ChristiansUnite Forums

Theology => Bible Study => Topic started by: Berean_ on August 09, 2004, 01:55:13 PM



Title: I, II, III John
Post by: Berean_ on August 09, 2004, 01:55:13 PM
The books of I, II, III John are books that are not written to the Body of Christ. Many who know how to rightly divide use some verses from these books but fail to notice what verses go with them them.

As we know we are not under the law, not saved by keeping the commandments, and our sins are already forgiven us in Christ the moment we believed.

If one will carefully read over I John they will see that this is a book which is under law. It is written to the Kingdom Jews.  I had always taken it as the book of "love" and had read it as so, just because I was trained to do so. It is amazing the verses I had underlined and the ones I chose to ignore because they did not go with grace. They troubled me...but I figured they fit in some how. But they don't. Those of us who rightly divide should be very careful when choosing verses from books that are not addressed to the Body of Christ. Every book after the book of Philemon, that is from Hebrews on...is not addressed to the Body of Christ.

From I John: (there are many more troubling verses...I am just listing these)

I John 1:9: If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (We were already forgiven of all sin by the crosswork of Christ, when we believed)

3:4: Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.


Paul tells us:


Galations 4:14 14: For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:

15: Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression. 16: Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace;  






Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: Evangelist on August 09, 2004, 05:52:52 PM
Quote
The books of I, II, III John are books that are not written to the Body of Christ. Many who know how to rightly divide use some verses from these books but fail to notice what verses go with them them.

1 John, while written "generically" and not to a specific group (ie: church or town), is a letter to those who ARE redeemed, meaning the Body of Christ (church) in general.

Several things point to this, but most pointedly:
Ch. 2:18, where John makes ref. to the antichrist to come, vs. 19 where he speaks of those who have left the "fold", and why, and vs. 20 where he specifies that those to whom he is writing have received the Holy Ghost (an unction). In vs. 22 he specifies that those who deny Jesus as messiah are antichrist (would he say that to the Jews?), and in vs. 24 exhorts to "continue" in the Son.


While these three books are written primarily to combat the growing gnostic heresy, there are certain other characteristics and instructions that show up. In Ch. 5, vs 13 John specifies that he is writing so that the readers will "know that ye have ete4rnal life...", which would not be possible for the non-messianic Jew.

He also deals pointedly with the ever-present problem of sin. While Jesus died to cover our sins, and the sin that we did abide in before coming to Christ are covered and forgiven at the moment of belief and salvation, the sins that we commit afterward are "set aside", or forgiven ONLY when we ask forgiveness for them...an act of acknowledgment of our error, and repentence (or turning away) from that, whatever it was. Failure to seek forgiveness and to repent does not destroy or abrogate our salvation, but it most assuredly INTERRUPTS our communion with Him, and our usefullness in the Kingdom.

2 John is basically a continuation, although written to a specific person (the elect lady) and children, who apparently are being troubled by others. John continues to clarify the error of gnosticism and false teachers, and points out the specific ways in which a believer can "judge fruit."

3 John is written to a person named Gaius, and is probably the same Gaius mentioned in one of the Pauline epistles, and is an elder in a church. That he is definitely a believer is reinforced in 1:6, where Gaius is praised for the "witness of thy charity before the church:"

Considering that during the early years of the church (the first 40 or so) that vast majority of the church members were Jews who converted, or Messianic....is this what you mean by "Kingdom Jews"?

Quote
Those of us who rightly divide should be very careful when choosing verses from books that are not addressed to the Body of Christ. Every book after the book of Philemon, that is from Hebrews on...is not addressed to the Body of Christ.

Yes...it would be good to be very careful....especially when making blanket statements such as the above. ;)


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: Berean_ on August 09, 2004, 07:01:18 PM
Quote
The books of I, II, III John are books that are not written to the Body of Christ. Many who know how to rightly divide use some verses from these books but fail to notice what verses go with them them.

1 John, while written "generically" and not to a specific group (ie: church or town), is a letter to those who ARE redeemed, meaning the Body of Christ (church) in general.

Several things point to this, but most pointedly:
Ch. 2:18, where John makes ref. to the antichrist to come, vs. 19 where he speaks of those who have left the "fold", and why, and vs. 20 where he specifies that those to whom he is writing have received the Holy Ghost (an unction). In vs. 22 he specifies that those who deny Jesus as messiah are antichrist (would he say that to the Jews?), and in vs. 24 exhorts to "continue" in the Son.


While these three books are written primarily to combat the growing gnostic heresy, there are certain other characteristics and instructions that show up. In Ch. 5, vs 13 John specifies that he is writing so that the readers will "know that ye have ete4rnal life...", which would not be possible for the non-messianic Jew.

He also deals pointedly with the ever-present problem of sin. While Jesus died to cover our sins, and the sin that we did abide in before coming to Christ are covered and forgiven at the moment of belief and salvation, the sins that we commit afterward are "set aside", or forgiven ONLY when we ask forgiveness for them...an act of acknowledgment of our error, and repentence (or turning away) from that, whatever it was. Failure to seek forgiveness and to repent does not destroy or abrogate our salvation, but it most assuredly INTERRUPTS our communion with Him, and our usefullness in the Kingdom.

2 John is basically a continuation, although written to a specific person (the elect lady) and children, who apparently are being troubled by others. John continues to clarify the error of gnosticism and false teachers, and points out the specific ways in which a believer can "judge fruit."

3 John is written to a person named Gaius, and is probably the same Gaius mentioned in one of the Pauline epistles, and is an elder in a church. That he is definitely a believer is reinforced in 1:6, where Gaius is praised for the "witness of thy charity before the church:"

Considering that during the early years of the church (the first 40 or so) that vast majority of the church members were Jews who converted, or Messianic....is this what you mean by "Kingdom Jews"?

