ECT For Those who Think MAD to be False: What is the Gospel?
- Thread starter Lighthouse
- Start date
SimpleMan77
New member
I'm simply taking Paul and Luke's account of what happened - the only eyewitness accounts that we have of it. There is no commentary that has access to any other account - they read the same words you and I do.
Paul went to the conference to give testimony to 2 things, and get an answer on 1 large question. He testified to the Gospel he had been preaching and to the response from the Gentiles. The question was whether or not the Gospel he was preaching needed anything added to it, or if it meshed fully with the instructions of the Apostles.
He clearly explains his posture and approach to this meeting. He knew that if the apostles did not approve of the message he was preaching, then his work up to that point and his understanding was in vain. Paul essentially said that he was checking to see if he needed to be "straightened out".
By Paul's own account, the apostles did not add anything to his message, only that they were to keep the poor in mind (which underscores the completeness of what they discussed).
The only reference Paul makes to him "straightening out" anyone is after the conference, when Peter came to Antioch, and in a moment of peer pressure reverted back to Mosaic Law. In a moment of weakness he slipped back into his religious comfort zone, which was opposite to what they both knew to be truth, and Paul called him out on it.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
Interplanner
Well-known member
Just so you know: Danoh is pretty much a contradiction on all points. If there is a concrete situation in Gal 1-2 and Acts, which shows clearly what was going on, we still "need" Danoh to explain what was going on because people are so busy reading other books instead of him.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
The irony...
turbosixx
New member
It took me a while get your point of this verse but I finally got it. I can see how you could take “through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they” and read into it that grace appeared after Paul’s conversion. See I am trying to see your point of view.
That’s the problem I have with mad. They take a single verse out of context and give it a life of its own.
Here is the problem I have with the logic. Peter preached the same thing he’s always been preaching, Jesus is the Christ. The angel told Cornelius, Peter has the words by which you will be saved, Acts 11:14. After God made it evident to all that he was accepting of them by giving them the Holy Spirit, Acts 15:8; they were baptized, in the name of Jesus, just like Jesus instructed.
So if they were saved by grace, if I understand mad correctly, shouldn’t they have heard a different message? Or from a different messenger? Or not been baptized?
Hi and just read what most Dispensational say , like what Eph 4:5 says ONE BAPTISM and verse like Col 1:25 and 26 and Rom 16 16:25 and 26 and will be glad to explain ANY verse you say or want to know !!
Peter NWVWE PREACHED the Mystery and even says in 2 Peter 3:15 that Paul says what Paul says are HARD to understand !!
dan p
SimpleMan77
New member
For Those who Think MAD to be False: What is the Gospel?
Some people take a far narrower view of grace than the Bible supports. Paul taught that not only are we saved by the grace of God, but His grace teaches us that we must deny anything ungodly or connected to worldly lusts (Titus 2:11).
Blindness did not happen to Israel after the resurrection, it happened during the time of Jesus's ministry.
Matthew 23:37-39
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Note that Jesus said the only way that the house of Israel would see him is when they embraced those preaching the gospel (were willing to say "blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord). Until they were willing to do that, they would be in blindness.
Paul repeated that in 2 Corinthians 3:14-16
But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.
Once they turn to the Lord, and embrace the gospel, the blindness goes away.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
Some people take a far narrower view of grace than the Bible supports. Paul taught that not only are we saved by the grace of God, but His grace teaches us that we must deny anything ungodly or connected to worldly lusts (Titus 2:11).
Blindness did not happen to Israel after the resurrection, it happened during the time of Jesus's ministry.
Matthew 23:37-39
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Note that Jesus said the only way that the house of Israel would see him is when they embraced those preaching the gospel (were willing to say "blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord). Until they were willing to do that, they would be in blindness.
Paul repeated that in 2 Corinthians 3:14-16
But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.
Once they turn to the Lord, and embrace the gospel, the blindness goes away.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
turbosixx
New member
This is a new one, I have NEVER heard anyone make this claim.
Your logic is off. Being baptized “in the name of Jesus” and receiving the Holy Spirit through the laying of hands are two different things. We can look other places to see this is the case.
