FAQ |
Calendar |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#62
|
||||
|
||||
Re: "Rightly Dividing The Book of Acts"
Aloha brother Parrish,
If you are wondering what "set me off" with Premio53, the following Posts - made by Premio53 (criticizing brother Chette Nichols) might clarify: Quote:
When Premio53 said “I have no idea” – he/she said a mouthful! Premio53 has “NO IDEA” WHO brother Chette is. And Premio53 has “NO IDEA” as to WHY brother Chette said WHAT he said. And on top of that Premio53 has “NO IDEA”HOW WELL brother Chette can handle himself on issues like these. In other words – even though Premio53 HAD “NO IDEA” about WHAT or WHO he/she was talking about, he/she ventured a derogatory “OPINION” of brother Chette ANYWAY! WHO does Premio53 think he/she is? Proverbs 29:20 Seest thou a man that is hasty in his words? there is more hope of a fool than of him. {This goes for women too – just in case Premio53 is a woman, since Premio53 has CHOSEN not to tell us anything about him or her self.} Premio53 was taking these “cheap shots” at brother Chette Nichols. Brother Chette lays his life on the line every day on the remote Island of Palawan in the Philippines (awfully close to the radical Muslims!). Brother Chette has started at least three churches in the Philippines, and works more in the ministry in one day than I do in a month! Brother Chette subsists on anywhere’s between $50.00 and $500.00 a month and yet shares whatever God provides him (and his wife Tata; and there three children; and his mother-in-law; and sister-in-law) with those brethren in the church he pastors, and those outside the church as well. WHO IS PREMIO53 TO QUESTION brother Chette’s character or ability? Hmmm? I grow tired of these people who join this Forum and one of the first things they do is QUESTION the character, honesty, or ability of one of the members here. Or they jump into the middle of a Thread and disagree with something that someone posted without knowing anything about what has transpired on the AV1611 Bible Forums before hand (and are too lazy to check the Threads and Posts out). Check out Premio53”s Thread and Posts – it’s either QUESTIONS (ALWAYS "QUESTIONS") or it’s disagreement, dissent, argument, contention, or controversy. What’s with “Christians” nowadays? Here we have a perfect "STRANGER" (about whom we know NOTHING about); and he/she gets right into the “MIDDLE” of some “CONTROVERSIAL” issue; and he/she “takes sides”; and then he/she criticizes someone (WHO THEY DON’T KNOW FROM ADAM!). Are we to take such a person seriously? Are we supposed to extend the “right hand of fellowship” to a STRANGER that REFUSES to share his/her personal testimony with us and yet sees fit to criticize one of the brethren on this Forum? I trow not! Proverbs 26:17 He that passeth by, and meddleth with strife belonging not to him, is like one that taketh a dog by the ears. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Chette said
Quote:
Millions follow cults of people who have cleverly dissected the scriptures to preach a false gospel. The scriptures warn of these false teachers. Look, I have presented many scriptures to support my view. If you think I am in error, show me from these very scriptures where I am wrong. I believe Jesus was rejected on Palm Sunday when he entered Jerusalem. This is a very common belief with Baptists (I am an Independent Fundamental Baptist). I am not sure if it was this thread, but Brother Luke posted a link from Liberty College showing that Palm Sunday fulfilled many scriptures to the very day that Christ would offer himself as King to the Jews. So, this is not an unorthodox view whatsoever, and I happen to completely agree with it because that is what I believe the scriptures truly show. I showed how the apostles asked Jesus in Acts 1 if Jesus was going to restore the kingdom "at this time" and Jesus told them it was not for them to know this information. And I personally do not believe the Holy Spirit would inspire Peter to preach scripture that contradicts Jesus. I showed that in every instance in early Acts that the apostles were preaching "repentance unto life", or believeing on Jesus for forgiveness of sins and receiving everlasting life, never once mentioning the restortation of the kingdom. NOT ONCE. I have been accused several times of not rightly dividing the word, but no one has shown me clearly where I am in error on the scriptures I provided. I am still waiting on that. You can say what you will about me, I am not here to cause division or strife among the brethren. I am interested in truth, and truth only. I do not like to argue with anyone. But when I see someone who in my opinion is presenting false doctrine, I will stand up and say something about it. I do not think I know everything, but I do study carefully, and pray always for the Lord to give me understanding and discernment. I think I have presented very strong evidence for my views that there is only one gospel, and that Peter and the apostles were preaching the very same gospel in the early chapters of Acts as Paul was preaching later on. If someone can clearly show me where I am in error (from the scriptures, not personal interpretation), I will listen. I have looked at the evidence for this supposed "different" gospel preached to the Jews in early Acts. I am not convinced whatsoever from the evidence and scriptures provided. In fact, the more I have read and studied, the more convinced I have become that this teaching is an error. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin said:
Quote:
