ECT Rightly Dividing MADs

[Right Divider]

Secret to whom?

Everyone.

Rom 16:25-27 (AKJV/PCE)​

(16:25) Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, (16:26) But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith: (16:27) To God only wise, [be] glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen. ¶ Written to the Romans from Corinthus, [and sent] by Phebe servant of the church at Cenchrea.

​

Eph 3:8-12 (AKJV/PCE)​

(3:8) Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; (3:9) And to make all [men] see what [is] the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: (3:10) To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly [places] might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God, (3:11) According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord: (3:12) In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him. ​

If this thing given to Paul was HID IN GOD..... NOBODY KNEW IT until it was revealed to and through Paul.

Contrast this with what Peter says.

Acts 3:19-21 (AKJV/PCE)​

(3:19) ¶ Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; (3:20) And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: (3:21) Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began. ​

What Peter was preaching was KNOWN since the world began! Those two cannot be the SAME things, unless you use fiction writer "logic".

 

[musterion]

"If ye love me, keep my commandments" (Jn.14:15).​

Do you not obey His commandments? It is a fact that the following words of Paul are either speaking of the commandments of God or the commandments of the Lord Jesus or both:

"Furthermore then we beseech you, brethren, and exhort you by the Lord Jesus, that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please God, so ye would abound more and more. For ye know what commandments we gave you by the Lord Jesus. For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication: That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour; Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God: That no man go beyond and defraud his brother in any matter: because that the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also have forewarned you and testified. For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness" (1 Thess.4:1-7).​

Do you deny that the commandments spoken of here are the commandments of the Lord Jesus or are the commandments of God?

John was not speaking about Paul.

You quoted John, who exhorted his audience's obedience to His commandmentS.

Once again, where are all these commandmentS in the Bible?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Hi Jerry and I for believe that Jews can be saved !! 2 Cor 3:16 say it is possible , even today !!

One , Israel has been set aside as 2 Cor 3:13-16 says !!

Any Jews saved today , are BAPTIZO / PLACED into the B O C and all Jews , Gentiles , Bond and Free and all Males and Females LOSE THEIR IDENTITY in Christ as all in the B O C are a new Creation !!

The nation of Israel was temporarily set aside before the Hebrew epistles were written.

And those epistles were written during the present dispensation. So what is written in those epistles is doctrine which is for the present dispensation.

But some say that what is said in those epistles is for a future dispensation. If that is true then surely the authors of those epistles would have made it known that the doctrine they are teaching is not for the time when they were living but instead for a future time.

But those epistles will be searched in vain for any of those authors making it known that the doctrine they were teaching was not for the present dispensation but instead for a future dispensation. Those who originally received those dispensations would rightly assume that what they were reading in those epistles was for them right then and there!

But then came the Bullingerites who said that those epistles will only find their application in the future and then some of those in the Mid-Acts camp with itching ears embraced the ideas invented by the Bullingerites and rejected the teaching of the giants of Mid-Acts dispensationalism.

J.C. O'Hair was ineed one of the giants of Mid-Acts dispensationalism and here is what he said:

"Peter and James and ten other apostles are going to sit on twelve thrones and judge the twelve tribes of Israel. (Matthew 19:27 and 28). But I do not agree with Christians who say that the twelve apostles were not members of the Body of Christ...I make no such foolish statement...that these Epistles of Peter and James are not for this age...I use 1 Peter 3:18 in preaching the gospel of grace as frequently as I use any other verse" [emphais mine] (O'Hair, The Accuser of the Brethren and the Brethren Concerning Bullingerism).​

 

[john w]

What makes you think that I don't? Here are Paul's words about that appearance:

"For our citizenship is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our lowly body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body...The Lord is at hand (eggus)" (Phil.3:20-21;4:5).​

The Greek word eggus means "of times imminent and soon to come to pass" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

I believe what Paul say about this and since his words are addressed to those in the Body then I believe that the Lord's imminent appearance applies to them. So why do you accuse me of not believing what Paul said about this appearance?

Now let us look at another verse from the Hebrew epistles where the same coming of the Lord is described as being near:

"You too, be patient and stand firm, because the Lord's coming is near" (James 5:8).​

The Greek word translated "is near" at James 5:8 is eggizo and in this verse that word means "to be imminent" (A Greek English Lexicon, Liddell & Scott [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1940], 467).

