The Most Dangerous Teaching

[turbosixx]

Paul also took a vow in Acts 21 and performed purification rites under the law.

Acts 21:26 (AKJV/PCE)​

(21:26) Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them. ​

Yes, just like circumcision, it doesn't mean anything in Christ. Put Paul didn't preach circumcision nor vows but we do see him baptizing believers in the name of Jesus.

Lydia was already a worshiper of God who was praying on the sabbath day. Not a good example of a pagan gentile.

The Bible does not say one way or the other on the jailer, so we should not use that to speculate.

True it's speculation whether they were Gentiles but the fact remains he baptized believers just as Jesus instructed on how to make a Christian.

 

[Right Divider]

Yes, just like circumcision, it doesn't mean anything in Christ. Put Paul didn't preach circumcision nor vows but we do see him baptizing believers in the name of Jesus.

We see Paul doing many things. One thing that we do NOT see is Paul commanding anyone to get water baptized.

True it's speculation whether they were Gentiles but the fact remains he baptized believers just as Jesus instructed on how to make a Christian.

And later he stopped doing it.

Being baptized into His death happens without water.

 

[turbosixx]

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but the first believers called Christians were not even those in Jerusalem that followed the Lord for years. It was those in Antioch.?

Who converted those in Antioch? Barnabas saw the grace of God there before Saul had ever gone there, he was in Tarsus.
Acts 11:19 Now those who had been scattered by the persecution that broke out when Stephen was killed traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch, spreading the word only among Jews. 20 Some of them, however, men from Cyprus and Cyrene, went to Antioch and began to speak to Greeks also, telling them the good news about the Lord Jesus. 21 The Lord’s hand was with them, and a great number of people believed and turned to the Lord.

22 News of this reached the church in Jerusalem, and they sent Barnabas to Antioch. 23 When he arrived and saw what the grace of God had done, he was glad and encouraged them all to remain true to the Lord with all their hearts.

Barnabas then goes and get's Paul and they continue to work with the church that was there before Paul.
11:25 Then Barnabas went to Tarsus to look for Saul, 26 and when he found him, he brought him to Antioch. So for a whole year Barnabas and Saul met with the church and taught great numbers of people. The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch.

 

[turbosixx]

Why was Cornelius' family "out of order"? In early Acts it was water baptism FIRST and receiving the Holy Ghost after that. Something different was going on in Acts 10.

Yes, this was a special situation.

ONCE AGAIN.... why will you not show where Peter preached the cross as good news in Acts 1-8? One gospel, remember?

Then Paul didn't preach the cross in Acts 13 after he received the gospel.

 

[turbosixx]

And later he stopped doing it.

This is what that verse taken out of context really means.
17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—

We see Paul preaching the gospel to the Corinthians.
Acts 18:4 Every Sabbath he reasoned in the synagogue, trying to persuade Jews and Greeks.
5 When Silas and Timothy came from Macedonia, Paul devoted himself exclusively to preaching, testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Messiah.

Then when many believe, they were baptized.
18:8 Crispus, the synagogue leader, and his entire household believed in the Lord; and many of the Corinthians who heard Paul believed and were baptized.
If Jesus sent Paul to preach and him do the baptizing, then he should have been the one to baptize all those that believed, but we can see in 1 Cor. 1 that he baptized very few.
1 Cor. 1:14 I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. 16 (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.)

His point is he was commanded to preach but someone else can do the baptizing as we see in Corinth. We can see they were baptized by others such as Peter and Apollos.

 

[Right Divider]

Yes, this was a special situation.

So God can do different things at different times with different people? Indeed, that is exactly what the gospel of the grace of God is where there is neither Jew nor Greek....

Cornelius is NOT an example of a far away gentile. He was a man that feared God and blessed Israel.

Acts 10:2 (AKJV/PCE)​

(10:2) [A] devout [man], and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway.
​

Guess who "the people" are.

Then Paul didn't preach the cross in Acts 13 after he received the gospel.

That was a "special situation".

Check the CONTEXT.

Acts 13:14-16 (AKJV/PCE)​

(13:14) ¶ But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down. (13:15) And after the reading of the law and the prophets the rulers of the synagogue sent unto them, saying, [Ye] men [and] brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on. (13:16) Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with [his] hand said, Men of Israel, and ye that fear God, give audience. ​

In a SYNAGOGUE on the SABBATH with "Men of Israel and ye that fear God".

Once AGAIN, as I told you before, Paul preached the whole council of God. With those in the synagogue, Paul starts at the beginning and only later would get them to the NEW stuff.

 

[Right Divider]

This is what that verse taken out of context really means.
17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—

We see Paul preaching the gospel to the Corinthians.
Acts 18:4 Every Sabbath he reasoned in the synagogue, trying to persuade Jews and Greeks.
5 When Silas and Timothy came from Macedonia, Paul devoted himself exclusively to preaching, testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Messiah.

