[premio53]

Originally Posted by Bro. Parrish

You are correct brother, scripture can be wrongly divided.
I think you will find that there are several levels of dispensational doctrine being taught on this board. Most of us are going to subscribe to a "moderate" dispensational teaching, but there are a few on here that in my opinion go beyond that into the realm of Hyperdispensationalism, and their chopping never ceases, night or day. For more on that here are a few articles:
http://cnonline.net/~rkmiller/ultrad...m-ironside.htm
http://www.victory-baptist.net/hyper.htm
http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/hy...tionalism.html

On the other hand, I think brother George has done a good job warning about the quagmires associated with taking things too far, for example you will find that both George and Chette are in support of water baptism for believers. I think for the most part we have all tried to avoid the division this can create, while still allowing for some discussion. I think it is safe to say we ALL have disagreed with each other on SOME issues, at SOME time. But to me that is not a bad thing as long as it doesn't get out of control.

As I say, sometimes dispensationalism can be a divisive issue for Christians. But all of this in no way impacts our full support for the authority of the King James Bible, and even though we all may squabble from time to time on some issues, the heart of the forum is the inerrancy of the King James Bible and I can tell you that we all rally together as brothers to defend it when needed. My personal suggestion is that you "tread softly" here for a while until you get the lay of the land.

I will take your advice. I will sign out for awhile. I really don't know why George took such an offense though.

[George]

Aloha brother Parrish,

If you are wondering what "set me off" with Premio53, the following Posts - made by Premio53 (criticizing brother Chette Nichols) might clarify:

Premio53’s quote Post #43:
“Winman, I want to thank you for your study and how plainly you lay it out. I have no idea why anyone would accuse you of not rightly dividing the word of God or failing to properly study and instead of giving scripture to refute what you said, refers you to someone else. It may by that he has no answer to what you have said. Once again I thank you for explaining this in such a logical manner.”

Premio53’s quote Post #50:
“Why would it matter if he was Jehovah Witness, Morman or any other cult? Why not just answer the scriptures he has presented? Are you seeking some information to go after him personally?”

These are the kind of “cheap shots” that I despise! Premio53 doesn’t know WHAT he/she is talking about, or WHO he/she is talking about and yet he/she takes these “CHEAP SHOTS” against brother Chette! Just exactly WHAT is it that prompts “Christians” to do this? Hmmm?

When Premio53 said “I have no idea” – he/she said a mouthful! Premio53 has “NO IDEA” WHO brother Chette is. And Premio53 has “NO IDEA” as to WHY brother Chette said WHAT he said. And on top of that Premio53 has “NO IDEA”HOW WELL brother Chette can handle himself on issues like these. In other words – even though Premio53 HAD “NO IDEA” about WHAT or WHO he/she was talking about, he/she ventured a derogatory “OPINION” of brother Chette ANYWAY!

WHO does Premio53 think he/she is?

Proverbs 29:20 Seest thou a man that is hasty in his words? there is more hope of a fool than of him.
{This goes for women too – just in case Premio53 is a woman, since Premio53 has CHOSEN not to tell us anything about him or her self.}

Premio53 was taking these “cheap shots” at brother Chette Nichols. Brother Chette lays his life on the line every day on the remote Island of Palawan in the Philippines (awfully close to the radical Muslims!). Brother Chette has started at least three churches in the Philippines, and works more in the ministry in one day than I do in a month! Brother Chette subsists on anywhere’s between $50.00 and $500.00 a month and yet shares whatever God provides him (and his wife Tata; and there three children; and his mother-in-law; and sister-in-law) with those brethren in the church he pastors, and those outside the church as well.

WHO IS PREMIO53 TO QUESTION brother Chette’s character or ability? Hmmm?

I grow tired of these people who join this Forum and one of the first things they do is QUESTION the character, honesty, or ability of one of the members here. Or they jump into the middle of a Thread and disagree with something that someone posted without knowing anything about what has transpired on the AV1611 Bible Forums before hand (and are too lazy to check the Threads and Posts out).

Check out Premio53”s Thread and Posts – it’s either QUESTIONS (ALWAYS "QUESTIONS") or it’s disagreement, dissent, argument, contention, or controversy. What’s with “Christians” nowadays? Here we have a perfect "STRANGER" (about whom we know NOTHING about); and he/she gets right into the “MIDDLE” of some “CONTROVERSIAL” issue; and he/she “takes sides”; and then he/she criticizes someone (WHO THEY DON’T KNOW FROM ADAM!). Are we to take such a person seriously? Are we supposed to extend the “right hand of fellowship” to a STRANGER that REFUSES to share his/her personal testimony with us and yet sees fit to criticize one of the brethren on this Forum? I trow not!

