D
dfkuz
Guest
Catholic Dude:
- Status
B
bhlincoln
Guest
I have a site dedicated to the subject for those interested:
www.protestanterrors.com
Thanks,
BH
timothy2:
www.protestanterrors.com
Thanks,
BH
R
rjs1
Guest
Catholic Dude:
I think you are finding this guy as frustrating as I am!!! He is so locked into some preconceived funny interpretation of the Bible that we have no chance of getting him to actually look at what the Bible says. He is simply ignoring what Jesus COMMANDED us to do, to baptise. He is ignoring the numerous Biblical references to baptism as essential for becomimg a Christian. He is ignoring the fact that St Paul did baptise and that the early Church regarded baptism as essential.
I suggest that you have a brief look at the Berean website and you may begin to understand why this gentleman has the views he has. They are very anti Catholic (just read their comments about Pope John-Paul II) and have weird views about the New Testament period.
Dear Catholic Dude,
I think you are finding this guy as frustrating as I am!!! He is so locked into some preconceived funny interpretation of the Bible that we have no chance of getting him to actually look at what the Bible says. He is simply ignoring what Jesus COMMANDED us to do, to baptise. He is ignoring the numerous Biblical references to baptism as essential for becomimg a Christian. He is ignoring the fact that St Paul did baptise and that the early Church regarded baptism as essential.
I suggest that you have a brief look at the Berean website and you may begin to understand why this gentleman has the views he has. They are very anti Catholic (just read their comments about Pope John-Paul II) and have weird views about the New Testament period.
D
Deus_Solus
Guest
dfkuz,
Peace be with you.
dfkuz:
dfkuz:
dfkuz:
God Bless.
Peace be with you.
Actually I believe it is you who must take off your dispensationalist glasses to see the truth of the Scriptures clearly. The tradition of dispensationalism, and the subsequent identification of our current age as the “Dispensation of Grace” has served as a convenient vehicle for the elevation of Pauline thought above the rest of Scripture since he is considered to be the primary “steward” of this dispensation. It is an unscriptural, unhistorical attempt to “divide the word of God” (which in itself is a misguiding translation of the Greek orthotomeo - actually meaning to "correctly handle - in 2 Tim 2:15) that has led many astray.
This appears to be the crux of your argument (correct me if I am wrong). Unfortunately, it falls into the fallacy of an argument from silence. Simply because Paul does not explicitly mention baptizing people in his letters to the Churches, does not mean it did not happen. Such an assumption would be akin to asserting that Jesus was not wholly God and wholly man, simply because the Bible does not explicitly say so. As a result of this fallacy coupled with dispensationalism, your system of thought essentially negates the second half of the Great Commission.
How does this square with Matthew 28:19, when Jesus directs his disciples to baptize “all nations” and not just the Jews?
God Bless.
M
MiddleBear
Guest
They left the Catholic Church (and took many souls along with them).
R
Ric
Guest
You are right about one thing, your site is FULL of errors!
B
bhlincoln
Guest
what are some errors that you see?
Ric:
You are right about one thing, your site is FULL of errors!
B
briand
Guest
I dont know how to word this better, they had hope, that was by far their biggest mistake. Because it eventually leads to total melt down when one realizes that hope is totally absoluty futile in all ways. I cant word it better, sorry.
D
dfkuz
Guest
To all who have been troubled by my statements of plain fact about the Scriptures:
Catholic Dude had a good point that Paul didn’t mention the baptism of anyone in his letters because, duh, they were all baptized Christians already. Points for creative thinking on that one! YOU have the ‘silence’; I have Paul saying he was glad he didn’t baptize too many - and the plain statement that he wasn’t sent to baptize. Repeatedly Paul warns against returning to the works of the flesh. If hauling your flesh to be sprinkled or dunked isn’t sowing to the flesh, I don’t know what is! Paul says, ‘yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we Him no more.’ (2 Cor. 5:16) The things that Christ taught in His fleshly ministry to Israel play no part in the spiritual ministry given to Paul by the Risen Lord. ‘Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creation; old things are passed away; behold all things are become new.’ (2 Cor. 5:17) Water baptism as an ‘old thing’ has passed away.
Dispensationalism negates the 2nd half of the Great Commission? Peter himself negated the WHOLE Great Commission by using the ‘keys of the kingdom’ one last time in Gal. 2:9. ‘And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me [Paul], they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they [the 12 apostles] unto the circumcision.’ The ‘circumcision’ are the Jews only. So here we have Peter putting the Great Commission OUT OF COMMISSION by ‘loosing’ them from going to the Gentiles, using the authority Christ gave them in Matt. 18:18. Afterward, Paul went to the unconverted Jews as well as the Gentiles. This tells us that the ‘circumcision’ meant only those Jews already converted to the 12’s Gospel. The Jews and Gentiles that Paul went to were on level ground. The 12 promised to go ONLY to converted Jews. THAT’S DIFFERENT! Paul never wrote specifically to either group. But the Hebrew epistles are clearly addressed to Jews: ‘God…spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets’ (Heb. 1:1); ‘…to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad…’ (James 1:1); ‘Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers [dispersed Jewish believers] scattered throughout…’ (1 Peter 1:1); the other Hebrew epistles have a decidedly Jewish flavor, especially the Book of the Revelation, …‘which say they are Jews and are not.’ (Rev. 2:9; 3:9). These books were written for a reason - to help the new believers get through the Tribulation. Read them with that thought in mind and they’ll come alive!
