Examine Yourselves Whether You Be in the Faith, Part 1

GTY.org ^ | September 24, 1978 | John MacArthur

[redleghunter]

I would challenge you to determine who else it can be. The verse sasy “He who now letteth” 2 Thessalonians 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. Therefore it can’t be the body of Christ, the church and there is no other restrainer. The only restrainer of iniquity is the Holy Spirit and His work through the church.

As I said one can draw that conclusion from that ONE VERSE. My point is we cannot be 100% certain and draw the conclusion the Holy Spirit will not testify to Jesus Christ and not indwell believers in the tribulation. That is my point. Perhaps the restraining force is the same we see in Job where God restrains Satan. Don't call me dogmatic on that either. We see the 144,000 sealed in Revelation 7. Sealed on the head. Is that the Holy Spirit? I don't know, I am not certain of that.

My other point in the previous post is we should base our conclusions on all things in Scripture on multiple evidence. The 2 Thessalonians 2:7 reference is ONE verse. If I am in error and there are others I missed let me know. I checked out Daniel 9 and did not see any reference that jumped out to support the 2 Thess 2:7 reference.

So we cannot be 100% certain that "only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way" is the Holy Spirit. It makes the most sense, but to draw another conclusion that believers in the tribulation are not preached and accept the same Gospel we do is a major stretch in my humble opinion. Not even a guy like LaHaye makes such a claim. I will add most people accuse LaHaye of being sensational so I offer a look at what someone who is tenured and published well says. That would be John F. Walvoord. He is probably the one guy everyone else lifts their dispensational ideas from in the 20th and 21st centuries:

Walvoord article

I will add he does not see a different Gospel or people being saved by Temple worship.

So some of these posts are new, news to me. I have studied Darby, Scofield, Walvoord, J. Dwight Pentecost and even read LaHaye's non-fiction prophecy books. Not once do any of these premiere dispensationalists give an indication that the Gospel is different or temple worship is how people are saved.

[daniel1212]

Then please show me from Scripture when Peter first preached the same gospel that Paul preached. Paul calls his “my gospel”, ROm 2:16. Not “our gospel”. And where did Paul get his gospel from? Was he taught it by the 12?

I have shown you, and Peter did not change it after Paul's conversion, for as said, Paul's gospel was that of "testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ. (Acts 20:21; cf. 26:20)

And before Paul even mentioned the Lord Jesus to the barbarians in Acts 14, he even told them,

"We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein:" (Acts 14:15)

Thus according to HD understanding, Paul must be preaching salvation by works, rather than being consistent with Christ, Peter and himself in calling souls to salvation by faith, but a faith which changes lives by God's grace.

And thus attempting to make Paul's gospel different based on his use of "my gospel" will not work, for it is not shown to be salvifically different that Peter's or Johns, etc.

For Paul states that while he received the truth of the gospel directly from God, he "delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures...; (1 Corinthians 15:3)

Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel : (2 Timothy 2:8)

This, and that, as Peter whom you think preached a different gospel says, "ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:" (1 Peter 1:18-19)

And of repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ, (Acts 20:21) whom Peter and Paul both affirm is Lord, and by a manner of faith that confesses Christ, (Rm. 10:10) and effects works by love, salvifically constituted "the gospel of the grace of God," (Acts 20:24) and which both Peter and Paul preached.

And as said, if Peter preached a different gospel than Paul's - "what we have preached unto you" then he was accursed. (Gal. 1:6-9) And in which book he goes on to teach that "we" means one in which the other apostles concurred with, and which did not teach salvation by the works of the law, even though faith effects fruit the obedience of faith.

