Each of them free to teach doctrine that contradicts each other. They are all essentially independent, following the dictates of the Holy Spirit independently from the others. Is this your view?

2) The apostles themselves did not have authority over these "autonomous assemblies," correct? The apostles were merely sent to preach a nice sermon every now and then, but otherwise the assemblies were free to accept or reject what the apostles taught, according to the "consensus government" of the "autonomous assembly." Is this your view?

3) Is the Lord Jesus himself an authority over each of your "autonomous assemblies"?

4) Now, according to you, nobody has authority over another person in each of these "autonomous assemblies", correct? You can have a "pastor" that each "autonomous assembly" chooses but when it comes down to it, each person in each "autonomous assembly" is free to reject what his pastor teaches, if it disagrees with his own interpretation of Scripture, and what he believes to be the prompting of the Holy Spirit, correct?

5) Exactly how does this "consensus government" work? The "autonomous body" gets together, has a vote on whether "OSAS is true," for example, and if 60% of the members vote "Yes" then this particular body is free to teach OSAS?

6) Exactly how much "consensus" is necessary? 51% of the people in a particular "autonomous body" say "OSAS" so that's the doctrine in that particular "church"? 75%? 100% How much is required?

7) What is the "rule of faith" for each of your "autonomous assemblies"? Sola Scriptura? The Bible & private revelations given to each "autonomous assembly"? The Bible & traditions handed down by the apostles, that are not recorded in Scripture?

8) Does each "autonomous assembly" gets to decide its own rule of faith? If not, why not? And who decides it, then?

9) When it comes down to it, your "church" is nothing more than thousands or millions of individual Christians, each free to interpret the Bible for himself, free to accept or reject the teaching of any person (including his "pastor"). Essentially, there is no authority within the "church" except that each person is bound to follow his own conscience, his own interpretation of the Bible, and what he believes to be the promptings of the Holy Spirit, correct. Essentially, the "church" is just a bunch of individuals free to believe whatever they want, as long as they believe that their personal interpretation of Scripture is correct, and that they believe that they are prompted by the Holy Spirit to believe it, correct?

I consider all gatherings that have the foundation of the gospel and the foundations paid to be a church. but if they hinder the functioning of one another to edify eachother. then the spirit is often quenched and a single man or a few men can set up their false doctrines over all and there is no room for correction among the body. There is so much that could be said here but I wont go too long here.

Now this is what needs to be explored first. Specifically, what is the "the foundation of the gospel and the foundations paid". Could you please enumerate exactly what you think this is. Without this you have not told anyone anything at all, concerning what you consider to be a church.