For Sincere Inquisitors ONLY: MAD Explained

[Tico]

It was just that in the beginning. The Bible isn't a hunt and peck for reading, it is a study for life.

Peck?

 

[Pam Baldwin]

Hi Pam:

Ok, let me reword that.

Peter’s vision was a message to Peter from God that Gentiles no longer had to go through Israel for salvation (i.e. a proselyte)

IOW, salvation was equally available to Gentiles the same exact way it was available to Jews.

Agree?

If the vision was a message to Peter that the Gentiles no longer had to go through Israel for their blessings and instruction, then why do you think that God sent Peter to tell them anything? It seems to defeat the whole purpose IF the purpose was to tell Peter that Gentile nations did not have to go through Israel any longer....??

Shooting form the hip here, but I would say that Peter had to be told (reminded) by God that they were supposed to be that light unto all, the channel of blessings to the nations. The Jews had a superior attitude and refraind from contact with the dirty dog Gentiles.....nothing had changed, except Peter.

Now here is the tricky MAD part.

To the best of my MAD knowledge, MAD teaches that this vision to Peter was God continuing with plan A (New Covenant), and now salvation was given to the Gentiles the same way it was given to the Jews. Right after the vision Cornelius is saved.

Plan B (according to MAD), when Paul reveals the mystery doctrine to Jew and Gentile alike, is different. Plan A was for Kingdom believers, and plan B was for Body believers. To those MAD’s who believe Cornelius is part of plan B, it gets really confusing because the Body doctrine has not been revealed to Peter by Paul yet. (I think)

Most non-MAD’s see the vision of Peter as part of the transition from Jew to Gentile in the Body from Pentecost to the completed canon of scripture.

Well, if that's what MAD proponents say, I'm not totally MAD :dizzy:

What's with the "Plan A" and "Plan B"? ...and is there a contingent "Plan C"...."Plan D".....?? This sort of sounds non-Calvinistic. God always gets His Will done ....He is, afterall, GOD.

Am I missing something there......You say that Cornelius was saved right after the vision. Where's that? It seemed to me that he was already saved before the vision.

My memory fails me at times....but I do remember significance to the four corners.

Oh, and no, Cornelius was not body saint.

 

[Pam Baldwin]

Hi Tet, it was still through Israel (Corny blessed the seed of Abraham), only now it was made known that the Gentiles did not necessarily have to be circumcised. This opened the door for the salvation of certain types of Gentiles (as the ones Paul preached to during Acts), and Peter came to Paul's defense in Acts 15 over this circumcision issue.

Gentiles never "needed" to be circumcised. If they were , they would be proselytes of the gate. ( became Jews). So some were, some weren't.

 

[Pam Baldwin]

I have brought this up before, and will ask again.

If as you say the “weak” are Kingdom believers, then why wouldn’t a Kingdom believer who had knowledge of Body doctrine just convert to a Body believer, if Kingdom faith was “weaker” than Body faith?

It’s really hard for us non-MAD’s to grasp the supposed two kinds of believers sitting side by side in a church with their two different gospels. Especially if one is said to be “weaker” than the other.

Anyway, there are many believers today who observe the Sabbath, who don’t eat pork or shellfish, etc. Couldn’t these Body believers of today be considered “weak” in their faith for failing to rightly divide?

On one hand you have the Amish, then on the other hand you have gay bishops, same sex marriages being performed by pastors, women pastors, etc. Couldn’t these extremes to the left, and right be considered “weak” faith?

No. You assume that all these are believers....but belief in what? True, all saints are not on track, but they will progress to become mature.

One can't "switch" faiths. So, no, there are no other believers now except Body saints.

Why is that so hard to grasp, two different believers sitting next to one another? (not now, back in Paul's day) In the OT, you had Gentile believers and Jewish believers working out their salvation by following different laws. Paul told the Body saints to be patient and loving to others.

 

[Pam Baldwin]

_
"..except Jesus was crucified on a pole....arms straight above nailed to the straight pole."-Pam

Scripture, or history books, what people say?

