"God's Pure Word"

[John of Japan]

You went to all that school and never learned to obey Acts 2:38?

You can't even point sinners to remission of sins.

You wasted your time and money.

You need to go to the 3000 at Pentecosts' school before you go to any other school....

38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

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.)

 

[atpollard]

Seminary is strategically created to teach folks to skip Acts.

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.

 

[JesusFan]

Back up a minute.

Which modern translation is God's pure word?

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

 

[JesusFan]

I'm pretty sure you aren't an apostle.

Maybe one of those Paul warned us about!

 

[JesusFan]

So 1st century Christians were dumber than we are? Really?

Jesus took 3 years to train his disciples. That would be an absolute minimum, because none of us are Jesus.

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!

 

[JesusFan]

Let’s see….

Matthew: A Levitical priest certainly obtained a superior education in OT Law and prophets, as evidenced by his continual use of “this was to fulfill the scripture (or prophet)

Mark: Not sure, but since he could write at all suggests some formal education

Luke: The beloved Physician: The only Gentile writer of scripture. Uses near Classical Greek in the first four verses of Luke and Acts. That, and that he was a physician suggests extensive education.

John (and James his brother) from a wealthy family. His writing style of frequent dualism and repeating themes suggest extensive education.

Apostle Paul: Clearly advanced education within Judaism as well as Greek culture and philosophies. This is evidenced by his mastery of OT Law and the use of the knowledge of Roman culture to appeal to his readers. Without question, Apostle Paul would have held a PHD by our standards.

Peter, Jude, James: probably little formal education.

So, the Apostles varied from having little formal education to extensive education. Those who wrote most of the New Testament had extensive education, certainly many years or even decades in Paul’s case and perhaps Luke as well.

The question is not “seminaries” but education. Spurgeon had no formal seminary education but had immersed himself in studying scripture and what others had taught about scripture for years prior to preaching.

I’d be very careful letting a new Christian teach after only 6 months, as teachers will be held to a higher standard by God for what they teach.

peace to you

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

 

[JesusFan]

They did not have the Holy Ghost in those 3 years.

Also, why did they baptize always and only in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and seminarians do not?

Maybe they should go back to Jesus' training course?

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

 

[atpollard]

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!

... 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.

 

[Salty]

Aren't you baiting the very thing you forbade in the OP? (KJVO)

Negative - as it has a direct relationship to "Gods pure words"

 

[Truther]

I see. So since they did not have the Holy Spirit, they were dumber than we are. And Jesus took three years to train the 12, but since you have the Holy Ghost, you can do the same thing in 6 months. The Holy Ghost makes you smarter than Jesus! Right, got it.

Yes, they were dumber...

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


This was after 3 years.

 

[Truther]

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.

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.

 

[Truther]

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

Pure word of God or kinda pure?

 

[Logos1560]

You believe the KJV is wrong and I believe it is right.

I teach from it and you critique it.

I win.

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?

 

[Truther]

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

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.

 

[John of Japan]

Yes, they were dumber...

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

This was after 3 years.

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.

 

[Truther]

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.

 

[John of Japan]

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).

 

[John of Japan]

No, they still did not know what Jesus was up to even here....

6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.


Jesus said the millennial reign is not in their lifetimes and none of their business.

They actually thought they were going to reign over Israel back then.

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?

 

[John of Japan]

It is simple.

You know what makes it hard?

Presupposition.

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.

 

[John of Japan]

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....