I thought the speaker wanted to jump the Phil 3:3 hurdle because it says, "We are the circumcision," so he could coast on through the rest of his message. He seemed to choose his words very carefully:
Phil 3:3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
Of course, we know this is a spiritual circumcision of the heart and not a physical one. Yes, it gives us an identity, all right! It tells us who we are in Christ. Physical Israel WAS the circumcision in the OLD testament .... but now in the NEW testament, of which we are able ministers (2 Cor 3:6), WE are the circumcision. It is from God through the apostle Paul to the Gentiles. There is no getting around it! The outer has been REPLACED by the inner.
God said what He meant, and He meant what He said, right? Right!
Heb 12:25-a See that ye refuse not him that speaketh.
This is David Dowell, saying, "Think about it!"
Monday, July 19, 2010
Conf. Sunday Message # 4 on 7-18-10
I thought the analogy of ‘abstinence’ with the message topic was very thoughtful and good.
The speaker made a statement I would like to see ‘mid-Acts-ers’ take to heart, that is, "Either you find a verse telling you that exact thing, or there’s no verse and it’s probably not true." If they would apply that principle to their own doctrine, they would change it.
Personally, I don’t think writing on a mirror, "Thou shalt not steal," (or the like) would encourage us to disobey. Rather, it can be helpful to remind us to do right.
This speaker also spoke of repentance, as if it was not important. Since I am no longer a ‘mid-Acts-er’ .... I believe our rebellious mind must be changed for us to appreciate Christ’s sacrifice on our behalf.
I do not believe that works ever saved anyone, however, we who are saved should be ‘rich in good works’ (1 Tim 6:18), ‘a pattern of good works’ (Titus 2:7), ‘zealous of good works (Titus 2:14), and careful to maintain good works (Titus 3:8,14):
Eph 2:8-10 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
I sadly agree that many religious people, without a clear gospel message, have false hope while feeling comfortable, but will go to hell.
This is David Dowell, saying, "Think about it!"
The speaker made a statement I would like to see ‘mid-Acts-ers’ take to heart, that is, "Either you find a verse telling you that exact thing, or there’s no verse and it’s probably not true." If they would apply that principle to their own doctrine, they would change it.
Personally, I don’t think writing on a mirror, "Thou shalt not steal," (or the like) would encourage us to disobey. Rather, it can be helpful to remind us to do right.
This speaker also spoke of repentance, as if it was not important. Since I am no longer a ‘mid-Acts-er’ .... I believe our rebellious mind must be changed for us to appreciate Christ’s sacrifice on our behalf.
I do not believe that works ever saved anyone, however, we who are saved should be ‘rich in good works’ (1 Tim 6:18), ‘a pattern of good works’ (Titus 2:7), ‘zealous of good works (Titus 2:14), and careful to maintain good works (Titus 3:8,14):
Eph 2:8-10 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
I sadly agree that many religious people, without a clear gospel message, have false hope while feeling comfortable, but will go to hell.
This is David Dowell, saying, "Think about it!"
Conf. Sunday Message 3 on 7-18-10
BTW, speaking of accents, someone else thought this speaker said, "the WOOL of God", which was the ‘WILL’ of God. Well, I heard 2 others. I thought he was saying, "BOLD you up", and it was really ‘BUILD’. Then I heard you would be "FOOLED with knowledge", that was meant to be, ‘FILLED’.
His initial intent was to show 2 things:
1) Grace will produce every good work.
2) What some good works are.
Did I miss something? I never heard any of the second point.
The speaker said you don’t have to repent of your sin .... just trust Christ. According to what Paul taught, we need to REPENT unto GOD first .... then move to faith in Christ:
Acts 20:20-21 And how I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publickly, and from house to house,
21 Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks,
repentance toward God,
and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.
‘Mid-Acts-ers’ don’t see the need for repentance because they think it was in what-they-call ‘Israel’s prophecy-program’ and earlier linked to water baptism.
John the Baptist called the physical seed of Abraham (national Israel) to repentance .... to make their Messiah, their Christ (John 1:41, 4:25) manifest to Israel (John 1;31):
Matt 3:7-9 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
Mark 1:4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.
Peter taught repentance at Pentecost to ‘all the house of Israel’ (Acts 2:36):
Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (also Acts 3:19)
Peter ALSO taught repentance unto salvation to the GENTILES in Cornelius’ house (his kinsmen and near friends in Acts 10:24), as Peter later testified:
Acts 11:18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.