Paul IS the ‘primary steward’ of this dispensation; he says so himself in Eph. 3:2! Throughout his epistles, he makes this fact known: 1 Cor. 3, the ‘wise masterbuilder’; Romans 11:13, 'I magnify mine office; Gal. 1:11, 12: ‘But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man, for I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.’ Paul’s Gospel was so different from that of the 12 that Jesus Christ wouldn’t even allow him to confer with them for years so He could teach it to him Himself! The Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 was called because the 12 wondered exactly what Paul was preaching!
To answer the question of why the 12 were told to ‘baptize all nations,’ not just the Jews in Matt. 28:19, the 12 well knew from their prophetic writings that salvation was to go to the Gentiles THROUGH the House of Israel AFTER THEY (Israel) accepted their Messiah. (Is. 60:1-3; Zech. 8:22, 23). Gentile proselytes to Judaism had to undergo a ritual washing to make that which was unclean, clean.
How do we know which books belong in the Bible? The Holy Spirit oversaw the compilation of the canon as it is laid out in the Received Text (KJV). Unregenerate ‘Catholic’ tampering tried to place uninspired books into the sacred canon - books written during the 400 year period of silence between Malachi and Matthew (Amos 8:11) so we know they can’t be inspired! This error was corrected by Spirit-indwelt men during the Reformation period.
What happens when 2 people disagree on what a passage says? Who is right? The Scriptures themselves every time.
Unless a passage is clearly symbolic, it’s meant to be taken literally. God means what He says, and says what He means! He’s not a doddering old fool who can’t quite get his facts straight!
2 Timothy 2:15: ‘rightly dividing the Word of truth’: a better definition than ‘correctly handle’ is to ‘cut straight.’ (see the word ‘ortho’ in orthotomeo? Like in ortho-dontist?) And that’s what dispensational Bible handling does; it cuts straight paths between God’s different programs. Remember, God is a self-proclaimed ‘dispensationalist’ Himself: 1 Cor. 9:17; Eph. 1:10, 3:2; and Col. 1:25.
From a ‘workman that needeth not to be ashamed,’
dfkuz
Catholic Dude had a good point that Paul didn’t mention the baptism of anyone in his letters because, duh, they were all baptized Christians already. Points for creative thinking on that one! YOU have the ‘silence’; I have Paul saying he was glad he didn’t baptize too many - and the plain statement that he wasn’t sent to baptize. Repeatedly Paul warns against returning to the works of the flesh. If hauling your flesh to be sprinkled or dunked isn’t sowing to the flesh, I don’t know what is! Paul says, ‘yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we Him no more.’ (2 Cor. 5:16) The things that Christ taught in His fleshly ministry to Israel play no part in the spiritual ministry given to Paul by the Risen Lord. ‘Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creation; old things are passed away; behold all things are become new.’ (2 Cor. 5:17) Water baptism as an ‘old thing’ has passed away.
Dispensationalism negates the 2nd half of the Great Commission? Peter himself negated the WHOLE Great Commission by using the ‘keys of the kingdom’ one last time in Gal. 2:9. ‘And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me [Paul], they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they [the 12 apostles] unto the circumcision.’ The ‘circumcision’ are the Jews only. So here we have Peter putting the Great Commission OUT OF COMMISSION by ‘loosing’ them from going to the Gentiles, using the authority Christ gave them in Matt. 18:18. Afterward, Paul went to the unconverted Jews as well as the Gentiles. This tells us that the ‘circumcision’ meant only those Jews already converted to the 12’s Gospel. The Jews and Gentiles that Paul went to were on level ground. The 12 promised to go ONLY to converted Jews. THAT’S DIFFERENT! Paul never wrote specifically to either group. But the Hebrew epistles are clearly addressed to Jews: ‘God…spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets’ (Heb. 1:1); ‘…to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad…’ (James 1:1); ‘Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers [dispersed Jewish believers] scattered throughout…’ (1 Peter 1:1); the other Hebrew epistles have a decidedly Jewish flavor, especially the Book of the Revelation, …‘which say they are Jews and are not.’ (Rev. 2:9; 3:9). These books were written for a reason - to help the new believers get through the Tribulation. Read them with that thought in mind and they’ll come alive!
Paul IS the ‘primary steward’ of this dispensation; he says so himself in Eph. 3:2! Throughout his epistles, he makes this fact known: 1 Cor. 3, the ‘wise masterbuilder’; Romans 11:13, 'I magnify mine office; Gal. 1:11, 12: ‘But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man, for I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.’ Paul’s Gospel was so different from that of the 12 that Jesus Christ wouldn’t even allow him to confer with them for years so He could teach it to him Himself! The Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 was called because the 12 wondered exactly what Paul was preaching!
To answer the question of why the 12 were told to ‘baptize all nations,’ not just the Jews in Matt. 28:19, the 12 well knew from their prophetic writings that salvation was to go to the Gentiles THROUGH the House of Israel AFTER THEY (Israel) accepted their Messiah. (Is. 60:1-3; Zech. 8:22, 23). Gentile proselytes to Judaism had to undergo a ritual washing to make that which was unclean, clean.
How do we know which books belong in the Bible? The Holy Spirit oversaw the compilation of the canon as it is laid out in the Received Text (KJV). Unregenerate ‘Catholic’ tampering tried to place uninspired books into the sacred canon - books written during the 400 year period of silence between Malachi and Matthew (Amos 8:11) so we know they can’t be inspired! This error was corrected by Spirit-indwelt men during the Reformation period.