Quote
Those of us who rightly divide should be very careful when choosing verses from books that are not addressed to the Body of Christ. Every book after the book of Philemon, that is from Hebrews on...is not addressed to the Body of Christ.

Yes...it would be good to be very careful....especially when making blanket statements such as the above. ;)

So, I get things straight in the beginning and have nothing taken wrong, I am assuming you are stating that first off:

We can lose our salvation.

There is absoloutly no assurance of salvation until we die.

We are to obey the commandmants for salvation.

We are to be perfect.

We are under the law.

There is more...but this will due for now.
Thanks for your time.


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: BigD on August 09, 2004, 09:31:31 PM
IMHO the books of I, II, III John were written to the ones that James, Cephas (Peter) and John agreed, with Paul, that they would stay with the circumcision (Jews) and that he (Paul) should go to the heathen.

Those of the circumcision were saved during the preaching of "the gospel of the kingdom" and will one day inherit the kingdom here upon the earth. That is why they are often called "kingdom saints."

The 12 were commissioned by Jesus to preach "the gospel of the kingdom" to all the nations beginning at Jerusalem (Acts 1:8).

There is no record of the 12 ever going to the nations. Even in Acts 11:19 we find them going "to the Jews only."

After God set the nation of Israel aside, after the stoning of Stephen, and after the raising up of the Apostle Paul, the disciples realized that they could not carry out the "so called" great commission that Jesus gave them. They also recognized that Paul was given a different commission to go to all mankind with the gospel of uncircumcision, i.e. "the gospel of the grace of God." (Acts 15 and Galatians 2 are two different accounts of the meeting at Jerusalem where this was decided.

The books of James and I, II Peter are also written to the "kingdom saints."

Members of the Body of Christ, the Church for today, has no inheritance in an earthly kingdom, but we do have a heavenly home to look forward to.

God Bless.




Title: I, II, III John
Post by: Brother Love on August 10, 2004, 04:04:48 AM
The books of I, II, III John are books that are not written to the Body of Christ. Many who know how to rightly divide use some verses from these books but fail to notice what verses go with them them.

As we know we are not under the law, not saved by keeping the commandments, and our sins are already forgiven us in Christ the moment we believed.

If one will carefully read over I John they will see that this is a book which is under law. It is written to the Kingdom Jews.  I had always taken it as the book of "love" and had read it as so, just because I was trained to do so. It is amazing the verses I had underlined and the ones I chose to ignore because they did not go with grace. They troubled me...but I figured they fit in some how. But they don't. Those of us who rightly divide should be very careful when choosing verses from books that are not addressed to the Body of Christ. Every book after the book of Philemon, that is from Hebrews on...is not addressed to the Body of Christ.

From I John: (there are many more troubling verses...I am just listing these)

I John 1:9: If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (We were already forgiven of all sin by the crosswork of Christ, when we believed)

3:4: Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.


Paul tells us:


Galations 4:14 14: For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:

15: Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression. 16: Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace;  






AAAAAAAAAAAMEN and AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMEN!!!!!

Your friend and Brother

Brother Love :)

<:)))><


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: Berean_ on August 10, 2004, 12:02:46 PM
Thank you Big D and Brother Love.

That was an excellent explanation of I, II, and III John you gave Big D. I know it will help those of us who know the Word rightly divided to be able to understand that we are to use any books from Hebrews through Revelation, just as we use the Gospels or the Old Testament. All may be for us...BUT, they are not to us, the Body of Christ.

Therefore we must be very careful in the verses we chose to use, and read the former and latter verses to be sure we can use them for the Body of Christ.

I only started this thread because I have seen so many verses posted by folks who I believe know the Word rightly divided, and are using verses from these books which are putting the Body of Christ under law. I think it is quite by accident and not realizing what the verses are actually saying.

I have meant this thread in the spirit of love and hope it was taken as such. If I correct someone on using a verse it is only because I want them to know so they can grow in God's Word and have the knowledge and joy of how to rightly divide His Word. And also...so that others will know the truth. If verses from the books of John and others are left without a comment, some may begin to place themselves under the law because of those books and verses. That is why knowing how to rightly divide God's Word is so very important.

Again, this was meant in the spirit of love...God bless.

Thanks for your time and thanks again Big D for the great post...


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: ollie on August 10, 2004, 06:27:35 PM
IMHO the books of I, II, III John were written to the ones that James, Cephas (Peter) and John agreed, with Paul, that they would stay with the circumcision (Jews) and that he (Paul) should go to the heathen.

Those of the circumcision were saved during the preaching of "the gospel of the kingdom" and will one day inherit the kingdom here upon the earth. That is why they are often called "kingdom saints."

The 12 were commissioned by Jesus to preach "the gospel of the kingdom" to all the nations beginning at Jerusalem (Acts 1:8).

There is no record of the 12 ever going to the nations. Even in Acts 11:19 we find them going "to the Jews only."

After God set the nation of Israel aside, after the stoning of Stephen, and after the raising up of the Apostle Paul, the disciples realized that they could not carry out the "so called" great commission that Jesus gave them. They also recognized that Paul was given a different commission to go to all mankind with the gospel of uncircumcision, i.e. "the gospel of the grace of God." (Acts 15 and Galatians 2 are two different accounts of the meeting at Jerusalem where this was decided.

The books of James and I, II Peter are also written to the "kingdom saints."

Members of the Body of Christ, the Church for today, has no inheritance in an earthly kingdom, but we do have a heavenly home to look forward to.

God Bless.



"The 12 were commissioned by Jesus to preach "the gospel of the kingdom" to all the nations beginning at Jerusalem (Acts 1:8).

There is no record of the 12 ever going to the nations. Even in Acts 11:19 we find them going "to the Jews only."


