> General Discussions
Two for One
sonofone:
--- Quote from: indianabob on October 15, 2007, 09:55:19 AM ---sonofone,
regarding the OT NT.
I'm sure that you are aware that the 'people of God' in the O.T. didn't have the indwelling holy spirit. Their requirement was that they obey the leaders set over them by observing the written law. It seems to me then, that they didn't obey out of love for God although perhaps from respect reverence and fear of consequences. Isn't that the major difference between the OT and the New better covenant?
I would also note that many if not most people that we contact in churches are not the spiritual people of God in the best sense. Most attend out of habit rather than a desire to please God based upon true knowledge. So what kind of miracles should we expect and with what frequency?
From the perspective of a believer in the time of the apostles, was there a transition that was obvious to them. The letters of the NT were some time in coming and the folks there had the same background that they had grown up with. True, they now had the REAL Messiah and were thrilled about that and they had the teaching that the law would no longer be a confusing burden as administered by the priests, but their faith, it seems to me, was pretty basic and simple and based upon the promises in the OT along with the clarifications provided by Jesus through the apostles. e.g. love your enemies
Comment?
Bob
--- End quote ---
SONOFONE: Bob if I understand your question [properly it is an interesting one indeed to me. That is was there an obvious transition,concerning the apostles? Which is to say was it obvious to them? I have pondered such matters in my head for years. I have wondered things like did Paul and other writers of the Epistles believe that there letters which were sent to address specific issues in a specific space in time would one day be read,believed,followed misapplied for ages to come. In other words were they aware that they were writing the new testament? I will stop short for now on giving my opinion as there may be some teaching by Ray out there that I am unaware of so I'll yield the floor to one who might already have a response to this question. But if no response is available ,than I guess it's fair game at that time to give My take on it.
Gregor:
Greetings,
Interesting question indeed. Since you started this post, sonofone, I've been thinking about it too. Were the apostles writing specifically to the converted Jews who were in Rome, Corinth, etc. or including the newly converted Gentiles? Did the Samaratin converts attend the churches of God? I wonder too about whether they knew their letters would be studied 2000 years later by people from the opposite side of the globe, a totally different race, upbringing, and perspective. The first epistle of John was written to "My little children", the second epistle written to "the elect lady, and her children," and the third written to "the beloved Gaius", all from "the elder, John." So we have totally different audiences, written in a different time/place/culture/etc but written to Jews. Then Jude was written to "those who are called and sanctified..." I wonder how the letters would read had the apostles been writing specifically to us converted Gentiles in our day and age. This also leads me to believe that many a false doctrine could easily be invented by a carnal mind trying to interpret the spiritual truth found in these letters. One thing is for certain, all this confusion just reaffirms the need for the Saviour and our faith in Him.
2John.1:9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
May we learn to discern the doctrine of Christ, and abide in it.
Peace.
G.
Kat:
I can not see how the Apostles could have foreseen what was to be in the future. I believe that some of them may have though Christ could return to their own generation. Even though I think they wrote what they did very carefully, with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. But for them to think that 2000 years later Christ would not have returned yet and that their letters are being gone over with a fine tooth comb all these hundreds of years. I don't think they realized that.
Here are a few emails that may be have some significance here.
http://www.forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,3587.0.html ------
Hello Ray
What is your understanding of PRESENT TRUTH?
Reuben
When Peter wrote those words it was the truth that they THEN had.
For us it is the truth that we NOW have. Unfortunately the Church
LOST the truth that they then had, and NEVER LEARNED the truth
which we now have.
God be with me,
Ray
http://www.forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,2900.0.html ------
what about the Gospel writers? Were they supposed to have received revelation, even down to actual quotations of Jesus? Forgive my ignorance on the subject. Also, why do you think it took so long after Jesus' death before people started writing about him?
Sincerely,
Russ
Dear Russ:
Never been asked this question.
I believe that they did write about Him and His sayings from the beginning. And I believe that is why they knew how to quote Jesus accurately. There may have been many letters and manuscripts recording what Jesus did here and what He said over there, etc. Also, as time when on and those who did see and hear and know Jesus became fewer and fewer through death, it became necessary to put to ink and scroll as much as anyone could remember, along with those teachings that were actually written down, here and there and maybe almost everywhere.
The gospel of John, of course, was written by the Apostole John, and so he knew everything first hand, but even he may have had to consult manuscripts which had earlier recorded the actual quotations, places, dates, etc..
God be with you,
Ray
sonofone:
--- Quote from: Kat on October 15, 2007, 01:31:51 PM ---
I can not see how the Apostles could have foreseen what was to be in the future. I believe that some of them may have though Christ could return to their own generation. Even though I think they wrote what they did very carefully, with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. But for them to think that 2000 years later Christ would not have returned yet and that their letters are being gone over with a fine tooth comb all these hundreds of years. I don't think they realized that.
Here are a few emails that may be have some significance here.
http://www.forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,3587.0.html ------
Hello Ray
What is your understanding of PRESENT TRUTH?
Reuben
When Peter wrote those words it was the truth that they THEN had.
For us it is the truth that we NOW have. Unfortunately the Church
LOST the truth that they then had, and NEVER LEARNED the truth
which we now have.
