Revelation was written by John

[Particular Baptist]

Is dirtfarmer a full preterist or dispensationalist? Frankly, the opening post smacks of both.

 

[Sinthesis]

but when you try to use other scriptures to establish Church doctrine you get confusion, and God is not the author of confusion.

What confusion do you get exactly?

Peter preached the cross is full of shame and guilt

Is that how you believe Peter viewed the cross?

 

[smaller]

Is dirtfarmer a full preterist or dispensationalist? Frankly, the opening post smacks of both.

It's full preterism. Smell it a mile away. Called out specifically in post #4.

There are not twelve different Gospels by twelve Apostles.

Eph. 4:5

 

[Particular Baptist]

It's full preterism. Smell it a mile away. Called out specifically in post #4.

There are not twelve different Gospels by twelve Apostles.

Eph. 4:5

I must say that if full preterism, that old error of Philetus and Hymenaeus is permitted here, my days shall be few, and another this office take.

II Timothy 2.14-19.

 

[dirtfarmer]

What confusion do you get exactly?


Is that how you believe Peter viewed the cross?

hello Sinthesis, dirtfarmer here

Galatians 1:6 " I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ into another gospel." The mixing of law and grace.

What did Peter preach on the day of Pentecost? Acts 2:36 " Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ." No mention of salvation by the blood of Christ, but in Acts 2:38 he does mention baptism for the remission of sins. Are we to be baptized for the remission of sins, or baptized by the Spirit to be in Christ that has has paid the debt of sin for the whole world?

 

[Particular Baptist]

hello Sinthesis, dirtfarmer here

Galatians 1:6 " I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ into another gospel." The mixing of law and grace.

What did Peter preach on the day of Pentecost? Acts 2:36 " Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ." No mention of salvation by the blood of Christ, but in Acts 2:38 he does mention baptism for the remission of sins. Are we to be baptized for the remission of sins, or baptized by the Spirit to be in Christ that has has paid the debt of sin for the whole world?

Are you or are you not a full preterist?

 

[smaller]

I must say that if full preterism, that old error of Philetus and Hymenaeus is permitted here, my days shall be few, and another this office take.

II Timothy 2.14-19.

I think the semi-official ruling is that full preterism is out of bounds territory, at least in the end time discussion forums, where it is parceled out to a separate section for discussions. Not sure about here though.

 

[Particular Baptist]

I think the semi-official ruling is that full preterism is out of bounds territory, at least in the end time discussion forums, where it is parceled out to a separate section for discussions. Not sure about here though.

Let us allow dirtfarmer to answer.

 

[Douglas Summers]

I must say that if full preterism, that old error of Philetus and Hymenaeus is permitted here, my days shall be few, and another this office take.

II Timothy 2.14-19.

Hi, You need to stay to contend for the faith. You will find many a doctrines of men, self willed worshipers and half truths in just about any religious forum.

 

[Particular Baptist]

Hi, You need to stay to contend for the faith. You will find many a doctrines of men, self willed worshipers and half truths in just about any religious forum.

Brother Stauffer,

I have found that the case indeed. There are some that I like to call apostate boards. If heresy abounds enough, it is true and right according to the law of second causes and first-degree separation (Ro. 16.17-8; I Tim. 6.1-6, ad infinitum); but it is not right to do so less warrant.

 

[Particular Baptist]

It's full preterism. Smell it a mile away. Called out specifically in post #4.

There are not twelve different Gospels by twelve Apostles.

Eph. 4:5

He affirmed in another thread that he is not…

 

[Free]

In verse 3-5 of 1 Peter it is stated "begotten us again unto a living(lively-KJV) hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, To an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled , that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time." When is the last time but the earthly kingdom promised to the Jews.
Galatians 4:7 "Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son and if a son, then an heir of God through Jesus Christ

Are we not now an heir of God through Jesus Christ,?

Of course we are now heirs, as is every single person who believes in Christ:

John 1:11-13:
11 He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him.
12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God,
13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. (ESV)

I really have no idea what point you are trying to make here.

Where is it ever stated that the Church, the body of Christ, is a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people?

In 1 Pet. and in Rev., which is a point you still have not addressed.

Is there ever a "bride" that is a priest or part of a priesthood? We have been espoused to Christ as a chaste virgin, his bride.