Then when many believe, they were baptized.
18:8 Crispus, the synagogue leader, and his entire household believed in the Lord; and many of the Corinthians who heard Paul believed and were baptized.
If Jesus sent Paul to preach and him do the baptizing, then he should have been the one to baptize all those that believed, but we can see in 1 Cor. 1 that he baptized very few.
1 Cor. 1:14 I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. 16 (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.)

His point is he was commanded to preach but someone else can do the baptizing as we see in Corinth. We can see they were baptized by others such as Peter and Apollos.

Gee golly, Peter was commanded by the LORD Jesus Christ to baptize with water, Paul was not.

And Apollos was that guy that needed to be have Aquila and Priscilla expound to him the way of God more perfectly.

 

[turbosixx]

In a SYNAGOGUE on the SABBATH with "Men of Israel and ye that fear God".

Once AGAIN, as I told you before, Paul preached the whole council of God. With those in the synagogue, Paul starts at the beginning and only later would get them to the NEW stuff.

So you're saying this isn't the gospel in Acts 13?

So what was he preaching in Acts 14?
14:1 At Iconium Paul and Barnabas went as usual into the Jewish synagogue. There they spoke so effectively that a great number of Jews and Greeks believed. 2 But the Jews who refused to believe stirred up the other Gentiles and poisoned their minds against the brothers. 3 So Paul and Barnabas spent considerable time there, speaking boldly for the Lord, who confirmed the message of his grace by enabling them to perform signs and wonders. 4 The people of the city were divided; some sided with the Jews, others with the apostles. 5 There was a plot afoot among both Gentiles and Jews, together with their leaders, to mistreat them and stone them. 6 But they found out about it and fled to the Lycaonian cities of Lystra and Derbe and to the surrounding country, 7 where they continued to preach the gospel.

 

[turbosixx]

And Apollos was that guy that needed to be have Aquila and Priscilla expound to him the way of God more perfectly.

What did they correct "more perfectly" in Apollos' teaching?

 

[Danoh]

Who converted those in Antioch? Barnabas saw the grace of God there before Saul had ever gone there, he was in Tarsus.
Acts 11:19 Now those who had been scattered by the persecution that broke out when Stephen was killed traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch, spreading the word only among Jews. 20 Some of them, however, men from Cyprus and Cyrene, went to Antioch and began to speak to Greeks also, telling them the good news about the Lord Jesus. 21 The Lord’s hand was with them, and a great number of people believed and turned to the Lord.

22 News of this reached the church in Jerusalem, and they sent Barnabas to Antioch. 23 When he arrived and saw what the grace of God had done, he was glad and encouraged them all to remain true to the Lord with all their hearts.

Barnabas then goes and get's Paul and they continue to work with the church that was there before Paul.
11:25 Then Barnabas went to Tarsus to look for Saul, 26 and when he found him, he brought him to Antioch. So for a whole year Barnabas and Saul met with the church and taught great numbers of people. The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch.

:rotfl:

You're really giving the Hyrbrids the what-for, turbo.

It does "appear" that that part of Acts 11 had basically been merely a repeat of what the Circumcision Apostles had been made aware of by Peter earlier in Acts 11, as to what had transpired among the Gentiles through Peter in Acts 10.

Lol - man o man is this hilarious; you've got the Hybrid's shorts in a real twist of a fit on this.

:chuckle:

At the same time, turbo, why call for Saul?

We don't see the Circumcision Apostles call for him in Acts 10.

Something different is going on.

I submit to you that it is because of what Paul had already been busy with in the regions of Tarsus, etc - evangelizing both Jews and Gentiles "as heathen" in "the gospel of the grace of God" committed unto him, Gal. 1:6, 16; Acts 20: 24.

And that is why the PUBLIC separation of Paul in Acts 13.

_______________

Note:

I cite Galatians 1 before Acts 20, because Paul's words there in Galatians 1 were written by him many years before he basically verbally repeated them in Acts 20.

In contrast, as with the Acts 28ers, the Acts 9 / Acts 28 Hybrids on here who assert they are MADs (more like "Two Senders" - as one ACTUAL Acts 9 Pastor humorously refers to their error) assert "that was two DIFFERENT sendings of Paul."

So thanks for intended the amusement, turbo.



Rom. 5: 6-8.

 

[Danoh]

Gee golly, Peter was commanded by the LORD Jesus Christ to baptize with water, Paul was not.

And Apollos was that guy that needed to be have Aquila and Priscilla expound to him the way of God more perfectly.

Would that you and your "two sendings" pals were an Apollos.

How is it those two had not been seen fit to do the same with the Romans (your pals assert the Romans only "had a faith - they were not in the Body").

And yet, those two are already back in Rome before Paul even writes Romans...