Acts 8:14 Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them, 15 who, when they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. 16 For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.
Acts 9:17 And Ananias went his way and entered the house; and laying his hands on him he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you came, has sent me that you may receive your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” 18 Immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he received his sight at once; and he arose and was baptized.
Here they received the Holy Spirit directly from God instead of laying of hands and were baptized “in the name of Jesus”.
Acts 10:.. Then Peter answered, 47“Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.
turbosixx
New member
There's your problem, you're reading what MEN say. The bible wasn't written on a college or PhD level but a grade level.
Hi and Acts 19:6 has been in the bible for OVER 2000 years and you NEVER saw it until today , SHOCKING but not really as Acts 2 people never see things like this !!
dan p
turbosixx
New member
I'm actually trying to understand your point of view because if you understand the truth better than I, I want to know. You on the other hand, read what MEN write, believe it and have it all figured out. You don't even consider the arguments I put up.
SimpleMan77
New member
That is truly wanting to see something in a passage.
If I were telling a story, and said "I accidentally backed my car into John Smith, AND WHEN I got out, shook his hand and introduced myself, he said 'glad to meet you, but not in this way'", 99.999% of English speakers would understand that to be a chronological relating of events.
Essentially no one would look at it and say that the two events were both (the collision and the introduction, separated by the words "AND WHEN") referring to my introduction.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
Israel's was a Prophesied Grace...towards its' Prophesied intent.
The Body's is a Mystery Grace...towards its' Unprophesied intent.
Some MADs end up so focused on what they erroneously perceive as some sort of a competition with others that they end up poor at pointing out some of these finer distinctions; if...they were ever aware of such finer distinctions...to begin with.
Happens both whenever rushes into some sort of a perceived conclusion and or a competition :chuckle:
MAD is not un-susceptible to the railings of such expert amateurs either.
Keep that in mind TOLers - not all MADs are such rank amateurs.
Isn't she, though. She's my "TOL Heroine."
Oh, the absurdity of it all. How outlandish of you. You're stuck somewhere between "The Four Gospels" and the teachings of Paul. You're what they call, "A fence sitter." You're also a "Worker" and not a "Faither."
Today, in this "Dispensation of the Grace of God" there is no water baptism. The Holy Spirit baptizes the believer into "The Body of Christ."
John the Baptist stated in Matthew 3:11 "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
Basic first month children's Sunday school, but at least you posted the passage - even if you can not exegete its' various parts.
There's hope for you yet...maybe :chuckle:
As I have previously mentioned in another thread: Belief in the doctrine of Mid-Acts Dispensationalism isn't necessary in order to become a member of "The Body of Christ." However, the knowledge, wisdom, and truth of MAD, removes any seeming contradictions and confusion that may arise. Such as in the Book of James that speaks of "Faith alone isn't sufficient, works were needed, as well." James was speaking to the scattered tribes of Israel who were under "The Kingdom Gospel." Whereas, Paul preached "The Grace Gospel" to the Gentiles which taught "faith without works, saves."
SimpleMan77
New member
Keep in mind that the book of Acts was written during a time that there were literally thousands of separate conversion events, where hundreds of thousands of people were converted to Christianity. There was not enough ink and parchment to tell even 1/10th of a percent of the testimonies, so God, in his infinite wisdom, had a very specific reason for causing the detail to be captured where it was. Here is what was recorded in detail:
1. Acts 2: Jews (were commanded to be baptized and receive the Holy Ghost)
2. Acts 8: Samaritans (mixed-race Jews, were also baptized and received the Holy Ghost with visible evidence)
3. Acts 9: Paul, which sets the stage for the rest of the book, so his story needed to be told. Was baptized and received the Holy Ghost
4. Acts 10: Gentiles (received the Holy Ghost, then were commanded to be baptized).
5. Believers who had been baptized incorrectly (in a way that was only introductory to the Gospel, but not according to the fullness of the Gospel. They were rebaptized, and then received the Holy Ghost).
Note that these accounts covered every category: Jew, Samaritan, Gentile, and believer who needed a better understanding. These accounts were strategically included in this book.
Sent from my iPhone using TOL