Posted on 12/19/2014 1:30:26 PM PST by SeekAndFind
OK. Good night.
We are not told. What difference does it make? It's simply that there was a dispute rising from some who said they had to be circumcised and they didn't think that was right. The simply chose Paul and Barnabas to go back to the apostles and clarify. Trying to inject the understanding developed by the Catholic Church doesn't work.
>>Would it be possible to throw the caucus into disarray by letting more or less people assemble?<<
Again, don't try to inject today's erroneous understanding back into scripture. Whether the assembly their was 10 people or 100 makes no difference.
>>These are Biblical arguments.<<
No, they are not. The questions you are asking exhibits a total misunderstanding of the first century assemblies.
It is not possible for a human to conceive all of God’s will. We can only perceive what God’s will is for our own lives. By the leading of the Holy Spirit and reading the word are we able to apply those influences to first understand our situation and then apply those leading and teachings to our choices.
A church that worships prosperity (or any other doctrine) isn’t a church of Jesus.
That depends on what is found in the book. Does it align with the current New Testament? Are there any false doctrines contained within text? Can the authenticity be verified? If there are no problems, why not?
An elder is simply one of the older members of that assembly who has exhibited the ability to serve in that complicity who by consensus of the assembly is chosen to serve in that capacity.
>>Is he an elder across any denomination or only in that particular one?<<
Denomination? There are no denominations in the first century assemblies. You perhaps need to study the Greek word used. It is NOT church as the Catholic Church has corrupted the meaning. The Greek word used is ekklesia which simply means "those called out". The assemblies were simply local people from an area who became believers who met together.
>>Which elder is eldest? Is it by age or some other criteria?<<
An elder member of that assembly who met the gualifications spelled out by Paul who was chosen by the members of that group to serve in that capacity.
>>This is a nonsense argument and you know it.<<
You purport to tell me what I know?? It is not nonsense it is what scripture teaches.
Show from scripture where baptism is restricted to be done by a certain hierarchy.
>> “Who gave Jesus his authority?” <<
.
The Father
.
>> “Who can baptize and what is the methodology?”
.
Anyone that has the Holy Spirit can baptize.
One simply plunges into a running stream, head up stream, and allows the running water flowing over to symbolize the washing off of past sins, and the sin nature.
This must of course be accompanied by belief that these things will happen, confession of sins and sin nature, and sincere lifetime walkout in faith.
>> “Which commands/ordinances are they to obey?” <<
.
In our time, all that are personally applicable. The Temple ordinances were suspended until the millennial kingdom, due to the removal of the vail and destruction of the Temple.
The rest of the commandments are to be learned gradually over time, just as they were at Moses time, by hearing them read in your place of worship.
.
I've shown you from Gods' word that the commandments are not the same as the "book of the law" nor was it to be treated the same.
Deu 31:26 Take this book of the law, and put it beside of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.
The ten commandments were put inside the ark and are forever. The book of the law was put beside the ark and are not in affect during this age of grace. To try to combine them contrary to God's word is not wise. Nor is it wise trying to put people back under the law.
You have shown nothing but standard Dispy agitprop.
The age of grace began when Adam sinned, and will end at the last trump.
Interesting that Paul said the dispensation of grace had been given to him for the Gentiles. If you can't see the different way God deals with man after pentecost I suggest some study of scripture rather than the teachings of the prophet of the enemy.
1 Timothy 1:6-11 ESV
Certain persons, by swerving from these, have wandered away into vain discussion, desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make confident assertions. Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.
Oh my! I hadn’t even considered that one. Maybe those who preach the law ............?
Do you somehow not understand that dispensationalism is total bunk?
Do you not understand that all men are saved by the same grace? - Have you ever read Hebrews chapters 3 and 4?
.
That verse names all men.
There is not a man alive or dead that has not practiced one or more of the behaviors listed.
This is the kind of confusion that happens you yank a verse of Paul’s letters out of the total context, which you do on your every post.
.
You should maybe tell Paul.
Ephesians 3:2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
Read Hebrews!
Paul stated that his gospel was the same gospel preached to the Israelites in the desert.
Hebrews 3:
[12] Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.
[13] But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.
[14] For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;
[15] While it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation.
[16] For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.
[17] But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness?
[18] And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not?
[19] So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.
Hebrews 4:
[1] Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.
[2] For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.
[3] For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.
“This is the kind of confusion that happens when you yank a verse of Paul’s letters out of the total context, which you do on your every post.”
Confusion? Speak for yourself, seems very clear to me. Since that was not posted to you and is a decent chunk of Scripture only, with no context claimed, whar ARE you going on about?
.
Verses posted ripped from their chapter can lie like a rug.
This is especially true of Paul’s letters.
With Romans,one has to read the whole letter to make sense of it.
Pre-trib Dispyism is a study in heresy, and clipping scripture to support it can make one a deliberate deciever.
Say what? Christ had already died, rose from the dead, and ascended into heaven already then?
Hebrews 3 is simply comparing the rebellion of the Israelites to rebellion in his day and the lack of faith. Hebrews 4 again is simply making a comparison. They both had good news of faith. Both are talking of the faith which was exhibited by obedience. Dispensation does not mean that the means of salvation has changed. I'm beginning to think you may need to understand the meaning of the word Paul uses in Ephesians 3:2.
Look in the mirror and repeat:
“I’m beginning to think you may need to understand the meaning of the word Paul uses in Ephesians 3:2.”
Seriously! Dispensation as used in the Bible means most closely “provision.”
.
“Pre-trib Dispyism is a study in heresy,...”
Okay. Sounds like a disease. You a doctor?
“...and clipping scripture to support it can make one a deliberate deceiver”
First you have to know what is is to use it that way. I could label you an Armstrongite but would that be fair? Sounds like you might be a refugee from the WWCofG but how would I KNOW that? I don’t.
Your online demeanor is frankly rude, being clearly observable from your posts and witnessed to by rebukes from the Moderator (unsolicited by me, for the record). The constant accusations make one wonder just what it is you are here to accomplish, since civil discussion with you seems near impossible.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.