God be with me,
Ray
http://www.forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,2900.0.html ------
what about the Gospel writers? Were they supposed to have received revelation, even down to actual quotations of Jesus? Forgive my ignorance on the subject. Also, why do you think it took so long after Jesus' death before people started writing about him?
Sincerely,
Russ
Dear Russ:
Never been asked this question.
I believe that they did write about Him and His sayings from the beginning. And I believe that is why they knew how to quote Jesus accurately. There may have been many letters and manuscripts recording what Jesus did here and what He said over there, etc. Also, as time when on and those who did see and hear and know Jesus became fewer and fewer through death, it became necessary to put to ink and scroll as much as anyone could remember, along with those teachings that were actually written down, here and there and maybe almost everywhere.
The gospel of John, of course, was written by the Apostole John, and so he knew everything first hand, but even he may have had to consult manuscripts which had earlier recorded the actual quotations, places, dates, etc..
God be with you,
Ray
--- End quote ---
So Kat is this topic now fair game? as Ray has no specific teaching on this matter?
Deborah-Leigh:
Hello sonofone
My response in blue and your observations and questions in black font. Please note : Caps are used to identify what is accented in my mind and is not used to imply any superiority or highhandedness or looking down on your valuable contribution.
I had two questions for your consideration.Does it seem to you as it does for me that the four Gospels and the book of Acts would be better stated as transitional Gospels as opposed to New Testament Gospels.
Transitional? What for? Why?
I say this because Jesus came to establish,and fulfill the Old Covenant while pointing to and in his death establishing the New Testament.
This is why Jesus came.
Gal 3 : 8…the reason the Son of God was made manifest was to undo, destroy, loosen, and dissolve the works the devil has done.
Rom 8 : 3 For what the law could NOT DO, in that it was weak through the flesh, God SENDING HIS OWN SON in the likeness of sinful flesh and as a sin offering, condemned sin in the flesh. 4 that the righteousness of the law might be FULFILLED IN US who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit.
The book of Acts it would seem begins the New Testament church
This is certainly the one of the views of Babylonian teachings that aspires to Cell Group Home Churches as a means by which they attempt to imitate the activities of Paul as he visited the homes of the brethren.
however there was obviously a transition period for the church and the ushering in of the dispensation of Grace.
I believe that this term “Dispensation of Grace” is another word used to effect disguises, smoke screens and side roads that lead away from the Truth.
Ray Smiths teachings show to me that in every generation there are those few chosen who have judgment now upon them and they will be gathered and resurrected in the first resurrection to life. The time line of God for me, is not dependent on mans time line in his history. Mans time line of history shows increasing wickedness and approaching is the day of judgment for all generations. For God we know that a day is as a thousand and visa versa.
Which it would seem did not come into effect all at one time.
Are you still speaking about GRACE? Are you saying that God’s GRACE did not come into effect all at one time? I don’t think this is accurate to say or even think this. God does not change. God’s Grace does not evolve. Man is being conformed to the image of Christ not God.
Which leads me two my second question.Did the dispensation of Grace cause God to deal with man in a different way?
God is CAUSE. Nothing CAUSES GOD. NOTHING. To build upon a man taught foundation for me, leads to doubts confusion and multiple strings attached to multiplying deceptions and illusions that appear solid true and credible to my own logic and limitations. I have discovered that my logic and limits are not Gods logic or limits. Gods thoughts ARE higher.
By this I mean did the fact that God was now allowing
God doesn’t allow…God CAUSES. Man is not a sovereign independent entity that is able to act outside of God’s Sovereignty. There is a valuable source of teaching that is offered via Ray on this topic of what God allows which if I am not mistaken is nothing but God causes everything!
man time to grow in the faith
Here the only parallel line of thinking I can find is that God is still making man into the image of His Son and that the work of God is still not completed. It is not up to man to grow in faith. This is a work of God.
thereby withholding immediate judgement
I believe that God does withhold immediate judgment for those He reserves for purging and purification in the White Throne Judgement. For me, That is why wickedness appears to be thriving in our world and it is. This is all as God has Planned.
also cause God to stop the flow or onslaught of signs and wonders including miracles.
As has been said, Gods signs and miracles are everywhere. Einstein said the following. One can live life in one of two ways only. 1 ) As if nothing is a miracle or 2) As if everything is a miracle…Quite a smart man God made Albert to be!
Tongues for instance was a sign to the unbeliever because men were able to speak with other identifiable languages which were not there own,yet that sign is now gone and appears left shortly after the Church was established.The last known record of God executing instant judgement was in the book of Acts when he killed Ananias and Sapphira's up until this time it was common for God to strike you down instantly,or command or allow men to kill you instantly if you sinned.This is not happening now
Are you so sure? Autopsy simply disguises the cause as being something other than God but hear what the Scriptures say : Rev 1 : 18 I am He that lives, and was dead; and behold I am alive for evermore. Amen and have the keys of Hades and of DEATH. (Who has the keys? That heart attack. That stroke or cancer?...)
not with God or man.So Is the dispensation of grace the cause for the two way silence of heaven?
I do not believe that Heaven is silent I believe many are deaf and blind.
That is to say his silence in judgement,and miracles.
Or to say my dullness or deafness in judgement and/or my blindness or dullness to His miracles! :)
Peace to you
Arcturus :)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version