ECT Water baptism commanded for the BoC?

PhilipJames

New member
Hello Lighthouse,

Did you just call the written law 'empty'? As in 'void'?

No I did not say the law was 'void'. This is what I was saying:

since no human being will be justified in his sight by observing the law; for through the law comes consciousness of sin. (Rom 3:20)

Stephen was not justified by the LAW but by his FAITH, a faith that loved!, a faith that endured to the end! And that to suggest that he was not a member of Christ's body, having partaken of the ONE BREAD, is just silly...

Then notice that the same did not speak of enduring the end, and vice versa.

1 Cor 9:24-27

Do you not know that the runners in the stadium all run in the race, but only one wins the prize? Run so as to win.

Every athlete exercises discipline in every way. They do it to win a perishable crown, but we an imperishable one.

Thus I do not run aimlessly; I do not fight as if I were shadowboxing.

No, I drive my body and train it, for fear that, after having preached to others, I myself should be disqualified.


2Tim4:7

I have competed well; I have finished the race; I have kept the faith.

And if the law was of no effect for Stephen why did Peter argue with God in his vision in Acts 10?

because Peter hadn't, as yet, fully understood the freedom that Faith in Christ brings... the Holy Spirit was continuing to teach him...

"The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law."
-1 Corinthians 15:56

I accept your correction here. The power of sin is the law. And that law says: 'if you don't obey you will die'

A bodily resurrection does not negate the physical death that precedes it.

agreed, but just as we have been saved from spiritual death so to shall we be saved from physical death, our bodies WILL rise.

"And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, "
-Hebrews 9:27

He will appear again for salvation to those who eagerly await Him. This means the author of Hebrews is stating that salvation hadnot yet come to those in his dispensation, whereas Paul writes of his audience as having already been saved.

Or does it mean that we have been saved, that we are being saved, and that, if we endure to the end, we will be saved?

Jesus. It was Jesus. His ministry lasted three years, and the fig tree represents Israel.

Agreed! And? The fig tree did produce fruit... much fruit! Over a billion souls and counting.....

Is there a reason you barely reference Scripture?

Is there a reason you say that?

Did you not notice in Acts 15 that some of the council agreed that the Gentiles shoul follow the law? Why believe this if they did not have to follow it?

because they were in error. that was the whole purpose of the council! To definitively settle the issue. And the Holy Spirit ensured that the correct doctrine, that is the Truth was decided and carried to all the churches.

What Peter declares is that the Gentiles are under a dfferent dispensation and therefore are not required to be made into Israelite proselytes.

That is NOT what the council said.... here is the decision of the council: Acts 15:28:29

''It is the decision of the holy Spirit and of us not to place on you any burden beyond these necessities,

namely, to abstain from meat sacrificed to idols, from blood, from meats of strangled animals, and from unlawful marriage. If you keep free of these, you will be doing what is right. Farewell.'
"

What office? Apostle?

yes, and also chief of the apostles


Now ifyou want to show that Paul says the circumcision is part of the Body go right ahead.

Meanwhile I'll read Romans 4:16, which shows us that those of the law and those of faith are two different groups, both the seed of Abraham and therefore heirs of the promise.

On the contrary, Romans 4:16 shows that they are ONE group united in faith. Consider the prior passages..

Rom 4:11-12

And he received the sign of circumcision as a seal on the righteousness received through faith while he was uncircumcised. Thus he was to be the father of all the uncircumcised who believe, so that to them (also) righteousness might be credited,

as well as the father of the circumcised who not only are circumcised, but also follow the path of faith that our father Abraham walked while still uncircumcised.


see also Ephesians chapter 2

Jesus established the New Covenant for Israel and it was put on hold because the fig tree did not bear the desired fruit within the time it was given. So Israel was blinded until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in.

On what basis do you say the tree did not bear fruit? You do know that it is the New and everlasting covenant do you not?

And it is into that New Covenant that we, the wild olive, are grafted in.

I didn't say Peter was acting as though they were unclean at all times. You assume too much. And maybe I assume too much in regard to your intellect and intelligence. I thought you would understand that it was inmplied I was speaking of Peter's actions when the certain men from James showed up.

Considering some of the things you have said, I may have been over-careful not to assume anything that you may have 'implied'

Who continued to make said sacrifices?
Jews

And can you verify this was the only overlap?

Sure. The temple was destroyed. The New Covenant has begun, there will be no other sacrifice for sin, thus any attempt to resurrect the old covenant is doomed to failure.

You want that stated another way? The branches have been cut off... they will be grafted back in ONLY when they turn their hearts to Messiah, Jesus.

The covenant is with Israel; not all are Israel.

If they wish to have life, they need to be grafted in with Israel.

Paul was the only one to ever refer to believers as the Body of Christ. And he was the apostle to the Gentiles. No other apostle was to the Gentiles, nor did any of them refer to believers as the Body of Christ; either before or after Paul did.

You mean there is no RECORD of them having done so... to say they never did is to presume too much in my opinion.

Paul wrote that in the Body of Christ there is no Jew or Gentile, as recognized differently from each other.

Amen! ( I wish you would stop following those who try to make such a distinction...)


It is those outside of the Body who make that distinction.

Agreed!


And the circumcised, e.g. those of the law, are not of the Body, becuse the Body is those of faith.

and what of the circumcised that HAVE FAITH! The Church is built on them!

I haven't abandoned anything. But Paul did not follow their advice completely as they asked him to preach the Gentiles should stay away from things sacrificed to idols and Paul simply told his listeners to only refrain if it could make someone else stumble.

did he not? 1Cor 10:16-21

So it was too difficult for Jesus to tell his disciples the plan? Why was the vision necessary?

He DID tell them the plan. I don't think you realize the cultural obstacles that the Spirit had to lead them to overcome....


And if that was always the plan why call Paul to preach the new message before revealing it to Peter?

I think HE revealed it to all the apostles long before Paul was converted. That Paul grasped the revelation much more quickly than they , is surely due to GOD's grace but also to Paul's training as a Pharisee...

And did they do that? No, they did not. As seen in Galatians 2:9.

this is a division of territory... not 2 different Gospels... and yes they all preached to both Jews and gentiles. The Church was ONE!

We also know that when Jesus told them to do that He also told them to baptize. But Paul, who was also an apostle, was not sent to baptize. Why do you think that is?

because that was not his job.. (although he did baptize some). but he certainly preached baptism: 'one Lord, one faith, one baptism;

Peace!
PJ
 

DAN P

Well-known member
Hello Lighthouse,



Stephen was not justified by the LAW but by his FAITH, a faith that loved!, a faith that endured to the end! And that to suggest that he was not a member of Christ's body, having partaken of the ONE BREAD, is just silly...


/QUOTE]


Hi and where is a verse where Stephen is INCLUDED in the Body of Christ as Gal 3:28 says that in the Body of Christ there CANNOT be Jews or Greeks nor Bond or Slave NOT Male nor Female , how is that SILLY ?

Where is your verse ?

dan p
 

PhilipJames

New member
Hello dan,

Hi and where is a verse where Stephen is INCLUDED in the Body of Christ...

Where is your verse ?

dan p

1Cor10:16-17
The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?

Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.



Peace!
PJ
 

DAN P

Well-known member
Hello dan,



1Cor10:16-17
The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?

Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.



Peace!
PJ


Hi and that did not prove that Stephen is in the Body of Christ ?

Gal 3:28 proves that all that enter the Body of Christ are NEITHER Jews , Greek ,bond or slave not Male nor Female , so how SILLY is that ??

dan p
 

DAN P

Well-known member
Hello dan,



1Cor10:16-17
The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?

Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.



Peace!
PJ


Hi and that did not prove that Stephen is in the Body of Christ ?

Gal 3:28 proves that all that enter the Body of Christ are NEITHER Jews , Greek ,bond or slave not Male nor Female , so how SILLY is that ??

dan p
 
Top