One Church Or Two In Our New Testament?

[thessalonian]

because mine is considered far better than theirs. : 0 ).

:o

Prov 3
5] Trust in the LORD with all your heart,
and do not rely on your own insight.

:o)

1 Cor 3. If any one among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise.

 

[Terral]

Church #2 Has Eternal Security, But Church #1 Does Not

Hi Thessalonian:

Thank you for writing. A man with a question is one after my own heart.

Thessalonian >> Terral. Do those who use John 3:16 and John 10:28 as justification for Eternal Security missusing those verses?

Yes. Here is the golden question. Has Christ died for anyone in John 3 or John 10? The answer is No. Christ's offer to give His sheep (that is out us) eternal life is qualified by His statement that they must ‘endure to the end’ (Matthew 24:13) to be saved. Judas is counted among Christ’s sheep, but will he obtain eternal life like those who endured? No. What about Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1-10? They were indeed ‘called,’ but they were not ‘chosen.’ There is no such thing as ‘eternal security’ for those obedient to the ‘gospel of the kingdom,’ according to Church #1 and precept # 10 above, saying,

10. Members of the bride DO NOT have eternal security, but must ‘endure to the end.’ Matthew 24:13.

Those members of the kingdom church (Matthew 16:16-19, Matthew 18:17-18) are justified by works and NOT by faith alone (James 2:24), according to precept #7 of church #1.

Thessalonian >> For the record I don't hold to ES.

You would then be very much incorrect for the second church of the OP, which includes those saved today by Paul’s ‘word of the cross’ (1 Corinthians 1:18) gospel message. We have lives hidden with Christ “IN†God (Colossians 3:1-3) and have eternal security “IN†Christ Jesus, according to Church #2 and precept # 10. We were sealed by the Holy Spirit upon believing the gospel (Ephesians 1:13-14) for the ‘day of redemption’ (Ephesians 4:30), according to precept #7 for our church #2 of today. If you will notice, each doctrine component for both churches contains directly opposing precepts. Those justified by works (kingdom bride) have no eternal security, but the mystery church saved by faith apart from works (Ephesians 2:8-9) most definitely have been baptized into Christ (Galatians 3:27) with lives hidden in God Himself (Colossians 3:3). You do not believe in ET, because you have borrowed elements of the first church of the Opening Post and have added that to your own set of doctrinal components in true Roman Catholic fashion. Their beliefs include dumping the entire bible into one pot to take out what tastes good to them, without acknowledging that the word of God must be rightly divided (2 Timothy 2:15).

Thank you again for writing,

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

 

[Terral]

Christ "IN" Me AND God "IN" Him = Three

Hi Thessalonian:

Thank you for writing. Please use the Private Messaging system for your ‘chat’ and these threads for presenting your case for or against the hypothesis of the Opening Post.

Terral Original >> My sources are quoted in the OP of this thread; like 1 Corinthians 1:18 and so on. You will not find Terral quoting third party commentary from anybody, because mine is considered far better than theirs. : 0 ).

Thessalonian >> Prov 3 5] Trust in the LORD with all your heart, and do not rely on your own insight. 1 Cor 3. If any one among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise.

That is why you see Scriptural support for every statement in both outlines. Some of us have had Scripture rightly divided for decades. There is nothing wrong with preferring your own commentary to that of others. This bible thumper prefers to wet his own boots. : 0 ).

Christ in me is part of the ‘mystery among the Gentiles’ (Colossians 1:27) and this side of the debate his the ‘mind of Christ’ (1 Corinthians 2:16). This will make much more sense at the Judgment, when Christ points His finger at you to say “I told you so . . . right here . . .â€Â, but then He retrieves testimony from these deliberations. Christ in me is no fool and neither is God “IN†Him (2 Corinthians 5:19). God’s Word is what supports my case in the OP and you are encouraged to point out any errors you can using Scripture. GL.

Thanks again for writing,

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

 

[thessalonian]

Hi Thessalonian:

Thank you for writing. Please use the Private Messaging system for your ‘chat’ and these threads for presenting your case for or against the hypothesis of the Opening Post.

I didn't know you were a moderator. Perhaps they haven't gotten around to identifying you as one. If you have any issues with my posts and have a specific rule that I have broken please notify them.

Mormons support with scripture. Jw's support with scripture. That someone claims to support with scripture is meaningless. JM already gave sufficient reason to reject your theories about two kingdoms/ 2 gospels but you cannot see it.

Your twisting of scripture and nullifying of the Word of God is obvious to all who are open to truth.

 

[wavy]

Whew! And I thought I needed to repent of being arrogant (which I still do though :-D )

***not you, thess***

 

[Terral]

Show My Errors And I Will Kill The Fatted Calf In Your Honor

Hi Thessalonian and Wavy:

Thank you both for writing.

Terral Original >> Thank you for writing. Please use the Private Messaging system for your ‘chat’ and these threads for presenting your case for or against the hypothesis of the Opening Post.

Thessalonian >> I didn't know you were a moderator. Perhaps they haven't gotten around to identifying you as one. If you have any issues with my posts and have a specific rule that I have broken please notify them.

Heh . . . No. However, I have read the rules and understand that Judy has asked us to use the Private Messaging System for our personal chat. One does not have to be a Mod to know the rules and ask for you to please comply when writing on his threads. They do not want to see a mile of personal messages on this “Churches†Thread and neither does Terral.

Thessalonian >> Mormons support with scripture. Jw's support with scripture. That someone claims to support with scripture is meaningless.

No sir. Their interpretations will not withstand the test of debate on this thread. There is such a thing as ‘rightly dividing’ the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15), which tells you that there ways of doing things incorrectly. The right interpretation is the one that says exactly what God is saying without creating a single contradiction. Have you managed to point out any contradictions in my Opening Post? No. And you will not either; guaranteed. These things have been debated on other Boards long before they were presented here. Where is your evidence for one thing being stated out of true context? Heh . . . Nuff said . . .

Thessalonian >> JM already gave sufficient reason to reject your theories about two kingdoms/ 2 gospels but you cannot see it.

That would be your opinion about something JM said, which means less than nothing. What matters is what you can quote and what you can prove errant from my Opening Post using God’s Word. 2 Timothy 2:15.

Thessalonians >> Your twisting of scripture and nullifying of the Word of God is obvious to all who are open to truth.

We disagree. What we do not see is a long line of posts from members here “quoting >>†from the Opening Post and offering any kind of argument. JM has not even quoted one word from the Opening Post and has not even offered anything remotely similar to a solid case for any ‘one church’ interpretation of the New Testament. Where is your doctrinal outline teaching your one church? Heh . . . Perhaps the thing you guys fail to realize is that one must have sufficient spiritual maturity “IN†Christ Jesus to even offer a list of doctrinal outlines teaching your doctrines. The chances are that many of the members here have never even seen the doctrinal components for the two gospels ( http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=20385 ) or the two churches (in the OP) presented in an outline. That means you have never seen two outlines for the two churches taught in lists of directly ‘opposing’ doctrinal precepts either.

You must decide if your ‘one church’ is saved by the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 4:23, etc.) OR Paul’s ‘word of the cross’ (1 Corinthians 1:18) gospel message. Are your members called the ‘bride’ (John 3:29) like Peter’s kingdom church #1 OR “Christ’s body†(1 Corinthians 12:27) like those believing Paul’s gospel? Do your church members sit on throne judging Israel (Luke 22:30) like Peter and the bride (Revelation 20:4) OR judge the world and the angels (1 Corinthians 6:2-3) like Paul’s mystery church?

The two lists of doctrinal precepts teaching these doctrines of BOTH New Testament Churches exist in your Bible, which proves beyond all doubt that both of these churches exist. You guys can keep your heads buried in the sand if you like. Peter’s church #1 WAS seen by the OT prophets, but Paul’s mystery church was not. You cannot have it both ways and you must choose just ‘one’ for your own personal church, if you ever get around to posting that to this thread. When you have posted your ‘one church’ outline and JM has presented his case, then each of you will have room to boast. Until then neither of you have quoted and refuted one thing in the OP and this side will not be holding his breath either . . .

Wavy >> Whew! And I thought I needed to repent of being arrogant (which I still do though)

Are you referring to that “No church†post on the first page? Heh . . . Please forgive, but you are not posting on this thread with any presumption of being arrogant. Do you see errors in the Opening Post of this thread OR at the top of this page? Great! Then use your cut and paste button and copy that to your next reply and show everyone the folly of my errors using Scripture. Do that simple thing and this side of the Debate will kill he fatted calf, wash your feet, clothe you in fine garments, place a crown on your head and put golden rings on all your fingers; then invite all to the celebration dedicated only to you. GL in the “Two Churches†Debate,

Thank you both again for writing,

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

 

[thessalonian]

Heh . . . No. However, I have read the rules and understand that Judy has asked us to use the Private Messaging System for our personal chat. One does not have to be a Mod to know the rules and ask for you to please comply when writing on his threads. They do not want to see a mile of personal messages on this “Churches†Thread and neither does Terral.

Heh.... I'll leave it to the mods to determine if posting of a couple of Bible verses constitues chat. Notify them if you like. Are there two terral's here? :

I don't see this rule that you keep stating that one must quote a statement in the OP. Perhaps you should get the mods to add it.

 

[wavy]

Re: Show My Errors And I Will Kill The Fatted Calf In Your H

Wavy >> Whew! And I thought I needed to repent of being arrogant (which I still do though)

Are you referring to that “No church†post on the first page? Heh . . . Please forgive, but you are not posting on this thread with any presumption of being arrogant.

No, actually I was referring to these:

No. Please forgive. I thought you had something to add to this thread. My bad

You will not find Terral quoting third party commentary from anybody, because mine is considered far better than theirs.

Have you managed to point out any contradictions in my Opening Post? No. And you will not either; guaranteed. These things have been debated on other Boards long before they were presented here. Where is your evidence for one thing being stated out of true context? Heh . . . Nuff said . . .

That would be your opinion about something JM said, which means less than nothing.

You guys can keep your heads buried in the sand if you like.

When you have posted your ‘one church’ outline and JM has presented his case, then each of you will have room to boast. Until then neither of you have quoted and refuted one thing in the OP and this side will not be holding his breath either . . .

 

[Terral]

Sticks And Stones Does Not Make A "One Church" Cas

Hi Thessalonian and Wavy:

Thessalonian >> Are there two terral's here?

Wavy >> No, actually I was referring to these:

Did either of you find one thing errant about my ‘two church’ hypothesis or ANY of the Biblical evidence given in the 'two church' outlines of the Opening Post? No? Please feel free to post your ‘one church’ doctrinal outline at any time OR try to find even one error in my Opening Post. Otherwise I will thank you both for writing and you guys have a nice day. I would love to “quote >>†from the arguments of either of you, but you guys are off onto something else. GL with that. There is nothing for stone throwers here.

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

 

[thessalonian]

Terral,

Proof there is only ONE Church.

Matt.16
[18] And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build MY CHURCH, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.

Here Christ says he will build his church. I am sure you will say this is not Paul's Church. But such a claim makes a liar out of Christ for the gates of hell have prevailed against it if your theories are true. Christ spoke a false prophecy. The gates of hell have not and shall not prevail against Christ's Church and so we know that there is one Church that has existed since the day of pentecost. Not since Paul's episode on the road to Damascus. Pentecost is the day of the birth of the Church. This is where your theory is generated out of confusion. Christ was not establishing the Church but laying the groundwork for the day of pentecost when the Church would be established.

