Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiwi Christian
Also, Paul did refer to those Corinthians as "babes" in 1 Cor 3:1:
1 Corinthians 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. 2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.
This compliments what Peter said to those believers in 1 Peter 2:2 "As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:"
A general rule when rightly dividing the scripture to understand Church Age doctrine, is to use Paul's writings to the church as a measuring stick, and where another writer contradicts Paul you stay with Paul. The above examples from 1 Corinthians & 1 Peter demonstrate that there is no contradiction between what both men wrote in reference to those believers being babes/newborn babes fed with milk. This fits in with what John said about being born again, because when you are born again you start off as a baby again. That's my take on it anyway.
Just because John and Peter coined the phrase "born again", and Paul didn't mention it, doesn't mean that Church Age Christians are not born again. Those who teach such are called hyper-dispensationalists in my circles, they go overboard in their dividing of the Bible.
|
Matt, I have found in my experience that when person A accuses person B of being a "hyerdispensationalist" it nearly always means that person B is just more dispensational than person A. I came from the Campbellites and they have 2 dispensations: The OT and NT, I have been very receptive to the dispensational teachings as it resolves ALL my questions I had, and other than a few mysteries personal to me that are of no real serious consequence. there Bible harmonizes perfectly, and I have made a few little discoveries of my own, one being that not only do we have to rightly divide the Scriptures as a whole, we have to rightly divide Paul as to times past, but now, ages to come.
Grace and peace brother.
Tony