What happens when 2 people disagree on what a passage says? Who is right? The Scriptures themselves every time.
Unless a passage is clearly symbolic, it’s meant to be taken literally. God means what He says, and says what He means! He’s not a doddering old fool who can’t quite get his facts straight!
2 Timothy 2:15: ‘rightly dividing the Word of truth’: a better definition than ‘correctly handle’ is to ‘cut straight.’ (see the word ‘ortho’ in orthotomeo? Like in ortho-dontist?) And that’s what dispensational Bible handling does; it cuts straight paths between God’s different programs. Remember, God is a self-proclaimed ‘dispensationalist’ Himself: 1 Cor. 9:17; Eph. 1:10, 3:2; and Col. 1:25.
From a ‘workman that needeth not to be ashamed,’
dfkuz
R
rjs1
Guest
You have GOT to be kidding! How can you make a statement like this when you are the one who refuses, absolutely refuses, to take what the Bible says literally?
Jesus said, “Unless a man is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God” and
“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, BAPTISING them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of tthe Holy Spirit.”
I won’t even waste time listing all the references to people being baptised in the New Testament because you simply won’t take any notice.
I am afraid I give up. If you dismiss the explicit order of Our Lord Himself to baptise, then I have no hope of changing your mind. Continue in your Berean cult, but please don’t call it scriptural because that is the last thing it is.
D
dfkuz
Guest
Jesus came to announce that the Kingdom Israel had been waiting for was at hand, right? He was sent ‘only unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel’, right? This is probably the Kingdom He’s referring to entering here, right? Water baptism was clearly a requirement for entrance into that Kingdom, right? I’ve already admitted that, right? (Although it’s hard to prove whether Jesus is talking about water baptism in this passage; could be waters of birth). We’re not Israel, right? We’re not looking to go into Israel’s earthly Kingdom, right? Our citizenship is in Heaven, right? (Php 3:20) Heaven is a spiritual place, right? Earth is a fleshly place, right? Why would a fleshly ritual be required to enter a spiritual place? We’re saved by believing the gospel that Jesus Christ died for our sins and rose again, right? The Jews Jesus was sent to did not have to understand that gospel, but had to accept Jesus as their promised Messiah (believe in His Name) and be water-baptized in His Name to prove it (Acts 2:38) and to have their sin of crucifying their Messiah remitted. Then there was other stuff they had to do like give up everything and continue to abide in Him (John 15:4) to obtain a place in the coming Kingdom. We, on the other hand, need to realize that Christ died in OUR place and rose again for our justification. When we believe that, His Righteousness is imputed to us (in that He took our sinfulness upon Himself). Paul says over and over not to try to prove it by anything we do, but just believe. (Romans 4:5).
Israel was under the Law, right? But they didn’t keep it in faith, in fact they rejected the Father by killing His prophets, they rejected His Son by crucifying Him, and they were being given one more chance through the Ministry of the Holy Spirit to keep their part of the bargain they made at Sinai. The Gentiles didn’t make any covenant with God, right? So, God doesn’t require us to prove anything, but just asks us to believe. (Rom. 11:11)
Two different programs; two different gospels of salvation; two different ultimate destinations. One program made known since the world began (Acts 3:21); the other kept secret, hid in God since BEFORE the world began (Romans 16:25; Eph. 3:9). God redeems the earth back from Satan with Israel; He redeems the heavenly places back from Satan with us, the Body of Christ.
If you’d like to become a member of that Body, simply place your faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, and His death for your sins at Calvary followed by His resurrection, and you will be saved. Don’t insult the Lord of Glory by submitting to a prideful, look-at-me, fleshly ritual like getting all wet in front of a crowd. Eternal life is a free gift (Romans 6:23); don’t try to pay for it - that’s an insult to Him.
D
dfkuz
Guest
Another big error of the Protestant Reformers, Luther in particular, was that they did not repudiate the doctrine of transubstantiation entirely, but simply changed it to ‘consubstantiation,’ or a co-mingling of the real presence of Christ with the bread and wine.
C
Catholic_Dude
Guest
(my stuff in blue)
dfkuz-
…Paul didn’t mention the baptism of anyone in his letters because, duh, they were all baptized Christians already.
In otherwords EVERYSINGLE letter that St Paul wrote was to BAPTIZED people. His words therefore mean zero unless you have been Baptized.
Repeatedly Paul warns against returning to the works of the flesh. If hauling your flesh to be sprinkled or dunked isn’t sowing to the flesh, I don’t know what is! Paul says, ‘yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we Him no more.’ (2 Cor. 5:16) The things that Christ taught in His fleshly ministry to Israel play no part in the spiritual ministry given to Paul by the Risen Lord. ‘Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creation; old things are passed away; behold all things are become new.’ (2 Cor. 5:17) Water baptism as an ‘old thing’ has passed away.
So when Scripture records all those THOUSANDS of people who are recorded as rushing to get Baptized that was just a fad? Let me ask you this, why did Jesus get Baptized? And another question, are we to imitate Christ to the best of our human ability?