‘Mid-Acts-ers’ make a big deal out of Paul’s "BUT NOW" statements. Well, what about THIS ‘but now’ from Paul to the men of Athens on Mars’ Hill, who were too superstitious in all things (Acts 17:22)? God allows NO EXCEPTIONS when it comes to REPENTANCE:
Acts 17:30-31 And the times of this ignorance God winked at;
but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.
Did Paul MISUNDERSTAND his commission from ‘the risen, glorified Lord’ that he was given on the Damascus road (Acts 26:12-18)? No, he got it! Paul testified that Christ sent him to the Gentiles for THEM to REPENT:
Acts 26:19-20 Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision:
20 But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.
Paul taught REPENTANCE to the Romans .... in the context of God’s judgment .... for the SAME reason as we read in Acts 17:30-31:
Rom 2:3-5 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?
4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?
5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;
Paul showed that repentance is the prelude to salvation .... thus, it is WRONG to think you can BY-PASS repentance:
2 Cor 7:10 For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.
The speaker taught that God’s word will perfect and enable us. That is true. However, the speaker ignored the fact that it is ALL God’s word that is profitable to us for all these things .... NOT JUST Paul’s epistles ONLY as ‘mid-Acts-ers’ commonly teach:
2 Tim 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God,
and is profitable
for doctrine,
for reproof,
for correction,
for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
Obviously, the speaker has been looking at GREEK words to know that the same Greek word that is translated "Study" in 2 Tim 2:15 is translated "Endeavoring" in Eph 4:3. Would that information do anything to the frequent ‘mid-Acts’ teaching .... that, "The only verse in the Bible that tells us TO study the Bible also tells us HOW to study the Bible .... that is, to rightly divide it"? (FYI, the Greek word [spoudazo] is used 11 times, and translated ‘endeavour/ing’ 3 times, ‘be/do/give diligence’ 5 times, ‘be forward’ 1 time, ‘labour’ 1 time, and ‘study’ 1 time.)
I thought it was very hypocritical of the speaker to mock a particular preacher (whose name I know but won’t mention either), demonstrating his squinty eyes, and hand waving manner, with his (estimated) 40,000 number of people shown in the camera behind him, not counting the larger audience seated in front of him, along with his wife, plastic as he is, who teach the ‘word of men’ rather than the word of God .... and then .... for the speaker to scold someone using satire on a website about ‘mid-Acts’ doctrine? Seems like he can dish it out, but he can’t take it.
This is David Dowell, saying, "Think about it!"
His initial intent was to show 2 things:
1) Grace will produce every good work.
2) What some good works are.
Did I miss something? I never heard any of the second point.
The speaker said you don’t have to repent of your sin .... just trust Christ. According to what Paul taught, we need to REPENT unto GOD first .... then move to faith in Christ:
Acts 20:20-21 And how I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publickly, and from house to house,
21 Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks,
repentance toward God,
and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.
‘Mid-Acts-ers’ don’t see the need for repentance because they think it was in what-they-call ‘Israel’s prophecy-program’ and earlier linked to water baptism.
John the Baptist called the physical seed of Abraham (national Israel) to repentance .... to make their Messiah, their Christ (John 1:41, 4:25) manifest to Israel (John 1;31):
Matt 3:7-9 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
Mark 1:4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.
Peter taught repentance at Pentecost to ‘all the house of Israel’ (Acts 2:36):
Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (also Acts 3:19)
Peter ALSO taught repentance unto salvation to the GENTILES in Cornelius’ house (his kinsmen and near friends in Acts 10:24), as Peter later testified:
Acts 11:18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.
‘Mid-Acts-ers’ make a big deal out of Paul’s "BUT NOW" statements. Well, what about THIS ‘but now’ from Paul to the men of Athens on Mars’ Hill, who were too superstitious in all things (Acts 17:22)? God allows NO EXCEPTIONS when it comes to REPENTANCE:
Acts 17:30-31 And the times of this ignorance God winked at;
but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.
Did Paul MISUNDERSTAND his commission from ‘the risen, glorified Lord’ that he was given on the Damascus road (Acts 26:12-18)? No, he got it! Paul testified that Christ sent him to the Gentiles for THEM to REPENT:
Acts 26:19-20 Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision:
20 But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.
Paul taught REPENTANCE to the Romans .... in the context of God’s judgment .... for the SAME reason as we read in Acts 17:30-31:
Rom 2:3-5 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?
