Where is the greatest division found?

[TheScottsMen]

Where do we find the greatest book separation in the Bible? Tradition says Between Genesis-Malachi (OT) and Matthew-Revelation (NT)? But what says you? If its between NT and OT, where did the OT Start? Surely not Genesis due to the fact that the Old Testament or Covenant was not given to the Jews until the book of Exodus. So do we cut off Genesis? Where is the greatest serpeation found in the Bible?


TSM

 

[Iosias]

The greatest division is between Mystery and Prophesy

The mystery was not revealed to the prophets and cannot be found in the Old Testament. It was a secret "hid in God" (Ephesians 3:9) until it was revealed unto the apostle Paul, as he himself states "by revelation he made known unto me the mystery" (Ephesians 3:3). Paul goes on to explain the mystery in verse 6 saying "That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:". It has to be noted that the mystery cannot refer to the blessing of Gentiles in connection with Israel because this is perfectly clear from the fact that that was never a secret. That was known Genesis 12:3 when Jehovah states “And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” And this well-known fact is constantly referred to in the Old Testament for example we read in Genesis 22:18 “And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.”

So what is the secret? Paul explains clearly saying that the mystery is that we Gentiles who were at one time “aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world” (Eph 2:12) have now through the blood of Jesus Christ have been reconciled to God with the Jew in “one body by the cross” (Eph 2:16). Jesus has “broken down the middle wall of partition between us” (Eph 2:14), between Jew and Gentile, and through the baptism by the Holy Ghost we are placed into the “one new man” (Eph 2:15) and thereby reconciled us to God. We read in 1 Corinthians 12: 13 that “ by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.”

We read in 1 Colossians 1:26, 27 “Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:”. When we read “Christ in you” I do not believe that this is referring simply to the indwelling of the Holy Ghost but rather Christ dwelling in you the Gentiles.

That God has blessed both Gentile and Jew through the cross via the creation of “one new man” in which both are equal, where earthly distinction is lost. That is the glorious mystery “hid in God” but revealed through Paul. Thanks be to a graceful God. AMEN

 

[In Christ Forever]

Where do we find the greatest book separation in the Bible? Tradition says Between Genesis-Malachi (OT) and Matthew-Revelation (NT)? But what says you? If its between NT and OT, where did the OT Start? Surely not Genesis due to the fact that the Old Testament or Covenant was not given to the Jews until the book of Exodus. So do we cut off Genesis? Where is the greatest serpeation found in the Bible?

I view the garden of Eden and the New Jerusalem as the greatest seperation. One being physical on earth, the other being in Heaven.
Israel or anyone else no longer has to worship at a manmade temple or altar, but thru the heavenly Jerusalem above through the Holy Spirit of those in Christ.
Simply put, We now have access to the tree of Life from the Jerusalem above which is the mother of us ALL.

Old Convenant:

gene 2:8 The LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden, and there He put the man whom He had formed. 9 And out of the ground the LORD God made every tree grow that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life [was] also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. 10 Nowa river went out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it parted and became four riverheads.

Any views on why there are 2 trees of life, one on either side of the river? Does one represent one on earth and one in heaven? Or one for gentiles and another for Israel? I haven't really worked on this yet.

New Convenant?

Revelation 22:1 And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb. 2 In the middle of its street, and on either side of the river, [was] the tree of life, which bore twelve fruits, each [tree] yielding its fruit every month. The leaves of the tree [were] for the healing of the nations.

galatian 4:-- 25 for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children -- 26 but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all[spiritual Eve?].

 

[Hitch]

Jewsu said the Law and the Prophets were 'until John'.

 

[TheScottsMen]

Jewsu said the Law and the Prophets were 'until John'.

So you believe the NC started at John? Does not a New Testament or Covenant need a shedding of blood? I'm confused with your answer? But thats alright, I tend to be confused with a lot of peoples answers, so no worries

 

[@@Paul@@]

Jewsu said the Law and the Prophets were 'until John'.

What did John do?

 

[Iosias]

So you believe the NC started at John? Does not a New Testament or Covenant need a shedding of blood? I'm confused with your answer? But thats alright, I tend to be confused with a lot of peoples answers, so no worries

The NC began with the death of Christ Jesus. As to whether we are now in the NC I will reserve judgement.

http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/dispensationalistdiscussions/

 

[thereselittleflower]

Jewsu said the Law and the Prophets were 'until John'.

This is a good place.


Peace in Him!

 

[Terral]

Hi Paul:

Hitch >> Jewsu said the Law and the Prophets were 'until John'

Paul >> What did John do?

John the Baptist/Elijah (Matt. 1:13+14) marks the time that God began to ‘fulfill’ OT Prophecy. And thus:

"The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John; since that time the gospel of the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it.” Luke 16:16.

However the greatest division in Scripture is between Prophecy and the Mystery. The Prophets were given to see John the Baptist (Isa. 40:3, Mal. 3:1) and Israel as a Kingdom of Priests (Exodus 19:6, 1Pet. 2:9). None of them were given to see the ‘revelation of the Mystery’ (Rom. 16:25). This is why we cannot start our Mystery church (Eph. 5:32) in Acts 2, because Joel could see those things of Prophecy (Acts 2:16-21). None of them saw the writer who with is companions wrote over half of our NT.

In Christ,

Terral

 

[@@Paul@@]

Hi Paul:
[/font][/size]
John the Baptist/Elijah (Matt. 1:13+14) marks the time that God began to ‘fulfill’ OT Prophecy. And thus:

However the greatest division in Scripture is between Prophecy and the Mystery. The Prophets were given to see John the Baptist (Isa. 40:3, Mal. 3:1) and Israel as a Kingdom of Priests (Exodus 19:6, 1Pet. 2:9). None of them were given to see the ‘revelation of the Mystery’ (Rom. 16:25). This is why we cannot start our Mystery church (Eph. 5:32) in Acts 2, because Joel could see those things of Prophecy (Acts 2:16-21). None of them saw the writer who with is companions wrote over half of our NT.

In Christ,

Terral

Hi Terral,
I'm sure you are aware i do not believe the church began at Acts 2.

Calling something a mystery simply means it was kept a secret to some extent; the body of Gentiles being called out in Acts was part of the prophetic plan of God - the full knowledge of which was not made known until the Apostle Paul was raised up.

Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.
(Act 15:14-17 KJV)

Act 26:22 Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come:

Act 13:47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.​

I believe that body of Gentiles was apart of prophesy for it was always God's plan to send Isreal to the uttermost parts of the world as a channel of blessing and the means to salvation (John 4:2)...

Rom 10:19 But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you.
Rom 11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.​

Again, it was no mystery that savation would come to the Gentiles through Israel.

Mat 11:13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.

God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
(Heb 1:1-2 KJV)​

In the days of old God spoke to the fathers through the prophets... until He began to speak through John... Then the Son... Then the Son from above through the Holy Spirit...

 

[Terral]

Hi Paul:

Paul >> I'm sure you are aware I do not believe the church began at Acts 2. Calling something a mystery simply means it was kept a secret to some extent; the body of Gentiles being called out in Acts was part of the prophetic plan of God - the full knowledge of which was not made known until the Apostle Paul was raised up.

We agree, but those ‘prophetic plans’ were seen by the prophets, which means they are NOT part of the Mystery revealed to Paul. You are trying to connect things in Scripture that God has put asunder. And no, my understanding of what you do not believe is quite unclear.

Paul >> Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things. (Act 15:14-17 KJV)

Peter is speaking about his adventure with Cornelius in Acts 10, as he was presenting the ‘gospel of the kingdom.’ That has nothing to do with the Mystery of our ‘church’ (Eph. 5:32), and the ‘body of Christ’ (Eph. 4:12. You are claiming that our church did not start in Acts 2, but then appear to use Cornelius as an example of someone in our church today. He became a member of the same ‘church’ (Matt. 16:16-19, 18:17) Peter was building in Acts 2. If you do not start our mystery church in Acts 2, then where do you start it?

Paul’s quote >> Act 26:22 Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come:

Luke is demonstrating Paul’s defense of himself for ‘preaching the kingdom’ (Acts 20:25) before King Agrippa, and was sizing him up to ask this:

"King Agrippa, do you believe the Prophets? I know that you do." Acts 26:27.

Neither Luke or Paul are teaching “Grace Doctrine” from the Pauline Epistles here in Acts 26. Luke is writing from the perspective of the “of the things concerning the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3, 28:31), which amounts to the ‘fulfillment’ of Prophecy. Our ‘His Body’ (Col. 1:24) Mystery ‘church’ (Eph. 5:32) is part of what the Prophets were not given to see.

“Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I do my share on behalf of His body, which is the church, in filling up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions. Of this church I was made a minister according to the stewardship from God bestowed on me for your benefit, so that I might fully carry out the preaching of the word of God, that is, the mystery which has been hidden from the past ages and generations, but has now been manifested to His saints, to whom God willed to make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.” Col. 1:24-27.

Paul >> Again, it was no mystery that salvation would come to the Gentiles through Israel.

Salvation was coming through Israel to the Gentiles in the offering of the ‘gospel of the kingdom,’ which was according to Prophecy. Paul’s ‘my gospel’ was sent to the nations (Rom. 16:25-27) apart from Israel, and was given because of Israel’s transgression from your quote (Rom. 11:11+12). Israel is being hardened throughout this process (Rom. 11:25), which forbids salvation coming through them to the Gentiles for today. The ‘gospel’ and the ‘preacher’ (Rom. 10:14) has replaced any particular ‘nation’ as the source of salvation for anybody. Believers were first called ‘Christians’ in Antioch (Acts 11:26), after Paul and Barnabas taught there for a year; and not in Jerusalem.

Paul quotes >> Mat 11:13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.

Please . . . you pretend that God never raised Paul up (Acts 9:15) and revealed (Gal. 1:11+12) our Gospel (Christ and Him crucified; 1Cor. 2:2) for the salvation of hearers today. John the Baptist has nothing at all to do with Paul’s ‘my gospel,’ which is according to the ‘revelation of the mystery.’ Rom. 16:25. For a professing ‘Dispensationalist,’ you appear to be inclined to mix Prophecy and the Mystery at a moments notice. The events pertaining to the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matt. 24:14) are seen by the Prophets, and relate to the ‘bride’ (John 3:29) of Prophecy (Hosea 2:19+20). The things of the ‘gospel of the grace of God’ (Acts 20:24) and our Mystery church (Eph. 5:30) were not seen by the Prophets. There is no intersection of Prophecy and the Mystery, because one was seen and is ‘fulfilled,’ while the latter remained hidden and is ‘revealed.’ Your interpretation and explanation mixes it all into one. The responsibility of the teacher for the body today is to show the differences between Prophecy and the Mystery; not to mix them into one pot to take out what tastes good to them.

In Christ,

Terral

 

[@@Paul@@]

Hi Paul:

We agree, but those ‘prophetic plans’ were seen by the prophets, which means they are NOT part of the Mystery revealed to Paul. You are trying to connect things in Scripture that God has put asunder. And no, my understanding of what you do not believe is quite unclear.

How about this...

The Church which is HIS Body could not begin BEFORE Israel was set aside.
The Church of God began at Acts 2 and is a kingdom church preaching the kingdom gospel to which Gentiles were invited in to partake of the blessings of Abraham with no need of being circumcised (mystery #1) and that they (Jews) were to be saved the same as us (Gentiles) ---- another revealed mystery, which was part of the revealed plan of God.

There was "a church" that began in Acts which later included Gentiles, that inclusion was part of the revealed plan of God and had nothing to do with the eternal purpose of God...

Peter is speaking about his adventure with Cornelius in Acts 10, as he was presenting the ‘gospel of the kingdom.’ That has nothing to do with the Mystery of our ‘church’ (Eph. 5:32), and the ‘body of Christ’ (Eph. 4:12. You are claiming that our church did not start in Acts 2, but then appear to use Cornelius as an example of someone in our church today. He became a member of the same ‘church’ (Matt. 16:16-19, 18:17) Peter was building in Acts 2. If you do not start our mystery church in Acts 2, then where do you start it?

No Sir, they are discussing whether of not Gentiles would need to be circumcised... Peter going to Cornelius open the door for the inclusion of Gentiles through Paul >> Peter was given the keys to the kingdom, not Paul.

Act 15:11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.​

There was not TWO Gospels running around during Acts; there may have been two bodies but it was still the “gospel of the kingdom” and the Jews were to be saved even as they (the Gentiles)… It sounds like you believe there were two groups of Gentiles running around during Acts???

As I said above, our calling could not start until Israel was set aside.

Salvation was coming through Israel to the Gentiles in the offering of the ‘gospel of the kingdom,’ which was according to Prophecy. Paul’s ‘my gospel’ was sent to the nations (Rom. 16:25-27) apart from Israel, and was given because of Israel’s transgression from your quote (Rom. 11:11+12). Israel is being hardened throughout this process (Rom. 11:25), which forbids salvation coming through them to the Gentiles for today. The ‘gospel’ and the ‘preacher’ (Rom. 10:14) has replaced any particular ‘nation’ as the source of salvation for anybody. Believers were first called ‘Christians’ in Antioch (Acts 11:26), after Paul and Barnabas taught there for a year; and not in Jerusalem.

I think you should go back and read Rom 16:25-27 again.

Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:
(Rom 16:25-26 KJV)​

Paul’s “my gospel” as you put it was being revealed by the “scriptures of the prophets” and was only kept a secret “since the world began”… That gospel was given to the gentiles to harden Israel but at the same time it was given to provoke Israel to jealousy!! See Rom. 11……… That provoking was according to plan and was seen by the Law.

Rom 10:19 But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you.​

Here’s the short, short version of what was going on in Acts…….. Stay tuned to the Acts study for the long version.

God using His almighty wisdom built a nation to be a light to the Gentiles, to be His channel of salvation unto the “ends of the earth” and to be a nation of priests.