About that 2Cor 5:16 passage, again you left off the first half of the verse, here is what it says:
14 For the love of Christ controls us, because we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died. 15 And he died for all, that those who live might live no longer for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised. 16 From now on, therefore, we regard no one from a human point of view; even though we once regarded Christ from a human point of view, we regard him thus no longer. 17 Therefore, if any one is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away, behold, the new has come.Your totally misunderstanding that passage, remember that in 1Cor is where St Paul talks about them already as Baptized…do you consider that “old things”? What is the time span between 1Cor and 2Cor to make 1Cor “old”?
If you back up to verse 10 here is what it says about the body:
10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive good or evil, according to what he has done in the body.
Dispensationalism negates the 2nd half of the Great Commission?
What is Dispensationalism? And how do you define the Great Commission?
Peter himself negated the WHOLE Great Commission by using the ‘keys of the kingdom’ one last time in Gal. 2:9. … The ‘circumcision’ are the Jews only. So here we have Peter putting the Great Commission OUT OF COMMISSION by ‘loosing’ them from going to the Gentiles, using the authority Christ gave them in Matt. 18:18.
What? It looks to me like you misunderstood something again. St Peter never negated anything, again you left off the first verse:
7 but on the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised 8 (for he who worked through Peter for the mission to the circumcised worked through me also for the Gentiles)
As usual you REFUSE to read anything in context. There was no “out of commission” anything. It says specifically that Peter was “entrusted” to the Gentiles, ie that was his primary scope of work. My request to you is that from now on when you quote something make it span at least 2-3 verses long.
(cont)
dfkuz-
…Paul didn’t mention the baptism of anyone in his letters because, duh, they were all baptized Christians already.
In otherwords EVERYSINGLE letter that St Paul wrote was to BAPTIZED people. His words therefore mean zero unless you have been Baptized.
Repeatedly Paul warns against returning to the works of the flesh. If hauling your flesh to be sprinkled or dunked isn’t sowing to the flesh, I don’t know what is! Paul says, ‘yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we Him no more.’ (2 Cor. 5:16) The things that Christ taught in His fleshly ministry to Israel play no part in the spiritual ministry given to Paul by the Risen Lord. ‘Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creation; old things are passed away; behold all things are become new.’ (2 Cor. 5:17) Water baptism as an ‘old thing’ has passed away.
So when Scripture records all those THOUSANDS of people who are recorded as rushing to get Baptized that was just a fad? Let me ask you this, why did Jesus get Baptized? And another question, are we to imitate Christ to the best of our human ability?
About that 2Cor 5:16 passage, again you left off the first half of the verse, here is what it says:
14 For the love of Christ controls us, because we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died. 15 And he died for all, that those who live might live no longer for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised. 16 From now on, therefore, we regard no one from a human point of view; even though we once regarded Christ from a human point of view, we regard him thus no longer. 17 Therefore, if any one is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away, behold, the new has come.Your totally misunderstanding that passage, remember that in 1Cor is where St Paul talks about them already as Baptized…do you consider that “old things”? What is the time span between 1Cor and 2Cor to make 1Cor “old”?
If you back up to verse 10 here is what it says about the body:
10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive good or evil, according to what he has done in the body.
Dispensationalism negates the 2nd half of the Great Commission?
What is Dispensationalism? And how do you define the Great Commission?
Peter himself negated the WHOLE Great Commission by using the ‘keys of the kingdom’ one last time in Gal. 2:9. … The ‘circumcision’ are the Jews only. So here we have Peter putting the Great Commission OUT OF COMMISSION by ‘loosing’ them from going to the Gentiles, using the authority Christ gave them in Matt. 18:18.
What? It looks to me like you misunderstood something again. St Peter never negated anything, again you left off the first verse:
7 but on the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised 8 (for he who worked through Peter for the mission to the circumcised worked through me also for the Gentiles)
As usual you REFUSE to read anything in context. There was no “out of commission” anything. It says specifically that Peter was “entrusted” to the Gentiles, ie that was his primary scope of work. My request to you is that from now on when you quote something make it span at least 2-3 verses long.
(cont)
C
Catholic_Dude
Guest
(cont)
dfkuz-
Afterward, Paul went to the unconverted Jews as well as the Gentiles. … The 12 promised to go ONLY to converted Jews. THAT’S DIFFERENT!
I hope your aware that St Peter and some of the others were the first convert Gentiles in Acts 10.
Paul never wrote specifically to either group.
What?!?! He singles out specific groups all the time.
But the Hebrew epistles are clearly addressed to Jews:
… These books were written for a reason - to help the new believers get through the Tribulation. Read them with that thought in mind and they’ll come alive!
The only verse that sticks out right now is James2:24: 24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.
Anyway, what is the Tribulation? I hear different things from people.
Paul IS the ‘primary steward’ of this dispensation; he says so himself in Eph. 3:2! Throughout his epistles, he makes this fact known: … Paul’s Gospel was so different from that of the 12 that Jesus Christ wouldn’t even allow him to confer with them for years so He could teach it to him Himself! The Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 was called because the 12 wondered exactly what Paul was preaching!
It doesnt say that anywhere about St Paul, in fact if you read the intro to almost every letter he is writing to a local church which he did NOT start, but was started by others. What Paul writes is for the already converted and willing to listen. So Jesus lied to the 12 on what the real Gospel was and led the 12 on a wild goose chase? I dont think so, it was the same Gospel always, it had to be explained to two very different groups.
As for the Acts15, Im starting to think that your playing with us.
Have you ever read Acts15? It starts off like this: 1 But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” 2 And when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and the elders about this question.