However Paul does mention this:

Colossians 1:23.  "If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;'

Any thoughts on this?
 Did paul complete the great commission with those that worked with Him. seperate from the 12?  Is the verse telling us the gospel has been preached to all?

ollie



Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: Reba on August 11, 2004, 01:03:53 AM
IMHO the books of I, II, III John were written to the ones that James, Cephas (Peter) and John agreed, with Paul, that they would stay with the circumcision (Jews) and that he (Paul) should go to the heathen.

Those of the circumcision were saved during the preaching of "the gospel of the kingdom" and will one day inherit the kingdom here upon the earth. That is why they are often called "kingdom saints."

The 12 were commissioned by Jesus to preach "the gospel of the kingdom" to all the nations beginning at Jerusalem (Acts 1:8).

There is no record of the 12 ever going to the nations. Even in Acts 11:19 we find them going "to the Jews only."

After God set the nation of Israel aside, after the stoning of Stephen, and after the raising up of the Apostle Paul, the disciples realized that they could not carry out the "so called" great commission that Jesus gave them. They also recognized that Paul was given a different commission to go to all mankind with the gospel of uncircumcision, i.e. "the gospel of the grace of God." (Acts 15 and Galatians 2 are two different accounts of the meeting at Jerusalem where this was decided.

The books of James and I, II Peter are also written to the "kingdom saints."

Members of the Body of Christ, the Church for today, has no inheritance in an earthly kingdom, but we do have a heavenly home to look forward to.

God Bless.



"The 12 were commissioned by Jesus to preach "the gospel of the kingdom" to all the nations beginning at Jerusalem (Acts 1:8).

There is no record of the 12 ever going to the nations. Even in Acts 11:19 we find them going "to the Jews only."


However Paul does mention this:

Colossians 1:23.  "If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;'

Any thoughts on this?
 Did paul complete the great commission with those that worked with Him. seperate from the 12?  Is the verse telling us the gospel has been preached to all?

ollie


 Carefull Ollie you are sounding like Hitch....


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: BigD on August 11, 2004, 06:28:22 AM
IMHO the books of I, II, III John were written to the ones that James, Cephas (Peter) and John agreed, with Paul, that they would stay with the circumcision (Jews) and that he (Paul) should go to the heathen.

Those of the circumcision were saved during the preaching of "the gospel of the kingdom" and will one day inherit the kingdom here upon the earth. That is why they are often called "kingdom saints."

The 12 were commissioned by Jesus to preach "the gospel of the kingdom" to all the nations beginning at Jerusalem (Acts 1:8).

There is no record of the 12 ever going to the nations. Even in Acts 11:19 we find them going "to the Jews only."

After God set the nation of Israel aside, after the stoning of Stephen, and after the raising up of the Apostle Paul, the disciples realized that they could not carry out the "so called" great commission that Jesus gave them. They also recognized that Paul was given a different commission to go to all mankind with the gospel of uncircumcision, i.e. "the gospel of the grace of God." (Acts 15 and Galatians 2 are two different accounts of the meeting at Jerusalem where this was decided.

The books of James and I, II Peter are also written to the "kingdom saints."

Members of the Body of Christ, the Church for today, has no inheritance in an earthly kingdom, but we do have a heavenly home to look forward to.

God Bless.

"The 12 were commissioned by Jesus to preach "the gospel of the kingdom" to all the nations beginning at Jerusalem (Acts 1:8).

There is no record of the 12 ever going to the nations. Even in Acts 11:19 we find them going "to the Jews only."


However Paul does mention this:

Colossians 1:23.  "If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;'

Any thoughts on this?
 Did paul complete the great commission with those that worked with Him. seperate from the 12?  Is the verse telling us the gospel has been preached to all?

ollie

BigD responds:
No, Paul DID NOT complete the "so called" great commission that was given to the 12 disciples. The were to preach "the gospel of the kingdom," and Paul was commissioned to preach "the gospel of the grace of God."

"The gospel of the kingdom" had the fulfillment of prophesy in view, and "the gospel of the grace of God" had to do with the revelation of the MYSTERY, "which was kept secret since the world began," and NOW revealed to the Apostle Paul.

Paul's commission, like ours today, is to preach "the word of reconciliation" (see 2Cor518-20), and "to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God..."

When the disciples were given their commission; the Law was still in effect. During the preaching of Paul's commission, the Law is set aside. However, after the rapture of the Chruch, the Body of Christ, "the gospel of the kingdom" will again be preached and the Law will again be in effect.

Concerning the phrase and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;'I will copy from "A Commentary Of COLOSSIANS & PHILEMON Based on the Greek New Testament" by Dr. Ernest R. Campbell, who is considered by many as an authority of the Greek language.

From the above mentioned book:(I am writing the word "omit" where Dr. Campbell uses the Greek word because I do not know how to write Greek letters on my computer.)

"With respect to the Gospel, of which the message of hope was a very significant part, Paul says that it was "preached in all creation under heaven." The Greek word translated "preached" (omit) is in the aorist tense and the passive voice, which implies that it had already been preached or proclaimed in all creation at the time Paul is writing. The phrase "in all creation" (omit); is probably best understood as being in the locative case, i.e., it was preached in the sphere of or in the midst of all creation.

To interpret and translate this to every creature is inconsistent with the known historical facts. Also, if this were the intended meaning, we would expect the same grammatical construction as in Mark 16:15, "to every creature" omit;). In writing to the Romans Paul refers to the limits to which he had preached the Gospel, namely, as far north as Illyricum (Rom. 15:19). He had wanted to get as far west as Spain (cf. Rom. 15:24, 28); however we have no record of him getting there.

Paul now affirms the fact that he was made a minister of the Gospel. It appears to us that the verb (omit); must be given a passive meaning in this phrase. To hold that it is a middle voice, and to translate it accordingly, means that Paul made himself a minister of the Gospel, which is foreign to his historical background and other affirmations.