As for "the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith: (Romans 16:25,26) the gospel is first a mystery because what both Peter and Paul preached was hide it from men, which is why Is. 6:9,10 is the or about the most referenced OT text in the gospels and NT (Mt 13:14,15; Mr 4:12; Lu 8:10; Joh 12:40 Ac 28:26,27; Ro 11:8)

And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed. (Isaiah 6:9-10)

Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. (1 Corinthians 2:8)

Secondly "the mystery of the gospel" most fully includes that which pertains to their being one gospel, not two:

Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel: (Ephesians 3:4-6)

Although salvation by grace was taught by the Lord Himself, as seen in John, (Jn. 3:16; 5:24; 10:27-29; 11:25,26) and typified in healings in the synoptics, and by Peter afterward as explained, this aspect of the Jews and Gentiles being of the same body was a mystery, even though the Lord alluded to it in John.

And which was revealed to Paul, and also the theology behind salvation by grace, under which the penitent publican, and so-called "good thief" and Mary and Martha, etc. were also saved by. Thanks be to God thru Jesus the Lord.

[daniel1212]

Do we know why he took that “vow”. The Greek word used their means “a prayer comprising a vow”. I haven’t ever seen the reasoning he gave behind that “shaving”.

It is not stated, but seems to have been similar to a temporary Nazarite vow, (Num. 6:1-27) preparatory for his going to Jerusalem to keep the feast there. (Acts 18:21) Jews made such vows to God as an expression of gratitude such as in deliverance from danger or calamity. (Josephus, Wars of the Jews, 2.15.1; Juvenal, Sat., 12, 81) JFB understands this to explain the haste with which he leaves Ephesus (Act_18:21), and the subsequent observance, on the recommendation of the brethren, of a similar vow (Act_21:24).

Where does it say that it was because of Jewish law?

While it was rather obviously based on Jewish law, I did not say Paul was doing this as one who was under the law, but that while Peter is charged with preaching different gospel in accommodation to the Jews, Paul is the one who take a Jewish vow. Which nowhere is taught for Christians to do, if not disallowed. My point was that if Peter did this then it would be invoked for support of him preaching a different gospel.

Or was it simply to be able to relate to Jews rather than a requirement?

Yes, though opinions are divided as to its propriety, and i at least think perpetuating the observance of shadows among Christians would be wrong. In the second case Paul is doing so as a testimony that he keeps the Law, (Acts 21:24) as some supposed he rejected the Law totally, but he did teach required obedience of the ceremonial law was abrogated, as well as reject the Law as the means of salvation. And trying to appease the Jews who included souls who required observance of even the ceremonial law for salvation almost got Paul killed by them.

While the wisdom of Paul taking a Jewish vow seems dubious, Christiancourier.com defends Paul against the accusation of sinning by so doing, stating,

If the apostle could circumcise Timothy as an expediency, with no design of associating the ritual with salvation (as was sometimes done – Acts 15:1), why could he not have done the same with reference to a sacrifice? To utilize circumcision as a matter of salvation was apostasy (Gal. 5:2ff). To practice the rite in order to remove prejudice—in that era when the law was so freshly abolished—was an exercise of wisdom (cf. 1 Cor. 9:19-23). To offer a sacrifice redemptively would have been wrong; but there is no proof that such was Paul’s intention. <

p>It should be noted in passing that ceremonial “purification” did not necessarily involve atonement for personal sin. A Jewish woman had to be “purified” following the birth of a child (cf. Lev. 12:1ff; Lk. 2:22), even though the act of bearing a child is not sinful. Paul’s act of “purification,” therefore, need not suggest that he was seeking personal forgiveness by means of an animal sacrifice. Clearly that was not Paul’s purpose in this temple ritual.

And if a requirement is that also for us today?

No, as it was not a requirement for Jews to be saved then, as the same gospel of repentance and faith is preach to both Jews and Gentiles. (Acts 20:21)

>>then so is Paul, who taught "not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified." (Romans 2:13)<<

Um, there is something that doesn’t fit there. I think reading that in the context of the rest of the chapter would cause one to understand that Peter was talking about if you are under the law you have to keep all the law and that to the letter.

I disagree. I see Paul teaching that as obeying the light one results in finding the Light, Christ, thus "To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life," (Romans 2:7) versus "them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness," (v. 8).

