Why does Paul call it "MY gospel?"

[biblebeliever123]

The point of Paul being FIRST person saved into the brand new creation, the church which is His body....... is...... Paul is the PATTERN.

1 Timothy 1:16 Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.


1 Corinthians 4:14 I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.
1 Corinthians 4:15 For though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.
1 Corinthians 4:16 Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.

1 Corinthians 11:1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

Philippians 3:17 Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample.

1 Thessalonians 1:6 And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost.

Paul was given his apostleship and ministry by the risen, ascended, glorified Lord and Paul is the pattern. We follow Paul as he (Paul) follows Christ. We do not follow Christ after his earthly ministry(the message and ministry given to the 12 who were sent to Israel.) The body of Christ has its own apostle and instructions.

 

[msortwell]

Words (outside of the quote) in italics were added during the most recent edit.

The point of Paul being FIRST person saved into the brand new creation, the church which is His body....... is...... Paul is the PATTERN.

1 Timothy 1:16 Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.


1 Corinthians 4:14 I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.
1 Corinthians 4:15 For though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.
1 Corinthians 4:16 Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.

1 Corinthians 11:1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

Philippians 3:17 Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample.

1 Thessalonians 1:6 And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost.

Paul was given his apostleship and ministry by the risen, ascended, glorified Lord and Paul is the pattern. We follow Paul as he (Paul) follows Christ. We do not follow Christ after his earthly ministry(the message and ministry given to the 12 who were sent to Israel.) The body of Christ has its own apostle and instructions.

Yes, I understand your assertion. You simply provide no evidence that Paul is THE ONLY example or THE ONLY pattern. Quite the contrary, Paul himself, as you quoted in 1 Thessalonians 1:6, was one of three patterns which newer believers could follow. Nor does your text demonstrate that Paul was the first ever to be the pattern to be followed.

Relative to Paul being the only pattern to be followed . . .

1 Thessalonians 1:6 And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost.

As we can see from 1 Thess 1:1, Silvanus and Timotheus were included (as far a Paul was concerned) the the "us" who the members of the church at Thessalonica are encouraged to follow (imitate). It was not just Paul, but Paul, Silvanus, and Timotheus.

And the Greek word for followers, used by Paul in 1 Thess 1:6, is the same term as he used in 1 Cor 4:16 and 1 Cor 11:1 which shares a common root with the term for "followers together" in Phil 3:17.

The clear, literal, Biblical evidence, is that the way in which Paul was a pattern for those in Thessolonica, Phillipi, and Corinth, was the exact same way in which Sivanus and Timotheous were patterns to believers in Thessolonica.

Relative to Paul being the first ever convert, to establish a pattern . . .

Consider 1Tim 1:15-16
15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
16 Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting. KJV

"First" in 1Tim 1:16 has a double meaning - it is a play on words. The term "chief" in the 15th verse is the same Greek word as "First" in the 16th verse (protos). Clearly Paul was not the first sinner chronologically. Rather he considered himself to be the worst sinner - the most extreme example of sinner. In light of this (his superlative sinfulness) he concludes that he is the chief example (the first) of Christ's patience and mercy toward sinners.

I believe both meanings of the word "first" were intended to be understood by the reader. I believe it was a play on words - a double meaning. But either approach clearly demonstrates a legitimate interpretation that prevents understanding Paul to be the first person saved by a gospel new, and different from that understood by the other apostles.

I see no basis for your assumptions regarding the primacy of Paul.

Mike

 

[Markea]

Romans 16:7 Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

They were 'in Christ' before Paul meaning they must have believed the kingdom gospel and been part of the little flock church. They had believed the message repent and be baptized for the remission of sins, the message preached by Peter and the eleven as well as John the Baptist.

The only thing that we can be certain of here from these scriptures is that they were IN CHRIST before Paul was.. all else is nothing more than speculation. Your saying that they believed a 'kingdom gospel' has absolutely zero scriptural basis because the scriptures say absolutely nothing to that extent..

Again.. the only thing that we can be certain of from this portion is that they were IN CHRIST before Paul was..

It does NOT say they were in the church the body of Christ.

IT DOES say that they were IN CHRIST before Paul was IN CHRIST which means that they were part of the SAME THING..

Paul was the first member of the church the body of Christ as he himself tell us. 1 Timothy 1:16 Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.

This is your claim and it's being erected by ONE VERSE of scripture which has already been shown to be lacking in its meaning of what YOU want it to mean.. and it's usually pretty clear what happens when folks start forming DOCTRINE on one verse of scripture alone.. this is why doctrine is built upon all the scriptures supporting it as Paul writes in Timothy.. and certainly it should be no less than two or three witnesses.

This is just another example in a long list of those who form DOCTRINE based upon ONE scripture verse..

 

[Markea]

The body of Christ is exactly what it says in scripture, the CHURCH which is HIS BODY

Exactly.. it's HIS BODY and yet YOU folks say that the BODY OF CHRIST is NOT the BRIDE OF CHRIST, nor the BRIDEGROOM.. and so when you're asked what it actually is.. you quote scriptures that are well known.. leaving out the ones which pertain to US (the church of God) being HIS BRIDE..

We're His flesh and His bones as Paul says.. and Paul goes on to explain the great mystery as he speaks concerning CHRIST and THE CHURCH... and that for this cause shall a man leave his Father and Mother and be joined unto his WIFE.. Christ Jesus left His Father and mother when He came to save us from our sins and to purchase us with His own blood.

