I understand that scripture.
Beloved57 are you sure you’re chosen?
- Thread starter Poly
- Start date
glorydaz
Well-known member
I think that "other gospel" was adding the works of the gospel of the Kingdom onto his gospel of grace.
I should have been clearer.
glorydaz
Well-known member
When Jesus spoke to the apostles about His death, burial, and resurrection, they had no idea what He was saying. I believe He said what He said so WE would see that He knew what was coming. In the Kingdom Gospel, the Jews were to believe that Jesus is the Son of God and the Messiah. They were still law keepers when He came. It's really not that complicated.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Are you really so concerned about my behavior? Why?
I'm at least as concerned about your behavior as you were towards mine in Post 161.
The reason, because Jesus said we were to love one another like we love ourselves.
yourpoint?
Member
Then are you answering your question to him?
If one believes that man is created damned with 'limited atonement', can he truly believe the Creator for his own individual atonement? On what basis can he believe that Christ died for him, yet not for all mankind?
Is it enough to 'hope' that Christ died for me?
He missed it. You surely didn't, right?
Oh brother! Ye are probably a King James only nutter to boot!
Just incredible! If this sort of stupidity was the way doctrine is supposed to be done, then the bible can be made to argue anything. This is the sort of thing David Koresh did to convince people he was a "sinning Messiah" of all things! This is the same sort of biblical slight of hand that Calvinists use to convince themselves that they have no free will and that the God of love is impassible and that the God who became flesh is immutable. It's a buffoonish way of using the scripture that allows one to "defend" ANY doctrine whatsoever, no matter how weird or idiotic.
You live your life everyday - every single day! You wake up alive and breathing, you're conscious of your own thoughts, words and deeds and yet somehow, someone was able to convince your feeble mind that you no longer commit sin. The only form of delusion that is more pronounced is the Pharaoh Syndrome where you ACTUALLY believe that you are an actual god.
You haven't any idea what you're talking about. The only reason you could ever utter the sentence "Christianity WITH sin is Judaism re-hashed." is because you do not understand the difference between Israel and the Body of Christ. You fail to distinguish Paul's gospel from that taught by Peter, James and John. Which, I would have to say, is rather interesting actually. I would not have expected the heresy of "sinless perfection" to have been one of the many issues connected with that all important distinction. It seems our encounter was not a COMPLETE waste of my time after all.
I'll tell you this...
The two posts that I wrote previously (posts 132 & 143) contain within them THE single most important Christian teaching that you have ever read since you became a Christian and it will continue to be, so long as your natural life persists. Failure to grasp it, believe it and apply it, is to not understand the bible. That's how big a deal it is.
Clete
P.S. To be perfectly clear, while I wrote those two posts in my own words, I am not the originator of that teaching, nor is the one whom I learned it from. The point being that the emphasis is being made on the teaching not on me nor any other teacher of it.
Last edited:
I think I did, because I was expecting something else.
But I think I found it, so we should be all good.
Well my intent was to be clear so let me just state it outright...
The sentence is Galatians 2:9. (It's actually only part of one of Paul's many run on sentences
)...From post 143...
Galatians 2:9 and when James, Peter, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.
Thus, Paul's gospel is not only different but so is his audience. The Twelve were apostles to Israel (which is why there were twelve, by the way. Twelve being the number biblically associated with Israel.) and Paul was THE apostle to the Gentiles and if all you do is keep this single biblical fact in mind while reading the New Testament, then pretty nearly all the major doctrinal conflicts that have plagued the church for centuries all become really really easy to resolve. Passages that seem to conflict now don't! Romans 4:5 and James 2:24 both mean precisely what they seem to mean and there is no conflict between them because what they are saying fits with the gospel that was being preached to their respective audiences. Paul was preaching a gospel of faith only with no works required while James was under the law and his followers were all "zealous for the law" (Acts 21:20) and so, naturally, faith mixed with works would be required.