And as faith is evidenced by works, thus there will be "glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile," "in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel," Rm. 2:10,16)

Thus the Gentiles who out of faith obey the essence of the Law according to the light they have will be justified, judged as having true faith, versus those who know the Law but disobey it.

However, even if Paul is only saying God-fearing Gentiles will find more mercy on the day of judgment than self righteous Jews, yet Paul in other places teaches that saving faith is that which works by love, (Gal. 5:6) "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." (Romans 8:4)

For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; (Titus 2:11-12)

And Paul teaches that saving faith mortifies the sinful deeds of the body, and that the kind of faith which results in suffering with Christ makes one "heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ, that we may be also glorified together, (Romans 8:17) rather than denying Him, for "if we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us: (2 Timothy 2:12)

This is not salvation by works, as works do not actually earn one eternal life, versus eternal damnation - which is what sin earns - but true faith does have good fruit, which testifies to its genuine nature, and which God covenantally rewards in grace. (Heb. 10:35; Rv. 2+3)

For it is Abrhamic type faith that is counted for righteousness, and which faith is manifest by obedience, versus those who evidence the contrary.

Thus as said, Paul knew the Thessalonians were elect based on their fire tried endurance and works of faith, (1Ths. 1) which was not simply good deeds. In contrast a believer who did not even provide for his own had denied the faith, (1Tim. 5:8) and he required the Corinthians to repent from sins in order to be saved, (2Cor. 6:14-18 ) and he disallows the impenitent in the church from claiming to be saved. (Ephesians 5:5)

Gal. 2:21, I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly. It can’t be both ways. Something had to have changed along the way.

Exactly, and neither Peter or Paul is teaching righteousness comes through the Law, neither are they teaching saving faith is inert, but that it confesses Christ in word and in deed, in virtue and works of faith. For the nature of faith is that it effects what one is and does, and we do not simply believe on the Lord Jesus to save us as a promise giver abstract from what He is, and thus what He did, but we believe on the Lord Jesus who hates sin and loves righteousness, and thus died for ours sins to save us from them.

[CynicalBear]

"According to THE GRACE OF GOD WHICH is GIVEN UNTO ME, as a wise masterbuilder, I HAVE LAID THE FOUNDATION, and another buildeth THEREON. But let every man take heed HOW he buildeth THEREON. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ."(1 Cor. 3:10,11).

I wonder if people are totally missing the implication of that verse. The word used there for “according” to the grace is the same word used in Matthew 9:29 and Mark 7:5 and especially Luke 2:22.<<

Luke 2:22 And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;<

Notice the similarity of use. According to the law or according to the Grace. The Law was given to Moses. The Grace was given to Paul. Put another way the gospel of the law was given to Moses and the gospel of grace was given to Paul. That should give some people a hint of the change.

[daniel1212]

Keeping the law is righteousness...... The church was under faith AND the Jewish law for righteousness...Jesus fulfilled the law for believers in him and transitions into faith only...

Two gospels is simply is not what Paul is teaching, but true faith is manifest by what one does. For salvation is by faith, which is counted for righteousness, justifying the unGodly, but not a faith abstract from who Christ is, but one who "condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. (Romans 8:4)

For Paul has been building his case in Rm. 2+3 that both Jews and Gentles are in need of salvation by faith said, thus he states in Rm. 3, "we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;... (Romans 3:9ff) Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: (Romans 3:24) See 120 and 162 and

[daniel1212]

Faith exhibited by works? What was the “gospel of grace” which Paul said had been a “mystery” until after Pentecost? That gospel could not have been preached prior.

Answered above. Again, Paul was not antinomian, but preached

"both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ. (Acts 20:21)

And saying, Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein: (Acts 14:15)

And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead. (Acts 17:30-31)

[daniel1212]

Affirmed.

[smvoice]

Paul took the shaving for the same reason he circumcised Timothy: "...because of the Jews" (Acts 16:3; 1 Cor. 9:20-23; 10:32).