What does it matter? Just because we are called the bride of Christ that means we cannot also be called a royal priesthood? Christ is also called a priest, king, and would be the bride's husband.

The word now in 1 Peter 2:10 is referring to the time of the call of Abram including Jacob's name being changed to Israel.

So "now" doesn't actually now? I find that to be very strange. Would it not make more sense that "now" means, at a minimum, post resurrection but more likely when the gospel went out to the Gentiles? Would that not make much more sense, especially when mercy is also mentioned?

1 Pet. 2:10, 10 Once you were not a people, but now you are God's people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy. (ESV)

As to Paul and Peter preaching being the same; Where does Peter say any thing abut being "baptized into Christ death. Peter offer baptismal remission of sins through repentance which will occur at a future time of refreshing. There is nothing about faith in the blood for righteousness. Paul preaches that salvation is unconditional through faith. Peter preached the cross is full of shame and guilt but Paul says there is glory in the cross.

You are being very selective in the verses you are using. I have given several which show they preached the same thing. Just because they do not use the exact same wording does not mean that they are not saying the same things.

And still, you have avoided my point that Peter clearly states Paul wrote to this same group of people, and about the same or similar matters. Why is this? Why do you continually avoid it?

 

[dirtfarmer]

Of course we are now heirs, as is every single person who believes in Christ:

John 1:11-13:
11 He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him.
12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God,
13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. (ESV)

I really have no idea what point you are trying to make here.


In 1 Pet. and in Rev., which is a point you still have not addressed.


What does it matter? Just because we are called the bride of Christ that means we cannot also be called a royal priesthood? Christ is also called a priest, king, and would be the bride's husband.


So "now" doesn't actually now? I find that to be very strange. Would it not make more sense that "now" means, at a minimum, post resurrection but more likely when the gospel went out to the Gentiles? Would that not make much more sense, especially when mercy is also mentioned?

1 Pet. 2:10, 10 Once you were not a people, but now you are God's people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy. (ESV)


You are being very selective in the verses you are using. I have given several which show they preached the same thing. Just because they do not use the exact same wording does not mean that they are not saying the same things.

And still, you have avoided my point that Peter clearly states Paul wrote to this same group of people, and about the same or similar matters. Why is this? Why do you continually avoid it?

hello Free, dirtfarmer here

Is every single person who believes in Christ included in the bride of Christ or is the Church the only one called the bride of Christ? Romans 3:30 " Seeing it is one God which shall justify the circumcision by faith and uncircumcision through faith."

Exodus 19:6 " And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. these are the words which thou shall speak unto the children of Israel.

Christ was first a lamb for sacrifice, now he is our priest to whom we look to for cleansing. One day he will be king of the earthly kingdom that was promised to Israel and we will rule with him as his bride, not as a kingdom of priest. The kingdom of priest will be the 144,000 that are sealed during the tribulation.

Since the covenant made with Abram, the Hebrews have been a people of God. Even today there is a remnant. Those Jews that of the body of Christ are part of the bride and are different from the remnant. Romans 11:5 " Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace."

 

[Douglas Summers]

Is every single person who believes in Christ included in the bride of Christ or is the Church the only one called the bride of Christ? Romans 3:30 " Seeing it is one God which shall justify the circumcision by faith and uncircumcision through faith."

As I understand the Scriptures about the Church, The Church is the Bride of Christ.

 

[dirtfarmer]

As I understand the Scriptures about the Church, The Church is the Bride of Christ.

hello Douglas Summers, dirtfarmer here

The Church was a mystery that was revealed to Paul and is the bride of Christ. According to Jeremiah 3:8 Israel was given a bill of divorcement from Jehovah. So there are 2 brides mentioned in scripture.

 

[reba]

Admin here

As I understand the Scriptures about the Church, The Church is the Bride of Christ.

Love this post... As i understand the Scriptures.... Exactly Douglas Summers ... well said ....my understanding may be different then yours but it is my understanding.... You are showing respect, through you disagree, to fellow CFnet members.. Respect for others grasp of the Word... For where they are on the path they are walking with Him...

Very much in keeping with this segment of the TOS

2.4: No Trolling. Do not make an inflammatory remark just to get a response. Address issues not personalities. Respect where people are in their spiritual walk, and respect all others in general. Respect where others are in their spiritual walk, do not disrupt the flow of discussion or act in a way that affects others negatively including when debating doctrinal issues, in the defense of the Christian faith, and in offering unwelcome spiritual advice.