The Exodus passage, and others, these "nuggets", answer the question. Look at Numbers, and how the tribes were arranged about the Tabernacle in the wilderness-from overhead, in the pattern of a cross. Dig into the book.


"It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2

Well, Scripture only says "cross", so it's hard to tell from that alone.

I will admit that I've heard it taught that the cross was a pole, a stake (and I'm not JW, nor heard it from the JWs). But you could be right....:jawdrop:. Either way, it was excruciating torturous pain that Jesus Christ endured for us.

Pam

 

[tetelestai]

Thought I'd throw this out there again. It's a REALLY important question, and TOTALLY pertinent to the topic at hand. And the answer to it exposes the the ignorance (which is sometimes honest, often not though) behind many of the straw man arguments that are propped up in attempts to make the MidActs position look foolish.

Hi cm:

As a dispensationalist, I am taught that whatever is written in the Bible was/is specific to certain people at a certain time. Sounds simple, but there are also things written that are transdispensational (i.e. murder)

The next really hard part is Jesus. Jesus said many things in the Bible, told many parables, etc. Since He is our Savior, it would appear natural to accept what he said or taught as being for us.

However, even the softest dispensationalist understands that Jesus first upheld the law, and taught the law, which does not apply to us. Unfortunately there are believers who don’t even understand this, and take everything Jesus said as being for us, and they get real emotional around it.

Traditional A2D’s have a hard time with early Acts, and Hebrews – Revelation. Because of all the apparent contradictions, they are forced to use the word “transition” to explain all the contradictions.

MAD attempts to explain all the contradictions by slicing the Bible up into, well, more dispensations. Also, MAD preaches two gospels, two mysteries, two programs, two kinds of believers, etc, which doesn’t go over too good with traditional Orthodox Christianity.

I acknowledge that there were two mysteries, one hidden in scripture and one hidden not in scripture, but hidden since the foundation of the world.

Peter preached the mystery hidden in scripture, and Jesus first revealed the mystery hidden in scripture in the upper room.

Paul revealed the other mystery hidden since the foundation of the world, not hidden in scripture.

So, are both of these mysteries doctrine for us?

In Rom 16:25 Paul says “my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ.

(Rom 16:25) 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 kept secret since the world began

What does Paul mean here? Does Paul mean the mystery hidden since the foundation of the world, and the preaching that Jesus Christ did when He was alive?

In Acts 20:35 Paul quotes Jesus. However the quote Paul uses is nowhere else in the Bible.

(Acts 20:35) "I have shown you in every way, by laboring like this, that you must support the weak. And remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’"

Notice Paul says “remember” the words of the Lord Jesus. This tells us that it was something Jesus said during the incarnation (my opinion).

So if Paul is referencing the words of Jesus when Jesus preached, then does that mean that the words of Jesus are for us too? Was Jesus preaching Kingdom doctrine? Was Jesus preaching Body doctrine?

To make a long story short cm, I don’t think the answer of Romans – Philimon is the answer. I think the answer is too complex to give in even 10 pages let alone a single post.

However, there is definitely stuff for us, stuff not for us, and stuff for everyone.

The Lords Prayer is a good example. For us? Not for us? For everyone?

 

[chickenman]

Hopefully we can progress through Acts soon. Acts 15 is next and is a really important chapter. We'll get there later. For now...

I'd like to address some strawman arguments that are commonly used against the MidActs position. And strawmen they are, as they are always used as an easy way to dismiss the position. When someone is determined to disagree, then the easiest way to do that is to throw out an argument that is EITHER inaccurate and easy to knock down, OR it can be accurate but so contrary-sounding (to one's held position) that it is treated the same way (knocked down and dismissed without honest evaluation).

I'm not picking on tetelestai, but he brought up some that are common. So I'll use some of his words and start there, leading to others as well.

Strawman #1:

Jesus said many things in the Bible, told many parables, etc. Since He is our Savior, it would appear natural to accept what he said or taught as being for us.

