[chickenman]

Originally Posted by Jerry Shugart

If it is a pleasure to have me back then why do you insult me by saying that I am playing games?

You think that you are entitled to insult anyone who disagrees with your views. That attitude certainly does not match the behavior which characterizes a Christian:

"therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace" (Eph.4:1-3).

You and I have been around this block many times before, Jerry. You're cocky (as tambora clearly sees), you're patronizing, you're pushy, and you can't stomach the idea of someone disagreeing with you, so you act this way. You certainly don't exemplify Eph. 4:1-3.

I honestly don't care if someone disagrees with me. Most people don't agree with me. But most people don't handle themselves in their disagreements (with me) in the way you do.

You're welcome to post your views in this thread, Jerry. As a MidActs believer, then it's fair that others see how you differ from me and some others. I think that's a great idea. What's not a great idea is for you to disrespect the request of the OP and repeated throughout by coming on this thread with your superior and patronizing attitude. So please either be respectful and simply share your view...or leave.

Again, I've not interest in playing your games. So please take them to one of the other ten million threads where your mess will fit in.

Thanks,
Randy

[Jerry Shugart]

Originally Posted by chickenman

I honestly don't care if someone disagrees with me. Most people don't agree with me. But most people don't handle themselves in their disagreements (with me) in the way you do.

Randy, you say that you do not care if someone disagrees with you. But your actions tell a different story.

When you cannot answer the message you attack the messenger. In my case, you did not even attempt to defend your ideas but instead you attack me by saying that I am playing games.

Again, I've not interest in playing your games. So please take them to one of the other ten million threads where your mess will fit in.

Let me see. You give a link to your response to what I said earlier:

I addressed this very thing in a response to Jerry a while back. Click here for that post.

But when I decided to show exactly how I responded to your response you accuse me of playing games.

[chickenman]

I don't care that you disagree. I care HOW you disagree. HUGE difference.

Hopefully you'll refrain from any more of your Jerryatrics (in this thread, at least). From this point forward, I'll certainly refrain from any more of this pointless exchange with you, Jerry. If you want to respectfully contribute in this thread, then please do so. Otherwise, please leave so that those who have said they like having a non-debate thread can actually have it.

Thanks,
Randy

[john w]

Time Past/But Now/Ages to Come

underline/bold is my emphasis:

"That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus." Ephesians 2:7


"Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ." Ephesians 2:11-13

"...in time past..."

The LORD God will bless all on-Jews through the nation of His own creation Israel. Israel is created as God’s chosen people, His "elect" for service(holy/sanctify=to be set aside, separated, "severed" for God's use/purpose). God created the nation Israel to have a privileged status before Him as a "peculiar", "different", separated("holy"=sanctified) people:

"But against any of the children of Israel shall not a dog move his tongue, against man or beast: that ye may know how that the LORD doth put a difference between the Egyptians and Israel." Exodus 11:7

"Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: ..." Exodus 19:5

"For wherein shall it be known here that I and thy people have found grace in thy sight? is it not in that thou goest with us? so shall we be separated, I and thy people, from all the people that are upon the face of the earth." Exodus 33:16

"But I have said unto you, Ye shall inherit their land, and I will give it unto you to possess it, a land that floweth with milk and honey: I am the LORD your God, which have separated you from other people." Leviticus 20:24

"For from the top of the rocks I see him, and from the hills I behold him: lo, the people shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations." Numbers 23:9

"For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth." Deuteronomy 7:6

"Only the LORD had a delight in thy fathers to love them, and he chose their seed after them, even you above all people, as it is this day." Deuteronomy 10:15

"For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth." Deuteronomy 14:2

"Thou hast avouched the LORD this day to be thy God, and to walk in his ways, and to keep his statutes, and his commandments, and his judgments, and to hearken unto his voice: And the LORD hath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar people, as he hath promised thee, and that thou shouldest keep all his commandments; And to make thee high above all nations which he hath made, in praise, and in name, and in honour; and that thou mayest be an holy people unto the LORD thy God, as he hath spoken." Deuteronomy 26:17-19

"And what one nation in the earth is like thy people, even like Israel, whom God went to redeem for a people to himself, and to make him a name, and to do for you great things and terrible, for thy land, before thy people, which thou redeemedst to thee from Egypt, from the nations and their gods." 2 Samuel 7:23/2 Chronicles 17:21

"And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company, and came, and stood before him: and he said, Behold, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel: now therefore, I pray thee, take a blessing of thy servant." 2Kings 5:15

"For the LORD hath chosen Jacob unto himself, and Israel for his peculiar treasure." Psalms 135:4

"He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation: and as for his judgments, they have not known them. Praise ye the LORD." Psalms 147:19,20

"You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities." Amos 3:2

In time past, Gentiles are blessed through Israel's rise to kingdom glory(Isaiah 49:6, Luke 2:30-32) as "...the Priests of the LORD....", "...the Ministers of our God:..."(Isaiah 61:6), "...as His "... messenger..."(Isaiah 42:19), His "...servant..." He has "chosen..." as His "...elect...(Isaiah 41:8, 44:1, 45:4, 54:17, 65:9). Israel was to become the LORD God's witness to the unbelieving world of the promised seed , the Lord Jesus Christ(Galatians 3:16), that there is one true and living God(Isaiah 43:1, 10-12; Matthew 24:14; Luke 24:48; Acts 1:8; 10:41,43):

" But now thus saith the LORD that created thee, O Jacob, and he that formed thee, O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine......Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. I have declared, and have saved, and I have shewed, when there was no strange god among you: therefore ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, that I am God." " Isaiah 43:1, 10-12

And thus, Israel was to be the LORD God's vessel(Jeremiah chapter 18, 19:11; Isaiah 52:11) by which "all families of the earth(shall) be blessed"(Genesis 12:2,3) through the Lord Jesus Christ. Israel was to be the appointed channel and were to be delivered from the curse of the law in order that the blessing of Abraham might come through the Lord Jesus Christ:

References: Genesis 12:1-3, 22:16-18, 49:10; Exodus 19:5,6; Psalms 67:2, 96:3, 98:1-3; Isaiah 41:8, 42:6,7, 44:1, 49:6, 56:6-8, 60:3, 61:6-9; Jeremiah 33:9; 2 Chronicles 6:32; Zechariah 8:13-23; 1 Kings 8:41-43; Matthew 5:16, 28:18-19; Mark 16:15; Luke 2:30-32, 24:46,47; John 4:22; Acts 1:8, 3:25; Romans 3:1,2, 9:4, 15:8; Galatians 3:16

This explains the Holy Bible's John 4:22, w/o spinning it.

Pick it up, man of chicken.

[Bright Raven]

What is it that you do not understand Jerry? This thread is not open for debate. It is for those who wish to learn about what MADists believe. See post #1. Ask valid questions or leave the thread alone.

[Jerry Shugart]

Originally Posted by chickenman

I don't care that you disagree. I care HOW you disagree. HUGE difference.

Again, when you cannot answer the message you attack the messenger. I will give you a chance to actually respond to the "message" because now I will disagree what you said here:

With that in mind, the context of John 5:24 is, again, all about the resurrection. Verses 21, 25, 28, and 29 each speak very specifically about a future resurrection. And verse 24 speaks of "pass[ing] from death unto life", something which looks to me to be another way to put..."resurrection". Which makes sense, considering that the verse is surrounded by resurrection passages.

According to you the following verse is about the "resurrection":

"Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life" (Jn.5:24).

According to you this verse is about resurrection and so if you are right then when a person believed Him they were resurrected and went from having a "natural" body to having a "spiritual" body:

"So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body" (1 Cor.15:42-44).

If you are right then we must believe that those who were in their natural bodies when they believed went from having a corruptible body to having an incorruptible and immortal body:

"For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory" (1 Cor.15:53-54).

I find that it is impossible for me to believe that those who heard the Lord Jesus and believed while they were in a natural body were resurrected into a spiritual, incorruptible and immortal body.

Randy, have you even considered that you are confusing being "born again" by the word of truth and being resurrected? They are two separate and distinct things. I cannot believe that all those who heard and believed the Lord Jesus while He walked the earth were resurrected when they believed His words.

[Jerry Shugart]

Originally Posted by Bright Raven

What is it that you do not understand Jerry? This thread is not open for debate. It is for those who wish to learn about what MADists believe. See post #1. Ask valid questions or leave the thread alone.

You must remember that it was Randy Himself who brought me into this discussion when he said:

I addressed this very thing in a response to Jerry a while back. Click here for that post.

No one forced Randy to bring a discussion from another thread to this one. And now that he has done so are you saying that I do not have the right to defend myself on these points which Randy himself brought up?

Besides that, I am explaining the original Mid Acts position of Sir Robert Anderson and J.C. O'Hair and not the Neo-MAD position of Randy.

So if anyone is actually interested in learning about what the MADists believe then they should listen to me and not those who are in the Neo-MAD camp.

[Nick M]

Originally Posted by Jerry Shugart

Besides that, I am explaining the original Mid Acts position of Sir Robert Anderson and J.C. O'Hair and not the Neo-MAD position of Randy.

Actually, he is explaining what Paul said.

[Jerry Shugart]

Originally Posted by Nick M

Actually, he is explaining what Paul said.

Actually, my words were addressing the subject of this thread: "MAD Explained."

Of course I would not expect anyone in the Neo-MAD camp to actually discuss the meaning of the Lord Jesus' words at John 5:24. I would not expect any of them to state their opinion of whether they agree with Randy that the verse is about "resurrection." He wrote:

With that in mind, the context of John 5:24 is, again, all about the resurrection. Verses 21, 25, 28, and 29 each speak very specifically about a future resurrection. And verse 24 speaks of "pass[ing] from death unto life", something which looks to me to be another way to put..."resurrection". Which makes sense, considering that the verse is surrounded by resurrection passages.

Let us look at the verse:

"Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life" (Jn.5:24).

One of the most respected teachers in the original MAD community, J.C. O'Hara, said the following about the verse and he said nothing that even hints that a resurrection is in view:

"The statement of our Lord Jesus Christ, recorded in John 5:24, should certainly give assurance to any one whose trust is in the Word of God...The believer has eternal life. The believer shall not come into judgment. The believer has passed out of death into life. Most certainly God wants believers to have a positive "know so" salvation, the real assurance of salvation. Hear God's own Word:

"'These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may KNOW that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the Son of God.' I John 5:13

"The Greek word, translated 'know', is 'iedo', and the other definition in the Greek dictionary is 'perceive' and 'to be sure'. Can you not see then that God wants you to know, 'to be sure', that you have eternal life; because you believe unto the salvation of your soul. You did not obtain your salvation by earning it or by laboring for it. Neither do you retain it because you are paying for it with your good works " (J.C. O'Hair, THAT YE MAY KNOW THAT YE HAVE ETERNAL LIFE; "Bible Study For Bereans"; March 1936).

J.C. O'Hair understood that the verse is speaking about "salvation" and not "resurrection."

Perhaps you are willing to defend Randy's interpretation and tell us why J.C. O'Hair is in error?

[Choleric]

Originally Posted by chickenman

Same here. Sorry for the long delay. I look at a thread sometimes without having time to do anything in it. Then it drops off my UCP radar, and I forget.

I totally understand!

I wrote:

To which you responded:

There are certainly a lot of places like that in the scriptures – places where only faith or belief is mentioned. But that's not something new. Even in the prophetic scriptures that undeniably include the keeping of the commandments, it was said that “the just shall live by his faith” (Hab. 2:4), with no elaboration on keeping the law. It was understood that faith in God meant doing what He said to do. And the faithful man under the law would keep the law. So every time Jesus spoke of “believing”, He wasn't required to spell out what the believing man would do. It was understood; it permeated their way of life, their history, their relationship with God, etc.

I addressed this very thing in a response to Jerry a while back. Click here for that post.

I read through your post to Jerry. Rather than get too bogged down on this for now, I will try to focus on the covenants. Suffice it for now to say that I think the word "abide" is one we would have a disagreement on. But we can get to that later.

When you refer to the “law of liberty in Christ”, can you tell me where you're getting that phrase? Are you referring to the “law of liberty” that is in James? Or are you using the phrase generically of just the idea of our liberty in Christ?

Well, both. I had in mind James (forgetting how you see James) but also the general application of our freedom (liberty) in Christ. 2 Cor 3:17, Gal 5:1

I asked:

To which you responded:

The four gospel accounts are just like I Chronicles in the sense that they are simply a chronicling something. In the case of the gospels, they're chronicling [part of] the life of Jesus. So they're not like epistles that are written for the purpose of giving instruction/doctrine for living. They're simply accounts of His life (including Luke, a letter written to Theophilus). In them, it's easy to see that the time period represented in them was a time when Israel was definitely operating under the old covenant and awaiting the time of their people's restoration...being brought into the promised land and promised kingdom and promised new covenant.

The purpose of John is stated in John 20:31. Luke gives his purpose for writing to Theophilus in Luke 1:1-4. Surely all four accounts were written for similar purposes: to give any reader factual information about their Messiah so they could know what He did, what He preached, how He suffered, how He died and rose, etc. The accounts are necessary to be able to know the One Who is to be believed upon for salvation.

So that's how I take the gospel accounts. As true, inspired accounts of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. They are for us all. But it's obvious that the time period in them was for Israel operating under the old covenant. So when we see doctrinal matters in them "(show yourself to the priest", "keep the commandments", "do what the Pharisees say because they sit in Moses' seat", "tithe", etc.), we have to simply accept that they pertained to Israel and not us who are in the Body of Christ.

I agree that the gospels were for the Jews under the OC and I agree with you that they are more history than doctrine. That being said, we look at John 3 and see a great picture of Eph 2:8-9. We see the discourse with Jesus and Nicodemus and get a good understanding of what the coming dispensation of salvation by grace through faith would look like (though I understand you will likely disagree with my take on John 3).

I also agree that a large percentage of the doctrine we see (ie Matt 25 , Matt 5) are not for the BOC, but for the millennial kingdom. I guess you could boil my question for you regarding the gospels can be summed up more specifically like this: "Is there any doctrine in the gospels for the Church?" My answer would be yes. (ie John 3)

I said: "I see that and I think it makes a great deal of sense, which is where my "new heart" question comes from. I see verses that agree with this conclusion like Rom_9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;

But how about these verses:

Gal_3:15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.
Gal_3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

Eph 2:12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

I'm not sure what you're asking me about these passages. Can you clarify?

My original question (and where I would like to spend some more time, but no hurry) was regarding the covenant(s) and the application to the BOC and whether, in your view, we are under the New Covenant. You said that you didn't believe we were and so the verses I posted above were regarding the covenant. Eph 2 is the most specific as Paul writes to the church, he says we were at one time outside the covenants but we now aren't. What is Paul talking about in your view? What covenants was Paul talking about that the church is now participating in?

Okay. Fire away if you have any specifics, and I'll do my best. And if I don't know or am not sure, then I'll tell you. And maybe someone else can chime in if they have an answer.

Amen, brother.

OK, and Jerry, I do appreciate your input as I am trying to deepen my understanding. I like to get different perspectives as I learn. Thanks Randy!

[Butterfly]

Originally Posted by chickenman

You and I have been around this block many times before, Jerry. You're cocky (as tambora clearly sees), you're patronizing, you're pushy, and you can't stomach the idea of someone disagreeing with you, so you act this way. You certainly don't exemplify Eph. 4:1-3.

Again, I've not interest in playing your games. So please take them to one of the other ten million threads where your mess will fit in.

Thanks,
Randy

People like Jerry and Tet have not one ounce of SINCERITY when they discuss the mid-acts issue. They are only here to smear and play slanderous games against the belief. In other words, discussing with them is a waste of time.

Jerry has been playing this game for a lot of years. Nothing new for him.

[tetelestai]

Originally Posted by chickenman

From this point forward, I'll certainly refrain from any more of this pointless exchange with you, Jerry. If you want to respectfully contribute in this thread, then please do so. Otherwise, please leave so that those who have said they like having a non-debate thread can actually have it.

Thanks,
Randy

Could you kindly ask your fellow MADist to not make negative comments about me in your thread?

It's really not fair to ask certain people to not participate in your thread, but then at the same time allow others in your thread to make negative comments about them.

Thanks

Originally Posted by Butterfly

People like Jerry and Tet have not one ounce of SINCERITY when they discuss the mid-acts issue.

[Jerry Shugart]

Originally Posted by Butterfly

People like Jerry and Tet have not one ounce of SINCERITY when they discuss the mid-acts issue.

I am very sincere when I discuss the mid-acts view because I believe that the present dispensation began in the middle of the book of Acts. To even suggest that I am not sincere is ridiculous.

They are only here to smear and play slanderous games against the belief. In other words, discussing with them is a waste of time.

I am here to defend the original teaching of MAD against those from the Neo-Mad community,

Jerry has been playing this game for a lot of years. Nothing new for him.

Since you know that you cannot answer the points I made about Randy's idea that John 5:24 is about "resurrection" you attack me personally.

If you think that you can actually defend his view have at it. Nothing is stopping you. But so far no one has even attempted to defend his idea. Perhaps you will be the first.

[chickenman]

You're right, tet.

Butterfly and anyone else (me too), let's stick to the stated purpose of this thread. I made the mistake of jabbing at Jerry and starting a pointless exchange with him. Let's keep this to information only, explaining the MidActs view (including different flavors) to anyone sincerely interested in learning more about it. No patronizing, no comebacks, no jabs, etc.

Let's keep it clean, please.

Thanks, everyone, for your consideration.

[chickenman]

Choleric,
I'm on my phone right now so unable to do a whole lot. Tied up all day tomorrow. I'll respond to your post as soon as I can.

Thanks for your post.

Randy