Bob Hope
Member
without a perfect bible there is no faith.
No one needs a bible to be saved, let alone a perfect one. Only faith and obedience in Christ is needed.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
without a perfect bible there is no faith.
Him(Hob Bope) dumbing this post is all we need to know about this joker.without a perfect bible there is no faith.
No one needs a bible to be saved, let alone a perfect one. Only faith and obedience in Christ is needed.
He denies bible inerrancy. He mystically knows which verses are inspired and those which a chocked full of errors.Romans 10:17
He denies bible inerrancy. He mystically knows which verses are inspired and those which a chocked full of errors.
So Christ was not sent unto the Lost Sheep of Israel?
He was speaking to people who were not Israel?
And I am out of time, so check back in at a later point in time, Bob.
God bless.
Can you say for 100% certainty that you can know who they are?
And how does God redeem them?
Are not the twelve apostles all physical Israelites?
Weren't they part of the N.T. church?
Christ made the great commission directive very clear. It was to everyone who would listen. And it was to be the exact message He had taught. There is no need for anything further.
Weren't they part of the N.T. church?
Yes, but who are they?
without a perfect bible there is no faith.
That was the whole point of the post, Bob...they are the Lost Sheep of Israel.
And this is the same Israel that Messiah was prophesied of coming to.
He denies bible inerrancy. He mystically knows which verses are inspired and those which a chocked full of errors.
With such a low view of scripture it is a wonder how he was ever saved. I
He denies bible inerrancy. He mystically knows which verses are inspired and those which a chocked full of errors.
Some scripture is close to perfect in truth. Others not so much.
I guess you could say the Holy Spirit is mystical.
Well unfortunately you do not have a reliable enough Bible to know if your experiences are of the Spirit of God or not.
I do, but ......you do not.
Too bad there is not a sad rating.
So to simplify. Was the message that Christ brought supposed to be delivered to ALL of Israel while Christ was alive? Do you not understand that since the time of King David, the Israelites had migrated all over the world? Even at the time of the Captivity of the northern ten tribes Israel they were moving away from Israel. This was 700 years before Christ.
Now I am sure that the term Jew is strictly a religious term. As found in Esther 8:17. Men not of Israel had been converting to the law for thousands of years. As I have said, there were just enough real Israelites to facilitate the birth of Christ. Add in all those of Persia and it makes a genetic soup. From his life and through His death the the message of salvation was spread to the whole house of Israel via the true disciples of Messiah. It has just taken hundreds of years.
When I read Ezekiel 37 I don't see the modern nation of Israel. I see the whole house of true Israel. Meaning all men and women of all races who follow the Messiah.
Paul's letters only serve to confuse. He presumes that Israelites have rejected the Messiah. But have they? How could most of them reject the Messiah if the majority of them were thousands of miles away? If the Messiah was truly the fulfillment of the O.T. promise, as He was, then salvation has been standardized for all men. All men from the O.T. were brought in through Christ.
If the Messiah was truly the fulfillment of the O.T. promise, as He was, then salvation has been standardized for all men. All men from the O.T. were brought in through Christ.
Future Israel, including the 144,000 of each tribe, are all part of the church. They are all made part of the bride. Just as the apostles are part of the N.T. Church.
And just as a Jew is a religious term referring to those practicing O.T. law, a gentile is also a religious term referring to anyone not practicing the law. Jew and gentile are purely religious.
This is simply not found in Scripture. We do not ascribe religious connotation to the terms Jew and Gentile, because we know that proselytes could be brought in.
In order for this to be true, those who are saved through Christ would cease being Jews, right? But nowhere do we see Jews commanded to shed their heritage.
We see the elders of Jerusalem urge Paul to partake of ceremony which is distinctly Jewish:
Acts 21:17-26
King James Version (KJV)
17 And when we were come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly.
18 And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present.
19 And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry.
20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:
21 And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.
In view is Paul's ministry among the Gentiles, clearly distinguished as such. The question is, "Paul, are you teaching the Gentiles to forsake the Law? Tha is what everyone is saying."
The truth is, Paul was not teaching Gentiles to forsake the Law, but specifically preaching the Gospel of Christ, which demands, for those who are under Law, they they go on unto that which is perfect, progressing, rather than abandoning from the Law, which the Writer of Hebrews basically calls the foundational teachings of the faith we are to have.
Now watch what happens next:
22 What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come.
23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them;
24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.
25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.
Here, just as in Acts 15, we see again Gentile believers distinguished from Jewish believers. For them, v.25 describes suggested teaching that they might "do well," not...be saved.
But, these Jerusalem elders want Paul to partake of this ceremony.
Now see how that ceremony concludes:
26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them.
Notice that an offering will be made for every one of them? Do you understand what this signifies?
It means that Jewish believers were still not only following their heritage, but were offering up sacrifice.
I have mixed thoughts on this, because my heart always cries out, "No, Paul! Don't do it! Refuse!"
Instead of Paul being taken and ultimately having his head cut off, what I would like to see here is Paul preaching to these fellows, explaining to them the same way that the Writer of Hebrews explains to his brethren.
But that is not the case.
So we see that in rejecting Paul, you also reject John, and James, and...the Gentile Luke.
You are creating doctrines that are not from Scripture, but simply doctrines you want to believe. Jew and Gentile are not religious/irreligious terms. Israel was not the Church and still isn't (and never will be, because there is and will be only One Fold).
God bless.
I would again point out that Christ states He came to Israel, it doesn't matter that there weer those of Israel outside of the land. We see they are not disconnected from Judaism, the land, or the Law, as shown in Acts 2.
You are presenting a point that is completely irrelevant to what Scripture actually shows us, and does not support your view.
"Jew" is not strictly a religious term, it is derived from Judah, and simply refers to an inhabitant of that Kingdom. It was adopted to speak of all those of Israel.
As far as infiltration of Gentiles into a Jewish Heritage, if Christ can have Gentile ancestry and remain a Jew, I think it safe to say that this is the case for Israel as a Nation. That does not mean I think there was a lot of this, but, again, it is not a point which nullifies what Scripture actually teaches. Christ was a Jew, He came unto the Lost Sheep of House of Israel (and this means Israel, not the Northern Kingdom), and Scripture distinguishes between Jew and Gentile in the creation of the new man.
Then we would disagree, because the Israel that will be saved will be...dead.
That is the whole point of Ezekiel 37, and it pertains to Israel in particular.
And you define "the whole true house of Israel" as all men and women that follow Messiah. You believe this because you want to believe it, not because you see this in Scripture. It is contrary to some very simple teachings, not to mention a very basic Bible teaching found throughout the Old Testament.
Believing Gentiles under Law were not called Israel, they still maintained a distinction of Gentile:
James distinguishes, even in the Church Age, between Israel and Gentiles:
James 1
King James Version (KJV)
1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
Israel will be, just as they are now, a Nation outside of the will of God. They will be, according to Daniel, practicing Temple Service, but, that Service will not be legitimate, because the Covenant of Law has been abrogated.
John 1:11
King James Version (KJV)
11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
John and Paul agree.
"His own" were the Jews. It's just basic, Bob.
And your view actually argues against that, Bob: you know Christ brought Jew and Gentile together, but you are doing your best to say He didn't.
The Church began at Pentecost and are not Jews, are not Gentiles, they are the Church. It didn't exist prior to Pentecost. The "church" in the wilderness were of Israel, not of the Body of Christ. They are spoken of without distinction between faithful and unfaithful, but as a whole, and as a whole they fell in the Wilderness.
No, Bob, future Israel will be Israel outside of Christ (we know this because they are left to go through the Tribulation), and we see the 144,000 sealed by God. I believe this group will evangelize Israel, as well as Gentiles, likely, but, they are not members of the Body until sealed.
This is simply not found in Scripture. We do not ascribe religious connotation to the terms Jew and Gentile, because we know that proselytes could be brought in.
In order for this to be true, those who are saved through Christ would cease being Jews, right? But nowhere do we see Jews commanded to shed their heritage.
We see the elders of Jerusalem urge Paul to partake of ceremony which is distinctly Jewish:
In view is Paul's ministry among the Gentiles, clearly distinguished as such. The question is, "Paul, are you teaching the Gentiles to forsake the Law? Tha is what everyone is saying."
The truth is, Paul was not teaching Gentiles to forsake the Law, but specifically preaching the Gospel of Christ, which demands, for those who are under Law, they they go on unto that which is perfect, progressing, rather than abandoning from the Law, which the Writer of Hebrews basically calls the foundational teachings of the faith we are to have.
Here, just as in Acts 15, we see again Gentile believers distinguished from Jewish believers. For them, v.25 describes suggested teaching that they might "do well," not...be saved.
But, these Jerusalem elders want Paul to partake of this ceremony.
Now see how that ceremony concludes:
26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them.
Notice that an offering will be made for every one of them? Do you understand what this signifies?
It means that Jewish believers were still not only following their heritage, but were offering up sacrifice.
I have mixed thoughts on this, because my heart always cries out, "No, Paul! Don't do it! Refuse!"
Instead of Paul being taken and ultimately having his head cut off, what I would like to see here is Paul preaching to these fellows, explaining to them the same way that the Writer of Hebrews explains to his brethren.
But that is not the case.
So we see that in rejecting Paul, you also reject John, and James, and...the Gentile Luke.
You are creating doctrines that are not from Scripture, but simply doctrines you want to believe. Jew and Gentile are not religious/irreligious terms. Israel was not the Church and still isn't (and never will be, because there is and will be only One Fold).
God bless.