These are things I've been trying to explain to you: Acts OPENS with a renewed opportunity of repentance extended to the nation Israel..It concludes with salvation sent to the Gentiles APART FROM and IN SPITE of that once favored nation. Until they are completely set aside in Acts 28, Paul does and performs things that are Jewish in nature: preaching to the Jews concerning Jesus, the promised Messiah.

Read ROm. 11:11-13. Israel "stumbled but did not fall", She does "fall" and this results in salvation going to the Gentiles and Israel's "DIMINISHING" phase follows through to the end of Acts. She doesn't just go "POOF!" off the radar, her setting aside is gradual. She DIMINISHES off the scene and into blindness. While the Gentiles GREW in stature and by the end of Acts, they were saved not BECAUSE of Israel but IN SPITE OF her.

BTW: please read Acts 2:36-40 and Acts 3:18-26. Israel's PROMISED KINGDOM was being OFFERED during the PENTECOST ERA. This fact alone makes Pentecost part of the "time past" of Eph. 2.

[redleghunter]

Let's be clear on the matter. What Peter explained and preached in Acts chapter 2 is Grace. He did so using OT prophecies and revelations. He also explained the death and resurrection of Jesus (same Gospel stated by Paul in the epistles). The Finished Work of Jesus Christ, those actions, is the Grace. Peter was not giving a theological speech but a call for those to confess with their mouth and believe in their hearts Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior. He does so in his sermon:

Acts 2:

14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, raised his voice and said to them, “Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and heed my words. 15 For these are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day. 16 But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:

17 ‘And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God, That I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your young men shall see visions, Your old men shall dream dreams. 18 And on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days; And they shall prophesy. 19 I will show wonders in heaven above And signs in the earth beneath: Blood and fire and vapor of smoke. 20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into blood, Before the coming of the great and awesome day of the Lord. 21 And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the Lord Shall be saved.’ 22 “Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know— 23 Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; 24 whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it. 25 For David says concerning Him:

‘I foresaw the Lord always before my face, For He is at my right hand, that I may not be shaken. 26 Therefore my heart rejoiced, and my tongue was glad; Moreover my flesh also will rest in hope. 27 For You will not leave my soul in Hades, Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption. 28 You have made known to me the ways of life; You will make me full of joy in Your presence.’ 29 “Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. 30 Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, 31 he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. 32 This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. 33 Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear. 34 “For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he says himself:

‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand, 35 Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.”’ 36 “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

37 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?”

38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.”

Then a summary here same chapter:

40 And with many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying, “Be saved from this perverse generation.” 41 Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them.

Then we have in Acts 3 the portico of Solomon sermon:

12 So when Peter saw it, he responded to the people: “Men of Israel, why do you marvel at this? Or why look so intently at us, as though by our own power or godliness we had made this man walk? 13 The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers, glorified His Servant Jesus, whom you delivered up and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let Him go. 14 But you denied the Holy One and the Just, and asked for a murderer to be granted to you, 15 and killed the Prince of life, whom God raised from the dead, of which we are witnesses. 16 And His name, through faith in His name, has made this man strong, whom you see and know. Yes, the faith which comes through Him has given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all. 17 “Yet now, brethren, I know that you did it in ignorance, as did also your rulers. 18 But those things which God foretold by the mouth of all His prophets, that the Christ would suffer, He has thus fulfilled. 19 Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, 20 and that He may send Jesus Christ, who was preached to you before, 21 whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began. 22 For Moses truly said to the fathers, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren. Him you shall hear in all things, whatever He says to you. 23 And it shall be that every soul who will not hear that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.’ 24 Yes, and all the prophets, from Samuel and those who follow, as many as have spoken, have also foretold these days. 25 You are sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed.’ 26 To you first, God, having raised up His Servant Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities.”

Then we have in chapter 4 Peter says this:

8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders of Israel: 9 If we this day are judged for a good deed done to a helpless man, by what means he has been made well, 10 let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole. 11 This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’ 12 Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

I don't see how Peter was preaching a different Gospel.

[redleghunter]

Since Pentecost we are in the dispensation of grace.

One Gospel at Pentecost to present. Agree.

