musterion
Well-known member
Very interesting article. Would like to see Spanky (Tet) attempt to refute it point by point.
http://graceambassadors.com/mystery...ew-covenant-and-the-fellowship-of-the-mystery
Theology Club: Differences btw Old Covenant, New Covenant and Fellowship of the Mystery
- Thread starter musterion
- Start date
http://graceambassadors.com/mystery...ew-covenant-and-the-fellowship-of-the-mystery
Those four articles by Justin have been the standard Acts 9 understanding of that issue for some sixty years or more (though it also appears that Darby had held to that much over more than a century ago).
Which is, and is based on the understanding that Paul preached the truth of Ephesians two throughout his Acts ministry, and not at some later point, as is for example, the different understanding on this by others within Mid-Acts (those STP was referring to as the 3% who hold his and heir's "later in Acts" understanding on this).
Those four articles - the one you posted the link to, Musterion, and Justin's additional three:
...are basically the standard view...of the same Spirit, different application, or the principle I keep going on about.
Though Justin did not appear to address the actual sense of Paul's "of the spirit" (lower case "s") but appeared instead, to attribute that as referring to the Spirit (capital "S").
Which is odd, if I am correct on that, as he is KJVO.
Paul is actually referring to a principle the Lord had also referred to...
John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
The Lord was relating there that He was ministering through His Words, to the spirit of men. That just as it is the spirit of a man that gives his flesh, his body its life, His words were able to give a man's spirit the life of God.
John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
In Paul's application of that, the source and its' principle are one and the same Spirit based principle, at the same time that its application differs within the Israel of God in contrast to its application within the Body of Christ.
Being that he is dealing with the Corinthians in their focus on their own flesh, Paul is referring to Romans 7 and 8 issues, there in 2 Cor. 3:6's "not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit givet life."
Thus his relating there...
2 Corinthians 3:5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;
Or what the Spirit of God was now enabling in the spirit of men through Paul's unique gospel.
In contrast, Paul basically reminds the Corinthians there in 2 Cor. 3; that the Law had only been able to minister through the flesh, and as a result, was weak; in that it was weak through the flesh, and as a result, had not been able to bring about in man that righteousness of the Law it had promised to give that man who could meet its required "patient continuance in well doing" Rom. 2:7.
Thus, the Spirit did not only free the Grace Believer from those strictly by the letter of the Law ordinances under the Law that had been so contrary to man; so against him; but was now empowering them by the same Spirit "without the Law" Rom. 3:21.
Galatians 3:1 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? 3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3:3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
Galatians 4:3 Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 4:5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. 4:6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. 4:7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ. 4:8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods. 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
That right there is Romans 1-8 and Ephesians 1-6 truth, by the way.
Galatians 5:2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 5:3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. 5:5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.
There's a whole lotta sufficiency going on there in all that in the spirit of men by and through the Spirit of God!
Which is, and is based on the understanding that Paul preached the truth of Ephesians two throughout his Acts ministry, and not at some later point, as is for example, the different understanding on this by others within Mid-Acts (those STP was referring to as the 3% who hold his and heir's "later in Acts" understanding on this).
Those four articles - the one you posted the link to, Musterion, and Justin's additional three:
...are basically the standard view...of the same Spirit, different application, or the principle I keep going on about.
Though Justin did not appear to address the actual sense of Paul's "of the spirit" (lower case "s") but appeared instead, to attribute that as referring to the Spirit (capital "S").
Which is odd, if I am correct on that, as he is KJVO.
Paul is actually referring to a principle the Lord had also referred to...
John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
The Lord was relating there that He was ministering through His Words, to the spirit of men. That just as it is the spirit of a man that gives his flesh, his body its life, His words were able to give a man's spirit the life of God.
John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
In Paul's application of that, the source and its' principle are one and the same Spirit based principle, at the same time that its application differs within the Israel of God in contrast to its application within the Body of Christ.
Being that he is dealing with the Corinthians in their focus on their own flesh, Paul is referring to Romans 7 and 8 issues, there in 2 Cor. 3:6's "not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit givet life."
Thus his relating there...
2 Corinthians 3:5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;
Or what the Spirit of God was now enabling in the spirit of men through Paul's unique gospel.
In contrast, Paul basically reminds the Corinthians there in 2 Cor. 3; that the Law had only been able to minister through the flesh, and as a result, was weak; in that it was weak through the flesh, and as a result, had not been able to bring about in man that righteousness of the Law it had promised to give that man who could meet its required "patient continuance in well doing" Rom. 2:7.
Thus, the Spirit did not only free the Grace Believer from those strictly by the letter of the Law ordinances under the Law that had been so contrary to man; so against him; but was now empowering them by the same Spirit "without the Law" Rom. 3:21.
Galatians 3:1 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? 3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3:3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
Galatians 4:3 Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 4:5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. 4:6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. 4:7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ. 4:8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods. 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
That right there is Romans 1-8 and Ephesians 1-6 truth, by the way.
Galatians 5:2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 5:3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. 5:5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.
There's a whole lotta sufficiency going on there in all that in the spirit of men by and through the Spirit of God!
heir
TOL Subscriber
I tend to stay away from Justin's site as he gets his teaching from Terence D. McLean and long story short: neither make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery.