MidActs'ers are treated as if we dismiss Christ's words, as if the words in red are MORE important than the words of God throughout the ENTIRE Bible. This is a silly notion. Strawman #1 holds no water at all. The covenantalist could say the same thing to the classical dispensationalist, by saying:

"God said many things in the Bible, revealed many stories, etc. Since He provided the way for our salvation, sending the One to die for our sins, it would appear natural to accept what He said or taught as being for us."
​

The point being, Classical Dispensationalists do not follow the Levitical laws. But God gave those. And God is the one who provided our way to be saved. So should we not, therefore, be heeding His words in Leviticus? Or Malachi?

That is a thoughtless argument used to poke a hole in the MidActs position.

Strawman #2:

MAD attempts to explain all the contradictions by slicing the Bible up into, well, more dispensations.

Classical Dispensationalists believe it is perfectly acceptable to "slice" between Malachi and Matthew in order to begin applying Jesus' words as doctrine for the Body of Christ. And they are perfectly happy to "slice" somewhere between Jesus' triumphal entry and Pentecost (many variations here in the Acts 2 camp...which raises another strawman that I'll point out in a few) as a dividing line for the beginning of "the church which is His Body". But when a MidActs'er explains how he recognizes different divisions, he is accused of "slicing" up God's Word.

It's total hypocrisy.

MidActs'ers want to recognize the God-given distinctions between Israel and the Body and where how those divisions play out in the writings of the Bible. Yet we are mocked by those who divide according to tradition.

Strawman #3:

MidActs'er cannot even agree on doctrine within their own camp.

We generally agree on doctrine. But there are many details that we can differ on, for sure. But in the classical dispensationalist camp, some believe that Israel was cut off at Jesus triumphal entry, some believe it was when he cursed and withered the fig tree, some believe it was at the crucifixion, some believe it was at Pentecost. In any group, there will be disagreement on details. It's hypocritical to add this argument to the many that people use to dispute the MidActs position.

If this were a legitimate argument, then the dissenters should become Catholics. Because as the Catholics on this forum have righly noted, there is very little doctrinal division among Catholics. So dissenters of the classical dispensationalist crowd...off you go to confession and mass.

Strawman #4:

MAD teaches that there are two ways to be saved.

So many don't care to honestly try to understand what we say, so when they hear that we believe there were kingdom believers awaiting their salvation in the end, and who operate under a different set of rules than the Body believers at the time, then the wall comes up and we're accused of teaching that Jews have to keep the law today while Gentiles are saved by grace.

For the one milliontieth and thirty-first time, ALL today are saved the same way.

Strawman #5

MAD people follow Paul and not Jesus

I could say that someone who follows Peter's instructions follows Peter. This is a silly argument. Israel in the wilderness followed Moses, because God gave TO MOSES the instructions by which Israel was to live. MidActs'ers believe that Jesus revealed to Paul the instructions by which the Body of Christ is to live. So we follow Paul's instructions to the grace believer. And in so doing, we are following the instructions given by our risen Savior, Jesus Christ.

I could apply the same reason that I mentioned earlier in this post, and prop up a strawman argument of my own by saying: "The Acts 2 Dispensationalist follows the Twelve but refuses to follow God" since, again, that person doesn't follow the instructions given by God the Father in Deuteronomy.

The fact is: we ALL follow (or at least say we follow) the writings that we believe are intended to be doctrine by which we are to live. And we ALL recognize that there are some writings that are not intended to be doctrine by which we in the Body are to live our lives.

The hypocrisy gets so old.

There are so many. And it gets so tiresome repeating ourselves over and over again.


Others...feel free to throw out some other strawmen you've heard.


My 2 cents...
Randy

 

[john w]

"But when a MidActs'er explains how he recognizes different divisions, he is accused of "slicing" up God's Word. "-man of Tyson

"Exactamundo."

1.We do not do create divisions, the LORD God does. We simply recognize them, as commanded by the same LORD God who gave these divisions.

2. Contrary to what most Christians have been taught, typically by their church SOF, instead of surveying the Holy Bible, we worship, serve, and believe a LORD God of division/separation. Truth, by its very nature, divides, separates, splits....In Genesis, the "seed plot" of the Holy Bible, we read:

"And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. " Gen. 1:3-7

"As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them." Acts 13:2

 

[bybee]

A thought

A thought

"But when a MidActs'er explains how he recognizes different divisions, he is accused of "slicing" up God's Word. "-man of Tyson

"Exactamundo."

1.We do not do create divisions, the LORD God does. We simply recognize them, as commanded by the same LORD God who gave these divisions.

2. Contrary to what most Christians have been taught, typically by their church SOF, instead of surveying the Holy Bible, we worship, serve, and believe a LORD God of division/separation. Truth, by its very nature, divides, separates, splits....In Genesis, the "seed plot" of the Holy Bible, we read:

"And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. " Gen. 1:3-7

"As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them." Acts 13:2

God's work with His creation/creatures is ongoing through history. So Paul may also be seen as a continuation of the work which God had planned? As you know, I hate schism, separation and division. So, of course I search for unity and common purpose in the Word of God. And guess what? I find it! peace to you my friend in Jesus the Christ, bybee

 

[chickenman]

God's work with His creation/creatures is ongoing through history. So Paul may also be seen as a continuation of the work which God had planned? As you know, I hate schism, separation and division. So, of course I search for unity and common purpose in the Word of God. And guess what? I find it! peace to you my friend in Jesus the Christ, bybee

Hi, bybee.

There is indeed unity throughout the Bible. For instance, the idea of the resurrection is woven throughout the entire Bible. So when we talk about dividing or distinguishing between different groups/rules/etc., it has nothing to do with de-unifying the scriptures and pitting scripture against scripture, another strawman that is commonly taped to the outside of the defender's brick wall.

Everyone divides. Everyone recognizes that Adam and Eve could eat of the Tree of Life, but then a page later...they couldn't. "Do" and "Don't" don't mean the same thing. Everyone recognizes that Israel was under the law, but Noah wasn't required to kill a man who picked up sticks on the Sabbath.

Everyone divides in that sense. Everyone recognizes distinctions between people/groups/etc.

But again..."Do" and "Don't" don't mean the same thing.

 

[john w]

God's work with His creation/creatures is ongoing through history. So Paul may also be seen as a continuation of the work which God had planned? As you know, I hate schism, separation and division. So, of course I search for unity and common purpose in the Word of God. And guess what? I find it! peace to you my friend in Jesus the Christ, bybee

_
Time for some more of that "moody gypsy", "Ernest T. Bass nut"("The Andy Griffith Show"), mean spirited, wacko, bible believing, intolerant, "un-Christian", fanatical, "member of a cult/sect", who needs to be drugged up, and isolated from the more "spiritual" members of the body of Christ.....and all that jazz, the undersigned, to get on his soapbox, pound the podium, and be a wolf in sheep's clothing-to wit:

The Holy Bible refers to "the church of the living God" as "the pillar and ground of the truth"(1 Timothy 3:15). "...thy word is truth."(John 17:17)

So, if anyone where to split, divide, a "church", just what would be the basis/justification of the split? One half(or whatever) sides with the truth, rightly divided(2 Timothy 2:15), the other half sides with error, not "sound doctrine", as preached by our apostle Paul(not Peter, not "the 12"), in this "dispensation of the grace of God"(yes, "dispensation" is a scriptural, biblical word, and a good one, at that(1 Cor. 9:17; Eph. 1:10, 3:2; Col. 1:25). This, like arguing, is to be embraced-it is a good thing. This is one of the harshest "truths", realities, to accept for babes in Christ(1 Cor. 3): the secrecy of so many Christians, when it comes to "who are you following?"

I say, shine some light in the dark "churches." Expose everybody to the light: Psalms 119:105(trans-dispensational biblical doctrine). Cockroaches scurry when the light is shone on them.