Paul also says that he has espoused us as a chaste virgin unto Christ..

Paul shows us that we are dead to the law through the body of Christ and that we should be married to another.. even to HIM who is raised from the dead.. that WE should bring forth fruit unto God..

If that wasn't enough.. we see it thematically in the OT.. Isaac is a precious picture of CHRIST.. the only begotten Son of Abraham.. the son of promise.. and when did Abraham send his servant to find a BRIDE for Isaac.. it was AFTER they came down from the mountain where Isaac was to be offered.

Rebekah is a perfect picture of the CHURCH of God.. Isaac's BRIDE.. and she was found at the well and was told all things pertaining to Isaac by the servant (a type of the Spirit) on their journey back to him..

This is how you build doctrine...by all the scriptures supporting the same thing.. not by one verse of scripture..

BUT YOU FOLKS SAY THAT THE CHURCH IS NOT THE BRIDE... while there is enormous scriptural support that teaches us precisely that..

 

[eph3Nine]

The bridegroom and the bride are both OT terms under the Kingdom program for Israel, which is found ONLY in Prophecy. OUR title comes from the MYSTERY program which was given to PAUL ALONE, and it is The church which is His Body.

You wont find Peter mentioning the Church which is His Body, anywhere. Why? Because his commission had to do with the nation Israel. Peter died. Paul may be dead, but the message given to him was the MOST RECENT and LAST revelation FROM God TO mankind. Pauls information SUPERCEDES Peters.

By the way, no one has REFUTED anything. REJECTING and REFUTING are two different things.

 

[Markea]

The bridegroom and the bride are both OT terms under the Kingdom program for Israel, which is found ONLY in Prophecy.

I just quoted Paul in three separate instances..

1. ..of CHRIST and the CHURCH with respect to a man leaving his father and mother and being joined unto his wife..

2. ..of Paul espousing believers as chaste virgins unto CHRIST..

3. ..of the fact that we are dead to the Law through the body of Christ and that we should be married to Him who is risen..

There's also the types in the OT.. of Isaac and Rebekah.. of Joseph taking a Gentile bride while in a Gentile land.. that's a wonderful story full of types which I'll get to later..

OUR title comes from the MYSTERY program which was given to PAUL ALONE, and it is The church which is His Body.

According to you.. but you say that the Body isn't his or hers.. so who's body is it ?

Pauls information SUPERCEDES Peters.

What's that verse...? ALL scripture is profitable etc...

By the way, no one has REFUTED anything. REJECTING and REFUTING are two different things.

Well you keep forming doctrine based upon ONE verse.. if that's what you consider correct.. just don't be surprised or say that people are argumentative if they disagree with your opinion of the scripture..

And perhaps you'll think again before you tell folks to think outside of the box when your spiritual life is no better than the effectual measure working in every other part.

 

[eph3Nine]

I just quoted Paul in three separate instances..

1. ..of CHRIST and the CHURCH with respect to a man leaving his father and mother and being joined unto his wife..

2. ..of Paul espousing believers as chaste virgins unto CHRIST..

3. ..of the fact that we are dead to the Law through the body of Christ and that we should be married to Him who is risen..

Marriage IMAGERY is a far cry from our being called the BRIDE of Christ and who the scripture identifies as His BRIDE. UNION is always Gods goal, however, our UNION has already taken place, and Israels is yet at a FUTURE TIME. She is the only BRIDE and she is the ONLY one with a covenant (ie marriage contract with God)

There's also the types in the OT.. of Isaac and Rebekah.. of Joseph taking a Gentile bride while in a Gentile land.. that's a wonderful story full of types which I'll get to later..

No need to go into that. Types are great, but the REAL DEAL is that God has only ONE bride, and we aint it.

According to you.. but you say that the Body isn't his or hers.. so who's body is it ?

We arent the bridegroom OR the Bride. We are a NEW creation which was kept SECRET...and separate from the titles for Israels program. God is building TODAY a BODY, which was NOT found in any OT scripture or in the gospels. Why? Because all of that had to do with another audience and another program.

WE are to be preaching Jesus Christ ACCORDING TO THE REVELATION OF THE MYSTERY!!! How can you do Gods Will today if you dont know what it IS, or what it contains?

Please read YOUR instructions in Romans thru Philemon...Pauls epistles...its only about 100 pages. Without those books, by the way, we would have a totally JEWISH book with NOTHING pertaining to our salvation at all.

What's that verse...? ALL scripture is profitable etc...

You are RIGHT, all scripture IS profitable "for our LEARNING". Unless its rightly divided it aint profitable for much of anything, because you are applying criteria to yourself that God hasnt given to you. So ALWAYS put that verse with 1 Tim 2:15. All scripture is profitable IF we rightly divide it. We are told that we can LEARN from all scripture , however NOT all scripture is put there for our obedience. We arent called to do the things required of Peter and the disciples and those who believed their gospel.

Well you keep forming doctrine based upon ONE verse.. if that's what you consider correct.. just don't be surprised or say that people are argumentative if they disagree with your opinion of the scripture..

ahhhhh come on now. I think Ive provided you with many more than just ONE verse. I cannot be held accountable if you arent READING them and looking them up and seeing what they are saying. Scripture isnt UP for anyones "interpretation". It says WHAT it says to whom it is ADDRESSED, and to read it any other way is to be foolish. NOT all the promises in the book are MINE, OR YOURS. The majority of them were written TO and ABOUT the nation Israel.

