David, we do not know that Paul was the only one who was given the teaching on the Body of Christ. We have not heard what the other apostles and disciples knew, preached, or wrote. so, I don't believe that your statement that Paul alone was given this teaching by the Lord and that Jesus did not also give it to the other apostles. Paul did not evangelize ALL of the Gentile world. Many of the disciples and apostles went to areas Paul never did and preached the Gospel. I believe that they had all of the knowledge that Paul had. But, as it happened, mostly Paul's writings have survived from that time period to be included in the canon of N.T. Scripture.
To make a statement that Paul alone had the teaching of the Body of Christ is to argue from the point of absence of extant recordings of what the other apostles taught. We do not know what they taught, so we cannot definitively say they did or did not have the fullness of information that Paul also received from the Lord.
I must clarify that in Ephesians 3:2 it does say "dispensation of the grace of God, which was given to me for you." (NIV)
This does not indicate that it is a period of time, rather that Paul has been given the administrative task of dispensing the Gospel to the Gentiles as God called him to do.
There is not a mention in the Bible of any":
of the "dispensations" listed by Darby and espoused by ardent dispensationalists. I prefer to speak about God revealing Himself and His plan/promise of salvation across the ages, not all at once, but as an unfolding from time period to time period until it reached it's fulfillment in Jesus.
I do not have a problem with people thinking of dispensations in this way, but I do not follow the thinking that there are 7 dispensations across times. I believe that the redemptive plan of the Godhead has remained the same since before creation. It was promised and prophesied until it reached its end in Jesus Christ.
I think that many dispensationalist teach error concerning that there are multiple ways for people to be saved across the ages, not one way, that of faith in God's promised salvation in a Redeemer to come, for the O.T. saints, and in the Redeemer who has come, for N.T. believers. I think also many these people teach error when they say that the only Scripture that applies to Gentiles are the epistles of Paul. Because of these errors, I cannot embrace dispensationalism.
You can find in Acts 15:22-29 you can read the response of the Jerusalem council with Paul and Barnabas concerning whether Gentile believers are required to be baptized to be saved. The decision was "NO". So, it is not required of N.T believers. It is not a sin to be circumcised, though, as long as one is not being circumcised in order to gain favor with God, as it doesn't do that. But many chose to have their sons circumcised still in many cultures. It is o.k. to do so.
I was baptized as Catholic when I was Born. I was submerged in the water for Mormon in my grade school, Finally baptized again in the Seventh Day Adventist. Long story short, it was a family feud beliefs and I have no control of it. Now I am older and wiser, in retrospect, I never received the Holy Spirit in any of those baptism; only until I understood in my heart the Bible messages of Jesus Christ. So, in my experience I do not believe in the water baptism. Although now I understand, I would not mind going to Jordan river and getting baptized next year, which I am excited about.
Now what does the Bible said about water baptism? We go back to when John the Baptist when he was preparing the Jews for the coming Messiah. There is a passage I forgot what verse, where someone asked somebody if they were baptized by the Holy Spirit then they said they were baptized by John the baptist. Then the person said you need to be baptized by The Holy Spirit. So when it was explained to them the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ they received the Holy Spirit. I will find that passage. That said, water baptism is not necessary to received the Holy Spirit. Agape.
Hello David: I am not convince Mathias is the 12th. Think about casting lots after the death of Jesus Christ. Peter stood and started the conversation. Remember how Peter always say something not right with Jesus? And being rebuke all the time? Although Paul did persecuted a lot of Christians He is hand picked by Jesus. If we look at qualifications and requirements for being apostle, Paul still qualifies. Only 12 will be in that wall foundation. If you take the logic of casting lots to pick your important apostle, Mathias may be there from John the Baptist to death of Jesus Christ, but Jesus Christ picked Paul. I prayed about this and I read all strong evidences. Also, the Book of Acts seems written in how everything happens. Even if we look at casting lots in Jonas, there is indeed a practice to do that. But I'm this case, because Jesus did the selections for the 11, I would not think Jesus will leave the decision lead by Peter, a man who deny Jesus 3X and Jesus told him "get thee behind me Satan. It does not fit the recognition. Sorry. We can agree to disagree on this one my friend. Agape.
I agree again David. Nice to find someone who know facts from the Bible only and not from any historical men or religious denominations. I do believe in the mystery of Christ in you. When God open my heart and eyes to the truth He immediately told me to grow in Charity and grace. Unbelievably started memorizing many verses until I fall asleep. These are a few. I love them all. I will just keep memorizing.