Act 13:47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.​

God did not only commanded Paul and Barnabas to go to the Gentiles; it was ISRAEL that was to be sent with Paul’s “my gospel” into the “uttermost parts of the world”… Which will have it’s complete fulfillment in the tribulation with the sealing of the 144,000 from the twelve tribes.

And now, saith the LORD that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, Though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the LORD, and my God shall be my strength. And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.
(Isa 49:5-6 KJV)​

Paul was sent to do what the nation should have done. If Israel was no longer the source of “salvation for anybody” then it would not have been necessary for Paul to preach to the Jews for three days before going to any Gentiles…

………Israel was commanded by Jesus Christ to go to the uttermost parts of the earth with the “gospel of the kingdom”. But FIRST they were to go to Jerusalem, SECOND to Judea and Samaria and THIRD to the uttermost parts… Israel the nation rejected the risen Messiah in both Jerusalem and in Judea and Samaria >> the final rejection being the stoning of Stephen (who’s name means king or “crowned”). So God raised up Paul to fulfill the THIRD, The uttermost part was Rome and they rejected it as well.

 

[In Christ Forever]

Salvation was coming through Israel to the Gentiles in the offering of the ‘gospel of the kingdom,’ which was according to Prophecy. Paul’s ‘my gospel’ was sent to the nations (Rom. 16:25-27) apart from Israel, and was given because of Israel’s transgression from your quote (Rom. 11:11+12). Israel is being hardened throughout this process (Rom. 11:25), which forbids salvation coming through them to the Gentiles for today. The ‘gospel’ and the ‘preacher’ (Rom. 10:14) has replaced any particular ‘nation’ as the source of salvation for anybody.

Hi again all. If I remember correctly, Christ said salvation was of the "jews". We know He came from the House of Judah, but why wouldn't Christ say "of Israel"? Trust me when I say I am not antisemetic as you know I love scripture, God and everyone else
What part of Israel was hardened and blinded? That appears to be a "mystery" to some, but Paul and Jesus explains who the ones were that were hardened and blinded. So it appears there were 3 different dispensations, one to the jew, one to Israel and one to gentiles. I can feel the fur flying on this but I want to see how dispensationalists view this. God bless.

Matthew 23:1 Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, 2 saying: "The scribes and the Pharisees[jews] sit in Moses' seat. 13 "But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither go in [yourselves,] nor do you allow those who are entering to go in.19 "Fools and blind! For which is greater, the gift or the altar that sanctifies the gift?

Why would Paul mention specifically that Wrath was coming upon the jews but no one else

1 thess 2:14 For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God which are in Judea in Christ Jesus. For you also suffered the same things from your own countrymen, just as they [did] from the Judeans[jews], 15 who killed both the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they do not please God and are contrary to all men, 16 forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they may be saved, so as always to fill up [the measure of] their sins; but wrath has come upon them to the uttermost.

 

[Terral]

Hi Paul:

Paul >> How about this... The Church which is HIS Body could not begin BEFORE Israel was set aside.

Whatever gave you an idea like that? That supposition is not even plausible. The Apostle Paul worked for the building of the bride and the body, as the whole purpose of God.

"But I do not consider my life of any account as dear to myself, so that I may finish my course and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify solemnly of the gospel of the grace of God [ my gospel; Rom. 16:25 ] And now, behold, I know that all of you, among whom I went about preaching the kingdom [ gospel of the kingdom; Matt. 24:14 ], will no longer see my face. Therefore, I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men. For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God.” Acts 20:24-27.

Both the kingdom and grace dispensations ran side by side during the time of Acts. The meeting in Jerusalem was between the members of bride [ James, Peter, John ] and the body [ Paul, Barnabas, Titus ]. There is no Scriptural evidence whatsoever to support the notion that the Gentile dominant body was placed on hold, for the bride to be set aside. Paul refutes that idea completely in his testimony to the Galatians:

“But when God, who had set me apart even from my mother's womb and called me through His grace, was pleased to reveal His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with flesh and blood, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I went away to Arabia, and returned once more to Damascus.” Gal. 1:15-17.

Then we compare this testimony with what is written in Acts regarding the first Christians:

“But there were some of them, men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who came to Antioch and began speaking to the Greeks also, preaching the Lord Jesus. And the hand of the Lord was with them, and a large number who believed turned to the Lord. The news about them reached the ears of the church at Jerusalem, and they sent Barnabas off to Antioch . . . And he left for Tarsus to look for Saul; and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. And for an entire year they met with the church and taught considerable numbers; and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.” Acts 11:20-26.

The first ‘church’ with members to be called ‘Christian’ was in Antioch under Paul and Barnabas. These are two of the characters Christ sent through a revelation to submit ‘the gospel I preach among the Gentiles’ to Peter, John and James and the ‘church in Jerusalem.’ Gal. 2:2. Paul’s letters to the Thessalonians, Romans and Corinthians were all drafted before the end of Acts. Your hypothesis above makes little sense in light of all the Scriptural evidence to the contrary.

Paul >> The Church of God began at Acts 2 and is a kingdom church preaching the kingdom gospel to which Gentiles were invited in to partake of the blessings of Abraham with no need of being circumcised (mystery #1) and that they (Jews) were to be saved the same as us (Gentiles) ---- another revealed mystery, which was part of the revealed plan of God.

No sir. The Kingdom church of Acts 2 had members long before this Day of Pentecost. John the Baptist and Christ have been gathering members to the ‘bride’ (John 3:29) for the past three years. This is the same ‘church’ of Matt. 16:16-19 and 18:17 that Christ was passing to Peter. The future tenses are used because Christ was still present and among the members of this assembly Himself. To say that this kingdom church started at Pentecost is to claim that John the Baptist and Christ Himself were incapable of convincing anybody to join their ranks. The opening of Acts speaks against you, because Matthias and Barsabbas (Acts 1:23) were chosen from a group of the 120 “of the men who have accompanied us at the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us – beginning with the baptism of John until the day He was taken up from us.” Acts 1:21+22.

The preaching of the kingdom in Acts 2 was a continuation of what had been going on in Israel for the past three years. Peter preached the same water baptism ‘for the forgiveness of sins’ (Acts 2:38) that John the Baptist (Acts 1:5) preached from day one. Mark 1:4. The difference here is that the Holy Spirit was offering the kingdom, instead of the Father (through John the Baptist), or the Son of God. Luke’s second letter to Theophilus is not about something new, but a continuation or sequel to the Gospel of Luke.

Terral Original >> Peter is speaking about his adventure with Cornelius in Acts 10, . . . If you do not start our mystery church in Acts 2, then where do you start it?

Paul’s reply >> No Sir, they are discussing whether of not Gentiles would need to be circumcised... Peter going to Cornelius open the door for the inclusion of Gentiles through Paul. Peter was given the keys to the kingdom, not Paul.

Peter’s preaching to Cornelius has nothing whatsoever to do with Paul or the body of Christ. Peter only used that testimony at this one meeting for the purpose of debate and show that God was working with the Gentiles. James then used this evidence in handing down the decision:

"Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles.” Acts 15:19

These Gentiles were not being added to the Kingdom church based in Jerusalem, but James realized that God was dealing separately with the ‘body of Christ’ through the stewardship of the Apostle Paul. We know this because of what James wrote to the “twelve tribes” after this meeting:

“For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.” James 2:10.