Contrary to his own will Paul had been made a minister of the Gospel (cf. Acts 9:13-16; Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 1:1; Gal. 1:1, 15-16; Eph. 3:1-5). The correct grammatical appraisal of the form of this word must allow it to have both a middle (cf. 1 Cor. 2:3; 9:15) and a passive meaning (cf. Heb. 2:2; 11:7). Paul was made a minister of the Gospel of the Grace of God (cf. Acts 20:24), the Gospel for this present Church age, which declares that believers will be holy, blameless, and irreproachable solely on the basis of Jesus Christ's meritorious death.

I hope this is helpful.

God Bless.

Live Well,  Laugh Often,  Love the Lord!


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: ollie on August 11, 2004, 08:07:13 AM
Thanks for your reply.

 What a concept that the gospel of Christ was one thing to the Jews and another to the gentiles. Especially when we are told that both are one in Christ. It is a concept that seems cultish and false according to scripture taken as a whole and not in part.

Paul proclaims what is the gospel he preached to the faithful at Corinth.

It seems to be the same gospel the 12 preached.

Also Paul acknowledges that it is in the very last sentence of this quote. He says, "I or they", then "we".

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:
 5.  And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
 6.  After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
 7.  After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
 8.  And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
 9.  For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.
 10.  But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.
 11.  Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.


Also, perhaps "all creatures under heaven" refered to the known world under the auspices of Rome. Just a thought on that verse.

Thanks again for your thoughts.
However the Bible teaches the same gospel of Christ given through God's grace to the Jew and Gentile.

Ollie


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: BigD on August 11, 2004, 08:41:44 AM
Ollie:
THANK YOU for your reply. However, I must leave shortly for most of the day; so I will not be able to answer this until probably this evening. So be patient.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord.


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: Evangelist on August 11, 2004, 03:40:32 PM
Posted by Berean
Quote
So, I get things straight in the beginning and have nothing taken wrong, I am assuming you are stating that first off:
We can lose our salvation.
There is absoloutly no assurance of salvation until we die.
We are to obey the commandmants for salvation.
We are to be perfect.
We are under the law.
There is more...but this will due for now.
Thanks for your time.

With all due respect, Berean, but your comments here indicate that you did not bother to read (with understanding) the scriptures and comments I posted.

Example:you said: "So, I get things straight in the beginning and have nothing taken wrong, I am assuming you are stating that first off:
We can lose our salvation."

whereas I had posted "John specifies that he is writing so that the readers will "know that ye have eternal life..." and "Failure to seek forgiveness and to repent does not destroy or abrogate our salvation,..."

So how do you get I'm stating we can lose salvation?

In addition, your other comments also don't fit at all with what was posted.

It appears at this point that you not only don't rightly divide the Word of God, but you can't even rightly discern or understand a clear, concise and unequivocal statement made by someone else, preferring instead to twist into something it is not.

Obviously, you not only didn't get things straight from the beginning, but you have taken everything wrong, and made false assumptions.

Certainly not very "berean-ish".


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: BronxBriar on August 11, 2004, 04:03:04 PM
I don't know where you find these translations of the bibles but the original was written in Greek and in ancient Greek.

Not one word, NOT ONE, of any extant NT text was written in ancient (classical) Greek. That age had been long gone and the Greek used by Paul and the other NT writers was Koine (common) Greek (and even that is quite different from the modern Greek used today). After that glaring error I just could continue with your post. Sorry.


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: Berean_ on August 11, 2004, 06:48:41 PM
Posted by Berean
Quote
So, I get things straight in the beginning and have nothing taken wrong, I am assuming you are stating that first off:
We can lose our salvation.
There is absoloutly no assurance of salvation until we die.
We are to obey the commandmants for salvation.
We are to be perfect.
We are under the law.
There is more...but this will due for now.
Thanks for your time.

With all due respect, Berean, but your comments here indicate that you did not bother to read (with understanding) the scriptures and comments I posted.

Example:you said: "So, I get things straight in the beginning and have nothing taken wrong, I am assuming you are stating that first off:
We can lose our salvation."

whereas I had posted "John specifies that he is writing so that the readers will "know that ye have eternal life..." and "Failure to seek forgiveness and to repent does not destroy or abrogate our salvation,..."

So how do you get I'm stating we can lose salvation?

In addition, your other comments also don't fit at all with what was posted.

It appears at this point that you not only don't rightly divide the Word of God, but you can't even rightly discern or understand a clear, concise and unequivocal statement made by someone else, preferring instead to twist into something it is not.

Obviously, you not only didn't get things straight from the beginning, but you have taken everything wrong, and made false assumptions.

Certainly not very "berean-ish".

Read this part of your post again. I will break it down for you.

He also deals pointedly with the ever-present problem of sin. While Jesus died to cover our sins, and the sin that we did abide in before coming to Christ are covered and forgiven at the moment of belief and salvation,

 the sins that we commit afterward are "set aside", or forgiven ONLY when we ask forgiveness for them...

Looks like one can lose their salvation to me if they do not ask. NO ONE can enter Heaven without having their sins forgiven.

ALL sin is forgiven the moment one believes. The law has been set aside...we are not under the law but under grace, therefore we shall not be judge by the law. There is not one transgression for the believer.

Here is the Word of God, Romans 4:14,15

14: For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:

15: Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.



Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: BigD on August 11, 2004, 08:26:55 PM
Thanks for your reply.

 What a concept that the gospel of Christ was one thing to the Jews and another to the gentiles. Especially when we are told that both are one in Christ. It is a concept that seems cultish and false according to scripture taken as a whole and not in part.

Paul proclaims what is the gospel he preached to the faithful at Corinth.