"That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ;" Colossians 2:2 KJV "In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." Colossians 2:3 KJV. Rejoice evermore my friend.
Chapter 17 "Genesis" God reveals his covenant to Abram (Abraham). This deals with circumcision and it's meaning. Galatians: Chapter 6 and Chapter 7. The apostle Paul reveals the New Covenant
To his fellow apostles. That Jesus is the way, weather you be circumcised or not circumcised. As long as you believe in Christ and confess your sins, ye be saved. Chat.7. Verses 12-15. Hope this helps! Amen.
It is true that the disciples witnessed Jesus ascend up on a cloud. I read in Acts 1:10 that it was two men in white apparel who spoke to the disciples. I do not see angels?
Some scholars believe that these two men were Moses and Elijah. They had been standing there the whole time. The disciples didn't see them because they were looking up.
And yes, You are correct in that all of the disciples were Galileans except for Judas. He's the only one that was not a Galilean. He was from the city of Kerioth outside of Galilee. In fact, Iscariot was not his last name. It was a word that tells us where he was from.
I've heard three different theories on how Judas died. I have never heard sword before. Number one, he hung himself but slipped out of the rope and burst open on the rocks below.
The second theory is that he hung himself and his dead body became bloated from the heat and that he burst open while hanging. That is pretty "far-fetched!"
But the archaeological accounts actually say that people who in those days committed suicide, they would go up on a cliff or hillside and they throw themselves down on a pole.
They impaled themselves. That's what they believed Judas did. He slit himself right in two and his bowels gushed out. And this was done in the field that the priests purchased with the money that Judas gave back.
I agree with you. I have noticed Dispensationalism has a negative interpretation and understanding. Maybe I will not use the word. I use Dispensation only on what Paul mentioned 4X on his epistles. But I think we have the same understanding. I am happy to have found someone like you. Agape.
This is a mystery at least while Christ was here in the flesh before the Resurrection ( Matt. 24:36). According to 2 Thess. 2:6 the restrainer is removed; then the man of sin can be revealed; hence all the events of the Tribulation commences at that point. This would signify as I can see the Holy Spirit in the way it manifests during the Church Age; also showing how the Holy Ghost is in some ways dependent in its actions to the Father. The Spirit is said to indicate; as John 16:8-11 sin; righteousness and judgment to come; and seals every believer until the Day of Redemption ( Eph. 4:30).
The offices of the Godhead somehow operate in this manner; despite each member being God. The best way I can see this is that God the Father is not able ever to be in the presence of sin without judgment coming from Him directly. There had to be some separation therefore or when Christ died at the cross the whole universe would have ceased to exist the moment He was estranged for that instant from the Father. It would seem the Holy Spirit; since it came from Christ directly at Pentecost has always been the way the Omnipresent Godhead can be within His chosen vessels. Truly; there was always that presence in Old Testament times; as it will be in some ways in the future Tribulation and beyond but the ministry changes. The results of that can be seen contrasting the promises of Matthew 16:18 and the statements of the saints being overcome in Daniel 7:15 etal.
I am stating all this so that verse about the Son of Man not knowing the Day and hour of His return can be better understood.
Christ learning obedience in a self depreciating manner ( Heb. 5:8) while He took on the form of man with all the limitations so He could be our substitute in life and death in every way; being tempted as we are but without sin ( Heb. 4:15) is also unfathomable in our minds. Nonetheless; Christ alerted to us that He comes a day we don't expect. We should be aware of signs; not overcome by fear
Ok. So, God creates by speaking this something into existence which never existed. And obviously when one speaks, the source of their words are the mind. And when God made or makes, it is out of something He previously created into existence. And create and made in action are different. Makes sense. Would you say that though the action be different, the outcome would be the same due to their common purpose, which is "God's will be done."? What I'm perceiving from this then is the words have the same meaning, due to their common purpose. And also, the only difference being God cannot make anything until He creates it.
Yes, it is for real, we will not be in these corruptible flesh bodies, 1 Corinthians 15:53.
Revelation 21:1-3 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. 2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
Revelation 22:1-4 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. 2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. 3 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: 4 And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.
I don't think our human minds can comprehend what it will be like, I know I can't.
Some denominations, like the R/Catholics and Eastern Orthodox churches accept those Books in their Biblical canon either as God inspired or just useful for reading. Thats why they are called deuterocanonical, meaning second in order after canonical books. Some accept all of them, others some of them. But there are churches, mainly in the Protestant branch, as well as the Jews themselves, that have rejected them as not inspired by God. GBU
"But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."
I believe it is true, as Jesus would not lie. When we die and live in again in eternity, we will be pure of heart because the sin nature will be removed from us. We will see God in Jesus our Savior.