While the believers under James who were ‘zealous for the Law’ (Acts 21:20) were bound to Mosaic Law (Matt. 5:18), these Gentiles were not to be troubled by the Kingdom church. After all, they were not under law, but under grace. Rom. 6:14, Col. 2:16+17, Gal. 5:1-5. If James had determined that the Gentiles were joining his Kingdom church, then they would have been placed under Mosaic Law also.

Paul quotes >> Act 15:11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

Paul’s commentary >> There was not TWO Gospels running around during Acts; there may have been two bodies but it was still the “gospel of the kingdom” and the Jews were to be saved even as they (the Gentiles)… It sounds like you believe there were two groups of Gentiles running around during Acts???

To hold your interpretation of Acts, one must bury his head in the sand and ignore a ton of Biblical evidence. Keep in mind that Luke is writing the account from the Kingdom perspective, and the Holy Spirit is drafting a transitional book of Scripture. You are forgetting that the Thessalonian church letters are addressed a decade before the end of Acts. The earliest of the Corinthian Epistles predate the close of Acts by about five years, and Romans at least a few years.

Paul >> As I said above, our calling could not start until Israel was set aside.

You can say that a thousand times if you like. The Biblical evidence is what proves the case.

Terral Original >> Salvation was coming through Israel. . . and not in Jerusalem.

Paul >> I think you should go back and read Rom 16:25-27 again. (quoted) Paul’s “my gospel” as you put it was being revealed by the “scriptures of the prophets” and was only kept a secret “since the world began”… That gospel was given to the gentiles to harden Israel but at the same time it was given to provoke Israel to jealousy!! See Rom. 11 . That provoking was according to plan and was seen by the Law.
Rom 10:19 But I say, Did not Israel know? . . . Stay tuned to the Acts study for the long version.

First, these three verses that end Romans are not part of all the manuscripts. The letter was first drafted by Paul, before the close of Acts, then he added the last three verses after the close to the already circulating Romans Epistles. The fact that our gospel was according to the ‘revelation of the mystery’ was withheld, until after Acts 28:28. Your point above about provoking Israel to jealously, and connecting that to the “Scriptures of the prophets” is simply erroneous. Paul’s reference here is to New Testament ‘Scriptures of the prophets,’ and not to the Old Testament at all. These are the ‘God-breathed’ New Testament documents like Romans, 1Corinthians, etc.. Our gospel and the body of Christ were being fashioned from early in Paul’s ministry, as evidenced in Galatians 1:15-17 and Acts 11:20-26.

Paul did make an indirect connection between the gospel and the mystery in 1Cor. 2:2-8, which was written before the close of Acts. He also connects our translation to the mystery in 1Cor. 15:51-53. The remainder of your points make no sense to me at all. If the body of Christ did not start until after Acts, then Paul had no members to write to until after 60 Ad.. Pop goes your theory. Paul's meeting in Jerusalem was to stop the bride church in Jeruslaem (Acts 15:29) from bothering the body churches. That happened in the middle of Acts, partner . . .

In Christ,
Terral

 

[Terral]

Hi InChristForever:

InChrist >> If I remember correctly, Christ said salvation was of the "jews". We know He came from the House of Judah, but why wouldn't Christ say "of Israel"? Trust me when I say I am not antisemetic as you know I love scripture, God and everyone else.

Christ made that statement early on in the Four Gospels during the time He was sent to Israel only. Matt. 15:24. The ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matt. 4:23, 9:35) was to be accepted, and all the nations would be blessed by Christ’s life. Israel deciding to crucify the King put a damper on the idea of salvation going through the Jews after that. So God raised Paul up (Acts 9:15), and revealed to him our gospel for today (Gal. 1:11+12). In case you were unaware, preachers call many to Christ every day without asking Israel for permission.

InChrist >> What part of Israel was hardened and blinded? That appears to be a "mystery" to some, but Paul and Jesus explains who the ones were that were hardened and blinded. So it appears there were 3 different dispensations, one to the jew, one to Israel and one to gentiles. I can feel the fur flying on this but I want to see how dispensationalists view this.

A new dispensation is created by God every time He calls a steward to be over a new household / administration. The oldest dispensation of all belongs to the Gentiles under Adam’s dispensation of conscience. Paul explains it like this:

“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 . . .” Rom. 2:14+15.

The ‘conscience’ aspect comes into play, because of the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (Gen. 2:17) that exists within every man. Adam was being dealt with under the dispensation of innocence until the fall. Then after the seed of this tree was inside him, then all his descendants were born with this seed within them also. The side benefit is that his descendants make good judges for replacing the forces of darkness (Eph. 6:12) who are now passing away (1Cor. 2:6). God tricked Satan into providing Him with the necessary traits within the children of Adam to replace Satan and his evil forces in this creation, so that we (sons of God; Rom. 8:14, 19) can now judge the world and the angels (1Cor. 6:2+3).

The next major ‘dispensation’ to come along is Israel under Moses. Yes, the Lord God made covenants with Noah and Abraham, but this is the big picture of Scripture. Israel is the apple of the Lord God’s eye and His ‘chosen race’ (Exodus 19:6, 1Pet. 2:9) upon this planet. Personally I would rather be a member of the body of Christ any day of the week, and twice on Sunday. Paul describes them in Romans 2:17-25 and again in Romans 9:1-5.

Then we come the members of the ‘body of Christ’ (Eph. 4:12) who are under the ‘stewardship of God’s grace’ (Eph. 3:2) given to the Apostle Paul. He became our father in Christ through the Gospel (1Cor. 4:15). We become the members of Christ’s body through obedience to the gospel of Christ’s shed blood, which Paul calls “my gospel” (Rom. 16:25). These are the three major dispensations ‘from Scripture’ on the earth today.

The ‘bride’ (John 3:29) of Christ was on the earth from the time of John the Baptist to the time of the last Kingdom disciple on the earth around 100 ad. Examples of the people belonging to this kingdom dispensation were the Twelve and those saved through the gospel of the kingdom throughout Acts (Samarians of Acts 8, eunuch, disciples of Acts 19:1-6, etc.). Those kingdom disciples were literally ‘cut off’ (Rev. 20:4) and shall be raised up to sit on thrones and judge the twelve tribes (Luke 22:30) during the coming restored kingdom of Israel on the earth. Therefore, when the body is taken (1Thes. 4:17) to start the “Lords Day” (Rev. 1:10) then Elijah shall receive the Holy Spirit by the Jordan and begin again to prepare the bride for the coming of the Lord. The difference is that Christ will appear at the ‘end of the age’ (Matt. 24:3-31), and Elijah will be preparing the bride for this ‘thousand years’ of restoration (Matt. 17:10+11, Acts 3:19-26, 15:16-18).