In an article found on the "Pre-Trib Research Center" web site Dr. Renald E. Showers writes:

"In light of James' statements C. Leslie Mitton wrote, 'James clearly believed, as others of his time did, that the coming of Christ was imminent.' On the basis of James' statements we can conclude that Christ's coming was imminent in New Testament times and continues to be so today, and that this fact should make a difference in the way Christians live" [emphasis added] (Showers, The Imminent Coming of Christ).​

Paul Sadler, past President of the Berean Bible Society, said the following:

"The 'secret' resurrection that will take place at the Rapture should never be confused with the 'first' resurrection at the Second Coming of Christ. Those who rightly divide the Word of truth now see that only the members of the Body of Christ will be raised at the Rapture" [emphasis mine] (Sadler, Exploring the Unsearchable Riches of Christ [Stephens Point, WI: Worzalla Publishing Co., 1993], 167).​

Since there can only be one imminent appearance of the Lord Jesus and since only members of the Body of Christ are looking for that imminent appearance then it is certain that the first century Jewish believers were indeed baptized into the Body of Christ.

But you don't believe that because for some reason you think that only some of the first century Jewish believers were baptized into the Body but not all of them.

What is the difference between the believing Jews who were baptized into the Body and those who were not?

It is evident that your theory is laughable, absurd, and silly. We see Sir Paul disagreeing with you here:

Romans-Philemon

Why should we believe you, instead of Paul?Why should I believe your silly, absurd, lame, laughable evidence, instead of believing the bible, and Paul?

Why are you assassinating me, the messenger? And why do you continue to run and hide, Acts 2-ite, Harry Ironside-ite, John Walvoord-ite?? Why do you have absolutely no interest in finding the truth in this matter,as all you care about is defending your mistaken beliefs and theories?


How did I do?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

How did I do?

You continue to do an excellent job of running and hiding from the fact that those who received the Hebrew epistles were waiting for an imminent appearance of the Lord Jesus and only those in the Body were waiting for that appearance.

 

[john w]

You continue to do an excellent job of running and hiding from the fact that those who received the Hebrew epistles were waiting for an imminent appearance of the Lord Jesus and only those in the Body were waiting for that appearance.

It is clear, obvious, that we see that you are doing a better job of running and hiding. Why don't you believe what Paul said about the appearance of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the body of Christ? Why should we believe you, instead of God the Father, the Lord Jesus Christ, and Paul, in Romans-Philemon? And why are you clearly attacking the messenger, and assassinating me, Ironside-ite? Why do you have absolutely no interest in finding the truth in this matter,as all you care about is defending your mistaken, lame, laughable, absurd Acts 2 beliefs and theories? We see that you have no answer.



How did I do?

 

[musterion]

You continue to do an excellent job of running and hiding from the fact that those who received the Hebrew epistles were waiting for an imminent appearance of the Lord Jesus

If Israel was still being preached to AS Israel when the Hebrew epistles were written, that would explain it perfectly without their being in the Body. That's been pointed out to you before, and you've ignored it before.

 

[john w]

If Israel was still being preached to AS Israel when the Hebrew epistles were written, that would explain it perfectly without their being in the Body. That's been pointed out to you before, and you've ignored it before.

Be careful, musty, as the kid may just shut you down with accusing you of running and hiding, pointing out what Sir Fillintheblank says, about your silly, lame, laughable theories, and that you are assassinating him.

Watch out!

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Why don't you believe what Paul said about the appearance of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the body of Christ?

Why do you keep repeating things which I have already proven not to be true? I believe what Paul said about the appearance of the Lord Jesus here:

"For our citizenship is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our lowly body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body...The Lord is at hand (eggus)" (Phil.3:20-21;4:5).​

The Greek word eggus means "of times imminent and soon to come to pass" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

I believe what Paul say about this and since his words are addressed to those in the Body then I believe that the Lord's imminent appearance applies to them. So why do you accuse me of not believing what Paul said about this appearance?

Now let us look at another verse from the Hebrew epistles where the same coming of the Lord is described as being near:

"You too, be patient and stand firm, because the Lord's coming is near" (James 5:8).​

The Greek word translated "is near" at James 5:8 is eggizo and in this verse that word means "to be imminent" (A Greek English Lexicon, Liddell & Scott [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1940], 467).

