"God's Pure Word"

So, you've heard all of my messages and all of my soul winning encounters in both Japanese and English, and you are therefore a witness that I "never learned to obey Acts 2:38"???? Really? You must be omniscient! (That's a big word you probably never learned, never having been to seminary. It kind of means "know it all" when applied to a human, but should only be applied to God.)

 

I don't believe you have really thought this trough ... why would any UNSAVED person WANT to go to seminary and study? The desire to attend seminary requires either a "new heart" or a Religious Pharisaical heart. Neither person would want to "skip" Acts 2:38 (for different reasons).

You are advocating irrational prejudice.

 

All valid ones are equally the word of the Lord to us in English!

 

Maybe one of those Paul warned us about!

 

Those Apostles of His had the greatest teacher in history to be their guide, had sign gifts and inspiration from and by the Holy Spirit, so they are way ahead of any today!

 

They all had the ultimate teacher, Jesus, and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, which none can claim today

 

Are you advocating here for Oneness only water baptist, as a requirement to be saved and have remission of sins?

 

... and the most influential (spreading the gospel) and prolific (writer) of the Apostles was Paul who:

1. was not a disciple for those 3 years of Jesus earthly ministry
   
2. had a theology degree in Judaism
   
3. then had 3 years of 1 on 1 tutoring by Jesus after receiving the Holy Spirit

Training after salvation and before embarking on Evangelism seems both useful and the Biblical norm. Today, we call that "Seminary" instead of "Arabia" (Gal.1:17-18) and it takes at least 4 years for most people. How long were Mark and Timothy "students" of Paul? The modern approach really seems fairly close to the norm. Not knowing the details of Seminary, it might lack some of the "mentoring" of the Jesus-Disciples and Paul-Timothy earliest model, which is probably sad but inevitable.

Then again, many young pastors start out as an associate pastor so it might not be completely different after all.

 

Yes, they were dumber...

Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,....


This was after 3 years.

 

They are told they are saved without being baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of their sins, and they fall for it.
I started a thread on this subject if you would like to resume the discussion there, so as not to derail this one.

 

Pure word of God or kinda pure?

 

How do you win by believing assertions or claims that are not true? You fail over and over to prove what you claim to be true.

You in effect critique the KJV by claiming that it is perfect and pure even though there are proven errors in the editions of the KJV. Your critique of the 1611 KJV is factually incorrect. Do you try to claim the actual errors in the 1611 edition of the KJV are "kinda pure"?

You avoid and dodge what I actually state. In agreement with scriptural truth (Prov. 30:6, Deut. 4:2, Deut. 12:32, Rev. 22:18-19), I have stated that any errors introduced by men are not pure words of God and any words added by men would not be pure inspired words of God. Are you rejecting statements based on clear scriptural truth? Do you claim that errors introduced by men are perfect, pure words of God?

 

I am not oneness, but they got Acts 2:38 right.

My thread is...

What is the name of the son per Matt 28:19?

if you would like to discuss it there.

 

And a modern person (you?) would then have understood all of what Jesus taught after being saved for just six months?

The topic of the thread is the pure Word of God. Understanding the Word of God was a spiritual effort back then, depending on the Holy Spirit's help (John 14:26), and it is the same for us. The idea that they were dumber back then is just plain ridiculous.

 

I went through a 10 week course on picture charts(one hour each), in 1979 and was teaching the entire Bible with those 10 lessons within 6 months.

I still teach it.

I gave this thread an example on my Youtube channel and they deleted it.

The Bible is easy peasy to teach and understand with the right technique.

I teach teachers how to teach it.

 

So you understand everything about the Bible? And anyone who takes your short course will know everything about the Bible and how to serve God in that short time?

Wow! I guess I wasted my time teaching Japanese pastors for years and now teaching American young people for years (about ten people from other countries). If only I had your incredible abilities and your short course.

Now that I hear you say it, the Bible must be so simple, especially the works of Paul. So Peter was a fool when he said that Paul taught in his epistles "some things hard to be understood" (2 Peter 3:16).

 

But you could have succeeded where Jesus failed, right? Six months, and you'd have had them all fixed up in evangelism, discipling, Christology, eschatology, and all the rest. The Bible is so simple, right?

 

What presupposition did Peter have when he said Paul's writings were difficult?

I see a presupposition here that you think you are better at it than Jesus. He failed to make things understood after 3 years, but you could do it in 6 months.

 

Well, folks, I have to have lunch and then go teach "Bible Translation Theory and Practice" to my seminary class. So I'm leaving this ridiculously arrogant conversation for now. Maybe tomorrow....