- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
07 Jun 18
2 edits
Christ has a wide range of disciplines that He could administer AS the need calls for. And I would say at the extreme end of that wide scope is to be "hurt" (not eternally loss), by "the second death".
The sheep of Christ cannot perish forever.
"My sheep hear My voice, and I know them and they follow Me;
It does not say that some could not procrastinate to follow Him.
" ... and they follow Me, and I give to them eternal life, and they shall by no means perish forever, and no one shall snatch them out of My hand.
My Father who has given them to Me, is greater than all, and no one can snatch them out of My Father's hand.
I and the Father are one." (John 10:28-30)
In light of the rest of the NT nothing here insists that the Father and the Son may not discipline the sheep who are in His hand. It is only that in THIS portion, discipline is not the subject but eternal security.
" ... they shall by no means perish forever."
Match that with -
" ... he shall suffer loss, but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire." (1 Cor. 3:15b)
Maybe you think that your local church is the body of Christ and God is working to build that church,
The local ground of the church is only the proper starting point to assemble practically as a church on earth.
The local ground of the church does not guarantee all who stand on this ground will be overcomers rewarded in the coming age. Why should it?
The seven churches in Revelation 2 and 3 ALL each had their perspective calling for some to hear and for some to overcome. Why should we expect it to be different in any other age?
but that is a delusion. Your doctrine is mouthworship. God will do no such thing to build on that church.
Concerning worship with the mouth Rajk999 has already been thoroughly refuted in the Thread "God encourages mouth worship" .
The call to come back to the local ground of the church is not a call to enter into a Christian utopia. It is a legitimate and biblical answer to the problem of denominations and divisions.
Having a utopia is one thing.
Having a clear vision is another.
Without a vision of how Christians can have practical unity the people run wild.
07 Jun 18
Who is and is not a part of the assembly of which Jesus spoke?
Luke 8
19And His mother and brothers came to Him, and they were unable to get to Him because of the crowd. 20And it was reported to Him, “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, wishing to see You.” 21But He answered and said to them, “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.”
This is the dividing line according to Jesus. It is clear the many Christians believe otherwise.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by @divegeester
You can be as abrasive as you like, it's water off a ducks back to me. Honestly I don't mind; in fact sometimes it makes me laugh when any of us gets a bit like that.
See then if you can speak to these questions.
Was the church in Corinth a genuine local church ?
I would say as the first church elaborated on in the epistles the church in Corinth was a typical church founded by the apostles.
1.) Did the fact that some were immature there make it NOT a genuine local church ?
Answer: No. It effected their spiritual health. It did not effect their standing as a genuine church.
2.) Did the fact that there were differences of opinion among them (ie, preferences over favorite servants of God, confusion of the over use of tongues speaking, law suites between believers, problems with head covering, doubting the resurrection of the dead, etc.) ... did these problems mean that they were not a local church ?
Answer: No. These problems effected the spiritual health of some of them, They did not effect their standing as the church in Corinth.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
07 Jun 18
My point here is that the objections you raise are hand wavings saying " But we cannot have one city one church today. Because of this and that problem of Christians."
The objection is not logical. No church in the New Testament as far as I know was completely without challenges among their constituents.
Yet all of them were according to cities.
All of them were according to localities.
(Four exceptions - churches in someone's house).
But this is just a historical matter that churches started usually in the homes of believers.
Thousands of saints in Jerusalem met from house to house. Yet the Holy Spirit said "the church [singular] in Jerusalem".
Your hand waving that "It cannot be today" has been already proven wrong.
Would any of the Jews in Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah have come back from Babylon to the good land if they imagined that it was impossible for God to recover the testimony He had had before the Babylonian Captivity?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by @thinkofoneWhat you are NOT telling the readers is that you consider Jesus' ministry "while he was on earth" to mean the resurrection of Jesus is a lying myth.
Who is and is not a part of the assembly of which Jesus spoke?
Luke 8
19And His mother and brothers came to Him, and they were unable to get to Him because of the crowd. 20And it was reported to Him, “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, wishing to see You.” 21But He answered and said to them, “My mother and My brothers are [b]these w ...[text shortened]... This is the dividing line according to Jesus. It is clear the many Christians believe otherwise.
In the Gospel of John, Jesus referred to "His brothers" only AFTER His resurrection. Before then (in John) the most intimate term He had for them was that they were His "friends." (John 15:15)
The Apostle John makes an emphasis of that point not because he was unfaithful and myth generating. He made it because he was FAITHFUL and KNEW the essence of Jesus' teaching.
He imparted His life into them because of His RESURRECTION , forming His indwelling of them as one divine and spiritual "family" entity.
" Jesus said to her, Do not touch Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brothers and say to them, I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God. " (John 20:17)
But your concocted "Jesus ministry while He walked the earth" disbelieves all that happened after He rose from the dead.
You think you're doing the will of Jesus to teach this way?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
It bears repeating. And repeat I will.
Rajk999 likes to point to the "sheep" in Matthew 25:31-46 to mean the disciples of Jesus Christ.
But the sheep in that prophetic like parable are the NATIONS who, afterall, are "the sheep of His hand"
"Make a joyful noise to Jehovah, ALL THE EARTH ... Know that it is Jehovah who is God;
It is He who has made us and not we ourselves. We are His peaple and the SHEEP of His pasture." (See Psalm 100:1-3)
The SHEEP in Matthew 25:31-46 are not the Christian church. The brothers in the Christian church would be of those AGAINST WHOM the sheep of the Gentiles are examined as to how they TREATED them.
" But when the Son of Man comes in His glory and all the angels with HIm, at that time He will sit on throne of His glory.
And all the nations [Gentiles] will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them from one another , just like the shepherd separates the SHEEP from the goats." (Matt. 25:31,32)
Of course this means that some NOT of the church enter into eternal life. Right ? Yes.
It does not say eternal life enters into them, but that they enter into eternal life. They are transferred into the blessed millennial age as those over whom the sons of God will reign as a reward. They enter a restoration of things as Adam and Eve had before the fall.
07 Jun 18
Originally posted by @divegeesterNo, you are not.
I'm liberal.
Does that mean we can be friends now?
Stop insulting me.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29602
07 Jun 18
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeAs no Christian has challenged this, I will take it as an accepted fact.
No, not really.
Gentiles are usually understood as 'non-Jews,'(which is probably your comeback) but Jesus also puts 'pagans' under the same umbrella. Now, when we take into account that Ignatius, in turn, called pagans atheoi (being “without God” ) we can link the 3.
Gentile = Pagan = Atheist.
😏
Edit: Ooh, we can also throw in Ephes ...[text shortened]... rael and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world."
07 Jun 18
Originally posted by @divegeesterShe does not want to be friends with you. Be thankful... lol
I am liberal, and how is that an insult?
😕
07 Jun 18
Originally posted by @tom-wolseyPaul cannot dismantle the teachings of Christ.
Nearly everything the justification by works radical legalists say is dismantled piece by piece in the book of Romans. They must resent Paul quite a bit.
I know of Catholics who utterly and openly despise St. Augustine (for the same reason), even though he is an established Saint in the Catholic Church!!
You must resent Christ quite a bit.
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeNo Christian can challenge the truth. Mr Philokalia attempted to rebutt what Paul says in Romans 2 about those who have no law, by citing Romans 3 about those who are under the law of Grace. Sometimes you really have to wonder what is the level of education and understanding of these people.
As no Christian has challenged this, I will take it as an accepted fact.
Originally posted by @philokaliaCan you understand that a part of Romans 2 is devoted to those who are not under any law ie the Law of Moses or the Law of Christ? Romans 3 speaks of Gentiles who are under grace because they have been taught the doctrine of Christ?. Why are you confusing the two? Can they not stand on their own as two separate doctrines?
This is the section of Romans 2 you must be referring to:
[quote]All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14 (Indeed, when Gentil ...[text shortened]...
Romans 3.
It says we are justified by faith through grace.
What does that mean to you?
Those who have been taught Christ are under Christ and have to follow the teachings of Christ.
Those with no law are under the law written in their hearts. God will judge them.