 

[Free]

Is every single person who believes in Christ included in the bride of Christ or is the Church the only one called the bride of Christ? Romans 3:30 " Seeing it is one God which shall justify the circumcision by faith and uncircumcision through faith."

Every single person who believes in Christ is a part of the Church and is included as his bride.

Exodus 19:6 " And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. these are the words which thou shall speak unto the children of Israel.

Rev. 5:8-10:
8 And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.
9 And they sang a new song, saying, "Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation,
10 and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth." (ESV)

I have given this previously and you have not addressed it.

In the OP, you sated:

"We establish church doctrine only from epistles written by Paul, not by Peter(Cephas), James, or John. Galatians 2:9 "And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision." All of Paul's epistles can be used for church doctrine. We don't have any writings of Barnabus.

The epistles written by James, John, and Peter were to the Jews. Peter at first preach the gospel of the kingdom. Paul preached the gospel of the grace of God."

And several times now I have stated what Peter says: that Paul wrote to the same group of people as Peter did, and about the same or similar matters. Why have you continued to avoid addressing it?

 

[Sinthesis]

but when you try to use other scriptures to establish Church doctrine you get confusion, and God is not the author of confusion.

What confusion do you get exactly?

Galatians 1:6 " I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ into another gospel." The mixing of law and grace.

One only gets confused when they don't understand scripture correctly. A correct reading of scripture will not result in the mixing of law and grace. There is only one gospel throughout scripture. The troubling idea that there is a separate gospel for a separate people is exactly the kind of perverted false teaching that frustrated Paul while dealing with the Galatians.

Gal 1:6 ¶ I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Gal 1:7 - Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
Gal 1:8 - But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9 - As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:10 - For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.​

Peter preached the cross is full of shame and guilt

Is that how you believe Peter viewed the cross?

What did Peter preach on the day of Pentecost? Acts 2:36 " Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ." No mention of salvation by the blood of Christ, but in Acts 2:38 he does mention baptism for the remission of sins. Are we to be baptized for the remission of sins, or baptized by the Spirit to be in Christ that has has paid the debt of sin for the whole world?

Do you believe Peter viewed the cross as full of shame and guilt? Peter clearly preaches salvation by the blood of Christ.

1Pe 1:17 - And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear:
1Pe 1:18 - Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers;
1Pe 1:19 - But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
1Pe 1:20 - Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,
1Pe 1:21 - Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.​

 

[JLB]

I must say that if full preterism, that old error of Philetus and Hymenaeus is permitted here, my days shall be few, and another this office take.

II Timothy 2.14-19.

 

[dirtfarmer]

Every single person who believes in Christ is a part of the Church and is included as his bride.


Rev. 5:8-10:
8 And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.
9 And they sang a new song, saying, "Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation,
10 and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth." (ESV)

I have given this previously and you have not addressed it.

In the OP, you sated:

"We establish church doctrine only from epistles written by Paul, not by Peter(Cephas), James, or John. Galatians 2:9 "And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision." All of Paul's epistles can be used for church doctrine. We don't have any writings of Barnabus.

The epistles written by James, John, and Peter were to the Jews. Peter at first preach the gospel of the kingdom. Paul preached the gospel of the grace of God."

And several times now I have stated what Peter says: that Paul wrote to the same group of people as Peter did, and about the same or similar matters. Why have you continued to avoid addressing it?

hello Free, dirtfarmer here

I will start by answering, If Paul wrote the book of Hebrews, and there is some evidence that he did, then when Peter stated that Paul had written to the Jews that would be correct. Paul did state that he was a Hebrew of Hebrews; as touching the righteousness which is in the law , blameless. The ending of Hebrews which states: "Grace be with you all. Amen", Is the signature that Paul uses. So, Hebrews could be what Peter had in mind when he stated that Paul had written to the same group of people.

It is my belief that only the believers that are the body of Christ are the bride of Christ.

As to your reference to Revelation 5:8-10; if that is the body of Christ that has been made kings and priest, Then who are they to reign over on earth? I believe that Matthew 28:19-20, which was commanded of the "eleven" disciples which were sent not into the way of the Gentiles as commanded of Christ earlier: Matthew 10:5. I know that 10:5 states 12, but that was before Christ was crucified and Judas Iscariot had hanged himself.