Lots more could be said about this passage with regard to your two Church theory but I will leave it at this obvious dilema you must answer.

Matt.18
[17] If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

So in the days of Paul and the twelve do tell which Church a believer would take a dispute to if he was a member of Peter's Chrurch. Or vice versa and the offense was from someone in the opposing Church? Don't tell me this is a teaching only for Jesus Church because Paul speaks of it quite clearly in 1 Cor.


Acts.9
[31] So the church throughout all Judea and Galilee and Sama'ria had peace and was built up; and walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit it was multiplied.

Get that. The Church was in Samaria. Samaritans were not Jews. Neither was Cornelius who of course was a gentile convert. Peter brought the faith to him. The Christian faith. The one faith. The one Church. Paul was even a Christian by then. But God does not send Paul to make cornelius a member of Pauls Church as opposed to Peter's. Because there is no such opposition. They are one. The JEWS saw that the gentiles accepted the Gospel in Acts 10, 11. It does not say, "so they will be another Church". Rather the gentiles were accepted as converts in to the ONE CHURCH.

Acts.11
[22] News of this came to the ears of the church in Jerusalem, and they sent Barnabas to Antioch.
[26] and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. For a whole year they met with the church, and taught a large company of people; and in Antioch the disciples were for the first time called Christians.

So Barnabas went to Antioch. Barnabas was a Jew. He made disciples of Jesus, some of whom were Jews. Are you telling us there are two different types of christans in two different Churches?

Acts.12
[1] About that time Herod the king laid violent hands upon some who belonged to the church.
[5] So Peter was kept in prison; but earnest prayer for him was made to God by the church.

Hmmm, seems like the Holy Spirit, inspiring Luke (who interestingly enough was a gentile) didn't know yet that there were two Churches. For he speaks of "THE CHURCH". Herod's rules applied to both Peter and Paul.


Acts.14
[23] And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they believed.
[27] And when they arrived, they gathered the church together and declared all that God had done with them, and how he had opened a door of faith to the Gentiles.

Hmmm. The door of faith was opened to the GENTILES. Paul was preaching by now. No indication at all that THE CHURCH was two different ones here. It even shows that the Jews and Gentils were both a part of the Church.

Acts 15
[22] Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to choose men from among them and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They sent Judas called Barsab'bas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren,

Hmmm. Acts 15 is full of stuff that refutes your two Church theory. Note that Paul was a part of this WHOLE CHURCH. The council brought together leaders from the WHOLE CHURCH. I am sure some of them were gentiles from where Paul reaped his converts. They came together and Peter declared the one gospel of grace. This is the same Gospel that Paul reprimands him for not giving a good example of in Galatians. Paul, a member, by your distortions of another Church, goes out with members of the Kingdom Church. No evidence that they gave different commands to two different Churches. They went out delivering ONE MESSAGE.



All I have time for right now. Of course JM already posted the verse that says that the Church is built on Prophets and APOSTLESSSSS. Paul was on apostle.

There is also 1 Tim 3:15 which says that THE CHURCH is the pilar and support of the truth. You have two Churches being the pilar and support of the truth. Or do you claim that Peter and the other eleven's Church was not teaching the truth? In saying such things you would be saying that Christ was not teaching truth either. I would hope not. But you might.

I am expecting from you "this is not in outline form and it doesn't quote me so I don't know how it applies to my OP". Or, "stop posting chat on this message board". I might even hear you say again "there is no scripture in any of your posts". Feel free to post these things. I love it. :-D

 

[Terral]

Thank You For Not Quoting Me From The Opening Post

Hi Thessalonian:

Thank you very much for writing and for not quoting from my hypothesis or two church outlines from the OP. Since you obviously could not “quote me >>†and point out errors, then you are trying to make a case for your “one church.†Very well. However, this affects NOTHING presented in the OP.

Thessalonian >> Proof there is only ONE Church.

No sir. This is evidence to support the premise that you see only one church in the New Testament.

Thessalonian quotes >> Matt.16 [18] And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build MY CHURCH, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.

Thessalonian Commentary >> Here Christ says he will build his church. I am sure you will say this is not Paul's Church. But such a claim makes a liar out of Christ for the gates of hell have prevailed against it if your theories are true.

Your prediction is most accurate. Has Christ died for anybody in Matthew 16? No. These kingdom disciples are being gathered through the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 4:23, Matthew 9:35, etc.), which includes the doctrinal components of repentance and water baptism (Mark 1:4, Acts 2:38). Does Paul teach that our forgiveness is through water baptism today? No. Paul’s Gospel includes our redemption that is “IN†Christ (Romans 3:24) and our forgiveness through His shed blood (Ephesians 1:7). Christ is gathering the only church to exist during His walk TO the Cross, which is the kingdom church gathered through the Gospel of the Kingdom. These are the same disciples (Peter and John) that Paul had to submit the ‘gospel I preach among the Gentiles’ (Galatians 2:2) some twenty years after Pentecost in Acts 15. Were these kingdom Jews baptized into Christ (Galatians 3:27) and into His death (Romans 6:3-4) to be raised with Him and seated ‘IN’ the heavenly places (Ephesians 2:6)? No. They did not even have that opportunity, because Christ has yet to die for anyone in Matthew 16. You are confusing Church #1 from my outline with Church #2 that could not even exist, until AFTER the start of Acts 9 with the Apostle Paul as the “first†(1 Timothy 1:15-16). How could Paul become their father “IN†Christ through the Gospel (1 Corinthians 4:15) way back in Matthew 16? That is quite IMPOSSIBLE and your interpretation does not even make Biblical sense.

Thessalonian >> Christ spoke a false prophecy. The gates of hell have not and shall not prevail against Christ's Church and so we know that there is one Church that has existed since the day of pentecost.

But, you are showing the kingdom church existing back in Matthew 16:16-19, just like in Matthew 18:17-18. Peter is preaching the same repentance and water baptism for the ‘forgiveness of sins’ (Acts 2:38) on Pentecost that John preached from the beginning (Mark 1:4-5). That tells you that Peter is adding to the same kingdom church (Matthew 16:16-19) here at Pentecost through the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 24:14). Peter was required to preach the gospel of the kingdom AND baptize (Mark 16:15-16) in water for salvation. However, that has NOTHING to do with Paul’s Gospel given to him through a ‘revelation of Jesus Christ’ (Galatians 1:11-12) AFTER the start of Acts 9 and his conversion.

You are trying to add the works of repentance, confession and water baptism (Mark 1:4-5) from the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 24:14) to Paul’s “my gospel†(Romans 2:16) that is “according to the revelation of the mystery†(Romans 16:25). Peter’s church is called the ‘bride’ (John 3:29) but Paul’s mystery church (Ephesians 5:32) is called “Christ’s body†(1 Corinthians 12:27). Prophecy sees Peter’s kingdom ‘bride,’ but NONE of the OT Prophets see Paul, our mystery gospel (Ephesians 6:19), our mystery church (Ephesians 5:32, Colossians 1:24-27) OR our mystery translation (1 Corinthians 15:51-53 = 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17). You are confusing Peter’s fulfillment of PROPHECY for the ‘bride,’ with Paul’s ‘revelation of the mystery’ for the mystery ‘body of Christ’ (Ephesians 4:12).

Thessalonian >> Not since Paul's episode on the road to Damascus. Pentecost is the day of the birth of the Church.

No sir. John the Baptist came first and began preaching the kingdom (Matthew 3:1-6) to Israel only and sins were forgiven right here in Mark 1:4-5. Christ is adding to the kingdom church in the very first chapter right here in Mark 1:14-15, while preaching the ‘gospel of God’ (Mark 1:14 = gospel of the kingdom in Matthew 4:23). You are inferring that nobody was saved and added to this same “bride†that John the Baptist talks about in John 3:29, as Christ called His Elect the “sons of the bridal chamber.†Mark 2:19. Peter and the others selected Matthias and Barsabbas (Justus = Acts 1:23) from those who walked with them for this entire three year period:

"Therefore it is necessary that of the men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us -- beginning with the baptism of John until the day that He was taken up from us--one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection." Acts 1:21-22.

Those men are representatives from the kingdom ‘church’ (Matthew 18:17-18) that enlarged throughout the three years leading up to Pentecost. John the Baptist is the spirit witness from God (John 1:6) coming before the witnesses of blood and water (Christ = sending Twelve). They are all preaching the “Gospel of the Kingdom†(Matthew 24:14), which we DO NOT even preach today. The Gospel of the Kingdom is Gospel #1 here ( http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=20385 ) Paul’s Gospel is #2. Your theology makes no distinction between these two gospels of the New Testament. Our ‘mystery’ church began with Paul on the road to Damascus.

Thessalonian >> This is where your theory is generated out of confusion. Christ was not establishing the Church but laying the groundwork for the day of pentecost when the Church would be established.

No sir. Your Roman Catholic Denomination mixes the works of the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ with Paul’s “word of the cross†(1 Corinthians 1:18) gospel message to create one of your very own. Since those rejecting the true gospel receive the ‘deluding influence’ (2 Thessalonians 2:11) to continue believing ‘what is false,’ then your interpretation says our church (NOT) began at Pentecost. You have picked a happy middle ground between the Kingdom church starting with John the Baptist and Christ AND our mystery church beginning with Paul to find yourself beginning your own personal church here in Acts 2. And yet, Peter is still preaching the same repentance and baptism of Mark 1:4-5, and you pretend that those saved through the ministry of John the Baptist and Christ are not gathered to any church at all.

The fact is that the “gospel of the Kingdom†was being preached through the Father (John the Baptist’s ministry from God = John 1:6) AND the Son (Jesus Christ) AND the Holy Spirit, which began on the ‘Day of Pentecost.’ This is the third leg of the offering of the “gospel of the kingdom†to ISRAEL ONLY (Acts 2:14, Acts 2:22, Acts 2:36) that began way back in Mark 1. The funny thing is that Peter is addressing “all the house of Israel†(Acts 2:36) and you say that is our Gentile dominant “His Body†Church (Colossians 1:24) under the ‘dispensation of God’s grace’ Ephesians 3:2, given TO PAUL for Gentiles. Haaaaa! That is really funny. Would you care to explain how Peter is preaching Paul’s “gospel to the UNCIRCUMCISED†(Galatians 2:7) to these “men of Israel†(Acts 2:22) on this feast day of Pentecost in Jerusalem in Acts 2? Heh . . . Good Luck.

Thessalonian >> Lots more could be said about this passage with regard to your two Church theory but I will leave it at this obvious dilema you must answer.

Please . . . since you quoted NOTHING from either of my two church outlines of the OP, then try to concentrate on proving your ‘one church’ theory that indeed needs a lot of work . . .

Thessalonian Quotes >> Matt.18 [17] If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

Thessalonian Commentary >> So in the days of Paul and the twelve do tell which Church a believer would take a dispute to if he was a member of Peter's Chrurch. Or vice versa and the offense was from someone in the opposing Church? Don't tell me this is a teaching only for Jesus Church because Paul speaks of it quite clearly in 1 Cor.