Luke 17:20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: 21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. 22 And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it. 23 And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there: go not after them, nor follow them. 24 For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day. 25 But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation. First Jesus told them the kingdom comes not with observation, it is not something you can see with your eyes. Then he tells them the kingdom of God is within you. I understand this as receiving the gospel, believeing on Jesus. This may be describing the church age. Then the Lord describes his second coming. But first he must suffer and be rejected of this generation. So Jesus did tell them the answer to their question, although they probably did not understand it. And this is a point to be made. It does not matter what the Jews thought at the time, that has no bearing on reality. They expected the Messiah to come as a King and restore the kingdom. That is the very question these Pharisees asked of Jesus. And the apostles asked the same in Acts 1. The Jews did not know about the church age, they did not understand the Gentiles would be grafted into the body. But that does not change the reality that these things must happen. So, to argue that the Jews didn't expect this thing or that is not really valid. They got it wrong on many counts. |
#65
|
||||||
|
||||||
Re: ""Rightly Dividing" The Book of Acts"
Aloha brother Winman,
I believe we are at “cross-purposes” in regards to this issue. You have continually ignored most of the points that I have made in this Thread, and then have proceeded to defend your beliefs (albeit with Scripture) without regard to what I have presented. I will now proceed to demonstrate what I have claimed: Winman’s Post #32 {with my comments & observations} Quote:
You can try to "explain away" the fact that at the stoning of Stephen the future Apostle to the Gentiles (Saul - Paul) shows up, and immediately following Stephen's death God leads Philip to the Samaritans (part Jews/part Gentiles) due to "persecution" alone; but that doesn't explain the SIGNS & MIRACLES that accompanied Philip's preaching (and which no longer follow "the Gospel of the Grace of God" - i.e. Paul's Gospel). And it surely wasn't "persecution" that caused God to GUIDE Philip to the Ethiopian Eunuch (a Proselyte Jew - i.e. A GENTILE with NO "connection" to the Jews in Jerusalem). It wasn't "PERSECUTION" that "FORCED" Philip to seek out the Ethiopian Eunuch; it was the LEADING of the Holy Spirit - beginning to turn to the Gentiles! "PERSECUTION" had NOTHING to do with it! You supplied a lot of Scripture, but most of it had NOTHING to do with our “real disagreements”. In other words most of the Scripture you supplied was superfluous, since we never had any “disagreement” as to WHEN the nation of Israel REJECTED her Messiah & King in the first place! We “disagree” as to WHAT constitutes the “Gospel” and WHY God turned to the Gentiles. I shall have more to say about some of your other Posts soon. Last edited by George; 06-14-2009 at 05:38 PM. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Bro George
We will have to agree to disagree. I do see that Jesus told some Jews of his death, burial and resurrection. John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. 14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. Nicodemus may not have understood what Jesus meant by being "lifted up", but Jesus was speaking of going to the cross. And John 3:16 is absolutely the same gospel we Gentiles are saved by. God "gave" his son. That is the death burial and resurrection right there. John 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. 33 This he said, signifying what death he should die. 34 The people answered him, We have heard out of the law that Christ abideth for ever: and how sayest thou, The Son of man must be lifted up? who is this Son of man? John 8:28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things. These verses are to show that Jesus did tell the people of his crucifixion, although I am sure they did not really understand these sayings. But that is not the point. Jesus was clearly teaching the Jews to believe on him for everlasting life throughout the four gospels. As far as signs, they ceased. But the early believers did speak in tongues and other gifts, including some Gentiles. 1 Cor 13:8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. As for the "gospel of the kingdom", let's examine a verse. Matt 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come. If this gospel of the kingdom means the restoration of the kingdom of Israel, is this what preachers and pastors in churches across the world should be preaching on Sunday morning? Should we preach every Sunday that the Jews should repent of killing Jesus so that the kingdom would be restored? That makes no sense whatsoever. No, it is the gospel that Jesus is the Son of God, who came and died for our sins on the cross, was buried, and rose from the dead. This is the gospel that is to be preached to all nations till the end. In Romans 2 Paul explains that the Jews and Gentiles are saved in the same way. Rom 2:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: And Acts clearly shows that Peter was preaching the gospel of believeing on Jesus for everlasting life in early Acts, not the restoration of the kingdom. Acts 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. 16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. 17 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? 18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life. Here you see Peter telling the apostles and disciples in Jerusalem that the Gentiles received the Holy Ghost just as they had on the day of Pentacost who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ. And then the disciples said, then hath God ALSO to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life. That is so very clear and easy to understand. There is no mention of repenting of killing Jesus here. But it is mentioned that the apostles and disciples on Pentacost believed on the Lord Jesus Christ. And verse 18 shows that the message was "repentance unto life". That is speaking of receiving everlasting life (John 3:16), not the restoration of the kingdom. Bro George, I respect you, but I am in total disagreement with you on this teaching. I see not one single verse in Acts where the apostles preached the restoration of the kingdom if the Jews repented of killing Jesus. But I clearly see the preaching of believeing on Jesus for the forgiveness of sins and receiving everlasting life. We will have to agree to disagree. Last edited by Winman; 06-14-2009 at 06:14 PM. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
I'm glad we can discuss these things without anger, it is a testimony to both of you and your walk with Christ. Pass the lemonade...