Since the body will be leaving the instant that the bride again starts to form, there will always be just three major dispensations on this planet. During the coming kingdom on the earth, Israel and the kingdom disciples will read the Hebrew Epistles of our New Testament as their personal mail to the ‘bride’ in the same way we use Paul’s Epistles for the ‘body’ today. The difference is that our last days on earth are described in 1Thes. 4:13-17 (1Cor. 15:51-54), while the ‘bride’s’ last days are described in Matthew 24:3-31. We are taken when the “Day of Christ” is “at hand” (2Thes. 2:2), while they are taken at the ‘end of the age.’ Matt. 24:31. The ironic thing about the coming Kingdom days is that the false teachers will be mixing Pauline grace doctrine from his Gentile Epistles with Kingdom doctrine from the remainder of the New Testament. The false teachers of today are doing just the opposite by defiling Grace doctrine with things from the Hebrew Epistles.

In Christ,

Terral

 

[@@Paul@@]

Whatever gave you an idea like that? That supposition is not even plausible. The Apostle Paul worked for the building of the bride and the body, as the whole purpose of God.

Both the kingdom and grace dispensations ran side by side during the time of Acts. The meeting in Jerusalem was between the members of bride [ James, Peter, John ] and the body [ Paul, Barnabas, Titus ]. There is no Scriptural evidence whatsoever to support the notion that the Gentile dominant body was placed on hold, for the bride to be set aside. Paul refutes that idea completely in his testimony to the Galatians:

Hi Terral, I never said any BODY was placed on hold, that’s what you think would have to happen if what I was trying to explain was true… Please quit putting words in my mouth…….. As you closed your post: “That happened in the middle of Acts, partner . . . “.

Act 20:24-27 KJV
(24) But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God.
(25) And now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more.
(26) Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men.
(27) For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God.


First off, that does not even say the “gospel of the kingdom”. It says “preaching the kingdom of God”… Second, Paul’s “My Gospel” was to the Gentile and was the inclusion of the gentile into the covenant blessings of Abraham by Faith alone > apart from circumcision > by the grace of God alone.

Salvation was always by Faith, there was IS and ever will be one way to be saved.

Third, I believe you are also wrong in your belief about the Bride > but that’s far to vast to cover, and we’re too different to begin discussing it… In Short, The Bride consists of those who EARN it while the body consists of those who believe… Simply believing in the gospel of the kingdom does not make one the Bride of the Lamb.

You believe Paul’s “my gospel” introduced a NEW dispensation, one that ran along side the “dispensation of law”… I completely disagree… No where do we see an example of two administrations of God running side by side.
1Co 4:1 Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.
….There is more than one mystery; we would do well to head Paul’s words.

Rom 1:1-2 KJV
(1) Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,
(2) (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,)

Rom 15:16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.

The Gospel of God was the offering of God’s grace through the work of Christ at Calvary > which was promised before by his prophets in the holy scriptures. i.e. the prophets new about it.

It was no secret that God would shed His grace on the gentiles; that was the plan all along (since the world began). It’s wrong to divide God’s administration in such a way; salvation has always been by grace through faith. Salvation does not = calling nor does it define a “church” or “body” or a “bride”…. The calling in Acts was to an earthly kingdom > our purpose was not explained until after the events of Acts took place.

There is no scriptural evidence to support the notion that Paul preached TWO Gospels and was bouncing back and forth from two different administrations of God… He was doing what the nation of Israel should have done > take the gospel of God to the Gentile nations offering than the same hope that Israel had: salvation by faith and an earthly kingdom. i.e. He was not offering the gentiles all spiritual blessings and a heavenly calling far above all pertaining to the hidden purpose of God – YET.

The first ‘church’ with members to be called ‘Christian’ was in Antioch under Paul and Barnabas. These are two of the characters Christ sent through a revelation to submit ‘the gospel I preach among the Gentiles’ to Peter, John and James and the ‘church in Jerusalem.’ Gal. 2:2. Paul’s letters to the Thessalonians, Romans and Corinthians were all drafted before the end of Acts. Your hypothesis above makes little sense in light of all the Scriptural evidence to the contrary.

I don’t see what this has to do with anything… The body began before but it’s name and purpose was not revealed until after Acts…. Christian was a bad word and simply calling someone a Christian does not institute a new calling. < The body began before…. It was the second step…

No sir. The Kingdom church of Acts 2 had members long before this Day of Pentecost. John the Baptist and Christ have been gathering members to the ‘bride’ (John 3:29) for the past three years. This is the same ‘church’ of Matt. 16:16-19 and 18:17 that Christ was passing to Peter. The future tenses are used because Christ was still present and among the members of this assembly Himself. To say that this kingdom church started at Pentecost is to claim that John the Baptist and Christ Himself were incapable of convincing anybody to join their ranks. The opening of Acts speaks against you, because Matthias and Barsabbas (Acts 1:23) were chosen from a group of the 120 “of the men who have accompanied us at the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us – beginning with the baptism of John until the day He was taken up from us.” Acts 1:21+22.

The preaching of the kingdom in Acts 2 was a continuation of what had been going on in Israel for the past three years. Peter preached the same water baptism ‘for the forgiveness of sins’ (Acts 2:38) that John the Baptist (Acts 1:5) preached from day one. Mark 1:4. The difference here is that the Holy Spirit was offering the kingdom, instead of the Father (through John the Baptist), or the Son of God. Luke’s second letter to Theophilus is not about something new, but a continuation or sequel to the Gospel of Luke.

You it was a continuation….. But it was also the birth of something NEW. So I suppose we will agree to disagree… Pentecost was the beginning of a NEW Nation; the “little flock” which was given the kingdom of heaven…. Why else do you think the disciples of John were re-baptized…

See my post: the festival of the wheat harvest here: http://www.christianforums.com/t114...cts-21-more-than-you-ever-wanted-to-know.html

While the believers under James who were ‘zealous for the Law’ (Acts 21:20) were bound to Mosaic Law (Matt. 5:18), these Gentiles were not to be troubled by the Kingdom church. After all, they were not under law, but under grace. Rom. 6:14, Col. 2:16+17, Gal. 5:1-5. If James had determined that the Gentiles were joining his Kingdom church, then they would have been placed under Mosaic Law also.

Yes, I understand that… Paul’s My Gospel was to the Gentiles. i.e. they did not need to keep the law or be circumcised – neither did the Jews (being ealous does not mean they were bound to keep the law). The Gentiles were learning the Mosaic Law during Acts…. No one is going to be placed under the law again, as believers we will want to obey God’s law.

…….again, I don’t see what this had to do with anything that we’re talking about.

To hold your interpretation of Acts, one must bury his head in the sand and ignore a ton of Biblical evidence. Keep in mind that Luke is writing the account from the Kingdom perspective, and the Holy Spirit is drafting a transitional book of Scripture. You are forgetting that the Thessalonian church letters are addressed a decade before the end of Acts. The earliest of the Corinthian Epistles predate the close of Acts by about five years, and Romans at least a few years.

Ya, everyone always thinks the exact same thing when another disagrees of sees something another way than we do…. “Biblical Evidence” is obviously relative.