And perhaps you'll think again before you tell folks to think outside of the box when your spiritual life is no better than the effectual measure working in every other part.

Nope. I will always challenge folks to put aside the canned responses they get from their PRIEST, or Pastor, and to actually LOOK for themselves. RELIGION is NOT what God called us to, and especially not to be deceived as to what His criteria and instructions are for us today.

My and YOUR spiritual life is only as good as our appointed spokemans instructions. Peter isnt MY apostle and he isnt yours either. New information has been given to a NEW apostle. To disregard that FACT is to reject God and His MYSTERY program. It has nothing to do with me. It is HIM with whom you will have the final "arguement".

 

[Markea]

Marriage IMAGERY is a far cry from our being called the BRIDE of Christ and who the scripture identifies as His BRIDE.

Yeah, the WORD OF GOD just says these things to make people think that we're espoused to Christ.. to make us think that we're His flesh and His bones.. His wife for whom He left His Father and Mother.. and so that we'll just think that we're dead to the Law and married to another who is risen from the dead..

But that's just imagery so that we'll think these things.. but of course we should listen to YOU instead.. yeah ok.. lol

UNION is always Gods goal, however, our UNION has already taken place, and Israels is yet at a FUTURE TIME. She is the only BRIDE and she is the ONLY one with a covenant (ie marriage contract with God)

Wow.. no scripture to back this up with 'ey.. perhaps we should just take your word for it..

No need to go into that. Types are great, but the REAL DEAL is that God has only ONE bride, and we aint it.

Yeah.. why bother with looking at the scriptures pertaining to Christ.. for in the volume of the book it is written of Him.. ? ? Probably wouldn't find anything there pertaining to Him or His bride.. OH RIGHT.. we already have ! AND what a precious type we have in Isaac and Rebekah.. a perfect picture of the Son of promise and his lovely BRIDE..

We arent the bridegroom OR the Bride.

Again, zero scripture to back that up.. whereas there is plenty of scripture which clearly shows the church of God to be the bride of Christ.. what you dismiss as mere imagery.. so be it..

We are a NEW creation which was kept SECRET...and separate from the titles for Israels program. God is building TODAY a BODY, which was NOT found in any OT scripture or in the gospels. Why? Because all of that had to do with another audience and another program.

I just showed you a precious picture of Isaac and his bride Rebekah.. how that she is a precious picture of the church.. although of course we didn't know this until the NT taught us of His church.. His flesh and His bones.. His Bride.

WE are to be preaching Jesus Christ ACCORDING TO THE REVELATION OF THE MYSTERY!!! How can you do Gods Will today if you dont know what it IS, or what it contains?

I tell folks about the Lord Jesus Christ all the time.. how that He died for our sins according to the scriptures.. how that He loves us and wants us to know that He is for us and not against us.. etc etc etc... the GOSPEL is simple.. and it's powerful.. it's the POWER OF GOD unto every one that believes.. and it's the the JEW first.. and also to the GENTILE... and it's UNTO ALL and UPON ALL those that believe.

Please read YOUR instructions in Romans thru Philemon...Pauls epistles...its only about 100 pages. Without those books, by the way, we would have a totally JEWISH book with NOTHING pertaining to our salvation at all.

I have, many times.. and I still grow through the living and powerful word of God.. Gosh.. it's as if some folks think that they already have exhausted the living word of God..

You are RIGHT, all scripture IS profitable "for our LEARNING". Unless its rightly divided it aint profitable for much of anything, because you are applying criteria to yourself that God hasnt given to you.

Well listen to you.. Mr matter of fact who forms doctrine from one verse of scripture.. saying that PAUL was the FIRST member of the BODY OF CHRIST when the scriptures refute that easily..

So ALWAYS put that verse with 1 Tim 2:15. All scripture is profitable IF we rightly divide it. We are told that we can LEARN from all scripture , however NOT all scripture is put there for our obedience. We arent called to do the things required of Peter and the disciples and those who believed their gospel.

That's right.. we don't sacrifice animals anymore either although it's still living and powerful in its ability to speak of our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ.. God's perfect Lamb.. who gave Himself freely according to all that the scriptures foretold..

ahhhhh come on now. I think Ive provided you with many more than just ONE verse.

Really.. so far you have claimed that PAUL was the FIRST member of the BODY OF CHRIST based upon 1 Tim 1:16 alone.. while Romans 16 refutes that claim..

 

[eph3Nine]

Tsk, tsk. You have refuted nothing young lady. If you would only stop huffing and puffing long enuff to take a deep breath and LOOK at some of what has been said, then we might be able to actually HAVE a conversation.

I have plenty of scripture to back up anything I say, but alas, not alot of time to sit and type it all out for every sentence. There are many more scriptures that prove Paul to be the apostle to we the Body of Christ, but, instead of refuting (which you seem to be so PROUD of thinking you are doing) you have done nothing but REJECT the scripture already provided. What would be the point of going to the trouble of giving you MORE?