Heh . . . According to you, this ‘church’ does not even exist until Acts 2, but your quote is from Matthew 18. Please say something that makes ‘Biblical’ sense . . . This is the same kingdom ‘church’ gathered through John the Baptist and Christ, unless you want to try and prove that neither of them were capable of actually preaching the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 4:23, Matthew 9:35) and actually converting anyone to the kingdom ‘bride.’ You must have a poor image of the preaching capabilities of John the Baptist and Christ, if nobody was gathered through the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ until Pentecost. Even Peter and the Twelve with all of those Jews like Matthias in Acts 1 are part of that ‘kingdom church’ that you are talking about in Matthew 16 and Matthew 18. Christ sent them out to gather more members in Matthew 10:5-7 from Israel only, but according to you NOBODY was gathered until Pentecost. Your theory here is simply untrue and you have a lot of explaining to do.

Thessalonian Quotes >> Acts.9 [31] So the church throughout all Judea and Galilee and Sama'ria had peace and was built up; and walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit it was multiplied.

Thessalonian Commentary >> Get that. The Church was in Samaria. Samaritans were not Jews.

The ‘gospel of the kingdom’ was going to the whole world, but to Jerusalem first (Luke 22:47) and then Samaria (Acts 1:8) and then to “the remotest part of the earth.†Acts 1:8. However, Israel did not obtain the kingdom of God, but those who were chosen through the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ did indeed obtain it (Romans 11:7). God gathered members to the ‘early rains’ (James 5:7) kingdom ‘bride,’ so they can be resurrected with the ‘body of Christ’ to START the “Day of the Lord†(2 Thessalonians 2:2) and sit on thrones during that 1000 years (Revelation 20:4) and judge over “ISRAEL†(Luke 22:30). Peter and the early rains kingdom church represent those ‘cut off’ in Revelation 20:4 and all of those martyred during the thousand years join them upon the ‘sea of glass’ (Revelation 4:6, Revelation 15:2) ‘before the throne’ (Revelation 7:14-15) of the Lamb. They represent the ‘bride’ going to the marriage supper (Revelation 19:5-10), but the members of our mystery “Christ’s body†judge the ‘world and the angels’ (1 Corinthians 6:2-3) and we are “IN†the Lamb in the ‘center of the throne’ (Revelation 7:17) even now (Ephesians 2:6-7). Peter and the kingdom ‘bride’ are justified by works and not by faith alone (James 2:24), while the members of our mystery church today are justified by faith apart from works (Romans 4:4-6). Once again your narrow theology does not make allowances for the vast differences between the two churches described in the OP of this thread. You are stomping around in the Four Gospels and early Acts pretending that this is our ‘mystery church’ (Ephesians 5:32) from the Pauline Epistles, because your Roman Catholic dogma is derived mostly from kingdom doctrine for the ‘bride.’

Thessalonian Commentary continues > > Neither was Cornelius who of course was a gentile convert. Peter brought the faith to him. The Christian faith. The one faith. The one Church.

NO sir. Cornelius was added to the Kingdom ‘bride’ just like everyone else converted through the “gospel of the kingdom†(Matthew 24:14). You are trying to combine kingdom doctrine for the bride with grace doctrine for Paul’s body of Christ mystery church from his Epistles.

Thessalonian >> Paul was even a Christian by then. But God does not send Paul to make cornelius a member of Pauls Church as opposed to Peter's.

No sir, because Cornelius was already called to the kingdom bride through obedience to the ‘gospel of the kingdom.’ That is why you see Peter offering him water (Acts 10:47) baptism for the forgiveness of his sins. God is using this as a ‘sign’ that the Gentiles under Paul’s ‘dispensation of God’s grace’ would receive the Holy Spirit by ‘hearing with faith’ (Galatians 3:2). Peter would use this information at the famous meeting in Jerusalem later in Acts 15:7-11, which convinced James and the others that Paul’s ministry among the Gentiles was something TOTALLY DIFFERENT and new from the kingdom church based in Jerusalem. That is why James passed down the judgment that “we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles†(Acts 15:19), even though the bride was told to keep the ‘whole Law’ (James 2:10). We see Paul and Barnabas going to the ‘Gentiles’ and Peter with the other kingdom Jews going ‘to the circumcised’ in Galatians 2:9, which is exactly what they were doing prior to this meeting. Paul is the apostle of Gentiles (Romans 11:13) addressing us in the first person, but Peter, John and James NEVER address the Gentiles once in the first person in any Epistles bearing their names. Your church fathers picked the WRONG APOSTLE to be the first ‘pope’ of their man-made Denomination . . .

Thessalonian >> Because there is no such opposition. They are one. The JEWS saw that the gentiles accepted the Gospel in Acts 10, 11. It does not say, "so they will be another Church". Rather the gentiles were accepted as converts in to the ONE CHURCH.

No sir. Do you see Peter or James going to any Gentiles after this meeting in the Middle of Acts (Acts 15)??? No; NOT ONE. Go ahead and try to find references to either of them (or John) addressing Gentiles in the first person. Good Luck, because they never do and Paul is the apostle of the Gentiles (Romans 11:13). The fact that proselytes like Cornelius are added to the kingdom ‘bride’ does not make the Kingdom church in Jerusalem AND Paul’s Gentile churches all over the known world (Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Etc) into the same thing. James commands that the kingdom Jews keep the whole Law (James 2:10), just like Christ commanded Israel (Matthew 5:18, Matthew 19:16-17). Paul says his Gentiles are under grace and not under law (Romans 6:14); even for the keeping of the Sabbath as a mere ‘shadow’ (Colossians 2:16-17).

Peter’s kingdom church remained under Mosaic Law, but Paul’s mystery church was never under the Law (Romans 2:14-15) from the very beginning. Nobody can be under the Law AND not under Law at the SAME TIME. Peter, John and James were reputed ‘pillars’ (Galatians 2:9) living in Jerusalem, which tells you they kept every ordinance of Mosaic Law like every other member of the kingdom ‘bride.’ Paul teaches his Gentiles against circumcision (Galatians 5:1-5) and abstaining from foods (1 Corinthians 10:25-27) and against “the customs†(Acts 21:21) of Mosaic Law. Do not try to convince me that Peter’s kingdom church AND Paul’s grace church are living under the same Mosaic Law and customs. Those called ‘believers’ who are ‘zealous for the Law’ (Acts 21:20) are conspiring to kill Paul in the same chapter (Acts 21:28-31), even after forcing him under the vow (Acts 21:22-24). Peter’s kingdom church is ‘zealous for the Law,’ but Paul’s grace church is under grace and not under law (Romans 6:14). You have mixed everything related to Paul’s mystery church and Peter’s kingdom church into one pot and now you are blind and cannot see the difference. GL with that . . . (snip)

Nothing else you say here even begins to attack the two gospel hypothesis presented in the Opening Post. Thank you very much for writing on the Churches Debate Thread.

In Christ Jesus and part of Church #2,

Terral

 

[thessalonian]

Your twisting will continue ad infinitum I suppose.

God bless

 

[wavy]

This is NOT our church for today and nobody has become a Kingdom Disciple under the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ for almost 2000 Years.

This is totally absent from scripture and must be superimposed.

This church was 'cut off' (Revelation 20:4) and will be revived again under Elijah (late rains = James 5:7) coming to restore all things (Matthew 17:10-11).

You are equating a future event with something in the past. No one (supposedly) has become a disciple under this supposed "kingdom church" for the past 2000 years because it was cut off in the future? Or do you hold a historicist view of Revelation?

Anyway, nothing in Revelation 20:4 suggest that any "church", much less a distinct, separate entity one called a "kingdom church" was "cut off". Revelation 20:4 merely speaks of martyrs who are killed.

This is our Mystery Church of today described only in the Pauline Epistles. We shall be caught up to the Lord (1 Thessalonians 4:17), when the 1000 Years “Day of the Lord†(1 Thessalonians 5:1-2) comes (2 Thessalonians 2:2).

It should be noted at this point that the phrase "mystery church" is absent from scripture.

Anyway, I'll see about these "differences" and compare them. I'll condense the "Kingdom Bride Prophecy Church" as the acronym KBPC and this "Mystery Church" as MC.

KBPC
1. Gathered through the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 4:23, Matthew 9:35, Acts 8:12).
MC
1. Gathered through obedience to Paul’s ‘word of the cross’ (1 Corinthians 1:18) gospel. 1 Corinthians 15:3-4.

You have created the distinction here, not the scriptures. More superimposition. The gospel of the kingdom includes the "word of the cross". Paul does mentioned the "kingdom of God" several times in his epistles (1 Corinthians 4:20; Galatians 5:21; Ephesians 5:5, to name a few).

The very same one here:

Mark 1:14
Now after that John was put in prison, יהושׁע came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,

Yahweh only has one kingdom. And in case the argument of a difference between an earthly kingdom vs. a heavenly kingdom arises, a comparison of Mark 1:15 and Matthew 3:2 affirm the words of John the Baptist that the kingdom of heaven is equivalent to the kingdom of God (among other proof comparisons).

Your first MC reference here just says the preaching of the cross is foolish to some people. Nothing suggests an ingathering of an MC as opposed to a KBPC. That must be presupposed and superimposed. Eisegesis, if you will.

Also, you quote 1 Corinthians 15:3-4, which says Messiah died for our sins according to the scriptures. How can the scriptures say this about the very letter to the Corinthians whom you say are part of an "MC" not seen or recorded by the prophets? A contradiction. But if we actually go back and look at what scriptures he was referring to, we'll see exactly how eisegetical these claims are.

1 Corinthians 15:3
For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

53rd chapter of Isaiah. Could be several of the verses, such as Isaiah 53:8, or Isaiah 53:12. Of course, this is speaking of the children of Israel (further validating the heritage it the Corinthians, as well as 1 Corinthians 10:1, where Israel in the wilderness was called their "fathers").

1 Corinthians 15:4
And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

Hosea 6:1-2, primarily. This directly deals with the healing and restoration of Israel. The reference to his burial could be a number of scriptures referring to him being in sheol, like Psalm 71:20, Psalm 16:10, for examples. So you have contradicted yourself. Obviously the people Paul wrote to were mentioned in the prophets.

KBPC
2. Lord seen betrothing the ‘bride’ by the OT prophets. Hosea 2:19-20, John 3:29.
MC
2. Our mystery church (Ephesians 5:32) not seen by the OT Prophets. Ephesians 3:4-6, Ephesians 3:9.

More presuppositions (I like this word). But lets say the "sons of men" from Ephesians 3:5 includes the "OT" prophets. This makes no difference. Firstly, the "mystery" here is not a separate entity church called an MC. The mystery is the fact of how the nations are fellow-heirs, affirmed by verse 6. This verse also refutes your point because it says they are to be of the same body as those who are not from the nations (i.e. Jews). The fact that they are part of the same body is the mystery, not that a distinct body of an MC was established by Paul, who seems to be a god to some people. You seem to be playing the game of Paul vs. Christ.

If Christ taught and preached a kingdom, how can Paul talk about the kingdom of Chirst (Colossians 1:13, for example) and yet his doctrine of a kingdom is different than the one Christ preached? This makes no sense whatsoever.

Also, the supposed fact that the prophets did not "see" it does not mean they did not write about it. Zecharyah did not understand the mystery of the two olive trees in the 4th chapter of his scroll, but he defintately wrote about it. Daniel, for another example, was perplexed by many things shown to him. On occasion of one of his last statements, he says "I understood not" in the 12th chapter. He was told to go his way, however, never being told the revelation of the things shown to him as recorded in the scroll. They were still written, however.