…..again, so what if the Corinthian, Roman and Thessalonian letters were written before the close of Acts? The Mystery of the gentile body is not an easy thing to grasp > it began in Acts though a kingdom ministry and it will be completed in the Tribulation during a kingdom ministry by the nation of Israel when they “Go into all the world baptizing all nations in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost… teaching them (the gentile nations) to OBSURVE all things that Christ commanded”… << The great commission is yet to even begin, there is no record of any nation being baptized in such a way: Why?.............because Israel rejected the commission.

First, these three verses that end Romans are not part of all the manuscripts. The letter was first drafted by Paul, before the close of Acts, then he added the last three verses after the close to the already circulating Romans Epistles. The fact that our gospel was according to the ‘revelation of the mystery’ was withheld, until after Acts 28:28. Your point above about provoking Israel to jealously, and connecting that to the “Scriptures of the prophets” is simply erroneous. Paul’s reference here is to New Testament ‘Scriptures of the prophets,’ and not to the Old Testament at all. These are the ‘God-breathed’ New Testament documents like Romans, 1Corinthians, etc.. Our gospel and the body of Christ were being fashioned from early in Paul’s ministry, as evidenced in Galatians 1:15-17 and Acts 11:20-26.

That’s what someone always says… It’s not in there because someone took it out!! (1) There is more than one mystery, Rom 16:25-27 is a reference to one made known by the scriptures of the PROPHETS. And just what new Testament scriptures would reveal the “mystery”?? Paul was the only one who wrote about it in the NT… The rest of the NT writings pertain to Israel and their yet future kingdom. Obviously Paul is referring to the OT writings.

Paul did make an indirect connection between the gospel and the mystery in 1Cor. 2:2-8, which was written before the close of Acts. He also connects our translation to the mystery in 1Cor. 15:51-53. The remainder of your points make no sense to me at all. If the body of Christ did not start until after Acts, then Paul had no members to write to until after 60 Ad.. Pop goes your theory. Paul's meeting in Jerusalem was to stop the bride church in Jeruslaem (Acts 15:29) from bothering the body churches. That happened in the middle of Acts, partner . . .

You apparently did not understand or read my post… The “Body of Christ” began “in the middle of Acts, partner”.

There were not “bride and body” churches running around in Acts… There was one church which consisted of all the members who were “in Christ”; whether Jew or Gentile, who’s hope and promises pertained to the blessings of Abraham.

Are you blessed with faithful Abraham?

 

[Terral]

Paul:

Paul >> I never said any BODY was placed on hold, that’s what you think would have to happen if what I was trying to explain was true… Please quit putting words in my mouth…….. As you closed your post: “That happened in the middle of Acts, partner . . . “.

Paul above >> The Church which is HIS Body could not begin BEFORE Israel was set aside.

Paul did not set Israel aside, until Acts 28:28. Perhaps you did not mean what you said, but this is exactly what you said to open your post above.

Paul >> First off, that does not even say the “gospel of the kingdom”. It says “preaching the kingdom of God”

So? Paul was preaching the Kingdom to many during Acts, just like Peter (Acts 2) and Philip (Acts 8). Paul just preached the kingdom to the disciples in Acts 19, where we see him laying hands for the Holy Spirit and the signs of Acts 2:1-4. This is the same “good news concerning the Kingdom of God” being described in Acts 8:12-17. If you cannot see it, then you are not looking.

Paul >> Second, Paul’s “My Gospel” was to the Gentile and was the inclusion of the gentile into the covenant blessings of Abraham by Faith alone > apart from circumcision > by the grace of God alone. Salvation was always by Faith, there was IS and ever will be one way to be saved.

Believing any good news message is a key factor. Paul’s gospel was not preached to Gentiles to include them as members into the ‘church in Jerusalem,’ under Peter, John and James. Instead, they became part of the ‘dispensation of God’s grace’ (Eph. 3:2) under Paul’s stewardship. Paul’s Epistles represent the steward dispensing grace doctrine to this newly formed ‘body of Christ.’ Your ‘salvation was always by faith’ is a meaningless point. Paul’s gospel was sent to the Gentiles, because of Israel’s transgression. Rom. 11:11+12.

Paul >> Third, I believe you are also wrong in your belief about the Bride, but that’s far to vast to cover, and we’re too different to begin discussing it… In Short, The Bride consists of those who EARN it while the body consists of those who believe… Simply believing in the gospel of the kingdom does not make one the Bride of the Lamb.

We agree. Christ says, “You will be hated by all because of My name, but the one who endures to the end, he will be saved.” Matt. 13:13. The members of the bride are justified by “works and not by faith alone.” James 2:24. Hebrews, James, Peter and John are writing ‘to’ the bride, while Paul is addressing the ‘body.’

Paul >> You believe Paul’s “my gospel” introduced a NEW dispensation, one that ran along side the “dispensation of law”… I completely disagree

Thank God for that, because then we both would be in error. The dispensation of the Law began way back with Moses and Israel. John the Baptist, Christ and the Twelve offered the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ to Israel of the flesh and began gathering the members of the new Kingdom dispensation during the time of the Four Gospels. This is the ‘church’ of Matt. 16:16-19, 18:17. Of this new dispensation under Peter, Paul writes,

“What then? What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened.” Rom. 11:7.

Those who were obedient to Peter’s ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matt. 24:14) preaching in Acts 2 obtained the forgiveness of sins and received the Holy Spirit through the laying of hands. They were added to the ‘church’ that had been growing throughout the Four Gospels, and would continue to grow for a short period. Paul is seen adding to this church in Acts 19:1-6 with the ‘disciples’ who had already received the Baptism of John (Acts 19:3). They were counted among the ‘chosen’ of Rom. 11:7. Those under Peter were under the new ‘kingdom dispensation’ while those under Paul were part of this ‘dispensation of God’s grace.’ The kingdom dispensation is now dormant, and shall begin again under Elijah (Matt. 17:10+11).

Paul >> No where do we see an example of two administrations of God running side by side. 1Co 4:1 Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God. ….There is more than one mystery; we would do well to head Paul’s words.

Sure, some of us see it clearly, while others do not. Paul’s Epistles pertain to those under the ‘dispensation of God’s grace.’ Those ‘zealous for the Law’ (Acts 21:20) are under Peter, James and the Kingdom church in Jerusalem. Quoting Paul to me over this point is meaningless. We already know you do not recognize the different dispensations of the NT. That must be awkward for one calling himself a ‘dispensationalist.’

Paul >> The Gospel of God was the offering of God’s grace through the work of Christ at Calvary, which was promised before by his prophets in the holy scriptures. i.e. the prophets new about it.

The New Testament prophets were given to see these things, but not the OT prophets. That simple aspect of the truth is clouding your vision on many things.

Paul >> It was no secret that God would shed His grace on the gentiles; that was the plan all along (since the world began). It’s wrong to divide God’s administration in such a way; salvation has always been by grace through faith. Salvation does not = calling nor does it define a “church” or “body” or a “bride”…. The calling in Acts was to an earthly kingdom; our purpose was not explained until after the events of Acts took place.

These are your claims Paul, which make no Biblical sense at all. They are so ridiculous I see no reason to refute them.