Proverbs 26:17 He that passeth by, and meddleth with strife belonging not to him, is like one that taketh a dog by the ears.

[Winman]

Chette said

One way to see if you are studying properly is to see how what you learned has lined up with those who do study properly. If you are always arguing and debating it comes from some point of seeing yourself as always right and everyone else as always wrong. That is why I back away after a few posts with you.

That is the biggest bunch of baloney I have ever read. So, you judge yourself the standard, or those you personally agree with. If I disagree with you or those you agree with, I am not properly dividing the word? Baloney.

Millions follow cults of people who have cleverly dissected the scriptures to preach a false gospel. The scriptures warn of these false teachers.

Look, I have presented many scriptures to support my view. If you think I am in error, show me from these very scriptures where I am wrong.

I believe Jesus was rejected on Palm Sunday when he entered Jerusalem. This is a very common belief with Baptists (I am an Independent Fundamental Baptist). I am not sure if it was this thread, but Brother Luke posted a link from Liberty College showing that Palm Sunday fulfilled many scriptures to the very day that Christ would offer himself as King to the Jews. So, this is not an unorthodox view whatsoever, and I happen to completely agree with it because that is what I believe the scriptures truly show.

I showed how the apostles asked Jesus in Acts 1 if Jesus was going to restore the kingdom "at this time" and Jesus told them it was not for them to know this information. And I personally do not believe the Holy Spirit would inspire Peter to preach scripture that contradicts Jesus.

I showed that in every instance in early Acts that the apostles were preaching "repentance unto life", or believeing on Jesus for forgiveness of sins and receiving everlasting life, never once mentioning the restortation of the kingdom. NOT ONCE.

I have been accused several times of not rightly dividing the word, but no one has shown me clearly where I am in error on the scriptures I provided. I am still waiting on that.

You can say what you will about me, I am not here to cause division or strife among the brethren. I am interested in truth, and truth only. I do not like to argue with anyone. But when I see someone who in my opinion is presenting false doctrine, I will stand up and say something about it. I do not think I know everything, but I do study carefully, and pray always for the Lord to give me understanding and discernment.

I think I have presented very strong evidence for my views that there is only one gospel, and that Peter and the apostles were preaching the very same gospel in the early chapters of Acts as Paul was preaching later on. If someone can clearly show me where I am in error (from the scriptures, not personal interpretation), I will listen.

I have looked at the evidence for this supposed "different" gospel preached to the Jews in early Acts. I am not convinced whatsoever from the evidence and scriptures provided. In fact, the more I have read and studied, the more convinced I have become that this teaching is an error.

[Winman]

Kevin said:

I don't necessarily have time to pick through Winman's post right now, all though I do say that I do agree with a couple of things that he said. The only thing I have to ask right now is why did John the Baptist and Jesus keep saying the kingdom of heaven is at hand and then start telling people how to get in to the kingdom of heaven if it there was no possible way for it to show up for another 2000+ years?

Kevin, the Pharisees asked this very question of Jesus.

Luke 17:20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: 21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. 22 And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it.
23 And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there: go not after them, nor follow them.
24 For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day. 25 But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation.

First Jesus told them the kingdom comes not with observation, it is not something you can see with your eyes. Then he tells them the kingdom of God is within you. I understand this as receiving the gospel, believeing on Jesus. This may be describing the church age. Then the Lord describes his second coming. But first he must suffer and be rejected of this generation.

So Jesus did tell them the answer to their question, although they probably did not understand it.

And this is a point to be made. It does not matter what the Jews thought at the time, that has no bearing on reality. They expected the Messiah to come as a King and restore the kingdom. That is the very question these Pharisees asked of Jesus. And the apostles asked the same in Acts 1. The Jews did not know about the church age, they did not understand the Gentiles would be grafted into the body. But that does not change the reality that these things must happen. So, to argue that the Jews didn't expect this thing or that is not really valid. They got it wrong on many counts.

[George]

Aloha brother Winman,

I believe we are at “cross-purposes” in regards to this issue. You have continually ignored most of the points that I have made in this Thread, and then have proceeded to defend your beliefs (albeit with Scripture) without regard to what I have presented.