If I thot you really had a desire to LEARN, it would be well worth the effort. But somehow, I think you just want to prove yourself RIGHT and me wrong. Im not so interested in being RIGHT. I am interested in Gods message for today being PROPERLY communicated because you and I will both stand before Him one day. I want TRUTH to prevail. Are you more interested in truth , or just in being RIGHT? Im more than willing to dialogue with you IF you will admit that possibly you might have MISSED something in your studies.

I had been saved for over thirty years and I had to admit it. THATS when I really began seeing what is really going on both in history and Gods Word, and how it relates to ME ie: where is MY mail?

By the way...Im NOT a MR. Im a MRS. Probably old enuff to be your mom, which would probably be really NICE for me as you seem like a very bright young lady.

 

[msortwell]

By the way...Im NOT a MR. Im a MRS. Probably old enuff to be your mom, which would probably be really NICE for me as you seem like a very bright young lady.

I know that your time is limited, and perhaps bb123 is also strapped for time, but I would appreciate a response to the following re-post. Preferably a response that uses Scripture and provides your explanations for that Scripture.

The point of Paul being FIRST person saved into the brand new creation, the church which is His body....... is...... Paul is the PATTERN.

1 Timothy 1:16 Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.


1 Corinthians 4:14 I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.
1 Corinthians 4:15 For though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.
1 Corinthians 4:16 Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.

1 Corinthians 11:1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

Philippians 3:17 Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample.

1 Thessalonians 1:6 And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost.

Paul was given his apostleship and ministry by the risen, ascended, glorified Lord and Paul is the pattern. We follow Paul as he (Paul) follows Christ. We do not follow Christ after his earthly ministry(the message and ministry given to the 12 who were sent to Israel.) The body of Christ has its own apostle and instructions.

Yes, I understand your assertion. You simply provide no evidence that Paul is THE ONLY example or THE ONLY pattern. Quite the contrary, Paul himself, as you quoted in 1 Thessalonians 1:6, was one of three patterns which newer believers could follow. Nor does your text demonstrate that Paul was the first ever to be the pattern to be followed.

Relative to Paul being the only pattern to be followed . . .

1 Thessalonians 1:6 And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost.

As we can see from 1 Thess 1:1, Silvanus and Timotheus were included (as far a Paul was concerned) the the "us" who the members of the church at Thessalonica are encouraged to follow (imitate). It was not just Paul, but Paul, Silvanus, and Timotheus.

And the Greek word for followers, used by Paul in 1 Thess 1:6, is the same term as he used in 1 Cor 4:16 and 1 Cor 11:1 which shares a common root with the term for "followers together" in Phil 3:17.

The clear, literal, Biblical evidence, is that the way in which Paul was a pattern for those in Thessolonica, Phillipi, and Corinth, was the exact same way in which Sivanus and Timotheous were patterns to believers in Thessolonica.

Relative to Paul being the first ever convert, to establish a pattern . . .

Consider 1Tim 1:15-16
15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
16 Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting. KJV

"First" in 1Tim 1:16 has a double meaning - it is a play on words. The term "chief" in the 15th verse is the same Greek word as "First" in the 16th verse (protos). Clearly Paul was not the first sinner chronologically. Rather he considered himself to be the worst sinner - the most extreme example of sinner. In light of this (his superlative sinfulness) he concludes that he is the chief example (the first) of Christ's patience and mercy toward sinners.

I believe both meanings of the word "first" were intended to be understood by the reader. I believe it was a play on words - a double meaning. But either approach clearly demonstrates a legitimate interpretation that prevents understanding Paul to be the first person saved by a gospel new, and different from that understood by the other apostles.

I see no basis for your assumptions regarding the primacy of Paul.

Mike

 

[Markea]

Tsk, tsk. You have refuted nothing young lady. If you would only stop huffing and puffing long enuff to take a deep breath and LOOK at some of what has been said, then we might be able to actually HAVE a conversation.

OK, so first it was arguing.. now it's huffing and puffing.. simply because what YOU say is being challenged by the scripures..

For example..

YOU say that PAUL was the FIRST member of the BODY of CHRIST whereas Paul himself says that there were others in Christ before him.. and we see that he was persecuting the very faith which he preached afterwards (as that too has been pointed out) which obviously shows that there were others who had been saved before he was, by the preaching of CHRIST..

YOU ALSO SAY that the church of God is NOT the BRIDE OF CHRIST whereas Paul teaches precisely that.. as many other portions of scripture do.. because while I agree that the church of God was hidden in times past.. there are numerous types of it shown to us in the scriptures. Isaac and Rebekah is a very obvious one.

I have plenty of scripture to back up anything I say, but alas, not alot of time to sit and type it all out for every sentence. There are many more scriptures that prove Paul to be the apostle to we the Body of Christ, but, instead of refuting (which you seem to be so PROUD of thinking you are doing) you have done nothing but REJECT the scripture already provided. What would be the point of going to the trouble of giving you MORE?

First of all.. who is trying to refute that Paul was an Apostle to the Body of Christ.. ? ? I AGREE WITH THAT COMPLETELY.. What I have clearly disagreed with is your claim that PAUL was the FIRST MEMBER of the Body of Christ (which you base solely upon 1 Tim 1:16), and that the CHURCH is NOT THE BRIDE OF CHRIST.. and thus far you have supported that claim with absolutely zero scriptural evidence...