|
#68
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
winman, I referred you back to Georges post because he has presented the differences in the Gospels of what Peter taught from Matt - Act7. I referred you back to his post so that we would not be going over ground that was already covered. I referred you to George's previous post because it was obvious that you didn't understand what was being shared from solid scriptural evidence and you answer is always, "I disagree with you". that is it you, you always disagree, then you come back to argue the point that was already covered. you don't seem to be learning or being edified but you seem to be pushing your view as being right and everyone else is wrong. We don't want to argue we come here to learn and to be edified. it gets ready tiresome dealing with you that is why I back away. but you always have one last word, one last shot. are you one of those types of people who must have the last word or you can't sleep at night? here I give you the last word. please let me post it for you, I disagree with you. there you have the last word Last edited by chette777; 06-14-2009 at 07:20 PM. |
#69
|
||||
|
||||
Re; "Rightly Dividing The Book of Acts"
Brother Winman said:
Quote:
Aloha brother Winman, The Lord Jesus Christ "SPOKE" of His death burial and resurrection on several occasions - always with His Disciples or in private. You quoted several verses, supposedly in "opposition" to what I said. We will now examine those verses to see if they are truly "contradict" my words: Quote:
I never said that the Lord didn't "reveal" to some of His Disciples His death, burial, and resurrection. I specifically said: "He {The Lord Jesus Christ} DID NOT “preach” His death, burial, and resurrection to the nation of Israel"! Nicodemus came to Jesus "by night" - this NOT the SAME as the Lord Jesus Christ "preaching" to the nation of Israel about His death, burial, and resurrection! John 3:1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: 2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him. And now on to your other verses: Quote:
And not only that - NONE OF THE VERSES YOU CITED SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THE LORD JESUS CHRIST'S "RESURRECTION", they only signified what kind of "death he should die". That's NOT much of a "gospel" - WITHOUT THE "RESURRECTION"! It surely isn't "the 'Gospel' of the Grace of God"! The verses that you cited DO NOT PROVE that the Lord Jesus Christ "preached" about His death, burial, and resurrection to the nation of Israel; on the contrary, they PROVE (along with verses that I cited before) what I claimed in Post #65: George's quote - Post #65 Quote:
I repeat: The Lord Jesus Christ NEVER PREACHED TO THE NATION OF ISRAEL HIS DEATH, BURIAL, AND RESURRECTION. {That is Paul's "Gospel" - "the Gospel of the Grace of God" - NOT "the Gospel of the Kingdom of God"} With the verses you cited - You have FAILED TO DISPROVE what I so clearly stated. Instead, I am afraid that you have (in desperation to "prove" your point) USED the Scriptures to support a personal belief, (in spite of what the "words" actually said) instead of having SEARCHED the Scriptures for the "TRUTH"; the whole "TRUTH"; and nothing but the "TRUTH". 2 Corinthians 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ. 2 Corinthians 4:1 Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not; 2 But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
I must say that this is a strange forum. I simply wanted to discuss scripture and everything becomes a personal attack.
Quote:
1) you will not rightly divide the word of truth 2) preconceived Ideas as to what the scriptures teach 3) failure to properly study to show thy self approved I simply thanked Winman for presenting what I thought were strong scriptural arguments and couldn't understand why anyone would accuse him of not studying the scriptures. The next thing I know George comes out of a whirlwind and slams me for not being hospitable because he thinks I was attacking you while demanding to know everything about my personal life instead of addressing the scriptures! I have no idea who George is but he seems to run this forum. That's fine. I'm new and understand my pecking order but I really don't understand the sensitive feelings. I will refrain from posting for awhile. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|