Split, split, split them up, I say. Split, split, and keep splitting. The Lord Jesus Christ came to split. He was, and is, the great divider: Genesis 1:4; Matthew 10:34, 25:32; Luke 12:51; John 7:43, 9:16, 10:19; Acts 13:2; Romans 1:1; 2 Timothy 2:15. A sword divides/separates. The cross divides and separates men and women-it does not unify. Dump the refuse, the garbage in the dumpster. Release the secret agent "all of the Holy Bible is written for my obedience" back into the ecumenical movement, where they belong. Then, and only then, can we truly be said to be in "the body, the church"(Col. 1:18,24 ; Eph. 5:23), worshiping the LORD God of truth(John 4:24), and separating the wheat from the chaff(Mt. 3:12, Luke 3:17), from within the true church, in this dispensation, and ending "divisions"( Romans 16:17; 1 Cor. 1:10, 3:3, 11:18). Let every "church" you join toss you out for being a "divisive, mean spirited, 'un-Christian', intolerant....." "MAD wacko", who needs to be drugged up, and properly schooled, albeit in a "sweet Christian manner", into obedience of the "church statement of faith." You wouldn't be splitting any churches, because they are not churches. They are "Rodney Kings", "Oprah Winfrey's"-"Can't we all get along, and nod our heads in agreement, as passive drones, who will be spoon fed by our 'church' leaders?", mutual admiration clubs, religious drain clogs/toilets, flushing Christians' knowledge, and thus acceptance, of the "dispensation of the gospel", "the dispensation of the grace of God", "the dispensation of God", committed to the apostle Paul(1 Cor. 9:17. Eph. 3:2, Col. 1:25),"the apostle of the Gentiles"(Romans 11:13), and thus, their apostle, down the proverbial toilet.

When we have spoken up on these boards, re. the absolute necessity of rightly dividing this word of truth, "Christians" get angry at us. They, obviously being more "spiritual" than us, don't like us. I say, please like us(sarcasm is a biblical principle). I want people to like us(vs. Proverbs 29:25; Mt. 6:2,5; John 5:44, 12:43 ; Acts 5:29; Galatians 1:10; Eph. 6:6; Colossians 3:22; 1 Thel. 2:4). We will be a good boys and girls, this time, and not be "divisive." If "sound doctrine"(1 Timothy 1:10; 2 Timothy 4:2,3; Titus 1:9, 2:10), is not important, we plead "guilty as charged."

"But thou hast fully known my doctrine(my note-Paul's doctrine for the body of Christ-Romans-Philemon), manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience..." 2 Tim. 3:10


Truth, by its nature, is divisive, and the word of truth, rightly divided, more so. Division is what the Lord Jesus Christ brought to the “ecumenical tupper ware party.” And that is what we should bring. And that is what I bring. I love Christians, and that is why I give them the truth, and the word of truth, rightly divided, and then encourage them to survey the Holy Bible, and figure it out for themselves-Acts 17:2, 11; 2 Timothy 2:15. However, if you love someone, you tell them the truth, sound doctrine, as scripture reveals it, rightly divided, whether they want to hear it or not. Truth must not be sacrificed(compromised) at the altar of today's so-called enlightened, non-judgmental, "ecumenical love boat" of a "tolerant" culture. The apostle Paul perhaps best summed it up when he asked the poignant question:

"Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" Galatians 4:16

The LORD God never sacrifices truth for peace, sound doctrine for compromise.

Split, split, split………..


"And to make ALL MEN SEE(emphasis mine) what is the fellowship of the mystery…" Eph. 3:9


John W, and the "W" stands for wolf.

 

[bybee]

Thankyou!

Thankyou!

Hi, bybee.

There is indeed unity throughout the Bible. For instance, the idea of the resurrection is woven throughout the entire Bible. So when we talk about dividing or distinguishing between different groups/rules/etc., it has nothing to do with de-unifying the scriptures and pitting scripture against scripture, another strawman that is commonly taped to the outside of the defender's brick wall.

Everyone divides. Everyone recognizes that Adam and Eve could eat of the Tree of Life, but then a page later...they couldn't. "Do" and "Don't" don't mean the same thing. Everyone recognizes that Israel was under the law, but Noah wasn't required to kill a man who picked up sticks on the Sabbath.

Everyone divides in that sense. Everyone recognizes distinctions between people/groups/etc.

But again..."Do" and "Don't" don't mean the same thing.