If you want to call that rejecting rather than refuting.. then that's your right.. although I have rejected nothing pertaining to the scriptures.. but only what YOU have SAID.. and again.. so far that's your claim that PAUL was the FIRST MEMBER of the BODY OF CHRIST and that the CHURCH is NOT THE BRIDE OF CHRIST.

If I thot you really had a desire to LEARN, it would be well worth the effort. But somehow, I think you just want to prove yourself RIGHT and me wrong. Im not so interested in being RIGHT. I am interested in Gods message for today being PROPERLY communicated because you and I will both stand before Him one day. I want TRUTH to prevail. Are you more interested in truth , or just in being RIGHT? Im more than willing to dialogue with you IF you will admit that possibly you might have MISSED something in your studies.

I've mentioned before that I am growing in the grace and in the knowledge of Jesus Christ because that's an ongoing process.. YOUR IMPLICATION here is that I require a DESIRE to LEARN FROM YOU.. rather than from the scriptures. LIKE you pushing the teaching that PAUL was the first member of the Body of Christ.. as if I need a desire to learn that when the scriptures refute that..? ? OR should I have a desire to learn that the CHURCH of GOD is NOT THE BRIDE OF CHRIST when the scriptures support the very opposite..? ? ?

See what I mean...? ?

Your claim or implication here is that I do not desire to learn from YOU.. and to that I will agree.. because if what you're teaching does not align with the TRUTH of God's Word.. then I'd be a fool to listen to you rather than Him..

I had been saved for over thirty years and I had to admit it. THATS when I really began seeing what is really going on both in history and Gods Word, and how it relates to ME ie: where is MY mail?

When you had to ADMIT what..? ? That Paul was the FIRST MEMBER of the BODY OF CHRIST as you claim...? ? ? OR that the CHURCH IS NOT THE BRIDE OF CHRIST.. ? ? If that's the case.. then I'd suggest that you're moving away from the TRUTH of God's Word rather than agreeing with it.

By the way...Im NOT a MR. Im a MRS. Probably old enuff to be your mom, which would probably be really NICE for me as you seem like a very bright young lady.

Personally, I don't care if you're an Elephant.. if what you're claiming is contrary to God's word then there's a problem. I'm not a young lady, I'm a man.. although I do happen to be united to a bright young lady.. as we're one in marriage.. having left my Father and my Mother quite some time ago to be joined to another.. just as Paul speaks of this in Eph.. as he reveals the great mystery pertaining to CHRIST and the CHURCH.

 

[eph3Nine]

YOU say that PAUL was the FIRST member of the BODY of CHRIST whereas Paul himself says that there were others in Christ before him..

That was already answered. Biblebeliever pointed out to you that we arent arguing that others before Paul were in Christ. Any kingdom believer who was saved was in Christ. He believed in the ministry of the earthly Jesus.

What the scripture does NOT say is that those who beleived BEFORE Paul were in the BODY of Christ. The Body of Christ was one of the MYSTERY truths given first and ONLY to Paul. Those saved before werent IN the BODY of Christ, but were called the LITTLE FLOCK. Check it out for yourself. You wont find Peter and the boys or Christ in His earthly ministry EVER referring to the church the BODY of Christ, or the Church which is His Body. This was a NEW thing and distinctly PAULS MESSAGE from the RISEN Christ.

and we see that he was persecuting the very faith which he preached afterwards (as that too has been pointed out) which obviously shows that there were others who had been saved before he was, by the preaching of CHRIST..

OK, now we are getting somewhere...Read this next part VERY carefully, please.

I want you to look what is BEING preached as we compare a few verses:
Lets compare what was being preached in the KINGDOM program here..

Acts 10:35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. (Peter preached WORKS associated with their faith: if works werent there, they werent accepted.)
,
Now, lets COMPARE and see if the same thing is being preached by Paul:

Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; (Now lets be honest here. This is definitely NOT the same thing, in fact, its exactly the OPPOSITE! Do you see it?)

Heres another stark CONTRAST..taken from the KINGDOM gospel:
Matthew 6:15 But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. (Note the "if". Israels program was ALWAYS conditional on what they DID.)

Now lets contrast that with the information given to Paul for US in this present program:
Colossians 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

Heres another from the Kingdom program:
Matthew 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Compare that with THIS. Paul is the ONLY one who told anyone that we are FREE from the law due to our identification with the RISEN Christ. Peter couldnt tell anyone this because the program and message he preached WAS the law. The earthly Jesus was BORN under the law and taught the law, as well as having been the ONLY One to FULFIL the law.

Romans 7:6 But now (a phrase used by Paul to signify a change in program HAS occurred) we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

YOU ALSO SAY that the church of God is NOT the BRIDE OF CHRIST whereas Paul teaches precisely that.. as many other portions of scripture do.. because while I agree that the church of God was hidden in times past.. there are numerous types of it shown to us in the scriptures. Isaac and Rebekah is a very obvious one.

There is not one scripture that says "the bride of Christ"...she is the lambs WIFE and she is identified as Israel. Paul NEVER once refers to us as the BRIDE OF CHRIST, but as the Church which is His Body. WE are already joined to Him, made ONE. OUR union is a done deal and it was part of a SECRET Hid in God. The UNION that God made plain and REVEALED in the prophetic scriptures and that has YET to be consummated is His UNION with His DESIGNATED BRIDE< which was and Is and always has been the nation Israel. See REV. 21:9-14 and you will see that the context is speaking of ISRAEL, not us. She is the lambs wife. This really is a side issue and will become plain to you ONLY as you see a distinction between Gods program with Israel and His program with us.