Do you see that? Some Jews started this problem and it needed fixing. Then it specifically says that Paul WAS SENT to the other 12 Apostles to get the matter cleared up. (Notice how he didnt go it alone) Read on…In fact St Peter is the main speaker and supports everything that Sts Paul and Barnabas were doing. The Apostles were all in agreement.
To answer the question of why the 12 were told to ‘baptize all nations,’ …
So where is the problem? You admit that they were sent to Baptize all nations just as I said.
How do we know which books belong in the Bible? The Holy Spirit oversaw the compilation of the canon as it is laid out in the Received Text (KJV). Unregenerate ‘Catholic’ tampering tried to place uninspired books into the sacred canon … This error was corrected by Spirit-indwelt men during the Reformation period.
You do know that the original KJVs did contain the “uninspired books”? The fact is that the Bible does NOT say that 66 books make up the Bible, NOR does it say what the names of all those books are to be.
The truth is that all the books that were to be in the Bible, especially the NT books, were established by the Church over the years. The Bible did NOT fall from the sky.
<<What happens when 2 people disagree on what a passage says? Who is right?>>
The Scriptures themselves every time.
Unless a passage is clearly symbolic, it’s meant to be taken literally. God means what He says, and says what He means! He’s not a doddering old fool who can’t quite get his facts straight!
I have to remember this one. I will never forget it.** Unless a passage is clearly symbolic, it’s meant to be taken literally.**
dfkuz-
Afterward, Paul went to the unconverted Jews as well as the Gentiles. … The 12 promised to go ONLY to converted Jews. THAT’S DIFFERENT!
I hope your aware that St Peter and some of the others were the first convert Gentiles in Acts 10.
Paul never wrote specifically to either group.
What?!?! He singles out specific groups all the time.
But the Hebrew epistles are clearly addressed to Jews:
… These books were written for a reason - to help the new believers get through the Tribulation. Read them with that thought in mind and they’ll come alive!
The only verse that sticks out right now is James2:24: 24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.
Anyway, what is the Tribulation? I hear different things from people.
Paul IS the ‘primary steward’ of this dispensation; he says so himself in Eph. 3:2! Throughout his epistles, he makes this fact known: … Paul’s Gospel was so different from that of the 12 that Jesus Christ wouldn’t even allow him to confer with them for years so He could teach it to him Himself! The Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 was called because the 12 wondered exactly what Paul was preaching!
It doesnt say that anywhere about St Paul, in fact if you read the intro to almost every letter he is writing to a local church which he did NOT start, but was started by others. What Paul writes is for the already converted and willing to listen. So Jesus lied to the 12 on what the real Gospel was and led the 12 on a wild goose chase? I dont think so, it was the same Gospel always, it had to be explained to two very different groups.
As for the Acts15, Im starting to think that your playing with us.
Have you ever read Acts15? It starts off like this: 1 But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” 2 And when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and the elders about this question.
Do you see that? Some Jews started this problem and it needed fixing. Then it specifically says that Paul WAS SENT to the other 12 Apostles to get the matter cleared up. (Notice how he didnt go it alone) Read on…In fact St Peter is the main speaker and supports everything that Sts Paul and Barnabas were doing. The Apostles were all in agreement.
To answer the question of why the 12 were told to ‘baptize all nations,’ …
So where is the problem? You admit that they were sent to Baptize all nations just as I said.
How do we know which books belong in the Bible? The Holy Spirit oversaw the compilation of the canon as it is laid out in the Received Text (KJV). Unregenerate ‘Catholic’ tampering tried to place uninspired books into the sacred canon … This error was corrected by Spirit-indwelt men during the Reformation period.
You do know that the original KJVs did contain the “uninspired books”? The fact is that the Bible does NOT say that 66 books make up the Bible, NOR does it say what the names of all those books are to be.
The truth is that all the books that were to be in the Bible, especially the NT books, were established by the Church over the years. The Bible did NOT fall from the sky.
<<What happens when 2 people disagree on what a passage says? Who is right?>>
The Scriptures themselves every time.
Unless a passage is clearly symbolic, it’s meant to be taken literally. God means what He says, and says what He means! He’s not a doddering old fool who can’t quite get his facts straight!
I have to remember this one. I will never forget it.** Unless a passage is clearly symbolic, it’s meant to be taken literally.**
D
Deus_Solus
Guest
Catholic Dude:
Dispensationalism is the theological framework from which dfkuz is operating. See this thread.
D
dfkuz
Guest
Catholic Dude! I appreciate the effort you’re putting into this. It makes my heart glad when a Catholic opens the Bible! When I finally did, I got saved!
me-black
you-blue
I hope you’re aware that St. Peter and some of the others were the first to convert Gentiles in Acts 10.He certainly did! Peter was clearly perplexed that God would send him to Gentiles before the nation was converted. ‘Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?’ Peter clearly admitted reluctance to go in to Gentiles in the manner he was sent. If this had been part of the original plan, Christ would have instructed them during that 40-day seminar He gave them before His ascension! In fact, this was immediately AFTER Paul’s conversion, and this was God’s way of letting Peter know that there had been a change in their program.
He (Paul) singles out specific groups all the time.I apologize, this is my fault for having to shorten my post. Originally, I wrote, Paul never addressed any of his letters to a specific group, Jew or Gentile. Paul’s letters were addressed to members of the Body of Christ.