4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?
5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;
Paul showed that repentance is the prelude to salvation .... thus, it is WRONG to think you can BY-PASS repentance:
2 Cor 7:10 For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.
The speaker taught that God’s word will perfect and enable us. That is true. However, the speaker ignored the fact that it is ALL God’s word that is profitable to us for all these things .... NOT JUST Paul’s epistles ONLY as ‘mid-Acts-ers’ commonly teach:
2 Tim 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God,
and is profitable
for doctrine,
for reproof,
for correction,
for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
Obviously, the speaker has been looking at GREEK words to know that the same Greek word that is translated "Study" in 2 Tim 2:15 is translated "Endeavoring" in Eph 4:3. Would that information do anything to the frequent ‘mid-Acts’ teaching .... that, "The only verse in the Bible that tells us TO study the Bible also tells us HOW to study the Bible .... that is, to rightly divide it"? (FYI, the Greek word [spoudazo] is used 11 times, and translated ‘endeavour/ing’ 3 times, ‘be/do/give diligence’ 5 times, ‘be forward’ 1 time, ‘labour’ 1 time, and ‘study’ 1 time.)
I thought it was very hypocritical of the speaker to mock a particular preacher (whose name I know but won’t mention either), demonstrating his squinty eyes, and hand waving manner, with his (estimated) 40,000 number of people shown in the camera behind him, not counting the larger audience seated in front of him, along with his wife, plastic as he is, who teach the ‘word of men’ rather than the word of God .... and then .... for the speaker to scold someone using satire on a website about ‘mid-Acts’ doctrine? Seems like he can dish it out, but he can’t take it.
This is David Dowell, saying, "Think about it!"
Conf. Sunday Message 2 on 7-18-10
I thought this was basically a good message. I disagree with the 3 types of people we encounter being .... 1) the lost, 2) Christians who do not ‘rightly divide’ and 3) ‘grace believers’. However, preaching on a ‘mid-Acts’ platform, those 3 classifications were to be expected. If he had said, 1) the lost, 2) carnal babes in Christ, and 3) those who are spiritual (1 Cor 3:1) .... then I would have agreed with him. But the remedies he gave for each of 3 groups were correct.
This is David Dowell, saying, "Think about it!"
This is David Dowell, saying, "Think about it!"
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Conf. Sunday Message 1 on 7-18-10
Is your trademark a funny thing?
Eph 5:3-4 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;
4 Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.
It would be better to be known for the defence of the gospel (Phil 1:7,17).
Rom 4:16 was read, but comments did not mention Abraham being the father of us all. Surprisingly, the speaker made the statement that even in the old testament, you can see God’s grace. Since when did ‘mid-Acts-ers’ bring that up?
Lay the groundwork .... start off by making 2’s.
Rom 6:14 has 2 operating systems: law and grace.
Rom 11:24 has 2 trees: the wild olive tree, and Israel’s own good olive tree. No remark was made that we are GRAFFED IN to Israel’s tree (vs. 19).
Col 1:20 has 2 places: earth and heaven.
So now we’re supposed to believe the practice of ‘2 things’ has been established?
The speaker read the verse:
Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
The questions were asked by the speaker: “The new covenant is with WHO? Got any problem understanding WHO that is?”
My answers on this response are following: “Why don’t we let OUR APOSTLE PAUL answer those questions? Let’s see what GOD through PAUL had to say about WHO Israel is! Who is the Jew now?”
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
Although once IS enough to ‘rightly divide’ .... once is NOT enough on this, Paul. Could you tell us that again? Who is the Jew now?
Rom 9:6-8 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
We’re still not convinced, Paul. Not the children of the flesh, but WHO are the seed of Abraham? Who is the Jew now?
Gal 4:28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
Come on, Paul. We’re ‘in Christ’ .... not ‘in Abraham’ .... right? Who is the Jew now?
Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
This is getting repetitive, Paul. Let’s refresh with Israel back in Jeremiah:
Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
God said He would put His law in Israel’s inward parts, Paul. There, answer that!
Rom 7:22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
God promised to write His law in Israel’s hearts, Paul. What do you say to that?
Rom 2:14-15 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)
Wait a minute, Paul. God will be Israel’s God, and they shall be His people (Jer 31:33):
2 Cor 6:16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
The speaker stated that "some say the law was up to the cross, then it’s grace forward after that." Now, why would ‘some’ say that?