I've mentioned before that I am growing in the grace and in the knowledge of Jesus Christ because that's an ongoing process.. YOUR IMPLICATION here is that I require a DESIRE to LEARN FROM YOU.. rather than from the scriptures.

Im delighted that you are growing in grace. Im merely PRESENTING to you the information that is part of that PACKAGE which you seem not to be aware of. Ive given you scripture...so lets concentrate on one thing at a time here. WE can all learn from each other, cant we? I had to learn this from someone patiently pointing out these very same things to me. I had to come to grips with the fact that there were some things I simply had not seen before they showed them to me. Were those things in the scriptures? YOU BET. Im not asking you or anyone else to take MY word for it, but to LOOK at the scriptures. So on this , we are definitely agreed. IF the scriptures dont say it...dont buy it.

LIKE you pushing the teaching that PAUL was the first member of the Body of Christ.. as if I need a desire to learn that when the scriptures refute that..? ? OR should I have a desire to learn that the CHURCH of GOD is NOT THE BRIDE OF CHRIST when the scriptures support the very opposite..? ? ?

scriptures havent refuted anything...you are REJECTING the biblical answers being shown to you. Thats not refuting.

Sorry that I mistook you for a young lady...I thot something you said indicated you were. My mistake.

 

[Markea]

That was already answered. Biblebeliever pointed out to you that we arent arguing that others before Paul were in Christ. Any kingdom believer who was saved was in Christ. He believed in the ministry of the earthly Jesus.

AND.. I totally disagree with BB123 as the answer which was given was that they must have been part of the kingdom church although the verse says absolutely NOTHING to that extent.. IN FACT, it implies the very same thing as it is referring to what Paul is a part of.. So.. there is absolutely no basis at all for that statement..

What the scripture does NOT say is that those who beleived BEFORE Paul were in the BODY of Christ. The Body of Christ was one of the MYSTERY truths given first and ONLY to Paul. Those saved before werent IN the BODY of Christ, but were called the LITTLE FLOCK. Check it out for yourself. You wont find Peter and the boys or Christ in His earthly ministry EVER referring to the church the BODY of Christ, or the Church which is His Body. This was a NEW thing and distinctly PAULS MESSAGE from the RISEN Christ.

I could say the same in that Peter does not refer to these as the BRIDE OF CHRIST.. although that's YOUR CLAIM.. that the kingdom church of Israel is the Lord's bride.. there's no such thing as the kingdom church of Israel in the scriptures.. There's God's earthly people Israel..ie, the Israel of God.. and there is the church of God His Body which consists of both JEWS and GENTILES together, being made a new creation IN HIM.. as scripture declares.

For He is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; having abolished in His flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in Himself of twain one new man, so making peace; and that He might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross..

I want you to look what is BEING preached as we compare a few verses:
Lets compare what was being preached in the KINGDOM program here..

Acts 10:35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. (Peter preached WORKS associated with their faith: if works werent there, they werent accepted.)
,
Now, lets COMPARE and see if the same thing is being preached by Paul:

Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; (Now lets be honest here. This is definitely NOT the same thing, in fact, its exactly the OPPOSITE! Do you see it?)

Heres another stark CONTRAST..taken from the KINGDOM gospel:
Matthew 6:15 But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. (Note the "if". Israels program was ALWAYS conditional on what they DID.)

Now lets contrast that with the information given to Paul for US in this present program:
Colossians 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

Heres another from the Kingdom program:
Matthew 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Compare that with THIS. Paul is the ONLY one who told anyone that we are FREE from the law due to our identification with the RISEN Christ. Peter couldnt tell anyone this because the program and message he preached WAS the law. The earthly Jesus was BORN under the law and taught the law, as well as having been the ONLY One to FULFIL the law.

Romans 7:6 But now (a phrase used by Paul to signify a change in program HAS occurred) we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

Your thoughts above seems to tell me that you believe that certain people (regardless of what dispensation they're in) were justified by the deeds of the LAW.. if that's true..(ie, if that's what YOU believe).. then you don't understand the GOSPEL.. because the same book which you have quoted (Romans) teaches us that the JUST shall live by faith.. we're taught this in the OT as well..

AND.. we know that the GOSPEL is to the JEW FIRST and ALSO to the GREEK.. but here's what's critical...

Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in His sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

So if your claim now is that these were somehow justified by keeping the law.. you're badly mistaken.. We can see that FAITH has always been what pleases God.. even back to Abel as it is written of those who believed God and embraced His promises.. Paul goes on to show two examples in ABRAHAM and in DAVID in Romans 4..

SO.. the just (justified) have always lived by FAITH, not be the deeds of the LAW..

There is not one scripture that says "the bride of Christ"...she is the lambs WIFE and she is identified as Israel. Paul NEVER once refers to us as the BRIDE OF CHRIST, but as the Church which is His Body. WE are already joined to Him, made ONE. OUR union is a done deal and it was part of a SECRET Hid in God. The UNION that God made plain and REVEALED in the prophetic scriptures and that has YET to be consummated is His UNION with His DESIGNATED BRIDE< which was and Is and always has been the nation Israel. See REV. 21:9-14 and you will see that the context is speaking of ISRAEL, not us. She is the lambs wife. This really is a side issue and will become plain to you ONLY as you see a distinction between Gods program with Israel and His program with us.