You and all others that want to project dispensationalism in a bad light say these things only because you read them from somewhere else. You like most others also don't study the position to actually test my doctrine as we are told to in scripture. I do not believe the things you commented on other than the comment on the different gospels. Different gospels is very clear in scripture. Paul says his gospel was a secret. Paul's gospel is Jew and Gentile on equal ground in a new body, something Jesus didn't teach. I teach the Bible literally and I don't need the word dispensation to do that, but its a Bible word no less. All I try to do is show people there is a different way other than tradition to understand the Bible. Most rely on tradition and theologians. I'm not interested in either. I teach the Bible literally. Jesus said he was only sent to Israel and I believe him. please don't tell the readers what you think my doctrine is. Your comments are about the Acts 28 position of dispensationalism. I am not this. I am a Bible believer. I believe the Bible as written, TO WHOM it is written.
There are some historical problems with 1 and 2 Esdras. In the narrative of 1 Esdras, the reign of the Persian King Artaxerxes incorrectly precedes those of Cyrus the Great (c. 559-529 BC) and Darius I (Darius the Great, 521-486 BC), although some believe this is simply a literary device called "prolepsis" in which a person or event is assigned to an earlier period or represented as if it had already occurred. First Esdras appears in the Septuagint as an expanded book of Ezra, containing four additional chapters. It is an account of King Josiah's reforms and history of the destruction of the temple in 586 BC and chronicles the Jews' return from Babylonian captivity under Zerubbabel. This book was said to be known by Josephus (born AD 38).
Second Esdras was written too late to be included in the Septuagint and, therefore, does not appear within the more prominent canon (Jewish, Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox). Second Esdras is also known by many other names, making it difficult to track fully. For example, 2 Esdras contains portions known in some circles as 3 Ezra, 4 Ezra, 5 Ezra, and 6 Ezra. The Ethiopian Church considers 4 Ezra to be canonical, whereas the Eastern Armenian Church labels it as 3 Ezra. Further, some scholars believe these books were written by several authors, including some possibly as late as the second century AD.
Second Esdras is often referred to as the Jewish Apocalypse of Ezra and contains seven visions of Ezra dealing with his angst over the pain and suffering inflicted upon Jews by Gentiles. Some scholars believe the book was written shortly after the AD 70 destruction of the temple in Jerusalem during the reign of Emperor Domitian (AD 81-96). While there is a definite tone of sadness in this work, there is consolation regarding ultimate retribution. There are six Messianic references within 2 Esdras.
To add them you would have to eliminate some of the other books we have due to contradictions.
To make a statement that Paul alone had the teaching of the Body of Christ is to argue from the point of absence of extant recordings of what the other apostles taught. We do not know what they taught, so we cannot definitively say they did or did not have the fullness of information that Paul also received from the Lord.
I must clarify that in Ephesians 3:2 it does say "dispensation of the grace of God, which was given to me for you." (NIV)
This does not indicate that it is a period of time, rather that Paul has been given the administrative task of dispensing the Gospel to the Gentiles as God called him to do.
There is not a mention in the Bible of any":
of the "dispensations" listed by Darby and espoused by ardent dispensationalists. I prefer to speak about God revealing Himself and His plan/promise of salvation across the ages, not all at once, but as an unfolding from time period to time period until it reached it's fulfillment in Jesus.
I do not have a problem with people thinking of dispensations in this way, but I do not follow the thinking that there are 7 dispensations across times. I believe that the redemptive plan of the Godhead has remained the same since before creation. It was promised and prophesied until it reached its end in Jesus Christ.
I think that many dispensationalist teach error concerning that there are multiple ways for people to be saved across the ages, not one way, that of faith in God's promised salvation in a Redeemer to come, for the O.T. saints, and in the Redeemer who has come, for N.T. believers. I think also many these people teach error when they say that the only Scripture that applies to Gentiles are the epistles of Paul. Because of these errors, I cannot embrace dispensationalism.
You can find in Acts 15:22-29 you can read the response of the Jerusalem council with Paul and Barnabas concerning whether Gentile believers are required to be baptized to be saved. The decision was "NO". So, it is not required of N.T believers. It is not a sin to be circumcised, though, as long as one is not being circumcised in order to gain favor with God, as it doesn't do that. But many chose to have their sons circumcised still in many cultures. It is o.k. to do so.
I was baptized as Catholic when I was Born. I was submerged in the water for Mormon in my grade school, Finally baptized again in the Seventh Day Adventist. Long story short, it was a family feud beliefs and I have no control of it. Now I am older and wiser, in retrospect, I never received the Holy Spirit in any of those baptism; only until I understood in my heart the Bible messages of Jesus Christ. So, in my experience I do not believe in the water baptism. Although now I understand, I would not mind going to Jordan river and getting baptized next year, which I am excited about.
Now what does the Bible said about water baptism? We go back to when John the Baptist when he was preparing the Jews for the coming Messiah. There is a passage I forgot what verse, where someone asked somebody if they were baptized by the Holy Spirit then they said they were baptized by John the baptist. Then the person said you need to be baptized by The Holy Spirit. So when it was explained to them the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ they received the Holy Spirit. I will find that passage. That said, water baptism is not necessary to received the Holy Spirit. Agape.
Great scripture for the post.
God bless.
Well spoken David.
"That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ;" Colossians 2:2 KJV "In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." Colossians 2:3 KJV. Rejoice evermore my friend.
To his fellow apostles. That Jesus is the way, weather you be circumcised or not circumcised. As long as you believe in Christ and confess your sins, ye be saved. Chat.7. Verses 12-15. Hope this helps! Amen.
It is true that the disciples witnessed Jesus ascend up on a cloud. I read in Acts 1:10 that it was two men in white apparel who spoke to the disciples. I do not see angels?
Some scholars believe that these two men were Moses and Elijah. They had been standing there the whole time. The disciples didn't see them because they were looking up.
And yes, You are correct in that all of the disciples were Galileans except for Judas. He's the only one that was not a Galilean. He was from the city of Kerioth outside of Galilee. In fact, Iscariot was not his last name. It was a word that tells us where he was from.
I've heard three different theories on how Judas died. I have never heard sword before. Number one, he hung himself but slipped out of the rope and burst open on the rocks below.
The second theory is that he hung himself and his dead body became bloated from the heat and that he burst open while hanging. That is pretty "far-fetched!"
But the archaeological accounts actually say that people who in those days committed suicide, they would go up on a cliff or hillside and they throw themselves down on a pole.
They impaled themselves. That's what they believed Judas did. He slit himself right in two and his bowels gushed out. And this was done in the field that the priests purchased with the money that Judas gave back.
Judas Iscariot was one the betrayer and treasurer.
Colossians 3,
Hopefully these are helpful
The answer to your question can be found in Matthew 22:23-33.
I agree with you. I have noticed Dispensationalism has a negative interpretation and understanding. Maybe I will not use the word. I use Dispensation only on what Paul mentioned 4X on his epistles. But I think we have the same understanding. I am happy to have found someone like you. Agape.
time by God through Jesus christ. God knew the heart of Paul that he loved God but paul after being born again was 3years
in a desert place away from man for God to teach Him the mystery of the body of Christ then he went to the church in jerusalem
to talk to the leaders their, thats in Galatians 1. When they saw the witness Pauls walk and talk they sent him to the gentiles
to preach the gospel of grace which is what Jesus Christ taught in practice to the Judeans.
The offices of the Godhead somehow operate in this manner; despite each member being God. The best way I can see this is that God the Father is not able ever to be in the presence of sin without judgment coming from Him directly. There had to be some separation therefore or when Christ died at the cross the whole universe would have ceased to exist the moment He was estranged for that instant from the Father. It would seem the Holy Spirit; since it came from Christ directly at Pentecost has always been the way the Omnipresent Godhead can be within His chosen vessels. Truly; there was always that presence in Old Testament times; as it will be in some ways in the future Tribulation and beyond but the ministry changes. The results of that can be seen contrasting the promises of Matthew 16:18 and the statements of the saints being overcome in Daniel 7:15 etal.
I am stating all this so that verse about the Son of Man not knowing the Day and hour of His return can be better understood.
Christ learning obedience in a self depreciating manner ( Heb. 5:8) while He took on the form of man with all the limitations so He could be our substitute in life and death in every way; being tempted as we are but without sin ( Heb. 4:15) is also unfathomable in our minds. Nonetheless; Christ alerted to us that He comes a day we don't expect. We should be aware of signs; not overcome by fear
Thanks for your input.
Yes, it is for real, we will not be in these corruptible flesh bodies, 1 Corinthians 15:53.
Revelation 21:1-3 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. 2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
Revelation 22:1-4 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. 2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. 3 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: 4 And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.
I don't think our human minds can comprehend what it will be like, I know I can't.