Lastly, Romans 16:25-26 refutes this entire gesture alone without any personal commentary of mine above:

Romans 16:25
Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of ha Moshiach יהושׁע, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,
Romans 16:26
But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:

KBPC
3. Kingdom Church based in Jerusalem. Acts 8:1, Acts 11:22, Acts 15:4.
MC
3. Grace Churches are all around the known world. Romans 1:8.

Once again, because of presuppositions of these fictional distinctions between a KBPC and an MC, you have taken these scriptures out of context. None of the scriptures in the KBPC references here say a "kingdom church" was based in Jerusalem. It just says there was a called out assemblage in Jerusalem. The reference for the MC does not say supposed "MC" churches are all over the world. It says their faith is known throughout the world (Romans Empire).

You also make a distinction here by the term "grace churches", implying that the one in Jerusalem is not saved by grace! Refuted by Peter in one of the very chapters you direct us to: Acts 15:11. He also said in verse 9 that no difference was put between them and other believers.

Amazing how this can be overlooked...

KBPC
4. Destined to become a kingdom of priests (Exodus 19:6) ‘holy nation,’ and ‘chosen race.’ 1 Peter 2:9.
MC
4. Our church will judge the world and the angels. 1 Corinthians 6:2-3.

This in no way separates two distinct "churches". There is no conflict here.

KBPC
5. Kingdom on earth as it is in heaven. Matthew 6:10.
MC
5. Our citizenship is in heavnen. Philippians 3:20.

I am really not trying to be rude, but this is just completely out of context. In Matthew 6:10, the Messiah says that we should pray for the kingdom (of heaven) to come here (which it has not). It says his will should be done on earth as it is in heaven, not that a kingdom is here on earth as it is in heaven (which he tells us to pray for to come, so how can it be here?).

Despite the terminology of Paul about a citizenship in heaven, which has obviously been misunderstood, we are still on earth. So we need to conduct ourselves as if we were not of the earth (earthly pleasures).

One can only see what you are saying if they want to and don't actually go check the references and read them with integrity...

This is all I'm going to do for tonight. I'll catch up on the rest later.

 

[wavy]

KBPC
6. Kingdom Disciples continue under Mosaic Law, until heaven and earth passes away. Matthew 5:17-19, James 2:10.
MC
6. We are under grace and not under law. Romans 6:14.

"Under law", exactly. A living "under law" existence is one without grace and atonement.

However, Paul makes it perfectly clear that what he means when he says this does not mean we should break the torah (6:15). And we all know what sin is (1 John 3:4).

This is speaking of the law of sin (7:23, 25) that enslaves us and is within our flesh (disproving that it is what is written). This is a combination of flesh + attempts at works or righteousness by law as taught by the Galatian heretics and other groups like the Qumran community.

KBPC
7. Kingdom Church justified by works and NOT by faith alone. James 2:20-24.
MC
7. Our church is justified by faith apart from works. Romans 4:4-6.

James elaborates on Paul's message (indirectly). Paul speaks of perfect obedience that merits justification. James speaks of a lifestyle after initial faith.

Paul is saying you can work all you want outside of faith, but you won't get anything from Yahweh. It takes initial faith at first. He is refuting the error of those who would teach that Messiah is not needed and grace is not needed because one has their own established righteousness. Still, within this very chapter, he points out the works of Abraham that he did because of his initial belief. This is the same point James is making. He's just arguing a different argument.

Paul's is for one to be considered saved. James is those who claim to be saved by faith but are lacking in righteous conduct. Abraham wasn't lacking in his belief. Once he did his work, the scripture was fulfilled that said his faith was accounted for righteosness (James 2:23). Had he not worked, the scripture would not have been fulfilled (or even written, for that matter).

So his point and Paul's point are the same.

KBPC
8. Kingdom church started with John the Baptist. Mark 1:4, Matthew 3:1-6, Acts 1:5, Acts 19:1-3.
MC
8. Grace Church started with Paul on the road to Damascus. Acts 9:15.

These scriptures are loosely used. Very weak. Example:

Acts 1:5
For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days hence.

How one looks at this and sees a "kingdom church" starting with John the Baptist is beyond me. John taught repentance to prepare the way of the Master. He was not starting a "kingdom church". This interpretation, sorry to say, is absurd. No way can one read these texts and come to your conclusions (which, forgive me if I am wrong, I doubt are your own). The belief must be there first and then must inserted in between the lines somewhere before one can actually "see" it.

Acts 9:15 doesn't even hint at the beginning of a "grace church" all because of the calling of Paul. One must assume his mission was to build a separate entity "grace church", then read that scripture and then assume that was the start of the preconceived "grace church".

It's illogical and "does violence" to sound biblical interpretation.

KBPC
9. Disciples received three baptisms (Father, Son and Holy Spirit; Matthew 28:19). Acts 8:12-17, Acts 19:1-6.
MC
9. Brethren receive only ‘one baptism’ (Ephesians 4:5) by the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 1:13-14, Ephesians 4:30) Himself. 1 Corinthians 12:13.

More loosely used scriptures. You swear up and down that this is flawless and that there are no errors with it?

The very foundations that lead come to these conclusions are flawed, especially when you must have the belief first before the scripture can support. None of these scriptures actually say what you are saying. Not in the least.

Matthew 28:19 is not about "three baptisms". It's actually "one name". The Greek is singular. The Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Spirit = Yahweh.

I can't give a thorough refutation to something with no substance...

KBPC
10. Members of the bride DO NOT have eternal security, but must ‘endure to the end.’ Matthew 24:13.
MC
10. Members of the body have eternal security “IN†Christ Jesus. Ephesians 4:30, Colossians 3:1-4.

Those who endure to the end are the secure ones. Those who do not are not secure. Sorry, but these scriptures do not say what you are saying they say.

Seeing the errors, which you say are not there, in this presentation is pretty easy. It's 4a.m. and I'm tired. No need for an in-depth rebuke of these things.

KBPC
11. Kingdom disciples must believe AND be baptized. Mark 16:15-16.
MC
11. The brethren are saved by believing the gospel without adding works. Romans 1:16-17, 1 Corinthians 1:21, Ephesians 2:8-9.

Again, belief implies obedience. You cannot believe and be disobedient. It's not possible. You can slip and may need a reminder (which is what James what doing in his letter) but as a lifestyle, one "yields" himself as a servant to obey (Romans 6:16).

And all the while, it is you creating the distinctions, not the scripture because you seem not to know how to reconcile them in light of all scripture. You are forcing the distinctions to occur.

KBPC
12. This Kingdom church is addressed by Peter, John and James (“twelve tribes dispersed abroad†= James 1:1).
MC
12. This Mystery church is addressed by the Apostle Paul ONLY in Scripture. 1 Corinthians 14:37-38.

1 Corinthians 14:37
If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
1 Corinthians 14:38
But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

Your proof text for the MC here, when one actually reads it, is no proof text at all.

I hadn't originally read the original post. But I saw an arrogant tone in many of your replies to other people. I wondered what could be so great and flawless about this OP of yours.

In all honesty, I think you have a bit more to prove before you can make such claims...

 

[Terral]

Paul's Mystery Body Versus Peter's Kingdom Bride

Hi Wavy:

Terral Original >> This is NOT our church for today and nobody has become a Kingdom Disciple under the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ for almost 2000 Years.

Wavy >> This is totally absent from scripture and must be superimposed.

The “Gospel of the Kingdom†appears in Matthew 4:23, Matthew 9:35 and Matthew 24:14. That is the gospel message that Jesus Christ preached all the way back in Mark 1:14-15 as the “Gospel of God†(Mark 1:14). Israel rejected this gospel message and Jerusalem was leveled in 70 AD with the Temple, which ‘cut off’ (Revelation 20:4) the kingdom church (Church #1 in OP) based in Jerusalem. Paul’s mystery church (Ephesians 5:32) has been growing through his “word of the cross†(1 Corinthians 1:18) gospel message since his conversion in Acts 9:15 to the present day. Israel’s rejection of the “King of the Jews†made the provision for Paul’s “my gospel†(Romans 2:16, Romans 16:25), which is the ONLY gospel with power today. I explain the differences between the two gospels here ( http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=20385 ).

Terral Original >> This church was 'cut off' (Revelation 20:4) and will be revived again under Elijah (late rains = James 5:7) coming to restore all things (Matthew 17:10-11).

Wavy >> You are equating a future event with something in the past.

Very good observation. All Prophecy was made in our past about things fulfilled in the future. That is the way ‘prophecy’ works . . . What? Do you think John is prophesying about past events in Revelation? Please . . .

Wavy >> No one (supposedly) has become a disciple under this supposed "kingdom church" for the past 2000 years because it was cut off in the future? Or do you hold a historicist view of Revelation?

No; I am no Preterist. Most all of Revelation is future and fulfilled during the 1000 Years “Day of the Lord†(1 Thessalonians 5:1-2). Peter and the Twelve and all of those saved by the “gospel of the kingdom†2000 Years ago represent the kingdom ‘bride’ (John 3:29) who were ‘cut off’ (Revelation 20:4), when the Holy Spirit was passed to Paul’s Ministry for the building of “Christ’s body†(1 Corinthians 12:27) for this “dispensation of God’s grace†(Ephesians 3:2). That is why you see Paul’s journeys in the last half of Acts and NO mention of Peter after Acts 15:14 as “Simeon.†The diagram showing this interpretation looks like this:

This diagram is laid out exactly like the Tabernacle of Moses (10 x 30 cubits) and the Temple where the Old Testament stands in the “Holy of Holies†in the golden “Spirit†section to the left. John the Baptist appears to divide the Old Testament from the New Testament (Matthew 11:13). God sent John the Baptist (John 1:6) to prepare the way for Christ, but he began to ‘decrease’ (John 3:30) at Christ’s baptism in the Jordan (Matthew 3:15-16), as the Holy Spirit was passed from the witness of “Spirit†to the witness of “Blood.†Look at the diagram and note that the “Gospel of the Kingdom†is being preached in three separate ministries that are all connected together in Father (spirit), Son (blood) and Holy Spirit (water) fashion. God uses the account of Steven (name means “Crownâ€Â) to show Israel’s rejection of Christ’s throne, as Steven sees Him at the “right hand of God†(Acts 7:56). Paul is the one receiving the robes that testify of everyone’s agreement to put Steven to death (Acts 7:58). God uses Paul as His ‘example’ (1 Timothy 1:15-16) for everyone coming to Him through his “word of the cross†(1 Corinthians 1:18) gospel message. Paul is then sent twenty years later to “submit the gospel I preach among the Gentiles†(Galatians 2:2) to this same Peter and John (Galatians 2:9) who have been preaching the “Gospel of the Kingdom†(Matthew 24:14) since the beginning.

You and I are living today in the ‘red’ “Mystery Revealed†section of the diagram above in anticipation of the coming “Day of the Lord†(in blue), where you will note that the “Gospel of the Kingdom†(Matthew 24:14) is again “the gospel†during that time. Peter and the early rains (James 5:7) kingdom ‘bride’ (John 3:29) are raised to START that “Day of the Lord†(Lord’s Day = Revelation 1:10), as they represent the kingdom church “cut off†2000 Years ago. They stand upon the ‘sea of glass’ (Revelation 4:6, Revelation 15:2) “before the throne†(Revelation 7:14-15) during the same 1000 Years that ‘we’ (body of Christ) are “IN†the Lamb in the “center of the throne†(Revelation 7:17).