Paul >> There is no scriptural evidence to support the notion that Paul preached TWO Gospels and was bouncing back and forth from two different administrations of God…

Sure there is, and we discussed that above in Acts 20:24-27. You do not understand it. That is your problem and not mine.

Paul >> He was doing what the nation of Israel should have done > take the gospel of God to the Gentile nations offering than the same hope that Israel had: salvation by faith and an earthly kingdom. i.e. He was not offering the gentiles all spiritual blessings and a heavenly calling far above all pertaining to the hidden purpose of God – YET.

Paul’s ‘gospel to the uncircumcised’ (Gal. 2:7) was carried to the Gentiles from the very beginning. Gal. 1:15-17. This misguided notion you have makes no sense to me at all. Why anyone should wish to forward that interpretation of Scripture is beyond me. When Paul was describing being sent through a revelation to submit his gospel to Peter (Gal. 2:2) what does he say?

“It was because of a revelation that I went up; and I submitted to them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but I did so in private . . .” Gal. 2:2.

Paul had been preaching this ‘gospel’ to the Gentiles for the past 14 years (Gal. 2:1). He confronts Peter about the ‘truth of the gospel’ in Gal. 2:14. You are pretending that Paul and Peter are preaching the same ‘gospel’ all this time, which is a completely erroneous supposition. If Peter and Paul preached the same gospel, then Paul had nothing to submit to Peter in the first place. This event occurs in the middle of Acts, and not anywhere near the end where Israel is set aside. If you will not believe Scripture, then you certainly will not be inclined to believe me. My post is written to the third party readers who have some opportunity of recognizing the truth of this matter.

Terral Original >> The first ‘church’ with members to be called ‘Christian’ . . . Your hypothesis above makes little sense in light of all the Scriptural evidence to the contrary.

Paul >> I don’t see what this has to do with anything… The body began before but it’s name and purpose was not revealed until after Acts…. Christian was a bad word and simply calling someone a Christian does not institute a new calling. < The body began before…. It was the second step…

Heh. The church’s name and purpose . . .? Please . . . This statement contradicts what you said above in the thread.

Paul Above >> How about this... The Church which is HIS Body could not begin BEFORE Israel was set aside.

Paul is very confused >> You it was a continuation….. But it was also the birth of something NEW. So I suppose we will agree to disagree… Pentecost was the beginning of a NEW Nation; the “little flock” which was given the kingdom of heaven…. Why else do you think the disciples of John were re-baptized … See my post:

Either the church of Acts 2 is a continuation OR something new. The disciples of Acts 19:1-6 were not re-baptized, but received the second (Acts 19:5) and third (Acts 19:6) baptisms of the Kingdom, according to Christ’s commands in Matt. 28:19. John’s baptism is only the first of the three. The disciples were ‘baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus’ the moment they “heard this.” Acts 19:5. Only then could Paul lay hands on them for the Holy Spirit. This is the three kingdom baptisms of the kingdom, and not the ‘one baptism’ (Eph. 4:5) for the members of the ‘body of Christ.’ Eph. 4:12.

Paul >> Yes, I understand that… Paul’s My Gospel was to the Gentiles. i.e. they did not need to keep the law or be circumcised – neither did the Jews (being zealous does not mean they were bound to keep the law). The Gentiles were learning the Mosaic Law during Acts…. No one is going to be placed under the law again, as believers we will want to obey God’s law. …….again, I don’t see what this had to do with anything that we’re talking about.

I understand that you are blind to many of these truths, Paul. Those ‘zealous for the Law’ were indeed under Mosaic Law. Matt. 5:18, James 2:10. The members of the ‘body’ are under grace and not under law. Rom. 6:14. Paul’s ‘my gospel’ was sent to Jew and Gentile. Rom. 1:16+17. Both the body and the bride have Jews and Gentiles membership. James is writing to the ‘bride’ while Paul is addressing the ‘body.’

In Christ,

Terral

 

[@@Paul@@]

I understand that you are blind to many of these truths, Paul. Those ‘zealous for the Law’ were indeed under Mosaic Law. Matt. 5:18, James 2:10. The members of the ‘body’ are under grace and not under law. Rom. 6:14. Paul’s ‘my gospel’ was sent to Jew and Gentile. Rom. 1:16+17. Both the body and the bride have Jews and Gentiles membership. James is writing to the ‘bride’ while Paul is addressing the ‘body.’

In Christ,

Terral

[/font]

LOL, please.... I'm blind to the "truths" as you see them. So?

The reason Paul preached to Israel FIRST the gospel of the kingdom was because Israel was still in the front of God's redemptive plan. They are the chosen channel to carry the gospel of the grace of God to the Gentiles _ I believe that will be completed after "Elijah" returns.

Israel the nation WILL offer God's salvation by grace to the gentiles; what Paul began in Acts will have a complete fulfillment during the tribulation.

Now, I said the "church which is His Body" could not begin before Israel was set aside and i believe it; regardless whether you understand it or not... I also said this "Body" began with the work of the Apostle Paul - Obviously you didn't take the time to understand what i was saying - so here you go... The Body in Acts was given the same HOPE Israel had >> They were grafted in to Israel to share in her blessings to provoke her to jealousy according to the prophetic plan of God.

That Body was given his own calling, his own hope, his own inheritance and his own destiny in the heavenlies far above all << that was the remaining "secret" which could not be revealed until after Israel was set aside. Why?? Because God's purpose was still for an earthly calling, pertaining to earthly hopes and an earthly inheritance..

You my friend are NOT grafted into Israel to partake of the "root and fatness" of the olive tree, you were given you're OWN tree. You're Mother is NOT a heavenly city. You will NOT be blessed with faithful Abraham according to his inheritance; you will be blessed with Christ Jesus - far above all - according to His inheritance in the saints (most holy THING)...


I know we disagree on this >> as i disagree with your understanding of the "revelation of the mystery". Can we at least agree on that and move on?

 

[Terral]

Hi Paul:

Paul >> The reason Paul preached to Israel FIRST the gospel of the kingdom was because Israel was still in the front of God's redemptive plan. They are the chosen channel to carry the gospel of the grace of God to the Gentiles _ I believe that will be completed after "Elijah" returns.

No sir. The ‘gospel of the grace of God’ (Acts 20:24) is Paul’s ‘my gospel’ (Rom. 16:25), and “Christ and Him crucified.” 1Cor. 2:2. Part of the ‘Mystery’ is that Israel is partially blind to these things, until the ‘fullness of the Gentiles has come in.’ Rom. 11:25. The ‘Gospel’ and the ‘preacher’ have replaced Israel as the ‘chosen channel’ to carry salvation to the Gentiles. Elijah shall carry the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ to Israel first, so that they can become the ‘kingdom of priests’ (Exodus 19:6). Then the Gentiles shall become part of the prophetic ‘bride’ during the coming restored Kingdom of Israel on earth. That is the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ that shall go to all the nations (Matt. 24:14) before the end will come.

Paul >> Israel the nation WILL offer God's salvation by grace to the gentiles; what Paul began in Acts will have a complete fulfillment during the tribulation.