I will now proceed to demonstrate what I have claimed:

Winman’s Post #32 {with my comments & observations}

Brother Winman's quote:

WHICH “GOSPEL” were you referring to?

“the gospel of the kingdom”? [Matthew 4:23]

“the gospel of the uncircumcision”? [Galatians 2:7]

“the everlasting gospel”? [Revelation 14:6]

Or were you referring to Paul’s “Gospel” – better known as:

“my gospel” [Romans 2:16]
“our gospel” [2Corinthians 4:3]

“the gospel of the grace of God”[Acts 20:24]

“the gospel of God” [Romans 1:1]
“the gospel of his Son” [Romans 1:9]
“the gospel of Christ” [Romans 1:16]
“the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” [2Thessalonians 1:8]
“the gospel of peace” [Romans 10:15]
“the gospel of the uncircumcision” [Galatians 2:7]

If you say that the “Gospel” you are referring” to is “the gospel of the kingdom”, you have a serious “problem”. You see Paul’s “Gospel” was called many things – but it NEVER was called “the gospel of the kingdom”. {NOT ONCE!} When a person “makes” all of the above “Gospels” the SAME, they are “HARMONIZING” the word of truth, instead of RIGHTLY DIVIDING the word of truth.

And if it is the “gospel of the kingdom” - WHICH Kingdom would you be referring to? The “kingdom of heaven”? [Matthew 3:2; 4:17; 5:3,10,19-20; 7:21; 8:11; 10:7; 11:11-12; 13:11,24,31,33,44-45,47,52; 16:19; 18:1,3-4,23; 19:12,14,23; 20:1; 22:2; 23:13; 25:1,14]

Or the “Kingdom of God”? [Matthew 6:33; 12:28; 19:24; 21:31,43; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11,26,30; 9:1,47; 10:14-15,23-25; 12:34; 14:25; 15:43; Luke 4:43; 6:20; 7:28; 8:1,10; 9:2,11,27,60,62; 10:9,11; 11:20; 12:31; 13:18,20,28-29; 14:15; 16:16; 17:20-21; 18:16-17,24-25,29; 19:11; 21:31; 22:16,18; 23:51; John 3:3,5; Acts 1:3; 8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23,31; Romans 14:17; 1Corinthians 4:20; 6:9-10; 15:50; Galatians 5:21; Colossians 4:11; 2Thessalonians 1:5]

If you try to say that “the gospel of the kingdom”; and “the everlasting gospel” and “the gospel of the grace of God” - i.e. Paul’s “Gospel”, are ALL the SAME; you run into the “problem” of when you read about them (in context) they are clearly NOT spoken of as being the SAME!

{The first “problem” with your statement is you fail to identify - WHICH “GOSPEL”? If there is ONLY ONE “Gospel”, then you are correct. IF there is MORE THAN ONE “GOSPEL”, then you are assuming that the “Gospel” that you accepted when you got saved (Paul’s Gospel – i.e. the “Gospel of the Grace of God”) is the SAME “GOSPEL” as the “Gospel” of the Kingdom of God.}

We have gone through this before - Paul’s “Gospel” (simply put) is:

1 Corinthians 15:1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

Romans 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Romans 10:8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

Did the Lord Jesus Christ “preach” the SAME “GOSPEL” as the Apostle Paul? You couldn’t PROVE it (in a "court of law") if your life depended on it! And the fact that - it was just before the Lord was taken by the nation of Israel’s leaders (to be killed) that He “forewarned” ONLY His disciples about His upcoming betrayal, death, and crucifixion [Matthew 20:17-19, 26:1-2] – does NOT “PROVE” that He “preached” His death burial and resurrection to the rest of the nation of Israel, or anyone else for that matter. {He came to the nation of Israel as their Messiah and King; (NOT their CRUCIFIED SAVIOUR!) and He presented Himself as such (He DID NOT “preach” His death, burial, and resurrection to the nation of Israel!). It wasn’t until He was about to be crucified that He revealed His betrayal, death, and crucifixion to His disciples – who refused to believe Him, even after He told them!}

Matthew 20:17 And Jesus going up to Jerusalem took the twelve disciples apart in the way, and said unto them,
18 Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death,
19 And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third day he shall rise again.

Matthew 26:1 And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings, he said unto his disciples,
2 Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.

Mark 1:14 Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,

What was the “Gospel” that the Lord “preached” (in Matthew)?

Matthew 4:23 And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.

Read Chapters 5, 6, and 7 of the Book of Matthew – those Chapters clearly DEFINE “the ‘Gospel’ of the Kingdom” [which “Gospel” - obviously is NOT the “SAME” as Paul’s “Gospel”!]

What was the “Gospel” that the Lord “preached” (in Mark)?

Mark 1:14 Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,
15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

Read Chapter 16 of the Book of Mark – “the ‘Gospel’ of the Kingdom” described therein obviously is NOT Paul’s “Gospel” – They are NOT the “SAME”]

Mark 16:14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.
20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

IF the “Gospel of the kingdom” is the “SAME” as Paul’s Gospel” WHAT HAPPENED to the “SIGNS” that were promised to “them that believe”? I know that the Pentecostals (i.e. “Charismatics”) have been TRYING to “reproduce” those signs for about a hundred years now, but in the 50 years I have been saved I haven’t SEEN one genuine SIGN following “them that believe”! I “believed” in October of 1958 and NO SIGNS have followed me! WHY is that?

It’s because I have believed the “Gospel of the Grace of God” (Paul’s “Gospel”); I did NOT believe the “Gospel of the Kingdom” - that the Lord and His disciples (including Judas) preached (exclusively to the Jews) while He was here on the earth; and which “Gospel” the Apostles and Disciples continued to preach (exclusively to the Jews and Proselyte Jews) in the first Seven (7) Chapters of the Book of Acts.

IF the “Gospel” that the Lord told His Disciples to preach is the “SAME” as Paul’s “Gospel” – WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SIGNS that were promised to “them that believe”? Hmmm?

And what about the “Gospel” in the Book of Luke?

Luke 4:42 And when it was day, he departed and went into a desert place: and the people sought him, and came unto him, and stayed him, that he should not depart from them.
43 And he said unto them, I must preach the kingdom of God to other cities also: for therefore am I sent.
44 And he preached in the synagogues of Galilee.
Luke 4:18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
Luke 7:22 Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached.
Luke 9:6 And they departed, and went through the towns, preaching the gospel, and healing every where.

Whatever “Gospel” the Lord “and His Disciples “preached” – “SIGNS” and “HEALING” always followed that “Gospel” (including the first few Chapters of Acts). And although “signs” and “healing” followed the Jewish Apostles during most of their ministry, the gifts (extraordinary powers) of “signs” and “healing” did NOT TRANSFER to the Gentile “believers”; and even at the end of Paul’s ministry, Paul was unable to cure his “beloved son” Timothy of a simple stomach ache or Timothy’s “often infirmities”! [1Timothy 5:23]

Paul truly had “the SIGNS of an Apostle” [2Corinthians 12:12] for several reasons:

1. To convince the other Apostles and the Lord’s Disciples that he (Paul) was a genuine Apostle.

2. To prove his “Apostleship” to unbelievers {Apostles were supposed to have “signs”.}.

3. To prove he was a genuine Hebrew Apostle to the Jews who were “scattered abroad” in the various cities where Paul preached (always “to the Jew FIRST, and also to the Greek” i.e. Gentile) [Romans 1:16; 2:10]. You see, the Jews “require a sign” [1Corinthians 1:22] and God was obligated to give them signs. So as Paul went from town to town and city to city, he always went to the Jews’ synagogues FIRST. God’s “commission” to Paul was that he was to go “to the Jew FIRST”, and so God gave Paul the “signs of an apostle” to PROVE to those Jews (that were scattered abroad) that he was, indeed, truly an Apostle from God.

Please notice how “lengthy” my comments have been on just one of your sentences – i.e. your quote: “Where I disagree, and perhaps I misunderstand you, is that from the beginning of Acts, the Lord had also determined the gospel would go to the Gentiles.” And please observe that all throughout my comments I have used Scripture to support my beliefs. The fact that someone USES Scripture to PROVE A POINT, doesn’t necessarily mean that WHAT they say, or are trying to PROVE, is “TRUE”!

The sad fact of the matter is –ALL of the Cults USE the Scriptures (Mormons; Seventh Day Adventists; Jehovah’s Witnesses; etc.)! And ALL of the Heretical branches of “Christianity” USE Scripture (Church of Christ; Baptist Bride; most Pentecostal churches, etc.)! TRUTH is NOT determined by whether someone (or some Sect) USES Scripture – “TRUTH” is determined by whether we are “rightly dividing the word of truth” or NOT!

We are commanded to: “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”[2 Timothy 2:15] The way to determine when a person is speaking the “truth” is to examine what they have said in their Posts and determine who is seeking to rightly divide “the word of truth”, and who is seeking to harmonize “the word of truth”. As to which one of us is presenting the “Truth” - I will leave THAT to the judgment of those on this Forum.

Here is the next part of your Post #32:

These verses and the verses that follow have no bearing on the real differences between us because we all know (and agree) that the Lord Jesus Christ was REJECTED (by the nation of Israel) in the four Gospels. My “point” has always been that the nation of Israel REJECTED THE HOLY GHOST living in the Apostles and Disciples, and it is this final REJECTION, by the nation of Israel, of the last Person in the GODHEAD that led to God turning to the Gentiles.

In my Post #31 on this Thread I said:

“In Acts Chapters 1 through 7 – There are at least 107 references made exclusively TO the people of the nation of Israel and NONE made directly TO the Gentiles! WHAT MORE does someone “need” in order to understand that in the first 7 Chapters of the Book of Acts, the Lord God (through the guiding of the Holy Spirit) led the Apostles and Disciples to preach ONLY to Jews and Proselyte Jews, and DID NOT “extend” that preaching to the Gentiles until AFTER the stoning of Stephen (the rejection of the Holy Spirit by the nation of Israel - which is the turning point of the Book Of Acts!), whereupon the Lord began to turn unto the “Gentiles” – who are referenced 28 times (AFTER Acts Chapter 7) from Acts 8 through Acts 28!”

And so most of the following Scriptures (that you cited) are superfluous, since we are in agreement as to WHEN the Nation of Israel REJECTED the Lord Jesus Christ.

Here is the next part of your Post #32:

I don’t know where you got the "idea" that we “disagree” on WHEN the Jews REJECTED the Lord Jesus Christ; or that I ever claimed that the nation of Israel REJECTED the Lord TWICE. I have always claimed that WHEN the Jews REJECTED the Apostles and Disciples between Acts Chapters 1 through Acts Chapter 7 – they were REJECTING The HOLY SPIRIT, Who was living in them and guiding them in what they said and did; and so most of your Post does not apply, and has little or nothing to do with our “real disagreements”. {I will have more to say about this “misunderstanding (on your part) in a later Post.}

Here is the next part of your Post #32:

Again, since you and I are in agreement as WHEN the Lord Jesus Christ was REJECTED, all or most of your comments do NOT apply to our “real disagreements’.

Here is the next part of your Post #32:

You can try to "explain away" the fact that at the stoning of Stephen the future Apostle to the Gentiles (Saul - Paul) shows up, and immediately following Stephen's death God leads Philip to the Samaritans (part Jews/part Gentiles) due to "persecution" alone; but that doesn't explain the SIGNS & MIRACLES that accompanied Philip's preaching (and which no longer follow "the Gospel of the Grace of God" - i.e. Paul's Gospel). And it surely wasn't "persecution" that caused God to GUIDE Philip to the Ethiopian Eunuch (a Proselyte Jew - i.e. A GENTILE with NO "connection" to the Jews in Jerusalem). It wasn't "PERSECUTION" that "FORCED" Philip to seek out the Ethiopian Eunuch; it was the LEADING of the Holy Spirit - beginning to turn to the Gentiles! "PERSECUTION" had NOTHING to do with it!

You supplied a lot of Scripture, but most of it had NOTHING to do with our “real disagreements”. In other words most of the Scripture you supplied was superfluous, since we never had any “disagreement” as to WHEN the nation of Israel REJECTED her Messiah & King in the first place! We “disagree” as to WHAT constitutes the “Gospel” and WHY God turned to the Gentiles.

I shall have more to say about some of your other Posts soon.

[Winman]

Bro George

We will have to agree to disagree. I do see that Jesus told some Jews of his death, burial and resurrection.

John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Nicodemus may not have understood what Jesus meant by being "lifted up", but Jesus was speaking of going to the cross. And John 3:16 is absolutely the same gospel we Gentiles are saved by. God "gave" his son. That is the death burial and resurrection right there.

John 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
33 This he said, signifying what death he should die.
34 The people answered him, We have heard out of the law that Christ abideth for ever: and how sayest thou, The Son of man must be lifted up? who is this Son of man?

John 8:28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.

These verses are to show that Jesus did tell the people of his crucifixion, although I am sure they did not really understand these sayings. But that is not the point. Jesus was clearly teaching the Jews to believe on him for everlasting life throughout the four gospels.

As far as signs, they ceased. But the early believers did speak in tongues and other gifts, including some Gentiles.

1 Cor 13:8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

As for the "gospel of the kingdom", let's examine a verse.

Matt 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

If this gospel of the kingdom means the restoration of the kingdom of Israel, is this what preachers and pastors in churches across the world should be preaching on Sunday morning? Should we preach every Sunday that the Jews should repent of killing Jesus so that the kingdom would be restored?

That makes no sense whatsoever.

No, it is the gospel that Jesus is the Son of God, who came and died for our sins on the cross, was buried, and rose from the dead. This is the gospel that is to be preached to all nations till the end.

In Romans 2 Paul explains that the Jews and Gentiles are saved in the same way.

Rom 2:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

And Acts clearly shows that Peter was preaching the gospel of believeing on Jesus for everlasting life in early Acts, not the restoration of the kingdom.

Acts 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. 16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?
18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

Here you see Peter telling the apostles and disciples in Jerusalem that the Gentiles received the Holy Ghost just as they had on the day of Pentacost who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ. And then the disciples said, then hath God ALSO to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

That is so very clear and easy to understand.

There is no mention of repenting of killing Jesus here. But it is mentioned that the apostles and disciples on Pentacost believed on the Lord Jesus Christ. And verse 18 shows that the message was "repentance unto life". That is speaking of receiving everlasting life (John 3:16), not the restoration of the kingdom.

Bro George, I respect you, but I am in total disagreement with you on this teaching. I see not one single verse in Acts where the apostles preached the restoration of the kingdom if the Jews repented of killing Jesus. But I clearly see the preaching of believeing on Jesus for the forgiveness of sins and receiving everlasting life.

We will have to agree to disagree.

I'm glad we can discuss these things without anger, it is a testimony to both of you and your walk with Christ. Pass the lemonade...

[chette777]

Originally Posted by premio53

Why would it matter if he was Jehovah Witness, Morman or any other cult? Why not just answer the scriptures he has presented? Are you seeking some information to go after him personally?

that would matter a lot JW's, Mormon's or cult members are not saved and have not the Holy Ghost to help them study the word of God, and would do little to contribute to edifying of the Body of Christ of which they are not part of.

winman,

I referred you back to Georges post because he has presented the differences in the Gospels of what Peter taught from Matt - Act7. I referred you back to his post so that we would not be going over ground that was already covered. I referred you to George's previous post because it was obvious that you didn't understand what was being shared from solid scriptural evidence and you answer is always, "I disagree with you". that is it you, you always disagree, then you come back to argue the point that was already covered. you don't seem to be learning or being edified but you seem to be pushing your view as being right and everyone else is wrong.

We don't want to argue we come here to learn and to be edified. it gets ready tiresome dealing with you that is why I back away. but you always have one last word, one last shot. are you one of those types of people who must have the last word or you can't sleep at night?

here I give you the last word. please let me post it for you, I disagree with you. there you have the last word

[George]

Brother Winman said:

"Bro George

We will have to agree to disagree. I do see that Jesus told some Jews of his death, burial and resurrection. "

Aloha brother Winman,

The Lord Jesus Christ "SPOKE" of His death burial and resurrection on several occasions - always with His Disciples or in private.

You quoted several verses, supposedly in "opposition" to what I said. We will now examine those verses to see if they are truly "contradict" my words:

John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

I searched the entire Chapter 3 of the Gospel of John and could not find the word "RESURRECTION" IN IT! Part of the "Gospel" is MISSING!

I never said that the Lord didn't "reveal" to some of His Disciples His death, burial, and resurrection. I specifically said: "He {The Lord Jesus Christ} DID NOT “preach” His death, burial, and resurrection to the nation of Israel"!

Nicodemus came to Jesus "by night" - this NOT the SAME as the Lord Jesus Christ "preaching" to the nation of Israel about His death, burial, and resurrection!

John 3:1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:
2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.

And now on to your other verses:

John 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
33 This he said, signifying what death he should die.
34 The people answered him, We have heard out of the law that Christ abideth for ever: and how sayest thou, The Son of man must be lifted up? who is this Son of man?

John 8:28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.

The fact that the Lord spoke these words does NOT "MEAN" that He "preached" His death. burial, and resurrection (i.e. Paul's "Gospel") to the nation of Israel! Can you NOT SEE - that when the Lord spoke these words - NO ONE (that heard the words) understood WHAT he was talking about?

And not only that - NONE OF THE VERSES YOU CITED SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THE LORD JESUS CHRIST'S "RESURRECTION", they only signified what kind of "death he should die". That's NOT much of a "gospel" - WITHOUT THE "RESURRECTION"! It surely isn't "the 'Gospel' of the Grace of God"!

The verses that you cited DO NOT PROVE that the Lord Jesus Christ "preached" about His death, burial, and resurrection to the nation of Israel; on the contrary, they PROVE (along with verses that I cited before) what I claimed in Post #65:

George's quote - Post #65

"{He came to the nation of Israel as their Messiah and King; (NOT their CRUCIFIED SAVIOUR!) and He presented Himself as such (He DID NOT “preach” His death, burial, and resurrection to the nation of Israel!). It wasn’t until He was about to be crucified that He revealed His betrayal, death, and crucifixion to His disciples – who refused to believe Him, even after He told them!}"

This is the "problem" I am having with you brother. I was very specific in the use of my words - i.e. I said: "He DID NOT “preach” His death, burial, and resurrection to the nation of Israel!" And you run off to three places in the Scriptures (where the Lord is clearly NOT "preaching" His death, burial, and resurrection TO the nation of Israel) and try to make those verses "MEAN" something other than WHAT they "SAY"! You can not possibly equate any of those verses with "preaching" to the nation of Israel the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ!

I repeat: The Lord Jesus Christ NEVER PREACHED TO THE NATION OF ISRAEL HIS DEATH, BURIAL, AND RESURRECTION. {That is Paul's "Gospel" - "the Gospel of the Grace of God" - NOT "the Gospel of the Kingdom of God"}

With the verses you cited - You have FAILED TO DISPROVE what I so clearly stated. Instead, I am afraid that you have (in desperation to "prove" your point) USED the Scriptures to support a personal belief, (in spite of what the "words" actually said) instead of having SEARCHED the Scriptures for the "TRUTH"; the whole "TRUTH"; and nothing but the "TRUTH".

2 Corinthians 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

2 Corinthians 4:1 Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not;
2 But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.

[premio53]

I must say that this is a strange forum. I simply wanted to discuss scripture and everything becomes a personal attack.

Originally Posted by chette777

winman,

I said it was taught but not for the application for the forgiveness of sins from Acts 3-8. it was taught as HISTORICAL facts to prove Jesus was the Promised Messiah for Israel and it was only taught to Israelite's and proselytes to Judaism.

You are still not seeing the truth of Acts three first if they believe what Peter is teaching about Christ being their prince the Holy one of promise (faith in the word preached by Peter not Christ finish work of the cross. NEVER NEVER NEVER does Peter even say that the death burial and resurrection are for the forgiveness of sins), then they are to secondly REPENT (a work), then they are to thirdly BE CONVERTED (a Work), and then they can have their sins blotted out (God's Grace or favor). The word THAT that is in "THAT your sins may be blotted out" it shows in clear English that if they didn't do the repenting and converting then no blotting out. There is a clear order of works based salvation here. none of Which we have to follow today to get saved. this is part of the Kingdom Gospel not the Gospel of Grace.

Failure to see the correct Gospel and to apply it would mean that some of you may not even be saved. and that would answer why it is you cant see the truth of the scriptures or rightly divide.

You accuse Winman of maybe not being saved because he disagreed with your interpretation concerning two gospels and then in this thread after Winman presented strong arguments supported by scripture you accuse him of:

1) you will not rightly divide the word of truth
2) preconceived Ideas as to what the scriptures teach
3) failure to properly study to show thy self approved

I simply thanked Winman for presenting what I thought were strong scriptural arguments and couldn't understand why anyone would accuse him of not studying the scriptures. The next thing I know George comes out of a whirlwind and slams me for not being hospitable because he thinks I was attacking you while demanding to know everything about my personal life instead of addressing the scriptures!

I have no idea who George is but he seems to run this forum. That's fine. I'm new and understand my pecking order but I really don't understand the sensitive feelings. I will refrain from posting for awhile.