Wavy >> Anyway, nothing in Revelation 20:4 suggest that any "church", much less a distinct, separate entity one called a "kingdom church" was "cut off". Revelation 20:4 merely speaks of martyrs who are killed.

Scripture is “Living AND Active†(Hebrews 4:12) and shows God’s sons many things hidden from the eyes of natural men. What makes you think those living 2000 Years ago and preaching the “gospel of the Kingdom†were not martyred? Scripture says “cut off†(pelekizo #3990) and NOT “beheaded†(apokephalizo #607) like John the Baptist in Matthew 14:10. This term “pelekizo†in Revelation 20:4 is used only here in your Bible and translators are guilty of transforming the term into their ‘beheading.’ John is talking about the entire assembly ‘cut off’ 2000 Years ago and everyone saved through the ‘gospel of the kingdom.’ Paul speaks of them, saying,

“What then? What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened.†Romans 11:7.

Peter and the Twelve with all of those saved at Pentecost, the Samarians and Eunuch of Acts 8, Cornelius of Acts 10 and the disciples of Acts 19:1-6 are examples of those “cut off†(Revelation 20:4) 2000 years ago, when the Holy Spirit began working EXCLUSIVELY with the members of “Christ’s body†(1 Corinthians 12:27) and the “Dispensation of God’s Grace†(Ephesians 3:2) and Church #2 of the Opening Post. Wavy cannot see any churches in the New Testament and is not qualified to even begin trying to separate kingdom doctrine for Church #1 under Peter (Matthew 16:16-19) from grace doctrine for Church #2 under Paul.

Terral Original >> This is our Mystery Church of today described only in the Pauline Epistles. We shall be caught up to the Lord (1 Thessalonians 4:17), when the 1000 Years “Day of the Lord†(1 Thessalonians 5:1-2) comes (2 Thessalonians 2:2).

Wavy >> It should be noted at this point that the phrase "mystery church" is absent from scripture.

You have placed quotes around “Mystery Church†and not me. Paul says,

“. . . because we are members of His body . . . This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church.†Ephesians 5:30, Ephesians 5:32.

Since Paul’s ‘my gospel’ is “according to the revelation of the mystery†(Romans 16:25), then obviously those part of his “dispensation of God’s grace†(Ephesians 3:2) are part of the “mystery is great†“His Body†Church of this same verse. Paul connects our “His Body†Church to “The Mystery†again with the Colossians, saying,

“Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I do my share on behalf of His body, which is the church, in filling up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions. Of this church I was made a minister according to the dispensation (Ephesians 3:2) from God bestowed on me for your benefit, so that I might fully carry out the preaching of the word of God, that is, the mystery which has been hidden from the past ages and generations, but has now been manifested to His saints, to whom God willed to make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.†Colossians 1:24-27.

Everyone saved today through Paul’s “message of truth†(Ephesians 1:13-14) becomes a member of this “His Body, which is THE CHURCH†dispensation that God bestowed upon Paul for our benefit. All of this information is given under “the Mystery†(Ephesians 3:3) umbrella that Paul describes throughout his thirteen Epistles for the members of this enlarging “His body†Church. Anytime you are discussing a topic related to “the mystery,†then only a percentage of those around you will have eyes from God to see it. Wavy is trying to describe events relating to Peter’s kingdom church (Matthew 16:16-19) and Paul’s mystery “His body†Church (Colossians 1:24) while trying to prove that no New Testament Church exists at all. : 0 ). Now that is funny . . .

Wavy >> Anyway, I'll see about these "differences" and compare them. I'll condense the "Kingdom Bride Prophecy Church" as the acronym KBPC and this "Mystery Church" as MC.

Terral Original >> KBPC 1. Gathered through the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 4:23, Matthew 9:35, Acts 8:12). MC 1. Gathered through obedience to Paul’s ‘word of the cross’ (1 Corinthians 1:18) gospel. 1 Corinthians 15:3-4.

Wavy Commentary >> You have created the distinction here, not the scriptures. More superimposition. The gospel of the kingdom includes the "word of the cross". Paul does mentioned the "kingdom of God" several times in his epistles (1 Corinthians 4:20; Galatians 5:21; Ephesians 5:5, to name a few).

No sir. The “Gospel of the Kingdom†(Matthew 4:23, etc.) was preached LONG before Christ died for anyone. Christ does not die for anyone, until the END of the Four Gospels. Paul’s gospel is given to him through a ‘revelation of Jesus Christ’ (Galatians 1:11-12) and then Paul is sent through another ‘revelation’ (Galatians 2:2) to go up and submit the “gospel I preach among the Gentiles†to the same Peter and John (Galatians 2:9) that you say already know it. Do we see Peter preaching forgiveness through Christ’s blood in Acts 2:38 AFTER Calvary? No. He is still preaching repentance and baptism for the ‘forgiveness of sins,’ just like John the Baptist from day one (Mark 1:4). The fact that the ‘kingdom of God’ is mentioned anywhere from Genesis to Revelation does NOT make the doctrinal composition of these two gospel messages into the same thing.

Wavy >> The very same one here: Mark 1:14 Now after that John was put in prison, יהושׁע came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,

Has Christ died for anyone in Mark 1? No. Obviously Christ is preaching the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 4:23), which includes repentance and water baptism for the forgiveness of sins (Mark 1:4-5). That is gospel #1 for Church #1 in the Opening Post of this thread. Paul’s gospel cannot be preached, until AFTER Christ is actually raised from the dead AND God reveals that to him (Galatians 1:11-12) AFTER his conversion in Acts 9:15. If anyone preached Paul’s gospel in the Four Gospels (never happened), then Satan would have known also and never crucified the Lord of Glory (1 Corinthians 2:6-8).

Wavy >> Yahweh only has one kingdom. And in case the argument of a difference between an earthly kingdom vs. a heavenly kingdom arises, a comparison of Mark 1:15 and Matthew 3:2 affirm the words of John the Baptist that the kingdom of heaven is equivalent to the kingdom of God (among other proof comparisons).

We agree. However, this is still the “gospel of the Kingdom†that added members to Church #1 of the Opening Post. Christ has not yet died for anyone and God is gathering members to the kingdom ‘bride’ (John 3:29) throughout the Four Gospels. Church #2 does not even start until Paul is converted in Acts 9:15 as the ‘first’ ("protos" = 1 Timothy 1:15-16). That is how he became our ‘father IN Christ through the Gospel.’ 1 Corinthians 4:15.

Wavy >> Your first MC reference here just says the preaching of the cross is foolish to some people. Nothing suggests an ingathering of an MC as opposed to a KBPC. That must be presupposed and superimposed. Eisegesis, if you will.

Heh . . . In other words, if Wavy is blind of seeing something, then these churches simply do not exist. Please . . . That is like an unbeliever saying there is no God, because of his blindness and ignorance. We trust in the truth of God’s Living Word to tell us ‘the truth’ and you sir simply do not see it.

Wavy >> Also, you quote 1 Corinthians 15:3-4, which says Messiah died for our sins according to the scriptures. How can the scriptures say this about the very letter to the Corinthians whom you say are part of an "MC" not seen or recorded by the prophets? A contradiction. But if we actually go back and look at what scriptures he was referring to, we'll see exactly how eisegetical these claims are. (snip)

Paul is referencing the “Scriptures of the prophets†(Romans 1:2, Romans 16:26), just like Christ did in Matthew 26:56. Those are the New Testament Prophets who started giving their prophesies about the time that Zacharias and Elizabeth were filled with the Holy Spirit back in Luke 1 and thirty years prior to John the Baptist and Christ appeared to Israel. Our New Testament books are taken from the ‘Scriptures of the prophets’ that span the time of about 100 years (0-100 AD). You are assuming that these are references to the Old Testament Prophets, when that is simply not true.

Terral Original >> KBPC 2. Lord seen betrothing the ‘bride’ by the OT prophets. Hosea 2:19-20, John 3:29. MC 2. Our mystery church (Ephesians 5:32) not seen by the OT Prophets. Ephesians 3:4-6, Ephesians 3:9.

Wavy >> More presuppositions (I like this word).

This word is a feeble attempt to cover your own blindness to the teachings of this “Two Churches In the NT†topic. The unbeliever says that you are ‘presumptuous’ in believing that any God exists . . . Who is more blinded – the unbeliever or you for believing in God?

Wavy >> But lets say the "sons of men" from Ephesians 3:5 includes the "OT" prophets. This makes no difference. Firstly, the "mystery" here is not a separate entity church called an MC.

Paul calls those part of the ‘dispensation of God’s grace’ (Ephesians 3:2) the “His body†Church (Colossians 1:24). He connects our ‘one body’ Church to “the mystery†in Ephesians 3:1-6 and Colossians 1:24-27. You can hide your head in the sand if that pleases you.

Wavy >> The mystery is the fact of how the nations are fellow-heirs, affirmed by verse 6. This verse also refutes your point because it says they are to be of the same body as those who are not from the nations (i.e. Jews).

No sir. The kingdom church under Peter is “Jewish†dominant, as Gentiles like Cornelius (Acts 10) are also saved by the “gospel of the kingdom.†However, Paul’s “His Body†Church is “Gentile†dominant and he is the ‘apostle of Gentiles’ (Romans 11:13). The fact that Jews AND Gentiles are part of the ‘bride’ under Peter and the ‘body’ under Paul does not make them into the same church. The differences in these two NT churches is outlined in the Opening Post, because these two churches are indeed DIFFERENT.

Wavy >> The fact that they are part of the same body is the mystery, not that a distinct body of an MC was established by Paul, who seems to be a god to some people. You seem to be playing the game of Paul vs. Christ.

No sir. That is your unsupported opinion. Peter is preaching the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 24:14), because that is what Christ gave him to do (Mark 16:15-16) when He ascended into the heavenly (Acts 1:9-11). Paul’s gospel and everything connected to “the mystery†was given directly to Paul through these ‘visions and revelations of the Lord.’ 2 Corinthians 12:1. That is how Paul received our gospel through a ‘revelation of Jesus Christ’ (Galatians 1:11-12) in the first place. Christ is giving Paul the things for our “His BODY†church in the world TODAY, just like Christ Himself gave Peter and the Twelve the things for the kingdom “BRIDE†face to face. This is about the differences in what Christ in the flesh gave to Peter VERSUS what Christ Jesus in the Spirit revealed to the Apostle Paul for us today. Every word Paul writes is the “Lord’s Commandment†(1 Corinthians 14:37-38) for the members of “Christ’s body†(1 Corinthians 12:27) in the world today, while Peter, John and James are writing “to†the Kingdom Disciples living during the 1000 Years “Day of the Lord†for when Elijah comes to restore all things (Matthew 17:10-11). Paul tells us the difference here:

“Therefore from now on we recognize no one according to the flesh; even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him in this way no longer. Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come.†2 Corinthians 5:16-17.

Christ of the flesh (Messiah) taught Peter and the Twelve all about the fulfillment of Old Testament PROPHECY. However, Paul did not know Christ of the flesh and He knows “Christ Jesus†our risen Lord from the time he was converted on the Road To Damascus (Acts 9:15). Christ from above was revealing the things “Hidden In God†(Ephesians 3:9), so Paul could dispense those things to us through his Epistles. Paul uses the term ‘mystery’ (musterion #3466) twenty times to describe things ‘hidden in God’ but now ‘revealed’ through his ministry. How many times do we see Hebrews, James, Peter and John using this term in all the letters bearing their names combined? ZERO. They are describing the fulfillment of PROPHECY, while Paul is revealing these things about our “His Body†Church and the “revelation of THE MYSTERY.†Romans 16:25. You are willing to simply toss everything into one pot in order to take out what tastes good to Wavy in complete ignorance of the fact that Prophecy IS SEEN by the OT Prophets and the Mystery IS NOT SEEN by them.

