Soul man
Member
The truth of divine revelation is taught as the answer to every problem in each Epistle. Each epistle is written to churches which were blood-washed and Spirit-filled, so when Paul prays for such churches as the Ephesians church to have a revelation in the knowledge of Christ, he is praying for this to take place in a church which is blood washed and Spirit filled and coming behind in no spiritual gift.
Thus it is obvious that if anyone wanted to make a point of it, he could have disagreed with Paul.
Many didn't because to them it seemed Paul was bringing a new doctrine.
But instead of being new, it was really the fullness of all that God was and is trying to do, wrapped up in a term.
Man, within himself, cannot know God. Man, through the blessings of God, cannot know him. Man, through the temporal life, cannot know God. Neither does man, through the free gifts of healing, salvation and the baptism in the Holy Spirit, come to know God.
For these reasons, the Apostle brings the message of Revelation to already-established churches.
This is not a controversial truth to most Bible scholars. The fact we need a revelation of Jesus Christ is agreed upon by all those who are willing to take the word, pure and undefiled, as it is written.
The controversy starts over how to receive this revelation. As usual in Gods work, the doctrine never divides, it is always the method. If you just believed the doctrine and never put a method with it you would be all right.
Most people are pleased when I preach the crucified life. But when I state a method by which to live it, they get angry. They don't want to live a truth, they just want to talk about it.
The eternal securitist, for instance, is quick to say that he has been baptized in the Holy Spirit, but when you turn to the Scriptures and pick out occasions when people were baptized in the Holy Spirit and use that for a pattern for receiving the Holy Spirit, he gets upset, he doesn't want methods.
We do not want practicality, we do not want to get down to business to see whether or not we measure up to the pattern. We prefer to say "I have it" without ever having to produce it, live it or make it practical.
It is amazing how much Christianity is based purely on talk and receiving of blessings. The two go hand in hand. We have received blessings and we talk about doctrines, but we cannot do both without living the life.
The revelation of Jesus Christ is the same way, Paul's epistles are full of the method of receiving the revelation of Jesus Christ.
Not just a revelation, but the revelation of Jesus Christ, Gal. 1:11-12.
Everybody has had a revelation, Jim Jones had a revelation, David Karesh had a revelation, but the method I speak of is the revelation of Jesus Christ, the indwelling life of Jesus Christ.
I am sure Manson himself had some kind of Revelation.
Every believer must have "the revelation of Jesus Christ" to really fully understand what God is doing right now, John 14:20.
Thus it is obvious that if anyone wanted to make a point of it, he could have disagreed with Paul.
Many didn't because to them it seemed Paul was bringing a new doctrine.
But instead of being new, it was really the fullness of all that God was and is trying to do, wrapped up in a term.
Man, within himself, cannot know God. Man, through the blessings of God, cannot know him. Man, through the temporal life, cannot know God. Neither does man, through the free gifts of healing, salvation and the baptism in the Holy Spirit, come to know God.
For these reasons, the Apostle brings the message of Revelation to already-established churches.
This is not a controversial truth to most Bible scholars. The fact we need a revelation of Jesus Christ is agreed upon by all those who are willing to take the word, pure and undefiled, as it is written.
The controversy starts over how to receive this revelation. As usual in Gods work, the doctrine never divides, it is always the method. If you just believed the doctrine and never put a method with it you would be all right.
Most people are pleased when I preach the crucified life. But when I state a method by which to live it, they get angry. They don't want to live a truth, they just want to talk about it.
The eternal securitist, for instance, is quick to say that he has been baptized in the Holy Spirit, but when you turn to the Scriptures and pick out occasions when people were baptized in the Holy Spirit and use that for a pattern for receiving the Holy Spirit, he gets upset, he doesn't want methods.
We do not want practicality, we do not want to get down to business to see whether or not we measure up to the pattern. We prefer to say "I have it" without ever having to produce it, live it or make it practical.
It is amazing how much Christianity is based purely on talk and receiving of blessings. The two go hand in hand. We have received blessings and we talk about doctrines, but we cannot do both without living the life.
The revelation of Jesus Christ is the same way, Paul's epistles are full of the method of receiving the revelation of Jesus Christ.
Not just a revelation, but the revelation of Jesus Christ, Gal. 1:11-12.
Everybody has had a revelation, Jim Jones had a revelation, David Karesh had a revelation, but the method I speak of is the revelation of Jesus Christ, the indwelling life of Jesus Christ.
I am sure Manson himself had some kind of Revelation.
Every believer must have "the revelation of Jesus Christ" to really fully understand what God is doing right now, John 14:20.
Last edited: