Where this guy pilgrim is coming from? Part 1

[pilgrim]

• 

As a new believer in Christ over fifty years ago, I began my attempt at combining Scripture with Scripture to form a coherent picture. From the beginning, however, I noticed a difficulty in what my Bible called “The Gospels” in the New Testament. So often I felt I had a reasonable understanding of what the Lord said until I read the epistles of Paul. I then began to have doubts of what I thought I understood about the Lord’s teaching. What Paul said in his letters to the churches seemed easier to understand than what the Lord had taught. The insurmountable problem I always encountered was in harmonizing the two.

Where the Lord had spoken of keeping the commandments as a way to enter into life, Paul said of those who taught the necessity of keeping the Law (Commandments), “Let them be accursed,” and if one put himself under the obligation of keeping the Law, then Christ was useless to him and he was fallen from grace. The more I struggled to understand, the greater became the confusion, until finally I ceased to seriously study what my Bible called “The Gospels,” in what was said to be the New Testament.

As the years passed, without a deliberate study of certain passages, they nevertheless kept coming to mind. Speaking of the New Covenant, in The Epistle to The Hebrews it is said: “For where there is a testament, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.” Only hours before His death, the Lord had said to His disciples when He passed the cup: “this is My blood of the New Covenant.”

Paul had said the Lord was “born under the law to redeem those under the law.” From my earliest years, I well remembered Christians often quoting: “without the shedding of blood there is no remission.”

Yet, it was sometime later when I began to put the above passages together with my earlier problem of harmonizing Paul’s teaching with the Lord’s words. By then the roots of Paul’s teaching on the Mosaic Law (Ten Commandments) had reached deep into my thinking. The more I studied the situation from the Scriptures, the more I realized that the division between the Old and New Covenant in my Bible was incorrect.

Paul in the Epistle to The Hebrews likened the New Covenant to a last will and testament which had no power, or authority for execution of its provisions until the death of the testator. Nor could there be a New Covenant until the sins under the Old Covenant were paid for. “And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant…(Heb. 9:15)” which continued up until His death and resurrection.
 
But even more serious were the ramifications of that mistake. It was a mixing of the Law of the Old Mosaic Covenant of commandments, and the gospel of grace under the New Covenant, where according to the apostle Paul, “Christ has delivered us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us.”

Not only was the division of the Old and New Covenant incorrect, but also the titles to what was called “the Gospels” were also incorrect. Instead of preaching the gospel that Paul preached, which the titles “Gospels” speak of, the Lord preached “the Law,” and the necessity of keeping the commandments to be saved. It was the same “Law” that Paul said was a ministry of condemnation and death. Besides the above, if we are to examine Scriptural record of the “gospel” that the Lord and His disciples did preach, it was the “Gospel of the Kingdom,” whereas, the present church is not a kingdom of any kind.

Unless the identifying title of the Lord’s message, the gospel of “the kingdom,” was used together, it was misleading, because we in this present dispensation of grace cannot preach the gospel of the kingdom. That message was that the kingdom of heaven was at hand, an offering of the Messianic Kingdom; the re-establishment of the Davidic kingdom, and that, to Israel only.

One of those indispensable truths that I have referred to many times is Paul’s claim that “his Gospel” and the present dispensation of grace and the rapture were mysteries, unrevealed, during the Lord’s ministry. If that fact is overlooked or ignored, then confusion about many things is inevitable because we then completely misapply what the Lord and His apostles said and to whom they were addressing.

Because of their allegorical, parabolic method of teaching, the early and modern translators taught the present church was what the Lord was speaking of, in Matthew 16:18 when He said He would build His church, they translated “Ekklesia” to “church” instead of the correct translation, “assembly.”

In context, when the Lord said He would build His assembly, He immediately identified that same assembly when He gave Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven, which he used in Acts 2 and 3. With the word church used for the first time in all the Scriptures instead of the common word assembly, the translators have misled others into the same mistake of believing He spoke of the present assembly of Christ.

It is obvious with no more than a casual reading of the early chapters of the book of Acts that the original apostles yet knew nothing of the present church. A mystery which remained until Saul of Tarsus was called to be Paul the apostle, and by special revelation given what he three times called “my gospel” and mission of taking salvation through faith in Christ to the Gentiles in this present dispensation of grace.

Another mistake soon realized was that according to Paul, the Old Testament (Mosaic Covenant of Commandments) did not start with Genesis, but “four hundred and thirty years after God made the promises to Abraham.” Yet we are told and see in our Bibles what is called “Old Testament” beginning with Gen. 1:1.

The reason for including the book of Genesis in what is called Old Testament is because the church with few exceptions until the eighteenth century and most today still teach the heresy that the church is the new Israel in which all the promises and covenants to Abraham have been or are being fulfilled. With the title “Old,” they have deliberately set the stage for the perpetuation of their mistake in teaching that all the covenants and promises to the Fathers have been or are being fulfilled in the present church, which they call the kingdom of God.

 
When we refer to the New Covenant (diatheke) as meaning testament, it is incorrect and should be translated “covenant.” The Hebrew word found throughout the writings of Moses, the Psalms, and Prophets consistently translated covenant is berith, and simply means covenant, or league. The Greek word diatheke is the equivalent of the Hebrew word birith (covenant). The English word “testament” has the same meaning as the Hebrew “testimony” (edah), to bear witness or testimony, in this case to whatever is revealed by God in His Word. The equivalent in Greek is mantureo, and neither should be used instead of, or to mean covenant.

But how could such serious mistakes just mentioned be found in the Holy Bible? How could all the Reformers and others since then almost without number, who spent a lifetime in poring over the Scriptures and written so many books, be so mistaken about something as obvious as the proper separation of the covenants? There could not possibly be a New Covenant until after the Lord’s death. In view of the profound implications, it was scarcely believable that they would knowingly mislead the Lord’s people, or were ignorant of all the passages of scripture that clearly show where the New Covenant began.

Not only had I been misled for years by those mistakes, but as I searched through the works of learned men past and present, I began to realize the serious aftermath of the mistakes that had been incorporated into the Bible and accepted by the unsuspecting as being part of the Word of God. In particular, the confusion regarding God’s ancient covenanted people Israel, the church, and the Messianic Kingdom of David. Even to the present, I am still baffled as to how so many extremely qualified people have for almost two millennia totally ignored such crucial mistakes and the issuing consequences, and teach others the same.

When I became a believer in 1959 I joined a Evangelical Church and because I studied so seriously I was given two different adult bible classes to teach. However, I soon came to realize that some of the church doctrine I was teaching was not according to the Scriptures. The church was very gracious and never denied me anything. But my conscious would not permit me to continue as a member, and that’s where my troubles began.

[JB Horn]

• 

Not only was the division of the Old and New Covenant incorrect, but also the titles to what was called “the Gospels” were also incorrect. Instead of preaching the gospel that Paul preached, which the titles “Gospels” speak of, the Lord preached “the Law,” and the necessity of keeping the commandments to be saved. It was the same “Law” that Paul said was a ministry of condemnation and death. Besides the above, if we are to examine Scriptural record of the “gospel” that the Lord and His disciples did preach, it was the “Gospel of the Kingdom,” whereas, the present church is not a kingdom of any kind.

What gospel do you see being preach in John 6 by your Savior and Lord?

Peace
JB

[pilgrim]

• 

Hi JB

In Jo. 6 the Lord was telling the Jews that He was the one that God had sent to save Israel.

At that time the disciples did not understand salvation through His blood because at that time sins had not been paid for. Until after the cross they would have offered the sacrifice commanded by Moses and the Lord because He was a teacher of the Law.

Because the Jews were already in a covenant relationship with with God. Those who believed in Him at that time would have gone to Hades had they died; such as the thief on the cross where they were preserved until sins were paid for. Afterwards when the Lord ascended He led captivity (them) captive into heaven.

JB I have never suggested that there was different ways of salvation and have explained that several times in my posts. there is only one Savior.

I have explained that though there were two gospels (good news) there was only one way of salvarion.

Paul said of the Gospel after the cross:

Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you--unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: 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, (1Cor. 15:1-4).

Now Jesus never explained that in Jo. 6, neither did He explain Peter's sermon to the Jews in Acts 2. We might say that before the cross when Jesus said "I am the Way, the truth and the life." Without the cross that is only half a gospel. we have to know how and by what means He saves.

What I have been saying is that the Jews before the cross did not understand salvation because it had never been preached and that because sins had not been paid for.

Now let me ask you, If you had nothing to read but Jo. 6 would you understand the gospel that Peter and Paul preached and be saved?
The Holy Spirit did not indwell people who believed Jesus in Jo.6, and Paul said that If you have not the Spirit os Christ, you are none of His.
Do you believe that today anyone can according the Scriptures be saved without hearing about the cross and the blood that paid for sins?

You see JB, that is one of the many reasons to understand and rightly devide the Scriptuers in the times and dispensations because God spoke different things to different people at different times.

That is the reason I keep trying to get people to rightly divide the Scriptures. In particular, where the Old and New Covenant and Law and Grace is separated. And the difference between Israel and the Church.

In His grace

pilgrim 

[JB Horn]

• 

Not only was the division of the Old and New Covenant incorrect, but also the titles to what was called “the Gospels” were also incorrect. Instead of preaching the gospel that Paul preached, which the titles “Gospels” speak of, the Lord preached “the Law,” and the necessity of keeping the commandments to be saved. It was the same “Law” that Paul said was a ministry of condemnation and death. Besides the above, if we are to examine Scriptural record of the “gospel” that the Lord and His disciples did preach, it was the “Gospel of the Kingdom,” whereas, the present church is not a kingdom of any kind.

Is the gospel that Paul preached other than what was preached by Christ in Luke 24:46-47, John 3 or John 6?
 
If you want a link between the OT and NT you might find it here. Ps 65:3   130:4,8 Is 1:18   43:26  55:1, 7

Peace
JB

[pilgrim]

• 

Before I answer anymore of your questions JB, please answer mine below that you overlooked in my last post.

Now let me ask you, If you had nothing to read but Jo. 6 would you understand the gospel that Peter and Paul preached and be saved?
The Holy Spirit did not indwell people who believed Jesus in Jo.6, and Paul said that If you have not the Spirit os Christ, you are none of His.
Do you believe that today anyone can according the Scriptures be saved without hearing about the cross and the blood that paid for sins?

pilgrim

[JB Horn]

• 

Before I answer anymore of your questions JB, please answer mine below that you overlooked in my last post.

Now let me ask you, If you had nothing to read but Jo. 6 would you understand the gospel that Peter and Paul preached and be saved?
The Holy Spirit did not indwell people who believed Jesus in Jo.6, and Paul said that If you have not the Spirit os Christ, you are none of His.

First of all if I had nothing to read but John 6, I would either be a Catholic or Moslem. But if you believe those words in John 6 were from Christ, and you were one of the chosen of Christ you would have been drawn and taught by the Father. Is that not what the Scripture (John 6) says? Even before the Cross there is an example Matthew 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou , Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Let me make the point that the Gospel of Grace was taught in the books we refer to as the Gospels in total by Christ.

And what did Paul teach.
1 Corinthians 9:12
2 Corinthians 2:12
2 Corinthians 4:4
2 Corinthians 10:14

And to head off you in case you are going in this direction of Galatians 2:7  to claim that one gospel was taught to the Jews by Peter and one taught to the Gentiles by Paul, let me remind you of some pertinent verses.

Romans 1:16
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth ; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek

1 Corinthians 12:13
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

Ephesians 4:4
There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;

Do you believe that today anyone can according the Scriptures be saved without hearing about the cross and the blood that paid for sins?

NO  And brought them out, and said , Sirs, what must I do to be saved ?  And they said , Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved , and thy house.  And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. .... So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Now your turn: Is the gospel that Paul preached other than what was preached by Christ in Luke 24:46-47, John 3 and John 6?

Peace
JB

 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled , which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.  Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,  And said unto them, Thus it is written , and thus it behoved Christ to suffer , and to rise from the dead the third day:  And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

[pilgrim]

• 

JB

As to what Jesus said about the Jews then coming to Him, if those before the cross were saved by believing Jesus, then why were they not saved then? Why did they not just be taken to heaven instead of going down to Hades? Do you remember that? It was because as Zech. 9:1 where it is said to the Jews who were already in a covenant relationship to God of whom it is said:

"As for you also, Because of the blood of your covenant, I will set your prisoners free from the waterless pit.

He was speaking of the blood of Israel’s New Covenant that set those in Jo. 6 free of their sins at the cross and after the Israel’s New Covenant began. If all we needed was Jo. 6, then why did the Lord tell the young ruler that if he was to have eternal life he would have to keep the commandments in Matt. 19:16-17? He believed Jesus but he still had to keep the Law to be saved because sins had not been paid for. Does that sound like Paul’s gospel of  grace? Paul said that if anyone taught the keeping of the Commandments was the way of life, “let them be accursed” (Gal. 1:8-9. yet you say Jo. 6 is the way of life and the same as Paul’s gospel.

Why do you suppose Peter was given the keys to the kingdom to use later if heaven was already open in John 6? Surely you can understand it was because sins were not paid for before the cross. Yet you want to argue that the words in Jo. 6 is the same as the gospel of Peter and Paul and is sufficient for salvation today. If it was not sufficient then it would not be today either. That kind of thinking today is what is called the social gospel of those who scoff at the bloody cross and say we just follow Jesus.

Why if the Lord’s words in Jo. 6 were sufficient for salvation then or now. Why did the Lord tell Nicodemus that unless he was born again he would never see the kingdom of God? Jo. 6 said nothing about being born again. That had to wait until Peter opened the doors to the kingdom of heaven that Nicodemus could be born again.

You say those before and those after the cross preached the same gospel. If that is true than why did those who heard and accepted it go to a different place when they died?

I asked:

Do you believe that today anyone can according the Scriptures be saved without hearing about the cross and the blood that paid for sins?

You answered:

“NO And brought them out, and said , Sirs, what must I do to be saved ? And they said , Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved , and thy house. And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. .... So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
Now your turn: Is the gospel that Paul preached other than what was preached by Christ in Luke 24:46-47, John 3 and John 6?”

     JB you are mixing teachings from two mutually exclusive covenants. If they teach the same thing, then why do we have an Old and New Covenant? As usual you leave out what would show you the truth such as above when Paul said of the Philippian Jailer’s household: “And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.” Do you really need someone to explain to you that Paul explained to the Jailer “his gospel,” so that he could be saved? The word of the Lord was simply the gospel of grace that Paul said was a mystery until given to him by the Lord (Rom. 16:25).

In trying to prove the gospel was preached before the cross, you say:

“And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled , which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, And said unto them, Thus it is written , and thus it behoved Christ to suffer , and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.”

In the above the Lord showed the apostles what you altogether missed. That is, that what He taught them before the cross was not sufficient for salvation for they did not at that time understand He had to go to the cross to pay for sins. And the converts they would have made among the Gentiles would have been proselytes.

   Nowhere can it be shown that the gospel of the kingdom the Lord and the twelve preached was changed. The preaching of the 12 to the Gentiles (Matt. 28:19-20) would have been to make them proselytes (Ex. 12:48-49). But it never got that far because Jerusalem and temple were destroyed and for all practical purposes the Jewish assembles disintegrated.

   That was the simple reason that Paul was called with a mystery gospel and dispensation of grace for the Gentiles because the Jewish churches ceased to exist and so ended the Gospel of the Kingdom in AD 70. They will be preaching the gospel of the kingdom (Rev. 14:6) even by angels in the tribulation which begins with the third offer of the kingdom (Matt. 10:5-23; 24:14).

   As for your quoting from Paul about his gospel being the same as the Gospel of the kingdom, if that was true then why did Paul say three times that his gospel was a mystery in past ages? He said:

For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles–if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of grace of God which was given to me for you, how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I wrote before in a few words, by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets: that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel, of which I became a minister according to the gift of the grace of God given to me by the effective working of His power. To me who am less than the least of all the saints, this grace was given that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, and to make all people see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ (Eph. 3:1 9).

In the above it is said:

1. This present dispensation of grace began when it was given to Paul (v. 2).

2. By revelation a special knowledge of a mystery was revealed to Paul (vv. 3 4).

3. Paul’s knowledge was unknown in past ages, now revealed to the apostles (v. 5).

4. The Gentiles are to be fellow heirs in the same body (v. 6).

  5. Paul was to preach to the Gentiles what had been hidden from the beginning of the ages (v. 9).

Paul also tells the Colossian and Roman church the same as the Ephesians.

I became a minister according to the stewardship (dispensation) from God which was given to me for you, to fulfill the Word of God, the mystery which was kept secret since the world began (Col. 1:25 26, clarification added).

Now to Him who is able to establish 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 (Rom. 16:25, italics added).

Paul directly states that it was “my knowledge,” “my gospel,” and this present dispensation that was a mystery; kept secret since the world began. In Eph. 3:5 he spoke of “his knowledge” which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men but now revealed to the holy apostles. It was revealed by the Holy Spirit to them when he said he: “went up by revelation,” and communicated to them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles” (Gal. 2:2). The Ephesians letter was written in AD 61 and was years after Paul wrote to the Galatians that he had already been sent to Jerusalem to enlighten the other apostles.

As Paul above makes it very clear that the church of today was a mystery, Peter in Acts 3:19-25 makes it equally clear that the kingdom of heaven that he was offering Israel was spoken of for centuries. He said: “...all the prophets from Samuel and those who follow, as many as have spoken, have also foretold these days.”

JB in an earlier post we went through this thing about Paul’s gospel being mystery and was sent to Jerusalem to explain it to the 12. I showed several times where Paul said his gospel was a mystery to which you never answered me or explained why you did not believe him. Now we have the same thing all over again.

In both then and now JB I fail to understand why you cannot accept what the Scriptures plainly say. Although you say yours’ is not Replacement, or Amillennial theology it is plain that it is. But it is not theology, it is complete confusion.

You said in an earlier post:

“Paul explains the grafting of the Gentiles to the Jewish root of Israel, and he makes it very clear that grafting is not replacement. For some reason members of the body of Christ want to put up a wall between Gentiles and Jews, and between Israel and the Church. I don't understand why it is so hard for some to believe or comprehend that Israel is and was from the start the church. Paul tells us in Eph 2:11-22 at the wall that divides Jews in the Gentiles has permanently been destroyed. The Law has been replaced with the New Covenant this is not the Church replacing Israel, Jerusalem or the Jewish people. There is no more Jew or Gentile (Rom. 10:12; Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11).”

In the above you say:

“For some reason members of the body of Christ want to put up a wall between Gentiles and Jews, and between Israel and the Church.”

You add things that Paul did not say. You say we want to put a wall between Gentiles and Jews. We do not put a wall between the two. There is a difference between an individual Jew and the nation Israel. But that is common confusion that you are always inventing. But you are correct that we do absolutely put a wall between the nation Israel and the present assembly of Christ. Paul always went to the Jews first in a new city before Gentiles and his churches were a mixture of both. Paul’s Jewish converts were no difference that Gentiles. But that cannot be said of Gentile proselytes by the 12. 

You furthermore say:

“I don't understand why it is so hard for some to believe or comprehend that Israel is and was from the start the church.”

May I kindly say, you don’t understand it because you are determined not to. You say yours is not Replacement theology yet the above is. Paul says the present church, his gospel, this whole dispensation of grace and the rapture were mysteries, unknown in past ages,  but you say “…that Israel is and was from the start the church.” Israel was a nation and the church is a people from all nations yet you say they are the same.

You say:

Paul tells us in Eph 2:11-22 at the wall that divides Jews in the Gentiles has permanently been destroyed. Paul said nothing about the wall being permanently destroyed. Evidently you want to believe that so much that it becomes real in you mind. It almost seems as though whatever you say, you believe it must be true because you said it.

Please JB, don’t take this as a personal attack, but it seems to me that your theology is nothing but total confusion. You take Scriptures from everywhere out of context and apply them to the present church without regard for who was being addressed, or under what covenant, dispensation or times the things were spoken.

But of Israel and the church and the wall being broken down and permanently destroyed, Paul tells the Ephesians he is speaking of this present dispensation of grace. But in Rom. 11:25-29 Paul says:

“For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; For this [is] My covenant with them, When I take away their sins." Concerning the gospel [they are] enemies for your sake, but concerning the election [they are] beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God [are] irrevocable.”

We find the same in Acts 15 about the restoration of Israel after the rapture:

“Then all the multitude kept silent and listened to Barnabas and Paul declaring how many miracles and wonders God had worked through them among the Gentiles. And after they had become silent, James answered, saying, "Men [and] brethren, listen to me: "Simon has declared how God at the first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name. "And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written: 'After this I will return And will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins, And I will set it up; So that the rest of mankind may seek the LORD, Even all the Gentiles who are called by My name, Says the LORD who does all these things.' ”

In both cases at the end we are reminded that God’s plan for the redemption of Israel cannot be abrogated.

Paul in Rom. 11:25-28. In Rom. 11:1 Paul asked the question, “Has God cast away His people?” He then in v.5 reminds us that even then, himself included, there was a remnant of Israel that had been saved. In v. 25 he says that a hardening in part (the other part that has not been saved) until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. He then adds: “And so all Israel will be saved.” even as the Prophets had foretold.

There is coming a day when God will save all Israel rather than just a remnant as in Rom. 11:5. Not only will all Israel be saved, but so will all the Gentiles who believe the “gospel of the kingdom” (Matt. 24:14), which is the “everlasting gospel” (Rev. 14:6); and go into the kingdom (Matt. 13: 38, 43; 25:34).

In the midst of Israel’s backsliding and apostasy, and in spite of all their sins, God always reminded them of a time when He would put away their sins and redeem them for himself. In the finality, their redemption had nothing whatever to do with anything they would do, but was wholly dependent on His promises and holiness in keeping those promises.

He had made a unconditional covenant with their fathers that was not dependent on anyone but Himself. Not only did He make a covenant, but He swore by an oath (Gen. 22:16 18) to carry out the same. It was previously said there must be repentance on the part of Israel. God will even bring that about.

Of the surety of their redemption and blessings, Ezekiel 20:40 44 says:

"For on My holy mountain, on the mountain height of Israel,” says the Lord God, “there all the house of Israel, all of them in the land, shall serve Me; there I will accept them, and there I will require your offerings and the first-fruits of your sacrifices, together with all your holy things. “I will accept you as a sweet aroma when I bring you out from the peoples and gather you out of the countries where you have been scattered; and I will be hallowed in you before the Gentiles. “Then you shall know that I am the Lord, when I bring you into the land of Israel, into the country for which I lifted My hand in and oath to give to your fathers. “And there you shall remember your ways and all your doings with which you were defiled; and you shall loathe yourselves in your own sight because of all the evils that you have committed. “Then you shall know that I am the Lord, when I have dealt with you for My name’s sake, not according to your wicked ways nor according to your corrupt doings, O house of Israel,” says the Lord God."

Furthermore, we read:

"Son of man, when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their own ways and deeds; to Me their way was like the uncleanness of a woman in her customary impurity. “Therefore I poured out My fury on them for the blood they had shed on the land, and for their idols with which they had defiled it. “So I scattered them among the nations, and they were dispersed throughout the countries; I judged them according to their ways and their deeds. “When they came to the nations, wherever they went, they profaned My holy name  when they said of them, ‘these are the people of the Lord, and yet they have gone out of His land.’ “But I had concern for My holy name, which the house of Israel had profaned among the nations where they had gone. “Therefore say to the house of Israel, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “I do not do this for your sake, O house of Israel, but for My holy name’s sake, which you have profaned among the nations wherever you went. “And I will sanctify My great name, which has been profaned among the nations, which you have profaned in their midst; and the nations shall know that I am the Lord,” says the Lord.”

Even Israel will think He has abandoned them:

“But Zion said, “The Lord has forsaken me, and my Lord has forgotten me.” Can a woman forget her nursing child, and not have compassion on the son of her womb? Surely they may forget, yet I will not forget you. See, I have inscribed you on the palms of My hands. Your walls are continually before Me (Isa. 49:14 16).”

Does this sound like the present church JB?

There was a Brother in England sometime ago that I tried several times to discuss the Scriptures with who was of the same persuasion as you with his two covenant amillennial beliefs. I got to where I realized we did not have enough in common to continue our discussions. Whatever Scriptures I furnished was ignored or twisted so that anything I said or showed was like talking in the wind.
I accomplished nothing. It is hardly different now; I am beginning to repeat myself to no avail so I will leave off with this discussion.

JB you are my Brother in the Lord and I love you for that reason. I hope that I have said something that in days to come you will remember and will receive a blessing. Perhaps someone will read my posts and because of it will better understand the unsearchable riches in God’s word and be blessed because of my efforts.

Please JB, do not be offended by anything I say or have said in any of my posts. May the Lord richly bless you in your studies and make you a blessing to others.

May the Lord bless you in times to come.

In His grace

pilgrim

[JB Horn]

• 

First please address my question.

Is the gospel that Paul preached other than what was preached by Christ in Luke 24:46-47, John 3 and John 6?

I realize that Christ preached the Gospel of the Kingdom, that is not in dispute.

Not only was the division of the Old and New Covenant incorrect, but also the titles to what was called “the Gospels” were also incorrect. Instead of preaching the gospel that Paul preached, which the titles “Gospels” speak of, the Lord preached “the Law,” and the necessity of keeping the commandments to be saved. It was the same “Law” that Paul said was a ministry of condemnation and death. Besides the above, if we are to examine Scriptural record of the “gospel” that the Lord and His disciples did preach, it was the “Gospel of the Kingdom,” whereas, the present church is not a kingdom of any kind.

But He also preach the Gospel of Grace.

Is the gospel that Paul preached other than what was preached by Christ in Luke 24:46-47, John 3 and John 6?

As far as I understand Luke and John are both what we refer to as Gospels are they not?

You asked me a question:

Do you believe that today anyone can according the Scriptures be saved without hearing about the cross and the blood that paid for sins?

NO

Words mean things, today means NOW.

Now please answer my question.

ειρήνη
JB

Here is the real debate, Paul said For by grace are ye saved through faith. Is this the same faith that Paul speaks of in Hebrews 11 (if you believe Paul wrote Hebrews)

[Fat]

• 

Hello pilgrim

He was speaking of the blood of Israel’s New Covenant that set those in Jo. 6 free of their sins at the cross and after the Israel’s New Covenant began. If all we needed was Jo. 6, then why did the Lord tell the young ruler that if he was to have
eternal life he would have to keep the commandments in Matt. 19:16-17? He believed Jesus but he still had to keep the Law to be saved because sins had not been paid for. Does that sound like Paul’s gospel of  grace? Paul said that if anyone taught the keeping of the Commandments was the way of life, “let them be accursed” (Gal. 1:8-9. yet you say Jo. 6 is the way of life and the same as Paul’s gospel.

So in the Old Testament anyone that broke the Commandments went to hell? Would that include the murders like Moses and David?

The Book says:

16And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

 17And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

There is no promise of salvation to anyone that does not keep ALL of the Commandments in those two verses you cited.

No one kept the Commandments but Christ.


Here is what Christ preached:

Matthew 9:2 KJV
And, behold , they brought to him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed: and Jesus seeing their faith said unto the sick of the palsy; Son, be of good cheer ; thy sins be forgiven thee.

That is grace by faith my friend



IHS
Fat

[pilgrim]

• 

Hey Fat, good to hear from you.

You asked

“So in the Old Testament anyone that broke the Commandments went to hell? Would that include the murders like Moses and David?”

I think you have misunderstood the place called Hades. Before the cross with the exception of Enosh and Elijah everyone went to Hades when they died.

Of Hades Lk. 16:19-31 says there were two compartments there. One was to preserve those of faith who trusted God before the cross, and another for lost unbelievers waiting for the day of judgment.

When Christ died He took the preserved from Hades to Heaven when He ascended. When Zechariah said: “Because of the blood of your covenant, I will set your prisoners free from the waterless pit” (Zech. 9:11) that is precisely what Paul was referring to when he told the Ephesians: “When He ascended on high, He led captivity captive” (set the prisoners free) (Eph. 4:8).

Concerning leading captivity captive, (Eph. 4:8). It is plain from the word ‘led,’ that He speaks of taking with Him others into heaven. Who but the redeemed would He take? Paul’s quote is from Ps. 68:18 where it speaks of the victor taking prisoners and returning with them as his spoils of war.
 
The war was with Satan and those prisoners were sinners who were set free from Hades (Zech. 9:11) because their sins were yet binding until He set them free through His shed blood of the New Covenant. In Ps. 68:19-20 he continues with a description of the captives that He led captive and the benefits to the people.

"Blessed be the Lord, who daily loads us with benefits, the God of our salvation! Our God is the God of salvation; Our God is the God of salvation; and to God the Lord belong escapes from death."

Because He has been the victor, and has the spoils of war (salvation), He now gives us gifts of men to show us the way of salvation and blessings through The One who overcame death and makes it possible for us to escape death. 

Rev. 20:13 says of the unsaved that are still in Hades:

"The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works."

Of my quote from Matt. 19:17 and keeping the Commandments to have life you say:

"

There is no promise of salvation to anyone that does not keep ALL of the Commandments in those two verses you cited."

I am not sure what all you intended in the above remark. If you are saying we must keep all the Commandments to be saved. When the Lord said: “keep the Commandments,” of course He meant all of them.

You are correct in that in that there is in that verse there is no promise of life. But Jo. 3:36 says:

"He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

Before the cross when one sinned they made the prescribed animal sacrifice as an atonement (Covering) until sins were paid for on the cross.

When you said:

"There is no promise of salvation to anyone that does not keep ALL of the Commandments,” you said: “there IS no promise.” According to the tense you are talking of the present.

There are some folks who teach the error that after we are saved and have the Holy Spirit we can and must keep the Commandments to make it to heaven. When we say our sins are forgiven, that is a practical expression, not a legal one. God does not legally forgive our sins. They must be paid for in full. “The wages of sin is death.” His Son paid for them in full and we are accounted as having died and rose with Christ to life.

Paul said:

“Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him” (Rom. 6:8).

"Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be [in the likeness] of [His] resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with [Him], that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. For he who has died has been freed from sin” (Rom. 6:3-7)."

In Rom. 10:4 Paul concludes:

“For Christ [is] the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.”

The bottom line is, IN CHRIST we are as safe as He is, and He is forever alive from the dead.

May the Lord bless you Fat.

pilgrim

[Fat]

• 

Brother pilgrim

Of Hades Lk. 16:19-31 says there were two compartments there. One was to preserve those of faith who trusted God before the cross, and another for lost unbelievers waiting for the day of judgment.

I am sorry but Luke 16:19-31 does not backup your statement.

IHS
Fat

[pilgrim]

• 

Why don't you explain it to us.

pilgrim

[Fat]

• 

First of all this is a parable pointing to a man who had no mercy on earth for his fellow man and his harden heart.

Second I would point out that Paul tells us that the dead elect are asleep until the rapture.

I am waiting with great anticipation for you to answer JB's question concerning the gospel Christ preach in Luke and John. 
He asked, "Is the gospel that Paul preached other than what was preached by Christ in Luke 24:46-47, John 3 and John 6?"

Blessings
Fat

[JB Horn]

• 

Why don't you explain it to us.

pilgrim

Can I help?
Abraham's bosom is meant heaven, a phrase well known to the Jews, by which they commonly expressed the happiness of the future state: of Abraham's happy state they had no doubt; and when they spake of the happiness of another's, they sometimes signified it by going to Abraham; as when the mother of the seven sons, slain by Caesar, saw her youngest going to be sacrificed- ``she fell upon him, and embraced him, and kissed him, and said unto him, my son, (Mkyba Mhrba lua Kl) , "go to Abraham, your father", and tell him, thus saith my mother'' from John Gill's Exposition of the Bible.

Peace

JB

[pilgrim]

• 

Answering Fat and JB

Fat says:

"I am waiting with great anticipation for you to answer JB's question concerning the gospel Christ preach in Luke and John.
He asked, "Is the gospel that Paul preached other than what was preached by Christ in Luke 24:46-47, John 3 and John 6?"

I have already answered JB so there is no reason to repeat myself.

You also quoted me and said:

Brother pilgrim
Quote
Of Hades Lk. 16:19-31 says there were two compartments there. One was to preserve those of faith who trusted God before the cross and another for lost unbelievers waiting for the day of judgment.

“I am sorry but Luke 16:19-31 does not backup your statement.”

I cannot help you if you do not believe Luke. Why don’t you explain yourself from the Scriptures as to where I am wrong?

You say:

“First of all this is a parable pointing to a man who had no mercy on earth for his fellow man and his harden heart.”

Your remark is common for Amillennial Replacement people. So you can use your imagination instead of what the Scriptures say, you say "it's a parable."

Listen to the Lord said in Lk. 16:19-20:

"There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day. But there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,..."

Of them both it says nothing about a parable. What it does say is: "There was" a rich man, and "there was" a beggr.

How can I take you seriously when you trash the Scriptures like that? besides that, your remark has nothing to do with what I said. It explains nothing.

Then you said?

“Second I would point out that Paul tells us that the dead elect are asleep until the rapture.”

Again, if you are going to say someone is incorrect, why don’t you explain or give the reader some Scriptures to explain your remarks?

As to your remark about Hades and soul sleep, for the benefit of the reader I will repeat myself below what I have already said about Hades and deliverance from there. Which if true, than according to you, souls are now sleeping in heaven.

Of Hades Lk. 16:19-31 says there were two compartments there. One was to preserve those of faith who trusted God before the cross and another for lost unbelievers waiting for the Day of Judgment.

When Christ died He took the preserved from Hades to Heaven when He ascended. When Zechariah said: “Because of the blood of your covenant, I will set your prisoners free from the waterless pit” (Zech. 9:11) that is precisely what Paul was referring to when he told the Ephesians: “When He ascended on high, He led captivity captive” (set the prisoners free) (Eph. 4:8).

Concerning leading captivity captive (Eph. 4:8). It is plain from the word ‘led,’ that He speaks of taking with Him others into heaven. Who but the redeemed would He take? Paul’s quote is from Ps. 68:18 where it speaks of the victor taking prisoners and returning with them as his spoils of war.
 
The war was with Satan and those prisoners were sinners who were set free from Hades (Zech. 9:11) because their sins were yet binding until He set them free through His shed blood of the New Covenant. In Ps. 68:19-20 he continues with a description of the captives that He led captive and the benefits to the people.

"Blessed be the Lord, who daily loads us with benefits, the God of our salvation! Our God is the God of salvation; Our God is the God of salvation; and to God the Lord belong escapes from death."

Because He has been the victor, and has the spoils of war (salvation), He now gives us gifts of men to show us the way of salvation and blessings through The One who overcame death and makes it possible for us to escape death.

JB says:

"Abraham's bosom is meant heaven, a phrase well known to the Jews, by which they commonly expressed the happiness of the future state:"

 
But at the Great White Throne Rev. 20:13 says of the unsaved that are presently still in Hades. Does that sound like heaven? I have heard a lot of and read much about Hades but that's a new one. You need to get real JB.

"The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works."

Of my quote from Matt. 19:17 and keeping the Commandments to have life you say:

"There is no promise of salvation to anyone that does not keep ALL of the Commandments in those two verses you cited."

I am not sure what all you intended in the above remark. If you are saying we must keep all the Commandments to be saved. When the Lord said: “keep the Commandments,” of course He meant all of them.

quoting you:

“You are correct in that in that there is in that verse there is no promise of life. But Jo. 3:36 says:

"He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

Before the cross when one sinned they made the prescribed animal sacrifice as an atonement (Covering) until sins were paid for on the cross.

When you said:

“There is no promise of salvation to anyone that does not keep ALL of the Commandments,” you said: “there IS no promise.” According to the tense you are talking of the present."

There are some folks who teach the error that after we are saved and have the Holy Spirit we can and must keep the Commandments to make it to heaven. When we say our sins are forgiven, that is a practical expression, not a legal one. God does not legally forgive our sins. They must be paid for in full. “The wages of sin is death.” His Son paid for them in full and we are accounted as having died and rose with Christ to life.

Paul said:

“Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him” (Rom. 6:8).

Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be [in the likeness] of [His] resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with [Him], that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. For he who has died has been freed from sin” (Rom. 6:3-7).

In Rom. 10:4 Paul concludes:

“For Christ [is] the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.” The bottom line is, IN CHRIST were as safe as He is, and He is forever alive from the dead.

Concerning soul sleep and the rapture, Paul said:

"For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus. For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord (1 Thess. 4:14 17)."

First, Paul said God would bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus. Now if He brings them with Him, then they must now be in heaven and I doubt if they are sleeping in heaven. When referring to those who sleep he is speaking of those whose bodies sleep and have died that will be resurrected and joined with soul and spirit from heaven and caught up together with the then living.

Also, in Rev. 7:9, 13-14 it is said:

“After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;…

“Then one of the elders answered, saying to me, "Who are these arrayed in white robes, and where did they come from?" And I said to him, "Sir, [fn] you know." So he said to me, "These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.”

The above scene takes place during the tribulation and before the Lord’s coming and the general resurrection. Yet there they are in heaven and wide awake.

JB said of Hades where the beggar and Abraham was:

“Abraham's bosom is meant heaven, a phrase well known to the Jews, by which they commonly expressed the happiness of the future state:”

“The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works” (Rev. 20:13).

Is God going to deliver the dead from heaven and judge them and cast them into the lake of fire?

Really, Fat and JB, If you guys cannot get real I really don’t have the time to answer such nonsense anymore. I answer you in great detail which takes time and labor and you half the time dismiss as nothing or totally ignore every thing I say.

Why don't you guys discuss these things with each other, then you will have more or at least some agreement; maybe.

In His grace

pilgrim