With their assembly...

Romans 16:3 Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus: 16:4 Who have for my life laid down their own necks: unto whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles. 16:5 Likewise greet the church that is in their house. Salute my well-beloved Epaenetus, who is the firstfruits of Achaia unto Christ.

One wonders if Paul in Romans 1 had meant that he had wanted to preach the gospel to them also...

Since, per your pals "the Romans were not in the Body..."

:doh:

Acts 17: 11, 12.

 

[turbosixx]

It does "appear" that that part of Acts 11 had basically been merely a repeat of what the Circumcision Apostles had been made aware of by Peter earlier in Acts 11, as to what had transpired among the Gentiles through Peter in Acts 10.

It "appears" that way because that's what it is. You have to "study" your why out of it being what it plainly says.

Is what Paul preached after this in Acts 13 the gospel he was given?

 

[Right Divider]

So you're saying this isn't the gospel in Acts 13?

So what was he preaching in Acts 14?
14:1 At Iconium Paul and Barnabas went as usual into the Jewish synagogue. There they spoke so effectively that a great number of Jews and Greeks believed. 2 But the Jews who refused to believe stirred up the other Gentiles and poisoned their minds against the brothers. 3 So Paul and Barnabas spent considerable time there, speaking boldly for the Lord, who confirmed the message of his grace by enabling them to perform signs and wonders. 4 The people of the city were divided; some sided with the Jews, others with the apostles. 5 There was a plot afoot among both Gentiles and Jews, together with their leaders, to mistreat them and stone them. 6 But they found out about it and fled to the Lycaonian cities of Lystra and Derbe and to the surrounding country, 7 where they continued to preach the gospel.

I'm saying that there are many gospels and Paul does not try to teach people the gospel of the grace of God if they don't believe that Jesus is the Christ. One step at a time.

 

[turbosixx]

I'm saying that there are many gospels and Paul does not try to teach people the gospel of the grace of God if they don't believe that Jesus is the Christ. One step at a time.

So what he preached in Acts 13 is what it takes to believe that Jesus is the Christ? Do you I understand you correctly on this?

 

[Danoh]

It "appears" that way because that's what it is. You have to "study" your why out of it being what it plainly says.

Is what Paul preached after this in Acts 13 the gospel he was given?

Right - just like how you clearly failed to study out Exodus 14 as to 1 Corinthians 10.

For that "into the sea" was not "into water."

I don't think you are up to no good.

Rather, as with the Hybrids also, your own approach is off in places.

Yours much more than theirs.

They at least have the most critical issue right.

This one here...

Rom. 5: 6-8.

In contrast, you do not.

 

[turbosixx]

In contrast, you do not.

If you knew what you were talking about I'd be concerned but you make Jesus a false prophet.

 

[Danoh]

It "appears" that way because that's what it is. You have to "study" your why out of it being what it plainly says.

Is what Paul preached after this in Acts 13 the gospel he was given?

Again, why the need to send for Paul?

For that matter, why was there a need for another Apostle at all?

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.

Acts 2:14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:

Revelation 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

I submit to you that you are in rebellion to Paul's distinct Apostleship; message; and ministry because your study approach is off, and as a result, has not allowed you to see the obvious.

One could say in your case that the path to ignorance on this issue is paved with good, but failed...intentions.

Again, I believe you mean well and are actually after the truth of a thing.

But your study approach is flawed in places.

Rom. 5: 6-8.

 

[turbosixx]

Right - just like how you clearly failed to study out Exodus 14 as to 1 Corinthians 10.

For that "into the sea" was not "into water."

You're so blinded you can't fathom that you might be wrong.

Why did Paul choose the dry land under the cloud and thru the sea for them to be baptized IN the cloud and IN the sea when there was plenty of dry land elsewhere? What about the dry land at Mt. Sinai when they received the law.

Were the Corinthians dry baptized??

 

[turbosixx]

I submit to you that you are in rebellion to Paul's distinct Apostleship; message; and ministry because your study approach is off, and as a result, has not allowed you to see the obvious.

I embrace Paul 100% and can easily see how it's in harmony with the 12.

 

[Danoh]

If you knew what you were talking about I'd be concerned but you make Jesus a false prophet.

Nope.

If there is one thing I am really good at, it is working backwards from another's assertions, to the approach their assertions originated from.

It is exactly how I study the assertions of the writers of Scripture.

The question "what governing principles in approach does this writer's assertions point back to as being where he is operating from?"

Been doing that kind of thing ever since I took apart or "opened" unto mine own understanding of its various parts, one of my mom's dinner table chairs, as a child: curious about what all held it all together.

Same principle in any form of study.

Luke 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Result of His having basically broken open or broken down all that as to its various components unto them?

Luke 24:31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight. 24:32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

Same thing in...

Acts 17: 11, 12.