Cross Reference
New member
Those who know the scriptures don't require proof of the knowledge of them __ from a brother.
ECT Two different gospels? One for the circumcisions and another for the uncircumcision?
- Thread starter oatmeal
- Start date
Those who know the scriptures don't require proof of the knowledge of them __ from a brother.
Cross Reference
New member
Why is an "illusion" needed to explain that which needs no explanation __ that which is factually recorded for our benefit?
oatmeal
Well-known member
Really?
How fascinating.
So you threw away your Bible?
Acts 17:11
It is amazing how many times Paul quoted OT scriptures in his writings.
Levolor
New member
I don't see how you get this "To be preached". The angel is always preaching that one message so that if anyone is listening that person can be converted.
The everlasting gospel is being preached everlastingly.
And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.
I underlined the part that says "to preach", and this is how it reads in four of the translations that I have checked. So, I don't get how you got what you wrote of "To be preached" with the addition of the word "be" and thereby changing the sentence's meaning?
You are asserting/assuming the reference is to "the 12," and "OT prophets."
Notice chronological order, in Paul's writings, "post" resurrection:" apostles, then prophets.
In "OT," order was prophets, then apostles.
"...I will send them prophets and apostles.." Luke 11:49 KJV
vs.
"And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets," 1 Cor. 12:28 KJV
"apostles and prophets"
Apostles first in this dispensation, then prophets. Paul was first an apostle, then prophet.
Only one exception. Coincidence? No-the bible is a book of details. As such, I pay attention to details, unlike most others. That is why I am a humble legendary TOL member.
In the OT, the chronological order was prophets, then apostles, i.e., "the twelve."
Cross Reference
New member
Yes-we insist that there is more than just one piece of good news in the bible, and know what the word "gospel" means.
You don't. Poor you. And we know the bad news about you, perverter.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
What exactly DO you think the word "gospel" means?
Do you believe the Gospel Truth alone provides eternal life?
How many ways can sinners find eternal life?
Do you believe the Gospel Truth ever fails to provide eternal life?
When and how does the Gospel ever become non-salvific?
You believe, like LALaw, that there is just one piece of good news in the book, cuz your church SOF told you so, and thus you honor your saint Judas, since he preached this "just one gospel" made up, satanic "doctrine" of yours.
I don't fall for your misdirection, change the subject technique, evil one, as I stay on topic, and I will continue to warn the babes/sheep, to stay clear of those big, bad wolf choppers, of yours.
Am I clear, wolfie-ette? Good.
Nimrod
Member
Dispensationalism at it's core. 2 ways of salvation. They really love dividing the Bible. :kookoo:
The way I see it. It has to do with correction and sound doctrine.
They come to us with these ideas and we give them the Biblical evidence to the contrary that is rock solid. How do they handle it?
They can't. They won't listen to sound doctrine and they won't correct themselves. They are sheep following their leader blindly.
Then again. Non-Christians do not understand the Scriptures like the elect, nor are they able to.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
:nono:
I'm MAD, and anyone who has ever been saved or ever will be saved has been saved by the shed blood of Jesus Christ.
Because God required men to believe different things at different times, different good news at different times, does not mean that they are not all saved by Christ's blood.
Cross Reference
New member
So you are Mad, which is what I thought all along.
What do you suppose it has bought you?
.
Nimrod
Member
You proved my point. At least 2 different ways to salvation throughout history.
Go on record, and argue that you don't "divide the bible." Go ahead.
oatmeal
Well-known member
john,
I am glad you pay attention to details
yes, and how does that effect what I stated?
Jesus Christ chose 12 to be apostles.
Does that mean that they were only apostles?
Did Peter have the characteristics of an evangelist?
Did Peter exhibit the characteristics of a pastor? "Feed my sheep..."
How about a prophet?
Was Jesus Christ an apostle as well as a prophet? and a teacher?
Hebrews 3:1
Was Jesus, the anointed, an apostle first or a prophet first? Or did it depend on what God was showing Jesus Christ to do? John 5:30;12:49
1 Corinthians 4:9
For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men.
The first shall be last and the last first
Last edited:
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
It's "lucridous" (Mike Tyson) to think that God required Noah to believe 1 Cor 15:1-4, as he does you and me.
oatmeal
Well-known member
Romans 15:1-3
Cross Reference
New member
????????
oatmeal
Well-known member
Jedidiah
New member
No, they had committed unto them two Gospels.
Until they were. Paul himself helped familiarize them with the law.
Not "truths" (Made Up) but Gospels.
I think I more or less agree...
Nope.
Except in Galatians 2:7, and therefore, except in the Bible.
Prove that the Gospel of the Circumcised is no longer operable.
:chuckle:
Until they were. Paul himself helped familiarize them with the law.
Not "truths" (Made Up) but Gospels.
I think I more or less agree...
Nope.
Except in Galatians 2:7, and therefore, except in the Bible.
Prove that the Gospel of the Circumcised is no longer operable.
:chuckle: