[Guyver]

Isn't it interesting that the Apostle Paul just covered at least three of the ten commandments in that one chapter in Ephesians chapter 4?

[SaulToPaul]

Originally Posted by Bean Counter

Hi Saul.

Your direct answer is much appreciated. Could you expound upon the mode of salvation for the "kingdom church"? You explained their position but I'm still trying to understand what it was that actually saved them. Were they saved by keeping the law OR saved by faith while still being required to keep the law?

If they had not yet received the atonement as you say, then wouldn't that mean they would still be sacrificing according to the law to cover their sin even though Christ had been sacrificed?

I see the differences between the Body and Israel and I find the MAD arguments convincing when I search it out in scripture. But there are still a few practical issues such as this that confuse me.

Thanks for any insight you can provide Saul,
Bean

I'll try my best to answer, according to my knowledge.

They were not saved by the Law, but they were not yet excused from the Law. If they sinned, they did not sacrifice animals any longer for their sins [I stand to be corrected by ], as the book of Hebrews was written to them and makes that clear. They had an unction from the Holy Ghost which gave them power over sin, but if they did slip, they had an advocate with the Father.

So, if they remained faithful unto the end (the end of their life, or when Christ came), they would receive the atonement, the blotting out of sins.

[SaulToPaul]

Originally Posted by chickenman

This is such a tired argument, William. You keep posting this regularly throughout the years, despite being given irrefutable proof that what you say is impossible. It cannot be true. For the thousandth time, if it was supposed to merely be some demarcation of ministry, then Paul reneged on the deal. For AFTER the supposed demarcation was established, Paul CONTINUED to go to circumcised people in every single city he went to throughout the Acts period.

Acts 15, Jerusalem council, is a "line of demarcation", according to godrulz. BUT...

Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews... Acts 17:1

And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. Acts 17:10

Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him. Acts 17:17

And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks. Acts 18:4

And he came to Ephesus, and left them there: but he himself entered into the synagogue, and reasoned with the Jews. Acts 18:19

And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God. Acts 19:8

And it came to pass, that after three days Paul called the chief of the Jews together... Acts 28:17a

Shame on Paul for not honoring his deal with Peter, James, and John, huh?

And, to further confuse rulz, if that's possible



Jews who accepted Christ in his earthly ministry and early Acts:


Romans 2:25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. (GOSPEL OF CIRCUMCISION)



And, those who rejected Christ in his earthly ministry and early Acts:


Romans 2:25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. (GOSPEL OF UNCIRCUMCISION)

[SaulToPaul]

Originally Posted by godrulz

Your paradigm is wrong, not exegetical. You have invested in your novel theory and cannot see the forest for the trees.

Oh.

[godrulz]

Originally Posted by Guyver

Isn't it interesting that the Apostle Paul just covered at least three of the ten commandments in that one chapter in Ephesians chapter 4?

Paul reiterated the whole Decalogue except the Sabbath (for a reason). God is not lawless. There is more than one purpose of the Law. MAD is muddled.

[Guyver]

Originally Posted by godrulz

Paul reiterated the whole Decalogue except the Sabbath (for a reason). God is not lawless. There is more than one purpose of the Law. MAD is muddled.

You're right about the first part, for sure.

I don't know if MAD is muddled or where it is, but some proponents of it like Nick and John are muddled because they can't even answer simple questions about the Bible from books that provide MAD doctrine, like Ephesians. I've asked them both what it means to walk worthy of their calling, but they don't seem to know.

[Bean Counter]

Originally Posted by chickenman

Does that help give you a better understanding of the MidActs position, Bean?

Thanks for the questions.

Randy

The first part about salvation helped. Thanks Randy.

The second part about the "kingdom Jews" still sacrificing is not computing in my brain despite the Hebrew passages you referenced. Hopefully you have the patience to answer two other questions that may help me in better understanding how the passages from Hebrews support your statement.

Two questions:

Question 1) I know this is very broad, and maybe it would be easier for you to direct me to a link that explains this, but can you please explain for me what the "New Covenant" that Christ spoke of in the upper room did exactly? I thought the New Covenant was Christ's blood. That he would be the atonement. But you're saying they only had the hope of Christ's atonement if they remained faithful, correct? So if my understanding of the New Covenant is correct, you're saying the New Covenant did not take effect immediately for those kingdom Jews.

Question 2) I know the MAD position is that the circumcision epistles were written to the Jews and are not applicable to the Body. But were they written as instructions to the Kingdom Jews for that specific point in time OR were they written for Jews at some point in the future? (I don't see how they could be both, and I thought I heard one MAD teacher say the context was written for the future, but you were applying Hebrews to them at that point in time.)

Thanks,
Bean

[glorydaz]

Originally Posted by SaulToPaul

I'll try my best to answer, according to my knowledge.

They were not saved by the Law, but they were not yet excused from the Law. If they sinned, they did not sacrifice animals any longer for their sins [I stand to be corrected by ], as the book of Hebrews was written to them and makes that clear. They had an unction from the Holy Ghost which gave them power over sin, but if they did slip, they had an advocate with the Father.

So, if they remained faithful unto the end (the end of their life, or when Christ came), they would receive the atonement, the blotting out of sins.

You're not saying the Jews have to wait for forgiveness of sins are you? That faith wasn't enough?

Acts 13:37-39
But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption. Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Ephesians 1:7
In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;

[Nick M]

Neg rep to Guyver for unbelievable stupidity.

[SaulToPaul]

Originally Posted by glorydaz

You're not saying the Jews have to wait for forgiveness of sins are you? That faith wasn't enough?