If the three examples given in the scriptures by Paul himself do not convince you.. then so be it.. that's your right to believe whatever you want.. Paul makes it perfectly clear in his examples that the church of God is the BRIDE of Christ.. for he tells the great mystery as it pertains to CHRIST and the CHURCH.. Personally, I can't imagine how a spirit filled CHRISTian could not see that enormous scriptural fact..

YOU say that the CHURCH is not the BRIDE, and it's not the BRIDEGROOM.. and all you can say is that it is HIS BODY... well... it's certainly ONE or the OTHER.. but you wouldn't dare suggest that we're the BRIDEGROOM.. would you.. so that leaves nobody..

Have it your way..

Im delighted that you are growing in grace. Im merely PRESENTING to you the information that is part of that PACKAGE which you seem not to be aware of.

This is where you're wrong.. I told you already that I've heard of Acts 9 people like yourself.. dispy is one of them.. I did say that I have not heard of your claim that PAUL was the FIRST member of the body of Christ.. and again.. the scriptures show that to be a false claim.. and your only scriptural claim to that is from 1 Tim 1:16.

Ive given you scripture...so lets concentrate on one thing at a time here. WE can all learn from each other, cant we? I had to learn this from someone patiently pointing out these very same things to me. I had to come to grips with the fact that there were some things I simply had not seen before they showed them to me. Were those things in the scriptures? YOU BET. Im not asking you or anyone else to take MY word for it, but to LOOK at the scriptures. So on this , we are definitely agreed. IF the scriptures dont say it...dont buy it.

I've already given you two examples.. you say that the CHURCH is NOT the BRIDE of Christ.. the scriptures show that the church is the bride of Christ.. even thematically.. Secondly.. you say that PAUL is the FIRST member of the Body of Christ.. the scriptures tell us plainly that there were others IN CHRIST before he was.. so you need to come up with some other church in order to support your claim..

scriptures havent refuted anything...you are REJECTING the biblical answers being shown to you. Thats not refuting.

That's perhaps the most ridiculous thing that I've heard you say yet.. because Paul wasn't the first member of the Body of Christ and the Church of God is clearly the Lord's bride..

 

[eph3Nine]

AND.. I totally disagree with BB123 as the answer which was given was that they must have been part of the kingdom church although the verse says absolutely NOTHING to that extent.. IN FACT, it implies the very same thing as it is referring to what Paul is a part of.. So.. there is absolutely no basis at all for that statement..

Let me put it this way. Since the program with Israel was the ONLY game in town, what assumption would YOU make as to what church they belonged to? The Kingdom church IS the law program that God had with Israel. You can argue this til the cows come home, but all it does is show that you clearly do NOT understand the nature of the dealings God had with the Jewish nation or WHY.

I could say the same in that Peter does not refer to these as the BRIDE OF CHRIST.. although that's YOUR CLAIM.. that the kingdom church of Israel is the Lord's bride.. there's no such thing as the kingdom church of Israel in the scriptures.. There's God's earthly people Israel..ie, the Israel of God.. and there is the church of God His Body which consists of both JEWS and GENTILES together, being made a new creation IN HIM.. as scripture declares.

Matthew 9:35 And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people.Luke 12:32 Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.Luke 13:28 There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.Luke 22:29 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;Luke 22:30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.Luke 23:51 (The same had not consented to the counsel and deed of them he was of Arimathaea, a city of the Jews: who also himself waited for the kingdom of God.Acts 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?Acts 28:23 And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening.

What you insist on ignoring is Pauls information being a SECRET, HID In God UNTIL God revealed it to him. God didnt DO that til Acts 9. Anything before that was the OLD program with the nation Israel. That is the point at which we must begin.

Well we really arent accomplishing anything here. I am told NOT to strive with those who will not SEE. You have been presented evidence and have rejected it. Lets just leave it at that.

Have a great day

 

[Markea]

Let me put it this way. Since the program with Israel was the ONLY game in town, what assumption would YOU make as to what church they belonged to?

I don't need to make an assumption.. for the scriptures declare plainly that the gospel of God concerning His Son Jesus Christ is for the Jew first and also for the Gentile.. and that all men can be justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in CHRIST JESUS.. and this grace extends UNTO ALL and UPON ALL them that believe.. for there is no difference.. for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God..

This is gospel 101.. it's not complicated..

The Kingdom church IS the law program that God had with Israel. You can argue this til the cows come home, but all it does is show that you clearly do NOT understand the nature of the dealings God had with the Jewish nation or WHY.

You're making it perfectly clear that you do not understand this basic principle of the gospel.. because by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in His sight

What you insist on ignoring is Pauls information being a SECRET, HID In God UNTIL God revealed it to him. God didnt DO that til Acts 9. Anything before that was the OLD program with the nation Israel. That is the point at which we must begin.

I do understand the scriptural distinction between Israel and the church of God.. although I do not agree with your further breaking apart of the church of God into a kingdom church and a body church.. for there is one body.. it's His church.. His flesh and His bones.. His bride..

Well we really arent accomplishing anything here.