John 1:17 For the law was given by Moses,
but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
Sure, there were thousands of Jews zealous of the law (Acts 21:10) during and thereafter the time when Jesus Christ came .... but those who were ‘of faith’ had to transfer their faith over to Him and receive His grace (John 1:16):
John 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me:
for he wrote of me.
On the issue of being dead in Christ, the speaker asked, "How many works can a dead man do?" Then he commented, "Sin won’t hurt you, and good works won’t help you."
To me, his statement is mutually exclusive:
For believers, sin won’t hurt .... but we are told to do good works. They will ‘help’ because we will be rewarded for them.
For sinners, sin WILL hurt .... and good works won’t help.
After approximately 38 minutes of making us separate from Israel (even though Eph 3:6 says we are "FELLOWHEIRS, and of the SAME body, and PARTAKERS of His promise in Christ by the gospel"), the speaker FINALLY got on subject with the title of his message, he said, "Now, how grace works:" I actually agreed with the last 7 minutes of his explanation of the topic he was supposed to preach, and that we are ‘made’ (not ‘set’) free.
This is David Dowell, saying, "Think about it!"
Eph 5:3-4 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;
4 Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.
It would be better to be known for the defence of the gospel (Phil 1:7,17).
Rom 4:16 was read, but comments did not mention Abraham being the father of us all. Surprisingly, the speaker made the statement that even in the old testament, you can see God’s grace. Since when did ‘mid-Acts-ers’ bring that up?
Lay the groundwork .... start off by making 2’s.
Rom 6:14 has 2 operating systems: law and grace.
Rom 11:24 has 2 trees: the wild olive tree, and Israel’s own good olive tree. No remark was made that we are GRAFFED IN to Israel’s tree (vs. 19).
Col 1:20 has 2 places: earth and heaven.
So now we’re supposed to believe the practice of ‘2 things’ has been established?
The speaker read the verse:
Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
The questions were asked by the speaker: “The new covenant is with WHO? Got any problem understanding WHO that is?”
My answers on this response are following: “Why don’t we let OUR APOSTLE PAUL answer those questions? Let’s see what GOD through PAUL had to say about WHO Israel is! Who is the Jew now?”
Rom 2:28-29 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
Although once IS enough to ‘rightly divide’ .... once is NOT enough on this, Paul. Could you tell us that again? Who is the Jew now?
Rom 9:6-8 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
We’re still not convinced, Paul. Not the children of the flesh, but WHO are the seed of Abraham? Who is the Jew now?
Gal 4:28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
Come on, Paul. We’re ‘in Christ’ .... not ‘in Abraham’ .... right? Who is the Jew now?
Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
This is getting repetitive, Paul. Let’s refresh with Israel back in Jeremiah:
Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
God said He would put His law in Israel’s inward parts, Paul. There, answer that!
Rom 7:22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
God promised to write His law in Israel’s hearts, Paul. What do you say to that?
Rom 2:14-15 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)
Wait a minute, Paul. God will be Israel’s God, and they shall be His people (Jer 31:33):
2 Cor 6:16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
The speaker stated that "some say the law was up to the cross, then it’s grace forward after that." Now, why would ‘some’ say that?
John 1:17 For the law was given by Moses,
but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
Sure, there were thousands of Jews zealous of the law (Acts 21:10) during and thereafter the time when Jesus Christ came .... but those who were ‘of faith’ had to transfer their faith over to Him and receive His grace (John 1:16):
John 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me:
for he wrote of me.
On the issue of being dead in Christ, the speaker asked, "How many works can a dead man do?" Then he commented, "Sin won’t hurt you, and good works won’t help you."
To me, his statement is mutually exclusive:
For believers, sin won’t hurt .... but we are told to do good works. They will ‘help’ because we will be rewarded for them.
For sinners, sin WILL hurt .... and good works won’t help.
After approximately 38 minutes of making us separate from Israel (even though Eph 3:6 says we are "FELLOWHEIRS, and of the SAME body, and PARTAKERS of His promise in Christ by the gospel"), the speaker FINALLY got on subject with the title of his message, he said, "Now, how grace works:" I actually agreed with the last 7 minutes of his explanation of the topic he was supposed to preach, and that we are ‘made’ (not ‘set’) free.
This is David Dowell, saying, "Think about it!"