It seems to be the same gospel the 12 preached.

Also Paul acknowledges that it is in the very last sentence of this quote. He says, "I or they", then "we".

BigD responds:
Part I - 1 Corinthians 15:1-11 will be in Part II

Ollie:
When Jesus came to earth, He COMMANDED His disciples; "Go not into the way of the Gentiles and into any city of the Samaritians enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matthew 10:5:6).

Jesus told the Syrophenician woman in Matthew 15:24 " I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

Paul says in Romans 15:8 "Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision (Isreal) to confirm the promises made to the fathers."

Paul says in Romans 16:25: Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began."

It appears to me that Paul is preaching something that was never preached before. Or, is Paul a liar?

In Galatians 1:11,12 Paul says: "But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ."

Paul didn't get his revelations until AFTER Jesus went back into heaven.

Paul writes in Ephesians 3:2 "If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:

3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in a few words,

4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mysteries of Christ)

5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apolstles and prophest by the Spirit;

How could Paul be preaching what Jesus and the 12 preached if what he preached several years after Christ went back to heaven?

I do study the Bible in its entirety. However, I do take it literally and in the context in which it was written. I do not read the Chruch, the Body of Christ, into what was required of the nation of Israel.

It appears to me that you are reading the revelations given to Paul into the Gospels. Do you read the Laws of Moses into the Garden of Eden or the battles of WWII into the battles of WWI. I don't think so. So, WHY do you read the future revelations to Paul into the Gospels. That just doesn't make sense to me.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord.


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: Sower on August 11, 2004, 08:38:41 PM
Quote
The books of I, II, III John are books that are not written to the Body of Christ.

Hogwash!


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: Shylynne on August 11, 2004, 08:47:00 PM
Quote
The books of I, II, III John are books that are not written to the Body of Christ.

Hogwash!

Double Hogwash!


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: Brother Love on August 12, 2004, 03:34:03 AM

Quote
The books of I, II, III John are books that are not written to the Body of Christ.


Quote


AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMEN!!!! BEREAN_ AAAMEN!

<:)))><


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: BigD on August 12, 2004, 08:59:56 AM
PART 2:
From the commentary by C. S. Stam on "1 CORINTHIANS.

PAUL AND HIS GOSPEL: I Cor. 15:1-4: "Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand:

"By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.

"For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures.

"And that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures."

Paul is very specific here. He says "this is THE GOSPEL WHICH I PREACHED UNTO YOU ... wherein ye stand ... by which also ye are saved." Thus of all the important passages in the Word of God, this is surely one to which we should pay most earnest heed, for it tells what God's message of salvation is for us today and how God saves sinners.

There is something about this passage, however, that troubles some sincere believers. They ask: "If this passage contains the gospel which remained a secretuntil revealed to Paul, why does he state that Christ both died and rose again according to the Scriptures'?" Well, Christ did, as a matter of fact, die and rise again according to the Scriptures; nor does this imply that what Paul had to say about His death and resurrection was a prophesied message rather than part of the mystery revealed to him.

Paul clearly states here that this is "the gospel which I preached unto you," and this was not the gospel which the twelve had been preaching. Otherwise he would not habitually use such phrases as: "my gospel" (Three times: Rom. 2:16; 16:25; 11 Tim. 2:7,8); "our gospel" (Three times: 11 Cor. 4:3; I Thes. 1:5; II Thes. 2:14); "the gospel which I preached unto you" (I Cor. 15: 1); "the gospel which was preached of me" (Gal. 1:11); "that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles" (Gal 2:2); and "that [gospel] which we preached unto you" (Gal. 1:8). Nor would he have had to go specially to Jerusalem to communicate to the leaders there "a message which they were already preaching. Much less would he have had to do this "privately" (Gal. 2:2).

At Pentecost Peter had charged his Jewish hearers with the death of Christ and when, convicted they asked: "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" he did not reverse himself and preach the cross as good news. Rather he said:

"Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. . ." (Acts 2:38).

Obviously, then, Paul's gospel was not that which the twelve had been preaching. In fact theirs was called "the gospel of the kingdom," while his is called "the gospel

of the grace of God" (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; Acts 20:24). Theirs, right through Pentecost, concerned the throne (Acts 2:29-36), while his concerned the cross (I Cor. 1:18,23).

Further, the apostle says here in I Cor. 15:3: I delivered unto you first of all thatwhich I also received." This and similar phraseology is familiar to Paul when referring to the revelation he received from the glorified Lord in heaven (cf. I Cor. 11:23; 1 Thes. 4:15). And if all these passages from the Word of God be not enough, we have the clearest, most emphatic, assurance as to this from Paul's own testimony in Gal. 1:11,12:

"But I certify you brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.

"For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but [I received it] BY THE REVELATION OF JESUS CHRIST."

How can our denominational brethren refuse all this testimony to the separate and distinctive ministry of the Apostle Paul? How could the spirit have stated it more clearly? How could He have insisted upon it more consistently?

Nowhere in the Old Testament Scriptures do we read that Christ would die and be raised again in three days for the sins of the world.

Isaiah 53, to which our opponents so often refer, does not say "all men" but "all we" and "us all," for Isaiah speaks as a Hebrew prophet, saying, "for the transgression of my people was He stricken" (Ver. 8). True, the Old Testament contains many prophecies about Christ, but all was purposely couched in veiled language and in types that could only be understood after Christ, the Antitype, had appeared. And what the cross had accomplished could not be revealed until the raising up of Paul, the chief of sinners saved by grace. He represented both Jew and Gentile, being both a born Hebrew and a born Roman (Acts 22:3,25,26).