The only verse that sticks out right now is James 2:24.Thanks for mentioning that one; I forgot to! If you can’t see a clear difference between James 2:24 and Romans 4:5, run it past a first grader! Israel’s Prophetic Law Program, under which James labored, DID entail works in addition to faith. Paul’s Mystery Grace Program prohibited works to be added to faith.
What is the Tribulation?
The Tribulation is that prophesied time on Israel’s calendar called also ‘the Day of the Lord,’ or ‘the Time of Jacob’s Trouble.’ There are almost too many references to it to count in the Old Testament prophets, especially Isaiah through Malachi. These prophecies of judgment, testing, and wrath have clearly never been fulfilled, but God keeps His promises! Indeed, they were the next event to follow Pentecost as Peter explains in Acts 2:16-21, ‘But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel…’ Joel’s prophetic book is largely taken up with the Lord’s Day of Wrath. What occurred in 70 A.D. was terrible indeed, but did not fulfill these prophecies at all.
As for Acts 15, I’m starting to think you’re playing with us…
Paul gives his private account of the Acts 15 Council in Galatians 2, where he says, ‘And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I shuld run, or had run, in vain.’ (Gal. 2:2) Notice how Paul stated, ‘that gospel which I preach’…not ‘we’ or ‘we all’! Paul made it clear that the Jerusalem apostles did not tell him what to do; he took his orders from the Risen Christ. ‘But of these, who seemed to be somewhat, they were, it maketh no matter to me, for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me.’
So where is the problem? You admit that they [the 12] were sent to baptize all nations just as I said.
me-black
you-blue
I hope you’re aware that St. Peter and some of the others were the first to convert Gentiles in Acts 10.He certainly did! Peter was clearly perplexed that God would send him to Gentiles before the nation was converted. ‘Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?’ Peter clearly admitted reluctance to go in to Gentiles in the manner he was sent. If this had been part of the original plan, Christ would have instructed them during that 40-day seminar He gave them before His ascension! In fact, this was immediately AFTER Paul’s conversion, and this was God’s way of letting Peter know that there had been a change in their program.
He (Paul) singles out specific groups all the time.I apologize, this is my fault for having to shorten my post. Originally, I wrote, Paul never addressed any of his letters to a specific group, Jew or Gentile. Paul’s letters were addressed to members of the Body of Christ.
The only verse that sticks out right now is James 2:24.Thanks for mentioning that one; I forgot to! If you can’t see a clear difference between James 2:24 and Romans 4:5, run it past a first grader! Israel’s Prophetic Law Program, under which James labored, DID entail works in addition to faith. Paul’s Mystery Grace Program prohibited works to be added to faith.
What is the Tribulation?
The Tribulation is that prophesied time on Israel’s calendar called also ‘the Day of the Lord,’ or ‘the Time of Jacob’s Trouble.’ There are almost too many references to it to count in the Old Testament prophets, especially Isaiah through Malachi. These prophecies of judgment, testing, and wrath have clearly never been fulfilled, but God keeps His promises! Indeed, they were the next event to follow Pentecost as Peter explains in Acts 2:16-21, ‘But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel…’ Joel’s prophetic book is largely taken up with the Lord’s Day of Wrath. What occurred in 70 A.D. was terrible indeed, but did not fulfill these prophecies at all.
As for Acts 15, I’m starting to think you’re playing with us…
Paul gives his private account of the Acts 15 Council in Galatians 2, where he says, ‘And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I shuld run, or had run, in vain.’ (Gal. 2:2) Notice how Paul stated, ‘that gospel which I preach’…not ‘we’ or ‘we all’! Paul made it clear that the Jerusalem apostles did not tell him what to do; he took his orders from the Risen Christ. ‘But of these, who seemed to be somewhat, they were, it maketh no matter to me, for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me.’
So where is the problem? You admit that they [the 12] were sent to baptize all nations just as I said.
- They were sent to baptize all nations, but only after Israel was converted. The Gentiles would not be willing to come to Israel’s ‘light’ if she didn’t have one. 2. The fact that in Gal. 2, Peter and the others promise to NOT go to the Gentiles, but to confine their ministry to Jews should prove to you that something was drastically different now that Paul was given his ‘Gospel of the Grace of God.’ (Acts 20:24) This gospel was sent to all mankind on an equal basis, not through the redeemed House of Israel as originally prophecied in the OT and instructed by Christ, which was the reason Christ was sent ‘only unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’
D
dfkuz
Guest
Reply to Catholic Dude, cont’d:
The truth is that all the books that were to be in the Bible, especially the NT books, were established by the Church over the years…Thankfully, the truly inspired books remain largely true to the Received Text, the manuscript used by the earliest Christians and faithfully translated into the KJV. The newer versions are translated from corrupted manuscripts. It’s unfortunate that the ‘apocrypha,’ or obviously uninspired, sometimes downright embarrassing, books added to the Catholic version of the Scriptures has been allowed to remain. To me, the biggest reason they should only be viewed with historic curiosity is that they were written and deal with a time when God had withdrawn His Face from His People in preparation for Israel’s Fourth Installment of their Fifth Course of Punishment (as outlined in Lev. 26).
Unless a passage is clearly symbolic, it’s meant to be taken literally.
Unless a passage is clearly symbolic, it’s meant to be taken literally. There, I’ll say it again because it’s true.