Conf. Saturday Message 1 on 7-17-10
In my nearly 30 years as a ‘mid-Acts-er’, during all that time COMBINED, I never heard so much teaching about Jesus Christ’s sacrifice from OUTSIDE of PAUL as I did in one night tonight. Verses came from Exodus, Leviticus, John, Psalms, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Mark. Wow! Wonder what caused that change? Also, the preacher was introduced as Brother. I suppose the bishops decided to all be brothers instead! "If a man desires the office of a brother?" They are still not KJV only. They have stopped calling each other Pastor, but they still won’t accept their office as a Bishop. It seems as if they are having a Brethren conference, along with being deceitful about their position.
In an opening passage, about where grace and wrath meet together, a very important point was missed.
The sentence BEGINS in verse 5 and does not END until verse 11.
Notice what ALL this one sentence contains.
It tells of God’s DAY of wrath AND judgment that INCLUDES -- get this --
BOTH the reward of the saved .... AND .... the punishment of the lost!
THAT fact right there wipes out the ‘mid-Acts’ RAPTURE illusion, that only-saints-saved-by-PAUL’s-"unique"-gospel will be caught up to heaven 7 + ? YEARS BEFORE the 70th week of Daniel even begins .... at which time .... they will go before the judgment seat of Christ and get their rewards and ASSIGNMENTS to positions in the heavenly places (NOT the heavenly city, new Jerusalem, but some ‘other’ heavenly realm).
In God’s day of wrath and judgment (vs. 5) ....
the 1st issue named IN THE VERSES (vs. 7) is the reward of God’s everlasting life ....
and the next issue named (vs. 8) is the punishment of the wicked who get God’s wrath.
So, actually, there is God’s GRACE and God’s WRATH .... in the SAME day:
Rom 2:5-11 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;
6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
11 For there is no respect of persons with God.
My point (the reward of the righteous and the punishment of the wicked in the same day) is the VERY SAME TRUTH that PAUL taught unto the church of the Thessalonians. "That day" is the day of Christ (2 Thess 2:2), the day when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven:
2 Thess 1:7-10 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all (not separate ‘entities’ of saints) them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.
The speaker spoke of "the system God set up to deal with sin .... teaching them (Israel) through the old testament .... and then (now, us) through the finished work of Christ." He would not say "through the NEW testament" because ‘mid-Acts-ers’ do not think they are under the new testament/covenant. They separate ‘the finished work of Christ’ (which they believe is ‘for them’) from the new covenant (which they believe is for Israel).
The speaker focused on "those great 2 words" .... ‘but now’. He called it "the Now Time Revelation" .... and said we first learn it through Paul:
Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; (He read the last part of this verse, but made no comment on it.)
Then he said the first time we learned it was when Paul preached it:
Acts 13:38-39 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness (Greek [aphesis]) of sins:
39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.
Did the speaker overlook Peter’s earlier testimony? Just after preaching the death and resurrection of Jesus (Acts 10:38-41), Peter said:
Acts 10:42-43 And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.
43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission (Greek [aphesis]) of sins.
Are having ‘the forgiveness of sins’ and receiving ‘remission of sins’ somehow DIFFERENT? They both result from believing in Christ. But in a ‘mid-Acts’ mindset, they are not the same, even though both ‘forgiveness’ and ‘remission’ are translated from the SAME Greek word [aphesis].
Before Paul, the scripture in John made the contrast between Moses (the law) and Christ (grace):
John 1:17 For the law was given by Moses,
but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
Paul also made that same contrast between Moses (the law) and Christ (the end of the law .... which is grace):
Rom 10:4-5 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.
5 For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them.
The speaker taught that the first time we learn justification by faith and faith alone is from Paul. Then he pointed to Paul’s example of Abraham to demonstrate it. Yet they don't want Abraham as their father (Rom 4:11,16):
Rom 4:3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
The speaker also quoted Paul’s pattern of David (which had several references to righteousness without works, that he did not mention from out of the OLD testament). He taught the time of justification by faith was only ‘now’, as the law "is not a faith alone system, but it is a faith system":
Rom 4:6-7 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
Now if PAUL was the first one who taught justification by faith alone .... he could not possibly cite ABRAHAM and DAVID as the representatives of it .... because Abraham and David were both way before Paul! Duh?!
The speaker also said that Paul gave a commentary on the events of Moses in Exo 32:9 - 34:7, when he wrote about the ministration of condemnation. However, the speaker failed to show that Paul’s contrast in the context and passage (2 Cor 3:3-18) was between the OLD testament and the NEW (which WE are able ministers of).
I also thought it was ironic that when the speaker coughed and cleared his throat several times, he was not at liberty to take a drink of water, since the host (at the previous conference in April) indicated that preachers with water at the pulpit irritated him.
The speaker presented PAUL’s teaching on standing in grace:
Rom 5:2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.
It is no surprise that, being a true ‘mid-Acts-er’, he failed to reveal PETER’s verse about the SAME thing:
1 Peter 5:12 By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand.
Maybe Paul’s standing in grace is different than Peter’s standing in grace? I don’t think so!
This is David Dowell, saying, "Think about it!"
In an opening passage, about where grace and wrath meet together, a very important point was missed.
The sentence BEGINS in verse 5 and does not END until verse 11.
Notice what ALL this one sentence contains.
It tells of God’s DAY of wrath AND judgment that INCLUDES -- get this --
BOTH the reward of the saved .... AND .... the punishment of the lost!
THAT fact right there wipes out the ‘mid-Acts’ RAPTURE illusion, that only-saints-saved-by-PAUL’s-"unique"-gospel will be caught up to heaven 7 + ? YEARS BEFORE the 70th week of Daniel even begins .... at which time .... they will go before the judgment seat of Christ and get their rewards and ASSIGNMENTS to positions in the heavenly places (NOT the heavenly city, new Jerusalem, but some ‘other’ heavenly realm).
In God’s day of wrath and judgment (vs. 5) ....
the 1st issue named IN THE VERSES (vs. 7) is the reward of God’s everlasting life ....
and the next issue named (vs. 8) is the punishment of the wicked who get God’s wrath.
So, actually, there is God’s GRACE and God’s WRATH .... in the SAME day:
Rom 2:5-11 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;
6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
11 For there is no respect of persons with God.
My point (the reward of the righteous and the punishment of the wicked in the same day) is the VERY SAME TRUTH that PAUL taught unto the church of the Thessalonians. "That day" is the day of Christ (2 Thess 2:2), the day when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven:
2 Thess 1:7-10 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all (not separate ‘entities’ of saints) them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.
The speaker spoke of "the system God set up to deal with sin .... teaching them (Israel) through the old testament .... and then (now, us) through the finished work of Christ." He would not say "through the NEW testament" because ‘mid-Acts-ers’ do not think they are under the new testament/covenant. They separate ‘the finished work of Christ’ (which they believe is ‘for them’) from the new covenant (which they believe is for Israel).
The speaker focused on "those great 2 words" .... ‘but now’. He called it "the Now Time Revelation" .... and said we first learn it through Paul:
Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; (He read the last part of this verse, but made no comment on it.)
Then he said the first time we learned it was when Paul preached it:
Acts 13:38-39 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness (Greek [aphesis]) of sins:
39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.
Did the speaker overlook Peter’s earlier testimony? Just after preaching the death and resurrection of Jesus (Acts 10:38-41), Peter said:
Acts 10:42-43 And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.
43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission (Greek [aphesis]) of sins.
Are having ‘the forgiveness of sins’ and receiving ‘remission of sins’ somehow DIFFERENT? They both result from believing in Christ. But in a ‘mid-Acts’ mindset, they are not the same, even though both ‘forgiveness’ and ‘remission’ are translated from the SAME Greek word [aphesis].
Before Paul, the scripture in John made the contrast between Moses (the law) and Christ (grace):
John 1:17 For the law was given by Moses,
but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
Paul also made that same contrast between Moses (the law) and Christ (the end of the law .... which is grace):
Rom 10:4-5 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.
5 For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them.
The speaker taught that the first time we learn justification by faith and faith alone is from Paul. Then he pointed to Paul’s example of Abraham to demonstrate it. Yet they don't want Abraham as their father (Rom 4:11,16):
Rom 4:3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
The speaker also quoted Paul’s pattern of David (which had several references to righteousness without works, that he did not mention from out of the OLD testament). He taught the time of justification by faith was only ‘now’, as the law "is not a faith alone system, but it is a faith system":
Rom 4:6-7 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
Now if PAUL was the first one who taught justification by faith alone .... he could not possibly cite ABRAHAM and DAVID as the representatives of it .... because Abraham and David were both way before Paul! Duh?!