Do you understand why (how) that sentence accomplishes the biblical/doctrinal clarification that I'm claiming it does?
Clete
Well my intent was to be clear so let me just state it outright...
The sentence is Galatians 2:9. (It's actually only part of one of Paul's many run on sentences
From post 143...
Galatians 2:9 and when James, Peter, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.Thus, Paul's gospel is not only different but so is his audience. The Twelve were apostles to Israel (which is why there were twelve, by the way. Twelve being the number biblically associated with Israel.) and Paul was THE apostle to the Gentiles and if all you do is keep this single biblical fact in mind while reading the New Testament, then pretty nearly all the major doctrinal conflicts that have plagued the church for centuries all become really really easy to resolve. Passages that seem to conflict now don't! Romans 4:5 and James 2:24 both mean precisely what they seem to mean and there is no conflict between them because what they are saying fits with the gospel that was being preached to their respective audiences. Paul was preaching a gospel of faith only with no works required while James was under the law and his followers were all "zealous for the law" (Acts 21:20) and so, naturally, faith mixed with works would be required.
Do you understand why (how) that sentence accomplishes the biblical/doctrinal clarification that I'm claiming it does?
Clete
That looks more like what I was expecting! I was just looking at the wrong part of your post.
You've read "The Plot", right?
Like Jesus said, you can know the tree, or the prophet, by its fruit.
What kind of "tree" do sinners come from?
Jesus said..."Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit." (Matt 7:15-17)
Your espouse a doctrine that forbids Jewish Christians from committing sin, and informs them of how, but allows Gentile Christians to ignore all of it.
That idea is not from God, who wants us all to love Him above all else and to love our neighbors as we love ourselves.
Your doctrine is the antithesis of God's will.
Last edited:
Read it, no, but I have listened to Bob's entire Plot seminar (on the 5 CDs).
musterion
Well-known member
By your standard, Catholics are saved. Pretty much the only ones in Christendom who aren't saved would be those who deny the Bible doctrine of the tri-unity of the God head, and flat out liberal apostates. Everyone else would readily sign off on your statement of faith, meaning you'd accept them as members of the Body?
We've disagreed very strongly on this point for years but I just want to clarify: you do realize that's where you stand?
Last edited:
yourpoint?
Member
You seem to 'know' you are 'elect'; how so?
Do you know that the devil believes all of that?
It is what we do with the knowledge that determines our fate.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Catholicism is a 'goldmine' of freedom.
But it's not 'Old Jed Clampett shooting a hole in the ground (because he missed what he was shooting at) and accidentally striking oil' freedom----you have to actually mine for it in Catholicism. You have to get to work!
But what work?
Study the Apostles. They are our teachers. They were given to us by Jesus.
So delusional liars are producing what sort of fruit?
Hmm
Once again, you can defend - let me be clear - YOU, HOPING, can defend ANY DOCTRINE WHATSOEVER with the way you handle scripture.
Pick any wacko nut job idiotic doctrine you care to name. Want to defend indulgences? You can! Want to defend the deity of Christ? You can! Want to defend the NON-deity of Christ? You can do that too! Want to defend the notion that David Koresh was a Messiah? You so totally CAN do it! How about a Christian Taoism Cult, want to start one of those? There are bible verses you can quote for that!
There isn't ANYTHING that cannot be argued from the bible when you completely ignore who is talking, who is being spoken to and what is being talked about and why.
That might be the single most idiotic thing anyone has ever accused me of.
You are stupid. You talk about things that you literally know exactly nothing about and you do so KNOWING that you speak in abject ignorance. That makes you a liar on top of being stupid and delusional.
Go believe whatever you want, you're going to anyway.
Clete
Last edited by a moderator:
The seminar is amazing but the book is better!
If you'd like a copy of the book, tell Connie to give you one and to charge to me. She's got my number if she wants to confirm or I can just call her.