[daniel1212]

Pleas show the Old Testament scripture that shows the Holy Spirit dwelling within those OT believers as opposed to just speaking to them.

Although this seems to have a critical effect on your hyper dispensation soteriology, that the Holy Spirit was in holy men is what the KJV and every translation (15) i have says,

Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. (1 Peter 1:11)

The Temple is to be rebuilt per the instructions of God. All sacrifices are to be resumed as it is the continuation of the 490 years prophesied by Daniel.

I see that but not as a means of salvation. And not the Temple of Ezekiel and Zech. 8

Whoa there. Revelation 11:13 says they “give glory to God” just as they had done in the Old Testament. It does not say they recognized Jesus as the Messiah at that point. The “remnant” at the point has simply been “set apart”.

I said "indicated," as in John, fearing God, and giving glory to Him is the gospel message, as that is what faith in the Lord Jesus does in the expression of a soul saved by faith.

And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters. (Revelation 14:6-7)

We must leave room for interpretation in doctrinal details of eschatology, unlike cults which major on it because it is substantially unclear.

[CynicalBear]

>> My other point in the previous post is we should base our conclusions on all things in Scripture on multiple evidence. The 2 Thessalonians 2:7 reference is ONE verse.<<

I will agree that just one verse would be somewhat weak and needs other scripture to validate. And there are others that indicate that the Holy Spirit is working during this “age of Grace” in ways that he did not during the Old Testament times or will during the last seven years of the 490 years given Israel in the prophecy by Daniel. Don’t however take from 2 Thes 2 that the Holy Spirit did nothing during the Old Testament or that He will do nothing during the tribulation. Being “taken out of the way” does not mean He will not still “be there” for those during the tribulation. He just won’t be working to the same extent He is now during the “age of grace”.

>>that believers in the tribulation are not preached and accept the same Gospel we do is a major stretch in my humble opinion.<<

I don’t think that is what I said and if it was what was taken from what I said I apologize. Of course the gospel will be “preached” during the tribulation. We have to take that as truth if we understand that there will be those who hold to the faith to the point of death during that time. One of the things we don’t know is if they are part of the “bride of Christ”. I personally don’t believe they are.

>> I will add he does not see a different Gospel or people being saved by Temple worship.<<

They are not saved by Temple worship. Most of them are not saved at all. There are only 144,000 of the Israelites that God set’s aside and protects through the tribulation. Even those are not “saved” as we are using the term until they finally accept Christ as their Messiah at His return to earth.

[daniel1212]

Ezekiel's Temple is a study, isn't it? Judaism admits it's very function is different from the functions and sacrifices of Temple Judaism, yet it represents a conundrum to Christendom, because it blatantly predicts sacrifices... blood sacrifices even, which seems to be just alright with the Prince, who inhabits the Temple and takes His breakfast in the East Gate thereof. That riddle, which neither the Jew nor the Christian can swallow, might be a pointer in and of itself...

i see is likely as a memorial, but not as if i have to be definite on its meaning,

[CynicalBear]

>>for it is not shown to be salvifically different that Peter's or Johns, etc.<<

I don’t think anyone said there was any “salvifically different” teaching other than the focus, emphasis and requirements during each dispensation. The dispensation changed at Pentecost. As smvoice showed in her post about 1 Cor. 3:10,11 there is the “according to the grace” and I pointed out that it was different than the “according to the law”.

[daniel1212]

What are they not accepting here? Are they rejecting temple worship to God or God's plan of salvation through faith in trust in the shed Blood of Christ.

They reject the former as part of the obedience of faith, like as some reject moral laws today, because they reject the latter. Like as,

But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us. (Luke 19:14)

Why else will the Lord need to rule the nations with a rod of iron?

And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain. And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the Lord will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. (Zechariah 14:17-18)

[daniel1212]

I think what we of this age need to remember is our charter. To watch and be ready and be found worthy when He comes for us. That is VERY clear in all the epistles and I might add was a MAJOR emphasis by Yeshua (Jesus).

Yes, it will get clearer, albeit with more competition to test us, as the day draweth nearer.

