heir
TOL Subscriber
Christ dying for our sins, being buried and raised again the third day is the gospel of our salvation!
1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV
ECT What's MAD?
- Thread starter ARMcCarley
- Start date
1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV
ARMcCarley
New member
Jew first then gentile. God told Abraham that his seed would bless many nations not just Israel
heir
TOL Subscriber
We were not included in the promise, but were strangers from it.
Ephesians 2:11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
Ephesians 2:12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
ARMcCarley
New member
I can agree since I do not believe water baptism necessary for salvation.
heir
TOL Subscriber
Don't be ridiculous. There was a gospel that was being preached in M, M, L and John (the gospel of the kingdom) and it did NOT include the fact that "Christ died for our sins"!
vfirestormv
Member
close but read a little further:
Eph 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
Eph 2:14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
Eph 2:16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
Eph 2:17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
Eph 2:18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
ARMcCarley
New member
Well I hope your not Jewish... Do you know right? You should do a test... You know that way you can choose the right gospel for yourself.
vfirestormv
Member
Bright Raven, I would implore you to not agree just to agree. I too believe it is not required for salvation, but search it through. Why would Paul have done it if it were wrong?
Maybe the jailor was a Jew? That is grasping at straws. He was sent not to baptize but to preach the gospel. His emphasis was on the gospel not on baptizing, I give ya that. But he was baptized himself and did baptize some and others baptized around him and he never called it a churchanity. Do you think he would have been afraid to say something if it was wrong?
Doom
New member
Another case of someone who has zero understanding of both what MAD believes and what the Bible teaches.The problem is that they essentially dismiss everything that Jesus and the disciples taught - they only give weight to "Paul's Gospel" as if it were something different. If it doesn't fit with their interpretation of Paul - it must not be relevant to them!
I don't think it was wrong and I do not think it is wrong for today. But I do not htink it is necessary either.
vfirestormv
Member
I can agree with that. Not that my agreeing with it has any bearing on it, just saying is all...
Nang
TOL Subscriber
They choose to read their KJV bibles in waffle houses, over bacon and eggs, and pretend to be most religious representation of righteous (non-works) believers . . . hoping their greatest witness would be to the next waitress, who might be impressed with such piety, shown by an opened KJV Bible!
Baptisms? Communion? What's the need, when grace covers the sacrifice of paying for gravy and coffee?
Or simply posting on Internet sites regarding fake dogma (pre-invented), of which they label "saving grace" without warrant or historical scrutiny.
Baptisms? Communion? What's the need, when grace covers the sacrifice of paying for gravy and coffee?
Or simply posting on Internet sites regarding fake dogma (pre-invented), of which they label "saving grace" without warrant or historical scrutiny.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
Do you think the sacraments of baptism and Holy Communion should be discarded?
Nang
TOL Subscriber
This is where you are blinded . . .
How could anyone deny that any of the Apostles failed to testify to the saving death and resurrection of Jesus Christ?
Such claims simply blows my mind . . .
csuguy
Well-known member
We can understand him in his capacity as Israel's Messiah, for we have been grafted onto Israel and thereby made partakers of the New Covenant, as Paul says in Romans 11. Salvation is from the Jews, as Jesus declares in John 4.
As for the mystery - you are merely reading your own ideas into the passage. Paul does not state that this mystery is some new Gospel in opposition to that given to the disciples. He does say: " the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel" (Ephesians 3:6). See here - they are fellow heirs, members, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus.
He is not introducing a new promise, separate from what Israel received. Rather he is saying that anyone is free to partake of the promises and blessings of Israel - they are free to be grafted onto Israel as fellow heirs and members of the body.
Your idea that something separate from Israel has been introduced is entirely unbiblical and has no backing from any scripture.
There was a wall in the minds of the Jews, but not in the Gospel - for Christ commanded them to go forth and make disciples of all nations, not just Israel. And scripture does not say that Peter learned that Gentiles were to be accepted through Peter; rather - it had always been acceptable for Gentiles to join Israel as proselytes.
Peter tells us in Acts 15 that "in the early days" God had decided that through Peter the gentiles would here the gospel and believe - and that they received the HS just as the jews did. You cannot say that the events in question here occurred only after Paul, or that Paul was the messenger to Peter. By saying this occurred "in the early days" of the church, he is pointing to things that happened quite some time ago - very likely prior to Paul and as early as the Pentecost.
Regardless of whether it was before or after Paul, the scriptures are clear that there isn't a new Gospel for them, no separate promise from Israel. Rather the gentiles are grafted onto Israel and become fellow heirs and partakers of the gifts and promises of Israel.
Peter tells us that from the "early days" of the church God had made this known to him (Acts 15). Jesus, of course, commanded them to go to all nations to make disciples.
That passage doesn't say what you think it says. try again.
Galatians 2 doesn't say there is a difference in their Gospels - only in their main demographic. Both tried to reach both jew and gentile.
You are being intellectually dishonest here. You know good and well that Paul teaches that the gentiles have been grafted onto Israel, and thereby made fellow heirs and members of the body.
Good one-asking me a question, after you've punted my last 100+.
What is the difference/"distinction," between a saved person, and a lost/blinded person?
Answer: the difference between heaven/myself, and hell/you.
So there.
Get saved, you vile perverter.
Stumped me there, with that "I'm sorry you don't like Christianity," and stuff your "the truth to me seems that you are proud and you think you are a teacher on here or something," as I have clout on TOL, vs. you do not. Poor you.
"So believe that a get some help."-you
You need some "hep" with English, or you need to not be drunk, when you "post."
Have a seat, little one.