In an article found on the "Pre-Trib Research Center" web site Dr. Renald E. Showers writes:

"In light of James' statements C. Leslie Mitton wrote, 'James clearly believed, as others of his time did, that the coming of Christ was imminent.' On the basis of James' statements we can conclude that Christ's coming was imminent in New Testament times and continues to be so today, and that this fact should make a difference in the way Christians live" [emphasis added] (Showers, The Imminent Coming of Christ).​

Paul Sadler, past President of the Berean Bible Society, said the following:

"The 'secret' resurrection that will take place at the Rapture should never be confused with the 'first' resurrection at the Second Coming of Christ. Those who rightly divide the Word of truth now see that only the members of the Body of Christ will be raised at the Rapture" [emphasis mine] (Sadler, Exploring the Unsearchable Riches of Christ [Stephens Point, WI: Worzalla Publishing Co., 1993], 167).​

Since there can only be one imminent appearance of the Lord Jesus and since only members of the Body of Christ are looking for that imminent appearance then it is certain that the first century Jewish believers were indeed baptized into the Body of Christ.

But you don't believe that because for some reason you think that only some of the first century Jewish believers were baptized into the Body but not all of them.

What is the difference between the believing Jews who were baptized into the Body and those who were not?

 

[john w]

Why do you keep repeating things which I have already proven not to be true? I believe what Paul said about the appearance of the Lord Jesus here:

"For our citizenship is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our lowly body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body...The Lord is at hand (eggus)" (Phil.3:20-21;4:5).​

The Greek word eggus means "of times imminent and soon to come to pass" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

I believe what Paul say about this and since his words are addressed to those in the Body then I believe that the Lord's imminent appearance applies to them. So why do you accuse me of not believing what Paul said about this appearance?

Now let us look at another verse from the Hebrew epistles where the same coming of the Lord is described as being near:

"You too, be patient and stand firm, because the Lord's coming is near" (James 5:8).​

The Greek word translated "is near" at James 5:8 is eggizo and in this verse that word means "to be imminent" (A Greek English Lexicon, Liddell & Scott [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1940], 467).

In an article found on the "Pre-Trib Research Center" web site Dr. Renald E. Showers writes:

"In light of James' statements C. Leslie Mitton wrote, 'James clearly believed, as others of his time did, that the coming of Christ was imminent.' On the basis of James' statements we can conclude that Christ's coming was imminent in New Testament times and continues to be so today, and that this fact should make a difference in the way Christians live" [emphasis added] (Showers, The Imminent Coming of Christ).​

Paul Sadler, past President of the Berean Bible Society, said the following:

"The 'secret' resurrection that will take place at the Rapture should never be confused with the 'first' resurrection at the Second Coming of Christ. Those who rightly divide the Word of truth now see that only the members of the Body of Christ will be raised at the Rapture" [emphasis mine] (Sadler, Exploring the Unsearchable Riches of Christ [Stephens Point, WI: Worzalla Publishing Co., 1993], 167).​

Since there can only be one imminent appearance of the Lord Jesus and since only members of the Body of Christ are looking for that imminent appearance then it is certain that the first century Jewish believers were indeed baptized into the Body of Christ.

But you don't believe that because for some reason you think that only some of the first century Jewish believers were baptized into the Body but not all of them.

What is the difference between the believing Jews who were baptized into the Body and those who were not?

Why do you keep repeating things which I have already proven not to be true, in Romans-Philemon, re. the body of Christ, and the appearing? I believe what Paul said about the appearance of the Lord Jesus here:

Romans-Philemon


Why should I believe your silly, laughable, absurd theories, instead of Paul?But you don't believe that because for some reason you think that Roman-Philemon is not true.


It is clear, obvious, that we see that you are still running and hiding. And why are you clearly attacking the messenger, and assassinating me, Ironside-ite? Why do you have absolutely no interest in finding the truth in this matter,as all you care about is defending your mistaken, lame, laughable, absurd Acts 2 beliefs and theories? We see that you have no answer.


How did I do?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

If Israel was still being preached to AS Israel when the Hebrew epistles were written, that would explain it perfectly without their being in the Body. That's been pointed out to you before, and you've ignored it before.

So now you want to run off to something else without even addressing the facts which you raised about John's words about the "commandments of God." So tell me, are the commandments spoken of by Paul at 1 Thessalonians 4:1-7 the commandments of God are the commandments of the Lord Jesus?

Israel had already been set aside by the time when the Hebrew epistles were written. And are we supposed to believe that even though those epistles were written during the present dispensation and received by people living during the present dispensation that the teaching found in those epistles was for a future dispensation?

If that teaching was for a future dispensation then there is no doubt that those who received those epistles would be told that it was for a future dispensation. But those epistles will be searched in vain for any of the authors telling them that the teaching is not for the time when they were living but instead for a future time.

You are so lost that you can't even figure this simple thing out!

 

[Jerry Shugart]

How did I do?

You did a good job of making a mockery of the Scriptures and once again you proved that even though you claim to believe the Scriptures you only pick and choose which verses you will believe and which ones you will not believe.

By doing that you have tricked your mind into believing that even though the teaching found in the Hebrew epistles was written during the present dispensation and received by those living in the present dispensation that the teaching found there is not for the present dispensation.

BRILLIANT!

 

[john w]

You did a good job of making a mockery of the Scriptures and once again you proved that even though you claim to believe the Scriptures you only pick and choose which verses you will believe and which ones you will not believe.

By doing that you have tricked your mind into believing that even though the teaching found in the Hebrew epistles was written during the present dispensation and received by those living in the present dispensation that the teaching found there is not for the present dispensation.

BRILLIANT!

So now you want to run off to something else, and hide, without even addressing what Sir Paul says here, re. your laughable, absurd, silly notions re. the body of Christ, and the appearing:

Romans-Philemon

Why should we believe you, instead of Paul? Why has your mind been tricked into believing Harry, Ironside-ite??

It is evident that we see, that your theory is laughable, absurd, and silly, and mocks the scriptures. We see Sir Paul disagreeing with you here:

Romans-Philemon

Again:Why should we believe you, instead of Paul?Why should I believe your silly, absurd, lame, laughable evidence, instead of believing the bible, and Paul?

And you never addressed why are you assassinating me, the messenger? And why do you continue to run and hide, Acts 2-ite, Harry Ironside-ite, John Walvoord-ite?? Why do you have absolutely no interest in finding the truth in this matter,as all you care about is defending your mistaken beliefs and theories?

Brilliant!(my caps button is not working).

We see/it is evident/it is obvious/it is clear, that you have no answer.


How did I do?

 

[DAN P]

You did a good job of making a mockery of the Scriptures and once again you proved that even though you claim to believe the Scriptures you only pick and choose which verses you will believe and which ones you will not believe.

By doing that you have tricked your mind into believing that even though the teaching found in the Hebrew epistles was written during the present dispensation and received by those living in the present dispensation that the teaching found there is not for the present dispensation.

BRILLIANT!

Hi Jerry and you will always DIS-BELIEF 2 Cor 3:13-16 ??

Jews are all under Rom 11:7-8 , God gave them the spirit of STUPOR and all those who refuse to believe that Israel HAVE NOT BEEN SET ASIDE , so is that you ??

dan p

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Brilliant!(my caps button is not working).

Your brain is not working either.

 

[john w]

Your brain is not working either.

Why do you continue to assassinate me, and attack the messenger? We see/it is evident/it is obvious/clearly, you have no answer, as you continue to run and hide to your Acts 2 Ironside-ism.

How did I do?

 

[musterion]

So now you want to run off to something else without even addressing the facts which you raised about John's words about the "commandments of God." So tell me, are the commandments spoken of by Paul at 1 Thessalonians 4:1-7 the commandments of God are the commandments of the Lord Jesus?

Israel had already been set aside by the time when the Hebrew epistles were written. And are we supposed to believe that even though those epistles were written during the present dispensation and received by people living during the present dispensation that the teaching found in those epistles was for a future dispensation?

If that teaching was for a future dispensation then there is no doubt that those who received those epistles would be told that it was for a future dispensation. But those epistles will be searched in vain for any of the authors telling them that the teaching is not for the time when they were living but instead for a future time.

You are so lost that you can't even figure this simple thing out!

What part of my post don't you understand? I'll explain it better to you.

 

[Tambora]

If Israel was still being preached to AS Israel when the Hebrew epistles were written, that would explain it perfectly without their being in the Body. That's been pointed out to you before, and you've ignored it before.

Good point.

 

[DAN P]

Why do you continue to assassinate me, and attack the messenger? We see/it is evident/it is obvious/clearly, you have no answer, as you continue to run and hide to your Acts 2 Ironside-ism.

How did I do?

Hi John w , he always avoids 2 Cor 3:13-16 and IF they can not believe the OT , how can they believe Hebrews ??

dan p

 

[musterion]

Good point.

He keeps ignoring it.