Well put! Now don't get me wrong, I'm not posting 95 theses! At least, not yet! While not denying the truth of what you have stated, I am choosing to focus on Love and unity.:think: You always give me food for thought. Thanks. peace, bybee

 

[penofareadywriter]

Dear Randy, Thanks to StoP, yourself and even my friend John W. I have come to see the truth of your exegesis of "Mid-acts ( in context). I'm amazed that I missed it in all of my years of study. And as you all have seen I pretty stubbornly fought against it! Upon reading and rereading Pauls's epistles and of course The Acts of the Apostles, I have come to a new, logical and sensible appreciation of Paul's special "Dispensation" to the Gentiles and that Heavenly mystery which God had prepared for us. I feel that my understanding is much more complete now. I have begun to feel the heart of Paul. I saw him as harshly didactic and difficult to follow. Thanks be to God I view him now with clear eyes as a man truly called and dedicated to serving God. As an Open-Theist" myself, I see Paul as having a very personal relationship with God through his love of Jesus our Savior. I have kept an open heart to consider what others have to share. From the bottom of my heart, I thank you for giving me an exponential learning experience. I am, quite literally, reading the Word through better lenses! Thanks and blessings, bybee:cheers:

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.......

 

[bybee]

I'm so glad you're back!!!

I'm so glad you're back!!!

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.......

Do not despair! I'm still an Open-Theist. I am unequivacable not Calvinist or Darbyish! And by the way, I have missed you! You see what happens when you stay away? Welcome back my friend. peace, bybee:wave:

 

[john w]

Well put! Now don't get me wrong, I'm not posting 95 theses! At least, not yet! While not denying the truth of what you have stated, I am choosing to focus on Love and unity.:think: You always give me food for thought. Thanks. peace, bybee

_
Ms bee of bye,

Unity, peace.... are always preceded by judgment. The biblical order is judgment first, and then peace, unity.

Your mission, bee of bye, should you decide to accept it, is to "check it out", per Acts 17:2,11....., to see if these things "were so." If any of your PI(Possible Mission) brain forces are caught or killed(Eccl. 12:12), the wolf will disavow any of your efforts. "Good luck", bee. This post will be ignored by most in 10 seconds....

 

[penofareadywriter]

Do not despair! I'm still an Open-Theist. I am unequivacable not Calvinist or Darbyish! And by the way, I have missed you! You see what happens when you stay away? Welcome back my friend. peace, bybee:wave:

I know....I leave for a few months a look what happens!:chuckle:

 

[penofareadywriter]

Acts20:21
testifying to Jews, and also to Greeks, repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.Acts 20:20-22 (in Context) Acts 20
Acts 26:20
but declared first to those in Damascus and in Jerusalem, and throughout all the region of Judea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent, turn to God, and do works befitting repentance.
Corinthians 7:10
For godly sorrow produces repentance leading to salvation,

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Acts20:21
testifying to Jews, and also to Greeks, repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.Acts 20:20-22 (in Context) Acts 20
Acts 26:20
but declared first to those in Damascus and in Jerusalem, and throughout all the region of Judea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent, turn to God, and do works befitting repentance.
Corinthians 7:10
For godly sorrow produces repentance leading to salvation,

Read the first paragraph of the original post.

 

[Pam Baldwin]

"But when a MidActs'er explains how he recognizes different divisions, he is accused of "slicing" up God's Word. "-man of Tyson

"Exactamundo."

1.We do not do create divisions, the LORD God does. We simply recognize them, as commanded by the same LORD God who gave these divisions.

2. Contrary to what most Christians have been taught, typically by their church SOF, instead of surveying the Holy Bible, we worship, serve, and believe a LORD God of division/separation. Truth, by its very nature, divides, separates, splits....In Genesis, the "seed plot" of the Holy Bible, we read:

"And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. " Gen. 1:3-7

"As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them." Acts 13:2

Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

 

[Pam Baldwin]

Well put! Now don't get me wrong, I'm not posting 95 theses! At least, not yet! While not denying the truth of what you have stated, I am choosing to focus on Love and unity.:think: You always give me food for thought. Thanks. peace, bybee

Bybee....love and unity can only be achieved by truth and perserverance....and that takes some hard work.