In any case, the apostle does not say here in I Cor. 15:3,4, that his message about the crucifixion and resurrection was the fulfillment of prophecy. This would have been untrue. Rather he says that it was "according to," or in accordance with, prophecy. As the Bereans found out, there was nothing in prophecy to  contradict his message and much to confirm it indirectly. Note: he quotes no prophecy from the Old Testament to the effect that Christ would die for the sins of all - including the Gentiles, for there is none.

THE PREACHING OF THE CROSS: The world will gladly listen to preaching about "the baby Jesus" or "the carpenter of Nazareth," or "the man of Galilee." They will gladly listen to the story of His life, but bring them to the cross and they back away. The preaching of the cross embarrasses the Jew. To him Christ crucified is a constant "stone of stumbling and a rock of offence." He complains with his fathers: "Ye intend to bring this man's blood upon us" (Acts 5:28).

To the Gentiles the preaching of the cross is foolishness. They laugh and say: "He could not save Himself! How can He save others? He could not save them by His life! How can He save them by His death?"

Thank God, what seems so foolish and illogical to them proves to be the only reasonable plan of salvation. We who have been saved are thrilled and proud of Christ; we love and adore Him, because He did not save Himself so that He might save us, for "Christ died FOR our sins."

Here, at Calvary, are solved for us the two greatest riddles of all time: that of the death of Christ and that of the sin of man. Why did God forsake His beloved Son? Why did He allow wicked men to outrage and crucify the sinless, harmless Christ? You will find the answer only when you ask why mankind (represented by Saul) hated and hounded Christ to His death. God's action was the only antidote to man's. Christ's death was the only remedy for man's sin. It was because of the utter unreasonableness of man's sin that God, to save him, had to be more than reasonable.

"My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?" "Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou Me?" These two questions represent the greatest riddles of all history, yet, strangely, one is the simple explanation of the other! One is complementary to the other!

That "Christ died" is a historical fact that everyone knows. "Our sins" also constitute a fact which no one can deny. But either of these facts alone remains an insoluble problem. We must bring the two together with the little preposition "for" between, accepting God's explanation that "Christ died FOR our sins."

In the two "whys" we here consider, the problems of sin and salvation are solved. The Savior and the sinner are brought together. The blasphemer, the persecutor, is thoroughly transformed and the Savior is glorified. This is what Paul's great message was all about and from it flowed "the exceeding riches of [God's] grace" to us (Eph. 1:7-10).

Man's sinful nature has always been an undeniable fact - but also an insoluble riddle to the unsaved. Why did God create man, knowing he would sin? Why did He permit sin? and many other questions. To them all there are many fragmentary answers, but the great, fundamental answer is that "Christ died for our sins." As to the Lord Jesus Christ, even secular history agrees that He was at the very least a good man. And here a God who is supposed to be just and loving, lets cruel and wicked men nail His Son to a tree where He dies in agony and disgrace. How could such a God be either loving or just, if it is not true that "Christ died for our sins"? and that this was purposed "in Christ Jesus before the world began" (II Tim. 1:9).

So, beloved, the secret of salvation, the key to heaven is contained in this simple statement of "five words" (I Cor. 14:19): "Christ died for our sins" (I Cor. 15:3). And Paul, the chief of sinners, now saved by grace, was the herald and the living demonstration of this glorious truth.

to be cont'd

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: BigD on August 12, 2004, 09:10:59 AM
PART 3

THE FOCAL POINT OF THE GOSPEL: While it is true that the gospel Paul proclaimed included the death, burial and resurrection of Christ - and His coming to receive His own unto Himself (Vers. 51-53), even this is not "the whole gospel," for surely "the gospel of the grace of God" must include the good news of all the riches of His grace as unfolded to us in the Epistles of Paul. And surely one must believe in a risen, living Christ to be saved (Vers. 2,4; cf Rom. 10:9,10), but is it not true that most, if not all, who hear the gospel from our lips understand fully that we proclaim one whom we believe to be living in heaven? Thus the focal point of Paul's message was the cross. Sincere believers who hold that in order to preach the whole gospel we should mention the resurrection of Christ along with His crucifixion every time we preach, should take note of the fact that Paul often mentions the crucifixion apart from any mention whatsoever of the resurrection; theresurrection, of course, being pre-supposed. We give but a few of many, many examples:

"I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ and Him crucified" (I Car. 2:2).

"For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness, but unto us which are saved it is the power of God" (I Cor. 1:17,18).

"But we preach Christ crucified . . . . the power of God and the wisdom of God" (I Cor. 1:23,24).

We have chosen only a few such passages from I Corinthians itself, but the rest of Paul's epistles are literally filled with the cross, the death and the blood of Christ.

Please note carefully that the apostle calls his gospel 'the preaching of the cross" (1:18), and as we have seen, the fact that "Christ died for our sins" solves the otherwise insoluble riddles of the death of Christ and the sin of man. It should also be noted that Paul's good news begins with the death of the cross. Peter charged his hearers with the death of Christ, but the mystery revealed through Paul changed the blame and accusation to good news, for Paul proclaimed the cross always and only AS GOOD NEWS:

We are "reconciled to God by the death of His Son" (Rom. 5:10).

"By the grace of God [He] tasted death for every man" (Heb. 2:9).

"Through death" He destroyed the devil, and delivered those who, "through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage" (Heb. 2:14,15).

". . . now in Christ Jesus, ye who sometimes were far off, are made nigh by the blood of Christ (Eph. 2:13).

". . . having made peace through the blood of His cross. (Col. 1:20).

"in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins according to the riches of His grace" (Eph. 1:7).

How many more such statements from the pen of Paul could be cited!  THE WITNESSES TO THE RESURRECTION: I Cor. 15:5-11: "And that He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve;

"After that, He was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

"After that, He was seen of James; then of all the apostles.

"And last of all He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

"For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the Church of God.

"But by the grace of God I am what I am: and His grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.

"Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed."

While the cross was indeed the focal point of Paul's great message of grace, it does not follow that the resurrection of our Lord was a secondary consideration in his doctrine. Indeed he probably discusses the resurrection of Christ, and therefore of the believer, at greater length here than he discusses any other subject of Christian doctrine.

Simon Greenleaf, of Harvard fame and one of America's greatest jurists, declared that there is more evidence for the bodily resurrection of Christ, than for any other major event in history. The more this writer has studied about the resurrection of the body in general and the bodily resurrection of Christ in particular, the more deeply he is convicted of the truth of Greenleaf's statement. The Apostle Paul does not discuss all this evidence in I Cor. 15, but he surely offers enough to completely silence the skeptic.

First, the apostle declares that "He was seen" by hundreds of people after His resurrection. We cannot here point out how conclusive this is in itself, but be it noted that the lives of Peter and the twelve were all revolutionized by the resurrection of Christ. Cowardice was changed into the rarest type of courage, doubt into unshakable faith, and sorrow into radiant joy.

Specifically, the apostle states that He was "seen of Cephas" and "then of the Twelve." The term, "the Twelve" is used as an official title, for the risen Lord could not have appeared to His twelve apostles, since one of them, Judas, was now dead. And if this passage refers to John 20:19-23, even Thomas was not present

(Ver. 24). Often our Lord's apostles were called "the Twelve," officially, whether or not all twelve were present.

It should be further noted that Paul here distinguishes himself from our Lord's twelve apostles. He was not, as some have taught, God's man for Judas' place. Acts 1:26 and 2:4 are but two of many absolute proofs that Paul could not even have qualified for a place among the Twelve, and the Scriptures plainly state that Matthias was Judas' successor.

"After that," says the apostle, our risen Lord "was seen of above five hundred brethren at once" (Ver. 6). This may well have taken place at the meeting of Matt. 28:16. Mark well that Paul says of these five hundred witnesses that "the greater part remain unto this present," (although some had "fallen asleep") and could bear witness to Christ's resurrection along with Peter and the Twelve. If, then, Paul was incorrect here, or bearing false witness, is it not reasonable to conclude that something should be found in the many writings left from his day to refute it? Would not someone from this multitude who were supposed to have seen Him, have risen to say: "I was there, but I did not see Jesus Christ risen from the dead." But of all the writings from Paul's day still extant no such denial has been brought to light.

"After that," says Paul in Ver. 7, "He was seen of James; then of all the apostles." Evidently he refers here to the James of the apostles, "Peter, James and John," not to James the Lord's half brother, for he goes on to say that next He was seen of "all the apostles," perhaps in the meeting of John 20:26-29. In any case we know that now all the living members of "the Twelve" were present. And this brings us to the greatest of all witnesses to the resurrection of Christ: Paul himself:

THE WITNESS OF PAUL HIMSELF: Ver. 8: "And last of all He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time."

Paul saw Christ, not on one or two occasions, but again and again. His testimony is by all odds the most conclusive. At his conversion the Lord said to him:

"I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee" (Acts 26:16).

And when Ananias was sent to restore his sight, he said:

"The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldst . . . see that Just  One, and shouldst hear the voice of His mouth" (Acts 22:14).

At his return to Jerusalem Paul saw the Lord again:

" saw Him saying unto me, Make haste, and get thee quickly out of Jerusalem: for they will not receive thy testimony concerning me" (Acts 22:18).

Add to these such passages as Acts 18:9; 27:23; I Cor. 11:23; 15:3; II Cor. 12:1,2; Gal. 1:11,12; and I Thes. 4:17, and who can wonder that the apostlechallenges the Corinthians:

"Am I not an apostle? ... Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are ye not my work in the Lord?" (I Cor. 9:1).

Hope this is helpful.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: Reba on August 12, 2004, 09:14:34 AM
Divide and conquer. Must be a wonderfull christian consept.


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: BigD on August 12, 2004, 09:20:54 AM
The books of I, II, III John are books that are not written to the Body of Christ.

BigD responds:
Berean is 100% correct in stating the above. However, the books of I, II, III John were written FOR the Body of Christ.

"ALL scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" 2Timothy3:16.

God Bless.


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: BronxBriar on August 12, 2004, 09:25:35 AM
Quote
The books of I, II, III John are books that are not written to the Body of Christ.

Hogwash!

I'm from the city. What exactly is hogwash? Is it a solid, liquid, or gas? ;)


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: BigD on August 12, 2004, 09:36:09 AM
Quote
The books of I, II, III John are books that are not written to the Body of Christ.

Hogwash!

BigD responds:
I've been told that you can find the answer in the Old Testeament @ Hezekiah 3:16.

It must be a matter of interpretation.

Hope this is helpful.

God Bless.

I'm from the city. What exactly is hogwash? Is it a solid, liquid, or gas? ;)


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: brotherjim on August 20, 2004, 12:55:04 PM
The books of I, II, III John are books that are not written to the Body of Christ. Many who know how to rightly divide use some verses from these books but fail to notice what verses go with them them.

As we know we are not under the law, not saved by keeping the commandments, and our sins are already forgiven us in Christ the moment we believed. . . .
Whoever,

Oh, my. I thought I had heard all the excuses.

I could almost understand how in times past man and his traditions and superstitions have taken the Holy Scriptures and bent and perverted them to justify man's remaining sins that he loves more than he Loves God, . . .

. . . . but to throw out entire Books of the Bible is certainly a much easier way not to confront Truth, I suppose.

Sadly, the poster I quote even has a grain of Truth mixed in with his distorted de-canonization.