[Iscool]

They are not the same. No matter how much a person wants to believe that. They are different. Plainly so.

Yes...That's why there were disciples wandering around who had heard the gospel of the Kingdom but had no idea of the mystery revealed to Paul, the gospel of the grace of God, which is Christ in you, (Col.1:27)...

Act 19:1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,
Act 19:2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
Act 19:3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
Act 19:4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
Act 19:5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
Act 19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

The gospel of the physical Kingdom with a physical King is the gospel that John the Baptist taught and is the gospel that will be preached during the Tribulation...

These people will then be under the law and will have to endure to the end (Mat 24:13) and overcome with good works (Rev 2:26)...And those are certainly not Eph 2:8,9...

[smvoice]

Show me in bold where Peter said that Christ's death was FOR OUR SINS. He did NOT. THAT is the mystery, hid in God from the foundation of the world until given to Paul by the risen Christ. Peter was preaching no sort of grace message at Pentecost. They were looking for Christ to return to set up the Kingdom, where they would be seated on 12 thrones, judging THE TWELVE TRIBES OF ISRAEL, that is what Christ told them they would be doing during the Kingdom reign (Matt. 19:28). Where Israel would be a Nation of Priests to the Gentiles, as promised to Abraham. THAT is what they were doing on the day of Pentecost. Why do you think it was imperative to have a 12th Apostle on that day? So Peter could preach that "Christ died for our sins"? That wasn't even revealed until Paul was saved, when it was first revealed to HIM. That is Acts, Chapter 9.

Pentecost was no secret, but rather the DEFINITE fulfillment of PROPHECY. Acts 2:16 with Eph. 3:5; Acts 3:21 with Rom. 16:25; Acts 3:24 with Col. 1:26; Acts 3:25 with Rom. 5:11.

Pentecost was a Jewish Feast associated with ISRAEL'S REDEMPTION and KINGDOM calendar. Lev. 23:15-21; Deut.16:16.

At Pentecost, Israel was not yet set aside and was thus STILL God's channel of blessing to the nations. Acts 2:14,22,36. Acts 3:25,26. Acts 5:32. Gal. 3:28. Eph. 2:13-18.

Israel's PROMISED KINGDOM was being OFFERED during the Pentecostal era. Acts 2:36-40. Acts 3:18-26.

There was ALREADY A CHURCH IN EXISTENCE on the day of Pentecost- a PROPHESIED CHURCH. Acts 2:47(In order for something to be "added to" it HAD to have ALREADY EXISTED). Matt. 16:18,19. Heb. 2:12. Psalms 22:22.

Early Acts is a record of the "Pentecostal Era." Read Acts 2:1-11; 2:12-47; Acts 3:1-11; Acts 3:12-4:22; Acts 4:23-5:11; Acts 5:12-42; Acts 6"1-7 and Acts 6:8-8:1.

Which BTW, in the very next chapter, we have Paul being saved (Chapter 9). Coincidence?

[smvoice]

You are EXACTLY right, Iscool. Sometimes I think we need a starter course for the Book of Acts, showing exactly what people were doing from the beginning to the end of Acts. TO sort it out and untangle the mess that religion has gotten us into, trying to make one thing fit another when it isn’t SUPPOSED to fit, it’s DIFFERENT. FOR A REASON. God’s reason. It’s HIS timeline for man. Not ours.

[CynicalBear]

>> Although this seems to have a critical effect on your hyper dispensation soteriology, that the Holy Spirit was in holy men is what the KJV and every translation (15) i have says,<<

Not sure the disparaging comment was necessary but nonetheless I may not be clearly defining my meaning. The function of the Holy Spirit was clearly different during the Old Testament than it is during this “dispensation of Grace”. Yes indeed, the Holy Spirit did work through selected individuals for periods of time in the Old Testament. In the New Testament He indwells ALL believers permanently. Yes I realize that is not what my original words conveyed now that I look back at them and I apologize. The premise still holds. His work is different in individual believers during this age than it was then.