Wavy >> If Christ taught and preached a kingdom, how can Paul talk about the kingdom of Chirst (Colossians 1:13, for example) and yet his doctrine of a kingdom is different than the one Christ preached? This makes no sense whatsoever.

Scripture is written to be interpreted in thousands of ways, which is why we have over 2000 denominations of ‘professing’ Christians. You fail to realize that God is gathering an intercessory kingdom of priests (Exodus 19:6, Revelation 1:6, Revelation 5:10) that was seen by the OT Prophets AND a ‘body’ of rulers and judges under Christ as the “Head†(Ephesians 4:15, Ephesians 5:32). Christ came in water AND blood (1 John 5:6) and the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ is the gospel OF WATER and Paul’s gospel is the gospel OF BLOOD. Your New Testament has a water witness (13 Kingdom Epistles) and a blood witness (13 Pauline Epistles) and you have them all mixed into one, but some among us know the difference.

Wavy >> Also, the supposed fact that the prophets did not "see" it does not mean they did not write about it. (snip)

That is foolishness, because these things were “Hidden IN GOD.†Ephesians 3:9. If the OT Prophets saw it, then so did Satan. Everything pertaining to the mystery and our mystery church was hidden in God to ensure that Satan would go ahead and crucify Christ (1 Corinthians 2:6-8).

Terral Original >> KBPC 3. Kingdom Church based in Jerusalem. Acts 8:1, Acts 11:22, Acts 15:4. MC 3. Grace Churches are all around the known world. Romans 1:8.

Wavy >> Once again, because of presuppositions of these fictional distinctions between a KBPC and an MC, you have taken these scriptures out of context.

Why even try to write on a topic that you cannot begin to even see? Paul went to find Peter and John in Jerusalem (Galatians 2:1-2), because that is where the kingdom church was based. They needed proximity to the Temple in order to keep the “whole Law†(James 2:10). Paul is the one traveling all over the known world spreading the ‘word of the cross’ (1 Corinthians 1:18) gospel messages, while building the enlarging “His Body†Church to large proportions. Peter and John are still going “to the circumcised†in Galatians 2:9, which you know is a reference to the Jews.

Wavy >> None of the scriptures in the KBPC references here say a "kingdom church" was based in Jerusalem. It just says there was a called out assemblage in Jerusalem.

LOL. Man, you are funny . . . A “called out assembly†is exactly what the term “Ekklesia†(#1577) means. Paul went there to ‘submit the gospel I preach among the Gentiles’ (Galatians 2:2), because that is where the kingdom church WAS LOCATED. Have you noticed that the letters of Peter and John contain numbers instead of church names??? Do you know why? Because the membership they addressed were from the Kingdom church based IN JERUSALEM. It would make no sense to say 1 Jerusalem and 2 Jerusalem for all of their letters. Paul’s Epistles are addressed to the various churches around the world, just like the outline says.

Wavy >> The reference for the MC does not say supposed "MC" churches are all over the world. It says their faith is known throughout the world (Romans Empire).

Heh . . . the words “Roman Empire†do not appear in Romans 1:8 either . . . Providing the correct ‘interpretation’ means reconciling the truth of a particular verse with everything God says on that topic without creating any contradictions.

Wavy >> You also make a distinction here by the term "grace churches", implying that the one in Jerusalem is not saved by grace! Refuted by Peter in one of the very chapters you direct us to: Acts 15:11. He also said in verse 9 that no difference was put between them and other believers.

Try writing arguments against what I ‘did’ say and stop trying to build straw men. Those saved by Paul’s ‘word of the cross’ (1 Corinthians 1:18) gospel message are part of the ‘dispensation of God’s grace’ (Ephesians 3:2). Peter and the ‘bride’ are justified by works and not by faith alone (James 2:24). God’s grace is present in any gospel message going to either the bride or the body. Paul makes the distinction in describing the ‘gospel of the GRACE of God’ (Acts 20:24) AND his “preaching THE KINGDOM†(Acts 20:25), as component parts of the “whole purpose of God†(Acts 20:27). That is why I choose to differentiate between these two churches as ‘kingdom’ (bride) and ‘grace’ (body) for these two separate ‘dispensations.’ Paul’s ‘body’ is justified by faith apart from works (Romans 4:4-6), which directly opposes the ‘works’ for the kingdom ‘bride.’

Terral Original >> KBPC 4. Destined to become a kingdom of priests (Exodus 19:6) ‘holy nation,’ and ‘chosen race.’ 1 Peter 2:9. MC 4. Our church will judge the world and the angels. 1 Corinthians 6:2-3.

Wavy >> This in no way separates two distinct "churches". There is no conflict here.

Heh . . . There is no sense in quoting me to just say “no way.†Please . . . stop being foolish. Christ promises Peter and the Twelve thrones judging ISRAEL (Luke 22:30), while Paul says we shall judge the ‘world and the angels’ (1 Corinthians 6:2-3). Those are the facts given above, whether you wish to acknowledge those differences or not. The concept of judging the angels is not one taught in the Old Testament or to Israel of the flesh during the Four Gospels. This truth was “Hidden In God†(Ephesians 3:9) and revealed ONLY through Paul’s Epistles for us today. Peter and the early rains bride is qualified to judge Israel during the coming 1000 Years Day of the Lord (Revelation 20:4), because they lived under Mosaic Law. Our Gentile dominant ‘body’ church has no qualifications to judge anyone under Mosaic Law. Peter and those on the ‘sea of glass’ (Revelation 4:6) shall judge all of those coming to join them during the 1000 Years Period. Our mystery church is “IN†the Lamb in the center of the throne (Revelation 7:17) and we judge all of those becoming members of the Lamb Himself.

Terral Original >> KBPC 5. Kingdom on earth as it is in heaven. Matthew 6:10. MC 5. Our citizenship is in heaven. Philippians 3:20.

Wavy >> I am really not trying to be rude, but this is just completely out of context. In Matthew 6:10, the Messiah says that we should pray for the kingdom (of heaven) to come here (which it has not). It says his will should be done on earth as it is in heaven, not that a kingdom is here on earth as it is in heaven (which he tells us to pray for to come, so how can it be here?).

Be rude if you like; it makes no difference to me. Israel’s inheritance is in the Promised Land (Genesis 15:18) on this earth. Israel of the flesh looks forward to the resurrection and being led into the land of Israel.

“Then He said to me, "Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel; behold, they say, 'Our bones are dried up and our hope has perished. We are completely cut off.' "Therefore prophesy and say to them, 'Thus says the Lord GOD, "Behold, I will open your graves and cause you to come up out of your graves, My people; and I will bring you into the land of Israel.†Ezekiel 37:11-12.

Those promises have NOTHING to do with the members of Christ’s body who have citizenship in heaven (Philippians 3:20) right now as we speak. Peter and the Twelve were looking for Chrito restore the kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6-7) right here on this planet. However, the members of Christ’s ‘body’ have been seated “IN†the heavenly places “IN†Christ Jesus (Ephesians 2:6-7) even now. We are to keep looking up where Christ is at the right hand of God (Colossians 3:1-3) and NOT upon the things of this earth. Christ is coming for His body church and we shall be ‘caught up’ (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17) in the air and forever be with Him. That has NOTHING to do with His Kingdom coming on earth AS IT IS in heaven. Matthew 6:10.

Wavy >> Despite the terminology of Paul about a citizenship in heaven, which has obviously been misunderstood, we are still on earth. So we need to conduct ourselves as if we were not of the earth (earthly pleasures).

Heh . . . You are saying that Paul’s precise words do not fit into your half baked theology. Despite Paul’s terminology indeed . . .

Wavy >> One can only see what you are saying if they want to and don't actually go check the references and read them with integrity...

Every supporting verse of Scripture says exactly what I said in the two doctrinal outlines for the two different churches in the New Testament. Your tactic of ‘denial, denial and more denial’ does nothing to prop up your “one church†interpretation of Scripture, which hopefully you will get around to presenting. You biggest problem is the presence of these two long lists of ‘opposing’ doctrinal components, because they force you to pick from one or the other in drafting your own doctrinal outline. Are your church members justified by faith apart from works (#7 for Church #2) OR by works and not by faith alone (#7 for Church #1)? You must pick one only and Scripture shows BOTH. Heh . . . This is truly funny . . . Does your church have ‘one baptism’ (#9 for Church #2 today) OR ‘three baptisms’ (#9 for Church #1) of the Father (John’s Baptism = Acts 8:12, Acts 19:3) AND the Son (Acts 8:16, Acts 19:5) AND the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:17, Acts 19:6)??? Your ‘one church’ doctrinal outline must either have Paul’s ‘one baptism’ or the multiple baptisms for his ‘preaching the kingdom’ (Acts 20:25 = Gospel #1 for Church #1). John the Baptist calls Peter church the ‘bride’ (John 3:29 = #2 for Church #1) and Paul never even uses the term in any of his letters to the ‘body’ (Ephesians 5:30, Colossians 1:24). And you want to talk about contradictions. Heh . . . Please present your ‘one church’ doctrinal outline ASAP and I will point out the errors using Scripture. GL.

In Christ Jesus and part of Church #2,

Terral

 

[cj]

There is only one Christ.

Thus there is only one Church of Christ.

There is only one God.

Thus there is only one Church of God.


And how can we know this?


We know it because it is Christ who is the Church, and Christ is also God.



There is a principle used in writing. It is that good writing come out of know the end from the beginning, meaning, you start with the end and work backwards so as to arive at the beginning.


With all respect Terral what you have present here is as wayward as error comes.


In the geographic location called Jerusalem we can find a picture of God's Church.

Jerusalem is built on high ground, and at its center is the highest ground, upon which we find the temple in which God once dwelt with man.

When readin the scriptures you will alway find where the going to Jerusalem is referred to as "going... UP... to Jerusalem."

Even if people lived on mountains that were higher than Jerusalem it is still consider as going up to Jerusalem. And with good reason, for whereever God is, is the reality of up.

But back to Jerusalem and the Church of God.

Every king must have a kingdom, and every kingdom is represented by one main city, in which the king dwells.

In fact, it is the city that represent the essence of the kingdom; or in other words, when a kingdom subject considers the kingdom of which he is a part he immediately considers the city as the center of his considerations.

This is what Jerusalem is, the center of Israel, the Israel of God.

But notice, there are two realities to this Israel, the outward reality and the inward reality. Meaning, the physical reality and the spiritual reality.

This is also related to the two histories, divine history and human history.


God is Spirit, and thus everything that comes out of God has is in its essence, spirit first.

God is also life, and in this life is light and love.

At the center of Jerusalem, at the very highest peak in Jerusalem, can be found Mount Zion, the place on which the temple of God, meaning God's dwelling place with man. Therefore, if God is life, light, and love, then life, love, and light can be found where God dwells, in His temple, on Mount Zion, in Jerusalem.

But remember, God is Spirit. Thus the reality of the finding the above is first a matter of spirit.


This relates back to the matter of the subject and his consideration of the kingdom in which he lives and is a citizen of.

Everything that the city represents, meaning everything that is off the king who is the center of the city, is in fact this citizens very center inwardly.