In other words, EVERY SINGLE letter that St. Paul wrote was to BAPTIZED people. His words therefore mean zero unless you have been Baptized.
Yes, if the ‘baptism’ you speak of is the supernatural action of God the Holy Spirit Who has baptized believers into the Body of Christ. If you mean that everyone Paul wrote to had been water-baptized…PROVE IT! Paul certainly didn’t think it was important…he didn’t do it and was glad he hadn’t done it to too many. Christ sent Paul to preach the gospel, not water baptize! And He sends us to preach the gospel, which is what saves today, not to water baptize. ‘Be ye followers of me…’ You’re the one arguing from silence; I have these plain words of Paul! Are you saying that the operation of God in baptizing us into His Son is insufficient? I’d be careful there, if I were you!
Cont’d in tomorrow’s post
dfkuz
The truth is that all the books that were to be in the Bible, especially the NT books, were established by the Church over the years…Thankfully, the truly inspired books remain largely true to the Received Text, the manuscript used by the earliest Christians and faithfully translated into the KJV. The newer versions are translated from corrupted manuscripts. It’s unfortunate that the ‘apocrypha,’ or obviously uninspired, sometimes downright embarrassing, books added to the Catholic version of the Scriptures has been allowed to remain. To me, the biggest reason they should only be viewed with historic curiosity is that they were written and deal with a time when God had withdrawn His Face from His People in preparation for Israel’s Fourth Installment of their Fifth Course of Punishment (as outlined in Lev. 26).
Unless a passage is clearly symbolic, it’s meant to be taken literally.
Unless a passage is clearly symbolic, it’s meant to be taken literally. There, I’ll say it again because it’s true.
In other words, EVERY SINGLE letter that St. Paul wrote was to BAPTIZED people. His words therefore mean zero unless you have been Baptized.
Yes, if the ‘baptism’ you speak of is the supernatural action of God the Holy Spirit Who has baptized believers into the Body of Christ. If you mean that everyone Paul wrote to had been water-baptized…PROVE IT! Paul certainly didn’t think it was important…he didn’t do it and was glad he hadn’t done it to too many. Christ sent Paul to preach the gospel, not water baptize! And He sends us to preach the gospel, which is what saves today, not to water baptize. ‘Be ye followers of me…’ You’re the one arguing from silence; I have these plain words of Paul! Are you saying that the operation of God in baptizing us into His Son is insufficient? I’d be careful there, if I were you!
Cont’d in tomorrow’s post
dfkuz
C
Catholic_Dude
Guest
Im pressed for time right now as well, I will get back to this as soon as I can.
D
dfkuz
Guest
Reply to Catholic Dude, cont’d
re: No water baptism is valid today
So, when Scripture records all those thousands of people who are recorded as rushing to get Baptized that was just a fad?
No, it was just part of another dispensation, one in which we do not live today. Ceremonial washings were part of Israel’s Law Program, and the Jews converted at Pentecost were still under the Law (Matt. 5:17). Paul makes it clear, esp. in Romans and Galatians, that we are not under the Law today.
Why did Jesus get Baptized?
He explains that Himself to John the Baptist: ‘Suffer it to be so now, for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness.’ John the Baptist revealed the Messiah to Israel (Luke 3:4-6). Jesus submitted Himself to be water-baptized in order to completely identify (remember, that’s what the word, ‘baptism’ means?) Himself with sinners in order to become ‘Sin’ for us when He died on the Cross. When we believe that He took our place, we become completely identified with Him with the result that His Righteousness now becomes ours. In our Grace Program, just believing the Gospel effects this complete identification with Christ; no additional ceremonial work is necessary. Israel’s Law Program required a washing from the Levitical Law to be performed in order to make Israel a ‘nation of kings and priests’ under their Messiah/King.
1 Cor 1 is where Paul talks about them already as Baptized…do you consider that ‘old things’?
1 Corinthians is where Paul puts water baptism in its place…and not a very important place. He says now that ‘For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.’ If water baptism saves, or is even a part of being saved, why didn’t Paul include it here? Because the Gospel is what saves today. Upon believing we become a ‘new creation,’ not just ‘born-again’ like redeemed Israel. Israel was born in going through the Red Sea, but being a part of that favored nation was not enough after the arrival of their Messiah on the scene. Israel, as a nation, needed to be born again by accepting that Jesus Christ was the Son of the Living God, and their Messiah and Kinsman Redeemer. We, by contrast, were never ‘born’ of God in the first place, being Gentiles and aliens from the promises of the commonwealth of Israel, so what we need is to be transformed by God into a creature that God can accept…and now that we’re born into newness of life in the Image of His Dear Son, we’re not only accepted in the Beloved (Eph. 1:6), but made sons and fellow-heirs with Christ. (Eph. 3:6; Romans 8:14-19)
cont’d next post
dfkuz
re: No water baptism is valid today
So, when Scripture records all those thousands of people who are recorded as rushing to get Baptized that was just a fad?
No, it was just part of another dispensation, one in which we do not live today. Ceremonial washings were part of Israel’s Law Program, and the Jews converted at Pentecost were still under the Law (Matt. 5:17). Paul makes it clear, esp. in Romans and Galatians, that we are not under the Law today.
Why did Jesus get Baptized?
He explains that Himself to John the Baptist: ‘Suffer it to be so now, for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness.’ John the Baptist revealed the Messiah to Israel (Luke 3:4-6). Jesus submitted Himself to be water-baptized in order to completely identify (remember, that’s what the word, ‘baptism’ means?) Himself with sinners in order to become ‘Sin’ for us when He died on the Cross. When we believe that He took our place, we become completely identified with Him with the result that His Righteousness now becomes ours. In our Grace Program, just believing the Gospel effects this complete identification with Christ; no additional ceremonial work is necessary. Israel’s Law Program required a washing from the Levitical Law to be performed in order to make Israel a ‘nation of kings and priests’ under their Messiah/King.
1 Cor 1 is where Paul talks about them already as Baptized…do you consider that ‘old things’?
1 Corinthians is where Paul puts water baptism in its place…and not a very important place. He says now that ‘For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.’ If water baptism saves, or is even a part of being saved, why didn’t Paul include it here? Because the Gospel is what saves today. Upon believing we become a ‘new creation,’ not just ‘born-again’ like redeemed Israel. Israel was born in going through the Red Sea, but being a part of that favored nation was not enough after the arrival of their Messiah on the scene. Israel, as a nation, needed to be born again by accepting that Jesus Christ was the Son of the Living God, and their Messiah and Kinsman Redeemer. We, by contrast, were never ‘born’ of God in the first place, being Gentiles and aliens from the promises of the commonwealth of Israel, so what we need is to be transformed by God into a creature that God can accept…and now that we’re born into newness of life in the Image of His Dear Son, we’re not only accepted in the Beloved (Eph. 1:6), but made sons and fellow-heirs with Christ. (Eph. 3:6; Romans 8:14-19)
cont’d next post
dfkuz
D
dfkuz
Guest
Reply to Catholic Dude, cont’d
re: Dispensationalism
What is Dispensationalism?
The term dispensation is used by God to identify the fact that at different points in human history, He deals with man in different ways. Take for example, the food God wants us to eat. Adam and Eve were told to eat of the fruit of the Garden (no animal meat). When Noah came off the ark, he was told he could eat whatever he could catch. Later, Moses was given a detailed list of what was clean and unclean for Israel under the Law Covenant, which they were still under in early Acts. During this Dispensation of the Grace of God, Christ tells us through Paul that we are now to enjoy everything with thanksgiving.
Dispensations are not so much time periods as they are the ‘house rules’ of God’s administration over His people in varying circumstances. The Dispensations of Human Conscience and Human Government that began with Adam and Noah are still in effect, but the Dispensation of Grace that began with Paul will end with the Rapture. The Dispensation of the Tribulation will follow and will culminate in the Dispensation of the Kingdom which leads into the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times in which God will gather together everything in Christ, in heaven and earth. (Eph. 1:10).
God designed these dispensations in order to accomplish His Purpose for the heavens and the earth. He has placed certain boundaries in His Word so that we may recognize when His dealings with men change so that His people may honor Him by obeying what He says. (2 Tim. 2:15). Right now, we live within the boundaries of Paul’s epistles where we find the doctrines God has for the Body of Christ (a term found nowhere else). God has always desired man to simply trust Him for everything, but because of pride and stubbornness, man wanted to be judged on a performance-based merit system. So, God allowed it. But He desires now, in this Age of Grace, to bring forth a heavenly people to show forth His Mercy, Grace, and Long-Suffering by simply accepting the free gift He’s offering through His Son, Jesus Christ. All He asks is that we do not try to pay for it, earn it, deserve it, or keep it with the filthy rags of our own self-righteous acts (including water baptism) but to simply trust Him. (Romans 9:30-33; 10:3)
cont’d in next post
dfkuz
re: Dispensationalism
What is Dispensationalism?
The term dispensation is used by God to identify the fact that at different points in human history, He deals with man in different ways. Take for example, the food God wants us to eat. Adam and Eve were told to eat of the fruit of the Garden (no animal meat). When Noah came off the ark, he was told he could eat whatever he could catch. Later, Moses was given a detailed list of what was clean and unclean for Israel under the Law Covenant, which they were still under in early Acts. During this Dispensation of the Grace of God, Christ tells us through Paul that we are now to enjoy everything with thanksgiving.
Dispensations are not so much time periods as they are the ‘house rules’ of God’s administration over His people in varying circumstances. The Dispensations of Human Conscience and Human Government that began with Adam and Noah are still in effect, but the Dispensation of Grace that began with Paul will end with the Rapture. The Dispensation of the Tribulation will follow and will culminate in the Dispensation of the Kingdom which leads into the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times in which God will gather together everything in Christ, in heaven and earth. (Eph. 1:10).
God designed these dispensations in order to accomplish His Purpose for the heavens and the earth. He has placed certain boundaries in His Word so that we may recognize when His dealings with men change so that His people may honor Him by obeying what He says. (2 Tim. 2:15). Right now, we live within the boundaries of Paul’s epistles where we find the doctrines God has for the Body of Christ (a term found nowhere else). God has always desired man to simply trust Him for everything, but because of pride and stubbornness, man wanted to be judged on a performance-based merit system. So, God allowed it. But He desires now, in this Age of Grace, to bring forth a heavenly people to show forth His Mercy, Grace, and Long-Suffering by simply accepting the free gift He’s offering through His Son, Jesus Christ. All He asks is that we do not try to pay for it, earn it, deserve it, or keep it with the filthy rags of our own self-righteous acts (including water baptism) but to simply trust Him. (Romans 9:30-33; 10:3)
cont’d in next post
dfkuz
- Status