Paul's gospel was a mystery!

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Faith without works being a dead faith is simply another way of acknowledging that a person without works has no faith at all- as with anything else one believes, one's actions will reflect it.

But people will cherry pick the verse to imply an idea that good works are a saving mechanism when it's really just smoke from the flame. Vice versa, people will cherry pick Paul to imply an idea that a person without works is saved.

You say 'grace without works' as if it's supposed to mean something- grace without works is a grace which doesn't exist. Sorry to burst the bubble on people's vast misrepresentation of Faith Alone. 'Easy believism' is a dead Christianity.

MADism cuts out everything not of Paul, uses the one Bible version they feel doesn't contradict them, and manage to misrepresent Paul- and then above all their sins they will be assumed before disaster..

Can anyone say "Um, Hell no" :AMR:

:chuckle:
 

heir

TOL Subscriber
There is only one New Covenant.

You claim Paul has a different new covenant from that of Jesus, so then where is the blood of Paul's covenant? Jesus shed his blood for his new covenant.

Romans 11:27
Paul was an able minister of the NT, not of the letter, but of the spirit...(2 Corinthians 3:6 KJV). Paul confirms who the NC is about (Israel) and when Israel's sins will be taken away in one accord with what Peter preached in Acts 3:19-21 KJV, what was preached in 1 John 1:9 KJV and Hebrews (Hebrews 8:12 KJV). That is in contrast to we, the saved today/members of the Body of Christ. Our sins are gone! We have been forgiven all trespasses (Colossians 2:11-13 KJV)! We have now received the atonement (Romans 5:11 KJV)! Things that are different are not the same! The sooner you recognize that there were two bodies of believers (not bodies of Christ) in the "NT", the less confused you will be.
 

heir

TOL Subscriber
I was not speaking on that subject at all, I used it in an example of cherry picking. Don't try to find some outlet to preach something as if another person doesn't know :rolleyes:



:doh:

Cherry picking is a LOGICAL FALLACY. If it's overused, it's because you all CHERRY PICK too much.
You are the cherry picker and I'll demonstrate how. Which one of these shows how we are accepted with Him today?

Acts 10:35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

or

Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
 

jamie

New member
LIFETIME MEMBER
The sooner you recognize that there were two bodies of believers (not bodies of Christ) in the "NT", the less confused you will be.

Who is the head of Israel?

Who is the head of the church, his body?

Things that are the same are not different.
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
The letter of the new testament: God writes his laws on THEIR hearts and CAUSES THEM to keep his statutes

The spirit of the new testament: This is the righteousness of God IMPUTED to us, credited to us, based on HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS.


There is a difference.
 

heir

TOL Subscriber
Faith without works being a dead faith is simply another way of acknowledging that a person without works has no faith at all- as with anything else one believes, one's actions will reflect it.
No, it means what it says, as it says it and to whom (James 1:1 KJV). It is in contrast to what Paul preached TO the Body of Christ (Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV). You must 2 Timothy 2:15 KJV!

You say 'grace without works' as if it's supposed to mean something- grace without works is a grace which doesn't exist.
Romans 11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

MADism cuts out everything not of Paul, uses the one Bible version they feel doesn't contradict them, and manage to misrepresent Paul- and then above all their sins they will be assumed before disaster..
We 2 Timothy 2:15 KJV. And what is your problem with anyone believing the pure words of the Lord over your denominational, stinking thinking?

Can anyone say "Um, Hell no" :AMR:
Not here, mouth.
 

heir

TOL Subscriber
Who is the High Priest?
The Son of man

Matthew 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
 

Crucible

BANNED
Banned
It is sad that you limit yourself to only "use" scripture. Don't you believe all scripture is given by inspiration of God?

But more so to Paul, huh :AMR:

Peter was the first patriarch of Rome, the pontiff of the gentiles. But let me guess, you all probably deny that too :rolleyes:
 
Top