And in this we can see a picture of what the new heaven and new earth, eternity, will look like and be.

God at the center of all things.

But even more, unlike today, God's expression will come from all things.

The Church is the reality of this today. It is the foretaste of what is to come, the foretaste of the new heaven and the new earth, the foretaste of eternity.

The Church is God's expression on the earth today.

Actually, if we are to really consider what it means to be the expression of God on the earth today we would rightly conclude that the Church is God on the earth today.


And there cannot be two Gods on the earth.

Fact is, there can never be two Gods, punto finale.



Folks, this is a really brief explanation/overview of the reality of the Church. But we should all consider it as there is so much of God's riches to be had out of seeing this view of Jerusalem.


In love,
cj


Psalm 132.... "For Jehovah has chosen Zion; He has desired it for His habitation.

This is... My... resting place forever; Here will I dwell, for I have desired it.

I will abundantly bless its provision; I will satisfy its poor with bread.

And its priests I will clothe with salvation, And its faithful ones will shout with a ringing shout.

There I will cause a horn of David to shoot forth; I have prepared a lamp for My anointed one.

I will clothe his enemies with shame, But on him his crown will shine."



It kinda brings a new meaning to the phrase,... "Head for the hills" huh?

Maybe we should simply say,. "Head for the hill called Zion!"

 

[Terral]

Paul's Mystery Body Versus Peter's Kingdom Bride

Hi CJ:

Thank you for writing. The statements you made apart from Scriptural support have been omitted from this reply. Anyone can view those by seeing your Post above. Your opinions about ‘one’ this and ‘one’ that do not mean anything, unless you care to “quote >>†something from the Opening Post and challenge that using Scripture.

CJ >> There is a principle used in writing. It is that good writing come out of know the end from the beginning, meaning, you start with the end and work backwards so as to arive at the beginning.

Please . . . obviously your sentences above are not the product of ‘good writing.’ If you are going to try and prop up a premise, then at least use something from Scripture. Attack anything in the Opening Post by “quoting that†and offering any supported arguments you like.

CJ >> With all respect Terral what you have present here is as wayward as error comes. In the geographic location called Jerusalem we can find a picture of God's Church. (snip ‘high ground’; meaningless to this discussion)

Yes, the “kingdom†church (Matthew 16:16-19, Matthew 18:17-18) located in Jerusalem. That is doctrinal component #3 for Church #1. Paul’s churches were Gentile dominant (Romans 11:13) and were scattered all over the known world (Romans 1:8 = #3 for Church #2).

CJ >> Every king must have a kingdom, and every kingdom is represented by one main city, in which the king dwells. (snip)

Is there some rhyme or reason for your rambling? Are you addressing ANYTHING presented in the Opening Post of this thread? No. If you cannot “quote me >>†and refute anything from my ‘two church’ hypothesis OR present your own ‘one church’ doctrinal outline (good luck), then this rambling really does not mean anything. Please go and start a thread about whatever you are trying to talk about, which has no context to anything on this topic. To send me a long list of your personal ‘I believe’ statements and NO SCRIPTURE makes no sense whatsoever. I would like to quote where one thing you said attacked any of my positions, but you never got around to doing that in your post. Just “quote me >>†and show the errors from either or both of the doctrinal outlines provided in the OP, OR present your ‘one church’ outline and we will have something to debate.

CJ >> Folks, this is a really brief explanation/overview of the reality of the Church. But we should all consider it as there is so much of God's riches to be had out of seeing this view of Jerusalem.

Folks? Heh. Stop grandstanding and try to address the ‘topic’ of this thread. Your “Folks†are smarter than you think and they require interpretations based upon Scripture apart from one sentence lines of “I believe†testimony based upon nothing. Do we show ourselves approved to God by rightly dividing the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15), OR by standing on your soapbox and chatting with the folks? Maybe your next reply should be drafted with your Bible open. Please try again . . .

In Christ,

Terral

 

[Terral]

Paul's Mystery Body Versus Peter's Kingdom Bride

Hi Wavy:

Thank you very much for writing.

Terral Original >> KBPC 6. Kingdom Disciples continue under Mosaic Law, until heaven and earth passes away. Matthew 5:17-19, James 2:10. MC 6. We are under grace and not under law. Romans 6:14.

Wavy >> "Under law", exactly. A living "under law" existence is one without grace and atonement. However, Paul makes it perfectly clear that what he means when he says this does not mean we should break the torah (6:15). And we all know what sin is (1 John 3:4).

Gentiles have never been under the Law (Romans 2:14-15 “without the Lawâ€Â). There are over 600 ordinances of Mosaic Law given to ISRAEL, but we are under grace and not under law (Romans 6:14). Of course that means to keep the laws of your governing authorities (Romans 13:1-3). That is a LONG way from trying to pretend that Paul is bringing Gentiles under Mosaic Law in his Epistles. THAT is just foolishness. What you are failing to do is recognize that Peter’s kingdom church was most certainly under Mosaic Law, which is what Christ says in Matthew 5:18 AND James says after Calvary in James 2:10. However, both of those references are to ISRAEL (Matthew 15:24, James 1:1) and NOT the Gentile churches under Paul’s “dispensation of God’s grace†(Ephesians 3:2).

Wavy >> This is speaking of the law of sin (7:23, 25) that enslaves us and is within our flesh (disproving that it is what is written). This is a combination of flesh + attempts at works or righteousness by law as taught by the Galatian heretics and other groups like the Qumran community.

No sir. Paul discredits your testimony by combining the ‘grace’ aspect with the fact that we are not under law. Romans 6:14. He also teaches even keeping the Sabbath as a mere ‘shadow’ of things to come (Colossians 2:16-17), which teaches against one of the ten commandments. Even the Sabbath day is a shadow of things heavenly above and we are keep looking up (Colossians 3:1-3) and NOT upon the things of this earth.

Terral Original >> KBPC 7. Kingdom Church justified by works and NOT by faith alone. James 2:20-24. MC 7. Our church is justified by faith apart from works. Romans 4:4-6.

Wavy >> James elaborates on Paul's message (indirectly).

Please . . . James teaches exactly the opposite of Paul concerning Justification by faith APART from works. It is impossible to be justified by faith alone (Romans 4:4-6) AND by works (James 2:24) at the very same time. Heh . . . “indirectly�? That is funny . . .

Wavy >> Paul speaks of perfect obedience that merits justification. James speaks of a lifestyle after initial faith.

No sir. Your teaching on Justification needs a ton of work. Paul is talking about how God imputes His Righteousness upon those hearing (Romans 10:17) and believing (Ephesians 1:13-14) our Gospel for today. The ‘righteousness of God’ is revealed from ‘faith to faith’ (Romans 1:16-17) by the salvation process of ‘hearing’ and believing the gospel between the saved (preacher) and unsaved (hearer). James is talking about how a man is justified by works before other men AND God, which is another topic entirely disconnected from obedience to our Gospel for today. James is addressing the twelve tribes dispersed abroad (James 1:1), and Paul is speaking to the members of “Christ’s body†(1 Corinthians 12:27, Romans 12:4-5). You have yet to figure out the difference . . .

Wavy >> Paul is saying you can work all you want outside of faith, but you won't get anything from Yahweh. It takes initial faith at first. He is refuting the error of those who would teach that Messiah is not needed and grace is not needed because one has their own established righteousness. Still, within this very chapter, he points out the works of Abraham that he did because of his initial belief. This is the same point James is making. He's just arguing a different argument. (snip; meaningless Paul considered saved . . . lingo)

Heh . . . What you fail to realize is that Paul is teaching justification APART from works for Church #2, BUT James is teaching justification by works and NOT by faith alone (James 2:24) for Church #1. Your attempt to reconcile their teachings for these two separate groups (Paul = His body church; James = Bride church) is irrelevant to the discussion. These are still OPPOSING doctrines containing DIRECTLY OPPOSING doctrinal precepts for the TWO CHURCHES in the New Testament. Can you prove that our ‘His body’ church (Colossians 1:24) is the “twelve tribes dispersed abroad†in James 1:1? No you cannot. Can you prove that James is telling Paul’s Church #2 to keep the ‘whole Law’ (James 2:10). No you cannot, because he is speaking to the same kingdom ‘bride’ that John the Baptist is talking about in John 3:29. James is teaching “kingdom doctrine†to the members of the ‘bride’ and Paul is teaching “grace doctrine†to the members of the ‘body.’

Terral Original >> KBPC 8. Kingdom church started with John the Baptist. Mark 1:4, Matthew 3:1-6, Acts 1:5, Acts 19:1-3. MC 8. Grace Church started with Paul on the road to Damascus. Acts 9:15.

Wavy >> These scriptures are loosely used. Very weak. Example: Acts 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days hence.

This verse is placed there to show that the kingdom church began all the way back in Mark 1:4-5 with John baptizing Israel. Christ was telling the Twelve that their ministry was connected directly to John the Baptist (spirit), Himself (blood) and now the Holy Spirit (water) beginning at Pentecost. Christ received the Holy Spirit from John the Baptist in the Jordan River (Matthew 3:15-16) and now the Twelve were receiving the Holy Spirit promised (John 16:7) at the time of His departure. These three ministries are all preaching the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 4:23, etc.), which was now going to the whole world (Matthew 24:14). This has NOTHING to do with Paul’s Gospel to be later revealed, after his conversion in Acts 9:15, which is why Paul had to go up and submit the ‘gospel I preach among the Gentiles’ (Galatians 2:2) to these same kingdom disciples in the first place.

Wavy >> How one looks at this and sees a "kingdom church" starting with John the Baptist is beyond me.

Then you ignored Christ telling that to the Twelve right here in Acts 1:5. Peter is preaching repentance and water baptism for the ‘forgiveness of sins’ (Acts 2:38), just like John the Baptist in Mark 1:4-5. They are both preaching the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 4:23, etc.), which God is using to gather members to the prophetic kingdom ‘bride’ (John 3:29). How can you add these kingdom Jews to Paul’s mystery church, when his gospel is not even revealed to him yet (Galatians 1:11-12)?? How can you add members to the ‘dispensation of God’s grace’ (Ephesians 3:2) given TO PAUL, before he is even converted? Since ONLY the kingdom church exists during the Four Gospels and early Acts AND the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ is the ONLY gospel in town, then obviously all of these Jews in Acts 2 are being added to the Kingdom church under Peter (Matthew 16:16-19, Matthew 18:17-18). Paul would come to meet with them later in Acts 15 (Galatians 2) in order to submit his gospel in ‘fear of failure.’ Galatians 2:2.

Wavy >> John taught repentance to prepare the way of the Master. He was not starting a "kingdom church". This interpretation, sorry to say, is absurd.

No sir. This interpretation is ‘the truth,’ as Christ is preaching the same exact words of John the Baptist (Matthew 3:2) in Matthew 4:17 AND sending the Twelve to preach the same exact words to Israel only in Matthew 10:5-7. This kingdom church is simply the ‘called out ones’ hearing the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ during the three years that Christ preached that leading up to Calvary. Peter was adding members to that growing kingdom church on the Day of Pentecost, while preaching the same repentance and water baptism (Acts 2:38 = Mark 1:4-5). The difference is that the two baptisms of the Son (name of Jesus Christ Acts 19:5) AND the Holy Spirit (laying of hands = Acts 19:6) are added right here at Pentecost for the ‘gospel of the kingdom.’ Paul’s gospel comes along AFTER the start of Acts 9 and his conversion.