If I were to address anything about the first article you posted, I would have to bring up that the gospel of Christ was not preached to the Ephesians to whom Paul wrote the letter, but the gospel of the grace of God.
The fellowship of the mystery is between those who received the gospel of Christ (first trusted Ephesians 1:12 KJV beginning with Paul 1 Timothy 1:16 KJV) and those who received the gospel of the grace of God later (those who "also trusted" Ephesians 1:13 KJV/an all men inclusion 1 Timothy 2:4-6 KJV). Both believed the same good news (that Christ died for our sins and that He was buried and rose again the third day), but different details are within the mystery concerning each group (ie~mystery of Christ and of the gospel).
If I were to address anything about the first article you posted, I would have to bring up that the gospel of Christ was not preached to the Ephesians to whom Paul wrote the letter, but the gospel of the grace of God.
The fellowship of the mystery is between those who received the gospel of Christ (first trusted Ephesians 1:12 KJV beginning with Paul 1 Timothy 1:16 KJV) and those who received the gospel of the grace of God later (those who "also trusted" Ephesians 1:13 KJV/an all men inclusion 1 Timothy 2:4-6 KJV). Both believed the same good news (that Christ died for our sins and that He was buried and rose again the third day), but different details are within the mystery concerning each group (ie~mystery of Christ and of the gospel).
And forgive me, heir; for finding it amusing that you just had to find a means of addressing that which you in the same breath asserted being unwilling to consider.
We differ in this also; I will forever strive to receive the words of others with all readiness of mind.
I have a Mid-Acts friend - we go back and forth sharing our understanding of one thing or another.
As profound as he is; as much as we mostly agree on many things, as often as he has turned out the sounder one in some things; he too neverthelees every so often displays a same resistance to looking at the views of others.
I just don't understand that. The greater the exposure to views outside one's own; the wiser and more well rounded one ends up in one's own.
All the great men in the movement have shared this trait - each had been very well versed in all sorts of things and or views outside of Mid-Acts.
No, I am not saying I am all that. I don't need to.
We differ in this also; I will forever strive to receive the words of others with all readiness of mind.
I have a Mid-Acts friend - we go back and forth sharing our understanding of one thing or another.
As profound as he is; as much as we mostly agree on many things, as often as he has turned out the sounder one in some things; he too neverthelees every so often displays a same resistance to looking at the views of others.
I just don't understand that. The greater the exposure to views outside one's own; the wiser and more well rounded one ends up in one's own.
All the great men in the movement have shared this trait - each had been very well versed in all sorts of things and or views outside of Mid-Acts.
No, I am not saying I am all that. I don't need to.
heir
TOL Subscriber
And I doubt Paul had fellow Mid-Actsers in mind where they differ on an understanding that is a minor.
Consider that - Like it or not; we both hold to the fellowship of the mystery - and that you'd be in the dark without all the ground work those who came before laid out and that you only later came along to learn to disagree with after so obviously short a time in Scripture when you were first introduced to the view you now so adamantly hold to as the end all be all.
Consider that - Like it or not; we both hold to the fellowship of the mystery - and that you'd be in the dark without all the ground work those who came before laid out and that you only later came along to learn to disagree with after so obviously short a time in Scripture when you were first introduced to the view you now so adamantly hold to as the end all be all.
heir
TOL Subscriber
Scripture is always the best response.
heir
TOL Subscriber
Paul doesn't use the term "minor" in Romans 16:17 KJV. You said, "The greater the exposure to views outside one's own; the wiser and more well rounded one ends up in one's own.". I showed how that is not what Paul exhorted us to do. In fact, he says the opposite. Who do you think I'm going to follow? Your advice sounds like the same argument some use for "using all versions" of the "the Bible" instead of believing every word of the King James Bible. To follow your advice may lead to heeding seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. I know some pretty sound teachers who have departed the faith by entertaining wrong teachings as you suggest.
It's ignorance too for you to think that the divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which we have learned comes from just those outside of "MAD" with your, "And I doubt Paul had fellow Mid-Actsers in mind where they differ on an understanding that is a minor.". Paul knew and preached otherwise: Acts 20:30 KJV Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.
He may have been describing your 3% :chuckle:
And he was very well learned in the beliefs and practices of others as were the 47 translators of the KJV :doh:
If you want to be a bit too provincial; well, that is your perogative.
heir
TOL Subscriber
Your advice is in opposition to Paul's exhortation. I follow Paul.
You think you do - the only mystery hidden in the OT was Daniel's - Daniel 2; Revelation 10.
Your continued misread of passages in Rom. 16; 1 Cor. 2, etc., is not going to change that.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
The nuts and bolts of 1 Cor 15:1-4 (KJV) were veiled in the prophets, but the fact that they would be assembled together and presented to you was a mystery.
Nope; Paul is merely asserting his later Romans 1 opening - that He preaches the same Jesus who was prophesied; came; died; rose from the dead; and was seen by many witnesses - but NOT the same gospel about Him.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Didn't say the gospel as a unit was in the prophets. The nuts and bolts of it are there.
Christ dying for sins. Burial. Resurrection. It's all back there.
Passover, Unleavened Bread, First Fruits.
Not the ONE Mystery. Which is not about equal Gentile access to salvation. That only appears to be the case on its surface.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Why can't Romans 16 and Eph 3 be separate, but related, mysteries?