God’s grace is part of any gospel message, but clearly the ‘gospel’ going to the whole world during the kingdom is the ‘gospel of the kingdom.’ Matt. 24:14. That message includes repentance and water baptism ‘for the forgiveness of sins.’ Mark 1:4, Acts 2:38. Paul’s gospel shall be dormant through the coming kingdom just like the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ is dormant today.

Paul >> Now, I said the "church which is His Body" could not begin before Israel was set aside and i believe it; regardless whether you understand it or not. . .

Again, you can say that a thousand times, but still there is no truth in it. Israel was not set aside until Acts 28:28, while Paul began preaching his ‘gospel to the UNcircumcised’ (Gal. 2:7) very early in his ministry (Gal. 1:15-17). I presented the arguments that Paul wrote to the Thessalonians, Corinthians and the Romans as established churches BEFORE Israel was set aside. Did you come back and prove otherwise? No sir. Those statements continue to stand above, because they represent the truth. Paul was sent to submit Peter the ‘gospel I preach among the Gentiles’ in the middle of Acts (Gal. 2:1-9). This represents a meeting between the prophetic ‘bride’ under Peter (John 3:29) and the mystery ‘body’ (Rom. 12:4+5, Eph. 5:30-32) under Paul. Your statement here is contradictory to what the Bible says, and to your own testimony on this thread. Here is a brief history:

Paul first >> How about this... The Church which is HIS Body could not begin BEFORE Israel was set aside.


Paul second >> Hi Terral, I never said any BODY was placed on hold, that’s what you think would have to happen if what I was trying to explain was true… Please quit putting words in my mouth……..

Paul third >> >> Now, I said the "church which is His Body" could not begin before Israel was set aside and i believe it; regardless whether you understand it or not...

What I understand is that you keep trying to change my mind about when the ‘mystery (His body; Col. 1:24) church’ (Eph. 5:30-32) began. If our “His Body” (Col. 1:24) Mystery church began after Acts 28:28, then there were no ‘body of Christ’ church members to address his Gentile Epistles. We know that he wrote the Thessalonians letters a decade before the end of Acts, and the Corinthian, Roman and Galatian letters also before the close of Acts. This is clear evidence that members of the prophetic ‘bride’ and mystery ‘body’ were being gathered simultaneously. What you care to believe and teach is one thing, but what can you prove using Scripture? 2Tim. 2:15?

Paul >> I also said this "Body" began with the work of the Apostle Paul - Obviously you didn't take the time to understand what i was saying - so here you go... The Body in Acts was given the same HOPE Israel had. They were grafted in to Israel to share in her blessings to provoke her to jealousy according to the prophetic plan of God.

No sir. The wild olive branches are grafted directly into the RICH ROOT Himself.

“But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree.” Rom. 11:17.

In case you are unaware, Israel did not recognize Elijah (Matt. 17:12), crucified the King (John 19:19), killed and scattered the Kingdom apostles. Our gospel is sent to the nations today, because of Israel’s transgression. Rom. 11:11+12.

In Christ,

Terral

 

[Terral]

Hi Paul:

Paul >> That Body was given his own calling, his own hope, his own inheritance and his own destiny in the heavenlies far above all; that was the remaining "secret" which could not be revealed until after Israel was set aside. Why?? Because God's purpose was still for an earthly calling, pertaining to earthly hopes and an earthly inheritance..

No sir. Paul describes our mystery translation (1Cor. 15:51-53) to the Thessalonians (1Thes. 4:13-17) more than a decade before Israel is set aside in Acts 28:28. He is describing our last day and moment on this planet long before you have our ‘mystery’ church starting. You have convinced yourself of something that simply is not true in order to prop up this invalid interpretation which makes no sense at all.

Paul >> You my friend are NOT grafted into Israel to partake of the "root and fatness" of the olive tree, you were given you're OWN tree.

Your words contain no Scripture, and this is simply not true. Scripture above says that some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them in the rich root.

Paul >> You're Mother is NOT a heavenly city.

What kind of statement is that to make in this post? Paul also wrote these words, before Israel was set aside:

“Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free; she is our mother.” Gal. 4:26.

Paul >> You will NOT be blessed with faithful Abraham according to his inheritance; you will be blessed with Christ Jesus - far above all - according to His inheritance in the saints (most holy THING)...

This is common knowledge, Paul. What on earth are you going on about? Of course our citizenship is in heaven. Phil. 3:20. We were still grafted in to the Rich Root Himself; Christ. Rom. 11:17. Paul’s ‘gospel to the uncircumcised’ (Gal. 2:7) was still being preached long before Israel was set aside. This thread is about the “Greatest Division” in the Bible, and the answer is still that the biggest division is between Prophecy and the Mystery. While the two churches ran side by side, one was seen by the Prophets and one was not seen. The kingdom church was still under Mosaic Law (Matt. 5:18, James 2:10), while the mystery “His body” church was under grace. Rom. 6:14. Are you confounded by the fact that the members of these two churches stood side by side in Scripture? Those being baptized into the kingdom during the Four Gospels also stood with those who remained outside the membership of the ‘bride’ of Prophecy. Here they are mentioned in the same verse:

“John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting; and they came and said to Him, "Why do John's disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but Your disciples do not fast?" And Jesus said to them, "While the bridegroom is with them, the sons of the bridal chamber cannot fast, can they? So long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast.” Mark 2:18+19.

Peter, John and James were members of the Kingdom church (Matt. 16:16-19, 18:17), and counted among those who had received the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matt. 4:23) and been baptized ‘for the forgiveness of sins.’ Mark 1:4. The Pharisees did not become part of the plan of salvation for Israel:

“When all the people and the tax collectors heard this, they acknowledged God's justice, having been baptized with the baptism of John. But the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected God's purpose for themselves, not having been baptized by John.” Luke 7:29+30.

During the time of the Apostle Paul there were four major dispensations upon this planet.

1. Gentiles (Rom. 2:14).

2. Israel of the flesh (unconverted like Pharisees; Rom. 9:1-5)

3. Prophetic Bride under Peter and James (John 3:29).

4. Mystery Body under Paul (Eph. 5:30-32; 3:2).

When the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ became dormant, our dispensation #3 above disappeared from the face of this earth. Those are the ones ‘cut off’ in Revelation 20:4. That prophetic program shall begin again under Elijah, when he comes to restore all things (Matt. 17:10+11) the moment that our mystery church is taken (1Thes. 4:17). At that moment our dispensation #4 will be gone and shall also become dormant so that the Spirit of Elijah in us today (1Cor. 6:19) can begin working inside the members of the ‘bride.’

Paul >> I know we disagree on this. As I disagree with your understanding of the "revelation of the mystery". Can we at least agree on that and move on?

Since this thread is about simply answering the question about which division is greatest, then there is nothing else to consider here. Our points on when the ‘mystery’ body originated in Scripture have been presented to my satisfaction. Why you wish to begin the mystery body after Israel is set aside is still beyond my ability to fathom.


In Christ,


Terral