Wavy >> No way can one read these texts and come to your conclusions (which, forgive me if I am wrong, I doubt are your own). (snip)

You what? Heh . . . Your doubt and unbelief are the reasons we are having this discussion in the first place. You present Wavy’s side and Terral will continue to present his side using Scripture. Everyone else here can judge us both. My outlines and diagrams are all created by my own hands.

Wavy >> The belief must be there first and then must inserted in between the lines somewhere before one can actually "see" it.

Wavy Quotes >> Acts 9:15 doesn't even hint at the beginning of a "grace church" all because of the calling of Paul. One must assume his mission was to build a separate entity "grace church", then read that scripture and then assume that was the start of the preconceived "grace church".

Wavy Commentary >> It's illogical and "does violence" to sound biblical interpretation.

To say something is illogical only proves your own blindness and unwillingness to repent. We are obviously interpreting Scripture differently, but this side is quoting your every word and offering Biblical evidence that support my positions. My interpretation is doing violence to yours, but Scripture is saying exactly what Terral is saying.

Terral Original >> KBPC 9. Disciples received three baptisms (Father, Son and Holy Spirit; Matthew 28:19). Acts 8:12-17, Acts 19:1-6. MC 9. Brethren receive only ‘one baptism’ (Ephesians 4:5) by the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 1:13-14, Ephesians 4:30) Himself. 1 Corinthians 12:13.

Wavy >> More loosely used scriptures. You swear up and down that this is flawless and that there are no errors with it?

Your whining and complaining is proving nothing. Paul teaches ‘one baptism’ (Ephesians 4:5), which is how we are baptized by the ‘one Spirit’ into the ‘one body’ (1 Corinthians 12:13), but we see three separate baptisms for the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ in Acts 8:12-17 AND Acts 19:1-6. Those differences exist, because there are two gospels and two churches in your New Testament AND you make no distinction between the two, even though these seeming contradictions exist everywhere in your teaching.

Wavy >> The very foundations that lead come to these conclusions are flawed, especially when you must have the belief first before the scripture can support. None of these scriptures actually say what you are saying. Not in the least.

Heh . . . You are a funny guy. Your judgments about my presentation do not mean anything. The two long lists of doctrinal components are present, because the two churches in the New Testament are also. The heads of those two NT churches met in Jerusalem in Acts 15 (Galatians 2), so that Paul could submit the ‘gospel I preach among the Gentiles.’ Galatians 2:2. Paul calls his gospel the ‘gospel to the UNCIRCUMCISED.’ Galatians 2:7. You are somehow going to try and prove that the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 4:23, 9:35) sent to ISRAEL ONLY (Matthew 10:5-7, Matthew 15:24) is the same “gospel to the UNCIRCUMCISED†preached by Paul. Good Luck proving that . . . Heh . . .

Wavy Quotes >> Matthew 28:19 is not about "three baptisms". It's actually "one name". The Greek is singular. The Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Spirit = Yahweh.

No sir. If you are going to write your posts in English, then please do so to avoid this confusion. Scripture shows those three baptisms separately in Acts 8:12-17 and Acts 19:1-6 for the ‘gospel of the kingdom.’ Those are indeed three baptisms in the name of the Father (John’s = from God John 1:6 = forgiveness of sins = Mark 1:4-5) AND the Son (name of Lord Jesus = Acts 8:16, Acts 19:5) AND laying of hands for the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:17, Acts 19:6).

Wavy >> I can't give a thorough refutation to something with no substance...

You cannot offer arguments against interpretations you in no way understand . . .

Terral Original >> KBPC 10. Members of the bride DO NOT have eternal security, but must ‘endure to the end.’ Matthew 24:13. MC 10. Members of the body have eternal security “IN†Christ Jesus. Ephesians 4:30, Colossians 3:1-4.

Wavy >> Those who endure to the end are the secure ones. Those who do not are not secure. Sorry, but these scriptures do not say what you are saying they say.

Please . . . you just quoted me saying exactly what Christ said in Matthew 24:13 for the kingdom ‘bride.’ You can see His reference to the “gospel of the kingdom†in the NEXT VERSE (Matthew 24:14).

Wavy >> Seeing the errors, which you say are not there, in this presentation is pretty easy. It's 4a.m. and I'm tired. No need for an in-depth rebuke of these things.

Then write your posts during the light of day. If you cannot offer a case for something else, then there is no sense in quoting me in the first place. You quote from both outlines and then head off into your own direction anyway without paying any attention to the ‘opposing’ characteristics of what you just quoted.

Terral Original >> KBPC 11. Kingdom disciples must believe AND be baptized. Mark 16:15-16. MC 11. The brethren are saved by believing the gospel without adding works. Romans 1:16-17, 1 Corinthians 1:21, Ephesians 2:8-9.

Wavy >> Again, belief implies obedience. You cannot believe and be disobedient. It's not possible. You can slip and may need a reminder (which is what James what doing in his letter) but as a lifestyle, one "yields" himself as a servant to obey (Romans 6:16). (snip)

Please . . . this is not even a half baked attempt to refute anything in the Opening Post. Maybe you should try attacking one point in each post and spend some time actually trying to prove your ‘one church’ interpretation. GL with that . . .

In Christ,

Terral

 

[wavy]

Your judgments about my presentation do not mean anything.

Then you do not have to make long, confusing post about basically how right you are and how wrong I am (and everyone else).

Anyway, one scripture is needed to disprove everything you just said. I can't waste my time. You actually ignored many of the points I made. You also misunderstood much of what I said.

Ephesians 1:10. Messiah is gathering all things on earth and in heaven "in him".

This aboslutely disproves any concept of separate entity and dispensationalist theology...

Throughout the scriptures, we see two ages: this world and the world to come. I think you have funny concept of the word "dispensation" as it is found in your "dispensation" passages that you use to prove things like a "dispensation of grace". That is a misunderstading of the Greek term. Nothing in it denotes a period of this age versus that age.

Anyway, due to your arrogant tone, it is fruitless for anyone to continue.

But as the scripture says, if any man thinks himself to be wise, let him become a fool...

 

[Terral]

Paul Is The Steward Of This "Dispensation Of God's Grac

Hi Wavy:

Thank you for writing.

Wavy Original* >> Wavy >> The very foundations that lead come to these conclusions are flawed, especially when you must have the belief first before the scripture can support. None of these scriptures actually say what you are saying. Not in the least.

Terral Original >> Your judgments about my presentation do not mean anything. The two long lists of doctrinal components are present, because the two churches in the New Testament are also. The heads of those two NT churches met in Jerusalem in Acts 15 (Galatians 2), so that Paul could submit the ‘gospel I preach among the Gentiles.’ Galatians 2:2.

Wavy >> Then you do not have to make long, confusing post about basically how right you are and how wrong I am (and everyone else).

Please forgive if my statement was unclear. Your supported ‘arguments’ mean everything, which required a thoughtful reply. Your personal ‘judgments’ about my interpretations is the part that does not mean anything. My response was to your Original* statement above. In case you are unaware, the majority of professing Christians on this Board do not appear to agree with Wavy and his Legalism. My guess is that perhaps 1 out of 100 or even less hold your interpretations, which does not in itself make you wrong, but you “everyone else†lingo is kind of out of place . . .

Wavy >> Anyway, one scripture is needed to disprove everything you just said. I can't waste my time. You actually ignored many of the points I made. You also misunderstood much of what I said.

The valid points you made were addressed and the nonsense was indeed ignored. If you feel that something was proved in your original post above, then good for you. If you feel that nonsense is coming out of my mouth, then you should ignore that also. I am here to defend my ‘two churches’ hypothesis from the Opening Post (OP) and off topic rhetoric is indeed a waste of our time.

Wavy >> Ephesians 1:10. Messiah is gathering all things on earth and in heaven "in him". This aboslutely disproves any concept of separate entity and dispensationalist theology...

Please . . . What are you trying to attack from my original premise? If you quote nothing from the OP, then are we supposed to read your mind? You keep calling “Christ†the Messiah, which tells me you do not even know “Christ Jesus†at all. You are confusing Jesus of the flesh (Messiah) with “Christ Jesus†in whom this entire universe is held together (Colossians 1:16-17). Paul told you that we know Jesus according to the flesh NO LONGER (2 Corinthians 5:16-17), but you hold onto earthy images apart from seeing with spiritual eyes from God. How do you suppose God is going to sum up all things in any earthly Messiah? Heh . . . You will not find me quoting any Dispensationalists, but I am happy to point out the errors in their commentary.

Wavy >> Throughout the scriptures, we see two ages: this world and the world to come. I think you have funny concept of the word "dispensation" as it is found in your "dispensation" passages that you use to prove things like a "dispensation of grace". That is a misunderstading of the Greek term. Nothing in it denotes a period of this age versus that age.

LOL. Paul uses the term “oikonomia†(#3622) in Ephesians 3:2 to describe the ‘dispensation of God’s grace.’ You are confusing the Greek terms “aion†(#165) and this term that means:

--------------------

“oikonomia - primarily signifies "the management of a household or of household affairs" (oikos, "a house," nomos, "a law"); then the management or administration of the property of others, and so "a stewardship," Luke_16:2-4; elsewhere only in the Epistles of Paul, who applies it

(a) to the responsibility entrusted to him of preaching the Gospel, 1_Cor_9:17 (RV, "stewardship," AV, "dispensation");

(b) to the stewardship committed to him "to fulfill the Word of God," the fulfillment being the unfolding of the completion of the Divinely arranged and IMPARTED CYCLE OF TRUTHS which are consummated in THE TRUTH relating to the CHURCH as the BODY OF CHRIST, Col_1:25 (RV and AV, "dispensation"); so in Eph_3:2, of the GRACE OF GOD given him as a STEWARDSHIP ("dispensation") in regard to the same "MYSTERY;"

(c) in Eph_1:10; Eph_3:9, it is used of the arrangement or ADMINISTRATION BY GOD, by which in "the fullness of the times" (or seasons) God will sum up all things in the heavens and on earth in Christ. In Eph_3:9 some mss. have koinonia, "fellowship," for oikonomia, "dispensation." In 1_Tim_1:4 oikonomia may mean either a stewardship in the sense of 1(a) above, or a "dispensation" in the sense of 1(c). The reading oikodomia, "edifying," in some mss., is not to be accepted. See STEWARDSHIP.

Note: A "dispensation" is not a period or epoch (a common, but erroneous, use of the word), but a MODE OF DEALING, an arrangement, or administration of affairs. Cp. oikonomos, "a steward," and oikonomeo, "to be a steward."†Vine’s Expository Dictionary of NT Words.

------------------

You are defining the term ‘dispensation,’ according to Vines’ “erroneous†definition that is common among folks who misuse this term every day of the week. Those who believe our Gospel are added to this ‘dispensation of God’s grace’ (Ephesians 3:2) given to Paul for us today. Israel of the flesh is an example of those under the Dispensation of Mosaic Law. Paul dispenses Grace Doctrine to members of the ‘body of Christ’ (Ephesians 4:12) today, just like Moses dispensed the Law to Israel in the Old Testament. Peter is the steward over the early rains kingdom ‘bride’ (John 3:29), as Christ handed over those keys to him (Matthew 16:16-19) for that kingdom ‘church’ (Matthew 18:17-18).

Duty calls and I must fly. Thank you for writing,

In Christ Jesus,

Terral