Acts 13:37-39
But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption. Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Ephesians 1:7
In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;

Hi Glory,


Yes, Jews that believed Paul's gospel and entered the Body of Christ had received the atonement, having all sins blotted out.


The Jews which were the "little flock" of early Acts had to wait until Christ returned to receive their atonement, according to what was promised to them.


We can't lump all Jews in one basket, and all Gentiles in another basket. There were Jews and Gentiles in each basket. (Both the little flock, and the Body of Christ).

[Delmar]

Originally Posted by Guyver

I've asked them both what it means to walk worthy of their calling, but they don't seem to know.

We are "resting in Him" because we are saved. Still we challenge each other to do good works. Not to earn anything, but to glorify the King!

[Totton Linnet]

Originally Posted by Nick M

So, should any boys be circumcised on their 8th day? Who or who not? Provide scripture. Here is a hint. One is "perpetual" which means never ending.

*
Jewish boys are circumcised on the 8th day, English boys are not.

If Jews today get saved they think nothing of circumcision with regard to salvation, neither did the Jewish apostles...Paul said so, he said to Peter "you being a Jew live as a Gentile"

[chickenman]

Totton,
You gave me a rep (thanks) for this post...

Originally Posted by chickenman

NewDay,

Was there ever a gospel of the circumcision?

...and wrote: "You shot your own foot here dear Randy, for there is no gospel of the circumcision."

If I shot myself in the foot, then so did Paul when he wrote his letter to the Galatians.

Totton,
Was there ever a gospel of the circumcision?

Thanks,
Randy

[Nick M]

Originally Posted by Guyver

"Therefore, putting away lying, “Let each one of you speak truth with his neighbor,” for we are members of one another. “Be angry, and do not sin”: do not let the sun go down on your wrath, nor give place to the devil. Let him who stole steal no longer, but rather let him labor, working with his hands what is good, that he may have something to give him who has need. Let no corrupt word proceed out of your mouth, but what is good for necessary edification, that it may impart grace to the hearers. And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Let all bitterness, wrath, anger, clamor, and evil speaking be put away from you, with all malice. And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God in Christ forgave you."

And none of that has anything to do with salvation.

[chickenman]

Originally Posted by Bean Counter

The first part about salvation helped. Thanks Randy.

The second part about the "kingdom Jews" still sacrificing is not computing in my brain despite the Hebrew passages you referenced. Hopefully you have the patience to answer two other questions that may help me in better understanding how the passages from Hebrews support your statement.

I'll do my best. First, though, are you saying that it "is not computing in my brain" because you don't understand why they did it? Or are you saying you're not sure they actually did it (sacrifice)?

Two questions:

Question 1) I know this is very broad, and maybe it would be easier for you to direct me to a link that explains this, but can you please explain for me what the "New Covenant" that Christ spoke of in the upper room did exactly? I thought the New Covenant was Christ's blood. That he would be the atonement. But you're saying they only had the hope of Christ's atonement if they remained faithful, correct? So if my understanding of the New Covenant is correct, you're saying the New Covenant did not take effect immediately for those kingdom Jews.

They would only receive their atonement, forever blotting out of sins, when they would enter into the kingdom in which they would enter into their new covenant with Him. Until that time, they would have remission (temporary setting aside, or temporary forgiveness...however you want to word it) of sins. By abiding in Him, keeping the commandments, loving their brethren, then they would be kept by the power of the Spirit. Some who tasted of the heavenly gift they received at Pentecost could have, however, fallen away.

For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. Heb. 6:4-6

Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end; while it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation. Heb. 3:12-15

So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief. 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. Heb. 3:19-4:1

Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief. Heb. 4:11

Upon entering into the new covenant, their sins would be blotted out forever and they would forever be at peace. Faithful endurance was required up to that point, though. For the scriptures tell us that the new covenant was not in effect yet during the lives of those early saints.

In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. Heb. 8:13

In other words, that "old" covenant was still in effect. It was decaying and growing old, ready to vanish away, but it was still in effect, nonetheless, until the new would be put in place.

Question 2) I know the MAD position is that the circumcision epistles were written to the Jews and are not applicable to the Body.

They're not for us as doctrine. But I believe we can draw great application from them. We just have to let them be in their right place first, understanding that they were written for Israel under Peter's, et al, commission.

But were they written as instructions to the Kingdom Jews for that specific point in time OR were they written for Jews at some point in the future? (I don't see how they could be both, and I thought I heard one MAD teacher say the context was written for the future, but you were applying Hebrews to them at that point in time.)

This is a point of disagreement for us MidActs'ers. I believe that God's plan was to deliver the promised to kingdom to them within their lifetimes. So the letters (Hebrews through Revelation) were written to living Israelites to exhort them to remain faithful, to be patient when they seemed to be giving up hope, to not listen to scoffers who wanted to convince them God had given up on them, and to let them know what they could expect to experience in those end times preceding the delivery of the kingdom.

Due to the nation's overwhelming rebellion, though, God put that plan on hold. God said the following:

And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them. Jer. 18:9-10

He said that He reserved the right to NOT do that which He said He would do for them, depending upon their actions. In the first century, they rejected the offer that if they repent and confess, Jesus would return. So He withdrew the offer, did not do as He said He would do (per Jer. 18), and Jesus did not return with their promised kingdom.

Because the promises are irrevocable, though, then it will happen one day. Therefore, those same letters will still apply and be necessary for the future time when God reinstates that plan and prepares His chosen people for the coming kingdom.


How was that?