The speaker also said that Paul gave a commentary on the events of Moses in Exo 32:9 - 34:7, when he wrote about the ministration of condemnation. However, the speaker failed to show that Paul’s contrast in the context and passage (2 Cor 3:3-18) was between the OLD testament and the NEW (which WE are able ministers of).
I also thought it was ironic that when the speaker coughed and cleared his throat several times, he was not at liberty to take a drink of water, since the host (at the previous conference in April) indicated that preachers with water at the pulpit irritated him.
The speaker presented PAUL’s teaching on standing in grace:
Rom 5:2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.
It is no surprise that, being a true ‘mid-Acts-er’, he failed to reveal PETER’s verse about the SAME thing:
1 Peter 5:12 By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand.
Maybe Paul’s standing in grace is different than Peter’s standing in grace? I don’t think so!
This is David Dowell, saying, "Think about it!"
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Examination Invitation
During this coming week, these daily thoughts will be focused on reasoned responses to conference presentations. Each day’s assessment will be sincere, straight-forward, and principled. A fresh look at what the verses actually SAY .... to determine if anyone has forced a paradigm on them .... will enlighten our minds to purity of the truth.
Prov 25:19 Confidence in an unfaithful man in time of trouble is like a broken tooth, and a foot out of joint.
Preacher men who hold the office of a ‘bishop’ (KJV 1 Tim 3:1) .... yet call themselves a ‘pastor’ (The Living Bible, same verse) while claiming to be KJV .... are unreliable with the scriptures. They should be held accountable for their inconsistency. They should be as faithful with the word 'bishop' as they are with the word 'dispensation'. Some other 'Bible' translations substitute the word 'stewardship' for the word 'dispensation' in Eph 3:2. (The KJV uses 'stewardship' for the same Greek word 3 times in Luke 16:2,3,4). How hypocritical and two-faced that is:
1 Cor 4:1-2 Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.
2 Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful.
Last year the host introduced each of them to the podium as 'brother'. The church bulletin had been noticeably changed from having the names and titles of 2 pastors, 1 elder, and 2 deacons .... to 3 elders and 2 deacons. Do they have no 'bishop'? Yes, they have 2 .... but they don't want to be referred to as 'bishop' .... even though God through PAUL said being a 'bishop' is a good work. They don't want to be called a 'bishop' because they are ashamed of the KJV word, and they are unfaithful to the Bible (KJV) every time they call each other 'pastor' (The Living Bible word substituted every time for the KJV 'bishop') or when they avoid using the correct title 'bishop' (KJV word) for the office that the overseer holds:
1 Tim 3:1 This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. (also see Phil 1:1)
A lot of ‘mid-Acts-ers’ need to visit the dentist and the orthopedic podiatrist!
This is David Dowell, saying, "Think about it!"
Prov 25:19 Confidence in an unfaithful man in time of trouble is like a broken tooth, and a foot out of joint.
Preacher men who hold the office of a ‘bishop’ (KJV 1 Tim 3:1) .... yet call themselves a ‘pastor’ (The Living Bible, same verse) while claiming to be KJV .... are unreliable with the scriptures. They should be held accountable for their inconsistency. They should be as faithful with the word 'bishop' as they are with the word 'dispensation'. Some other 'Bible' translations substitute the word 'stewardship' for the word 'dispensation' in Eph 3:2. (The KJV uses 'stewardship' for the same Greek word 3 times in Luke 16:2,3,4). How hypocritical and two-faced that is:
1 Cor 4:1-2 Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.
2 Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful.
Last year the host introduced each of them to the podium as 'brother'. The church bulletin had been noticeably changed from having the names and titles of 2 pastors, 1 elder, and 2 deacons .... to 3 elders and 2 deacons. Do they have no 'bishop'? Yes, they have 2 .... but they don't want to be referred to as 'bishop' .... even though God through PAUL said being a 'bishop' is a good work. They don't want to be called a 'bishop' because they are ashamed of the KJV word, and they are unfaithful to the Bible (KJV) every time they call each other 'pastor' (The Living Bible word substituted every time for the KJV 'bishop') or when they avoid using the correct title 'bishop' (KJV word) for the office that the overseer holds:
1 Tim 3:1 This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. (also see Phil 1:1)
A lot of ‘mid-Acts-ers’ need to visit the dentist and the orthopedic podiatrist!
This is David Dowell, saying, "Think about it!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)