The Truth is, the Epistles of John were indeed not letters written to every born-again Christian who lived at John's time or who ever would live. They were intimate communications between John and his "children," those of the Heavenly Father through the New Birth who were FURTHER given over to John for his "espous[ing]" them to the bride of Christ (2 Cor. 11 - Paul). They were apostolicaly birthed into the Kingdom (as compared to those who attempt to be their own apostle, and perevert God's Truth accordingly).

Furthermore, we find as such, these who were children of an Apostle were well on the Way to being perfected in God's Love, that which the Word clearly staes, and in more than one place, is required for eternal Life.

For example, in Luke 10:25-28, Jesus Himself clearly states that eternal Life is only inherited by those who live in obedience to the NT's 3 (by impl.) Comm. of Love and Faith.

Graciously, since many will self-justify away Jesus' plainly spoken Words there, we are given 1 John 2:3-5 which basically says the same thing. But obviously, for those who have decided they have the power to throw away that entire Epistle, well--.

The Truth is, when we have been given by Grace the true doctrine of eternal Life, we will find no need to disregard any Scripture for any reason, not even the need to try and take Sciptures of square pegs and jam them into round holes. When we have the Truth by Grace, we will find that ALL Scriptures harmoniously agree with all others.

In Truth, the litmus tests of James' "works" and 1 Jn. 2:3-5 and Luke 10:25-28 are just that. They tell us if we are deceived or in Christ and in the Way and in the Truth.

If we have found the Way, which is the Love of God perfected in us by God's Spirit and Graces alone, we will automatically find our lives are being lived in obedience to the NT's 3 Commandments of Love and Faith. And such did not result from any fleshly works, but was simply the end result of our walking in the Spirit, that which the Word declares is necessary if we are to remain out from under the Law of Sin and Death, and continue under the protective umbrella of "the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus" (Rom. 8:1-2).

Yes, such is the "Law" all Christians are under if they continue in Grace. To say that there is no Law for the believer is clearly proven incorrect by Rom. 8:2, not to mention the very basics of human logic and principles of the universe. ALL entities must have in existence laws under which they operate, for where there is no law there is lawlessness. God did not take the Christian out from under the Law of Sin and Death to have them live lawless lives.

"For then with the mind I myself [Paul] SERVE the Laws of God."

We are taken out from UNDER the dead letter of the Law so that we have every advantage to SERVE the NT Law of Life in Christ Jesus by the Spirit, in newness of Spirit (Rom. 7:6).

The difference between being under a dead law and serving a life-giving law, is all the difference in the world, the difference between Life and death.

Law was not eliminated from society, but changed.

"For where there is a change in the priesthood, there is also of necessity a CHANGE n the Law."

But the lawless in heart, the lawless who seek justification for continuing to serve the still-remaining idols/impure motives of their heart, will always insist upon--.

So then the Gospel is quite simple. We are taken out from under the Law of Sin and Death so that the power of sin is broken, whereby we then have access to every Grace we need to continue in life "walking in the Spirit." But if instead we choose to continue and agape Love our remaining sins of the heart more than God, if instead of walking in Spirit who seeks fellowship with us so that He can reveal those remaining sins and further deliver us and subsequently equip us with more Grace, we rather choose to give into the dictates of our flesh, we place ourselves back under the Law of Sin and death, for we have counted the Blood of Christ Jesus a common thing, have trampled underfoot His Grace and made an open mockery of Him and His holiness, and no longer does any sacrifice remain because we have willfully sinned and in the Law of our mind (Heb. 11:26-29; Rom. 7:21, 25) have decided to serve our hearts' idols of sin rather than the Living God.

But then if we just decide we can throw out the Books of Hebrews too, then we can live in safety, correct?

"Be not deceived, God is not mocked: whatever a man sows, that will he also reap," born-again or not. Guaranteed!

But neither can we be as the foolish Galatians, who attempted to live by the Commandments through means other than strictly God' Spirit and Graces.

Give up, let Him, bro. jim

brotherjim@mail.com


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: brotherjim on August 20, 2004, 01:27:11 PM
Btw, my post above was written mainly for the benefit of those of us who ALREADY know that we know that we know, that God does not allow the born-again Christian to daily spit in the Face of Jesus and His Grace, and still in the end inherit eternal Life. As for those who desire to live lawless, such will always find what they insist are "loopholes in the Law" that allow them to live with their remaining sins of the heart and still inherit eternal Life. To the latter, God just had to suffer the trampling underfoot of His precious Truths, not only so that those of a sincere heart would understand the Biblical precepts behind what they know is Truth, but also for the slim chance that some who have wandered too far away may still be recovered from the snare of the adversary who has taken them captive to do his will, "if God peradventure will grant them repentance to the acknowledging of the Truth," as hard as that is for any of us to have the Faith and believe. Therefore, if such happens, ALL glory to God and Grace alone, amen? Amen!

bj


Title: I, II, III John
Post by: Brother Love on August 20, 2004, 04:20:43 PM
GRRRRREAT Preaching Brother Berean_

AAAAAAAAAAAAAMEN!!!!!

(We were already forgiven of all sin by the crosswork of Christ, when we believed)

And AAAAAAAAAAAAAAMEN!!!!!!

Your friend and brother

Brother Love :)

<:)))><


Title: Re:I, II, III John
Post by: Reba on September 01, 2004, 10:50:57 PM
Our doctines should fit the scriptures ..... We rip, squeeze, stritch, just plane ol leave out verses  or even Books that  dont line up with what WE WANT God to be saying. Gods Word stands as written even if we dont like it....


Title: I, II, III John
Post by: Brother Love on September 02, 2004, 04:51:01 AM
Our doctines should fit the scriptures ..... We rip, squeeze, stritch, just plane ol leave out verses  or even Books that  dont line up with what WE WANT God to be saying. Gods Word stands as written even if we dont like it....

Reba, AMEN!!! Now try it for a change :)

<:)))><