That's because what you consider an accomplishment is when somebody agrees with your point of view..

I am told NOT to strive with those who will not SEE. You have been presented evidence and have rejected it. Lets just leave it at that.

What makes you so sure that I'm the one who will not see.. ? What if it's you who will not see..? Are you beyond reproof ?

I've shown you evidence that Paul was not the first one in Christ as you claim.. yet you dismiss this and claim that these belonged to a different church.. and your claim rests upon ONE verse and one verse alone.. not a good doctrinal practice there..

I've shown you evidence pertaining to the great mystery of CHRIST and the CHURCH.. how that we're freed from the Law and married to another who is risen from the dead.. and that we've been espoused as chaste virgins to Christ.. and how that Rebekah is a precious type of the church with respect to Isaac, the only begotton Son of Abraham.. etc etc etc.. yet you claim that the church is not the BRIDE..

It's clear to me who will not see eph3Nine.. and that's fine with me..

 

[Tractor1]

Scripture Reading: Romans 16:25



In three places, the Apostle Paul refers to the message committed to him as "my gospel" (Romans 2:16; 16:25; II Timothy 2:8). Why does Paul personalize the gospel in this way? It is surely not out of pride or egotism, for Paul's words were written by divine inspiration.

Paul called his message "my gospel" to set it apart from the message preached by the Twelve Apostles. For you see, none of these could call their gospel "my gospel" because it was not just revealed to one of them, but to all twelve. But when God unveiled His message for the new dispensation of grace, He chose to reveal it to and through only one man, the Apostle Paul. But someone will ask, "Didn't the apostle preach the same Lord Jesus Christ as the Twelve Apostles?" The answer is, yes, but in a different way. In the words of our text, Paul preached Jesus Christ "according to the revelation of the Mystery which was kept secret since the world began" (Romans 16:25b).

The gospel preached by the twelve pertains to Christ's offer of the kingdom to Israel, and is called, appropriately, "the gospel of the kingdom" (Matthew 4:23). Paul's gospel pertains to God's gracious offer of salvation without works during this resent dispensation of grace, and is called, appropriately, "the gospel of the grace of God" (Acts 20:24). The majority of churches seem intent on mixing these two messages, but the Word of God maintains a clear distinction between he two. By the grace of God, let us boldly proclaim the gospel of the grace which Paul so passionately referred to as "my gospel."

What Paul calls "my gospel" (Rom. 2:16) is the Gospel of God's grace in its fullest development. Its acceptance results in nothing more positionally for its believer than that which was the experience of believers under Peter's post resurrection ministry. It does, however, present unique doctrinal revelation regarding the outcalling of the Church, her relationships, position, privileges, and responsibility.

In Christ,
Tracey

 

[eph3Nine]

What Paul calls "my gospel" (Rom. 2:16) is the Gospel of God's grace in its fullest development. Its acceptance results in nothing more positionally for its believer than that which was the experience of believers under Peter's post resurrection ministry. It does, however, present unique doctrinal revelation regarding the outcalling of the Church, her relationships, position, privileges, and responsibility.

In Christ,
Tracey

With all due respect, baloney!

Peter and Paul were commissioned to TWO different audiences with TWO different messages. To MIX the two is to MISS Gods plan and purpose for today and to fall into satans plan of evil...which by the way seeks to keep professing beleivers from seeing the distinctiness of Pauls message and apostleship.

If you reject Paul you reject the RISEN LORD JESUS as He is still speaking his LAST revelation to mankind.

 

[Markea]

The same gospel (the gospel of God, which Paul is not ashamed of) is to the JEW FIRST, and ALSO TO THE GENTILE.. just as Paul says that it is.. this is very simple..

Paul also shows how that the just (justified) have always lived by FAITH..

His grace extends UNTO ALL and is UPON ALL them that believe..

The gospel is simple.. and so the only thing that satan can do to it (and he is often very successful).. is to make it confusing or complicated..

Paul warned of anything that would detract from the simplicity that is IN CHRIST..

 

[Markea]

With all due respect, baloney!

Peter and Paul were commissioned to TWO different audiences with TWO different messages. To MIX the two is to MISS Gods plan and purpose for today and to fall into satans plan of evil...which by the way seeks to keep professing beleivers from seeing the distinctiness of Pauls message and apostleship.

If you reject Paul you reject the RISEN LORD JESUS as He is still speaking his LAST revelation to mankind.

With all due respect.. this truly is baloney !

Peter preached Jesus whom they had crucified and spoke of the resurrection in saying that God has raised HIM UP, having loosed the pains of death; because it was not possible that He should be holden by it, and that His body would not see corruption.. how that God had declared this same Jesus both LORD and CHRIST..

So again.. with all due respect.. your own comments are baloney !

 

[Dispy]

Markea:
Would you say that and accurate discription of the Church, the Body of Christ is: Jew and Gentile, one equal footing, without distinction and not under the Law?

If you answer to that is YES, Then PLEASE show me from the Scriptures where and/or when it started. If you don't believe it is, whould you PLEASE give me what your discription of the Body of Christ, where and when it started.

Chapter and verse, What Gospel did Jesus preach?

Chapter and verse, What Gospel did Jesus command His disciples to preach?

Chapter and verse, What Gospel did Paul preach?

Hope this isn't to much to ask of you, and eagerly awaiting your reply.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!