God bless,
RLW
There appears to be multiple men with that name: Luke 6:16, Acts 15:27,32, John 14:22, Matthew 13:55, Acts 9:11, Acts 15:22, Acts 1:13,
A guy also from Galilee = Acts 5:37,
Matthew 27:5, Matthew 27:4-10,
It's best to study, keep reading, keep studying
or meaning of what God did at the time He wanted to do it. You can put there administration of grace which is what it is.
The only time in the History of the world when by confessing Romans 10:9+10 and believing it in your heart that jew or
gentile could be born again of holy spirit and receive christ in them a resurrected spiritual body. Think about it jesus christ
is seated at gods right hand and we have that spiritual body in us. This is not believed because people say its too good to
be true. But in my mind thats how great and big our father is. Lastly look at 1 Corinthians 2:6-8 if the princes of this world
have known what god was going to do on Pentecost they would not have crucified Christ. Why because when he was alive he
was only at one place at a time, now evertime a person gets born again and really believes its christ in them. Thats how great
what we have is. Incredible but thats the truth of Gods Word.
renew our minds to the doctrine reproof and correction of the church epistles and believe Ephesians 4:1-6 it would be
spiritually a new day and time. There were no denominations in the book of acts and what Paul was always spiritually
fighting was unbelief in the body of christ due to people walking by the flesh and picking each other apart instead of
walking 1 corinthians 13. So we endeavor to walk Agapeo which is the highest calling. Love in Christ
to litterally see God i take you togospel of john 1:18 where it says no man hath seen God but His son our saviour hath
made him known. Also in John 4:24 God is spirit thats why His gift when born again is holy spirt.
Some denominations, like the R/Catholics and Eastern Orthodox churches accept those Books in their Biblical canon either as God inspired or just useful for reading. Thats why they are called deuterocanonical, meaning second in order after canonical books. Some accept all of them, others some of them. But there are churches, mainly in the Protestant branch, as well as the Jews themselves, that have rejected them as not inspired by God. GBU
"But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."
I believe it is true, as Jesus would not lie. When we die and live in again in eternity, we will be pure of heart because the sin nature will be removed from us. We will see God in Jesus our Savior.
You and all others that want to project dispensationalism in a bad light say these things only because you read them from somewhere else. You like most others also don't study the position to actually test my doctrine as we are told to in scripture. I do not believe the things you commented on other than the comment on the different gospels. Different gospels is very clear in scripture. Paul says his gospel was a secret. Paul's gospel is Jew and Gentile on equal ground in a new body, something Jesus didn't teach. I teach the Bible literally and I don't need the word dispensation to do that, but its a Bible word no less. All I try to do is show people there is a different way other than tradition to understand the Bible. Most rely on tradition and theologians. I'm not interested in either. I teach the Bible literally. Jesus said he was only sent to Israel and I believe him. please don't tell the readers what you think my doctrine is. Your comments are about the Acts 28 position of dispensationalism. I am not this. I am a Bible believer. I believe the Bible as written, TO WHOM it is written.
Part 2.
There are some historical problems with 1 and 2 Esdras. In the narrative of 1 Esdras, the reign of the Persian King Artaxerxes incorrectly precedes those of Cyrus the Great (c. 559-529 BC) and Darius I (Darius the Great, 521-486 BC), although some believe this is simply a literary device called "prolepsis" in which a person or event is assigned to an earlier period or represented as if it had already occurred. First Esdras appears in the Septuagint as an expanded book of Ezra, containing four additional chapters. It is an account of King Josiah's reforms and history of the destruction of the temple in 586 BC and chronicles the Jews' return from Babylonian captivity under Zerubbabel. This book was said to be known by Josephus (born AD 38).
Second Esdras was written too late to be included in the Septuagint and, therefore, does not appear within the more prominent canon (Jewish, Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox). Second Esdras is also known by many other names, making it difficult to track fully. For example, 2 Esdras contains portions known in some circles as 3 Ezra, 4 Ezra, 5 Ezra, and 6 Ezra. The Ethiopian Church considers 4 Ezra to be canonical, whereas the Eastern Armenian Church labels it as 3 Ezra. Further, some scholars believe these books were written by several authors, including some possibly as late as the second century AD.
Second Esdras is often referred to as the Jewish Apocalypse of Ezra and contains seven visions of Ezra dealing with his angst over the pain and suffering inflicted upon Jews by Gentiles. Some scholars believe the book was written shortly after the AD 70 destruction of the temple in Jerusalem during the reign of Emperor Domitian (AD 81-96). While there is a definite tone of sadness in this work, there is consolation regarding ultimate retribution. There are six Messianic references within 2 Esdras.
To add them you would have to eliminate some of the other books we have due to contradictions.
God bless.