ECT WHY DID PAUL HAVE AND UNTIMELY BIRTH , 1 COR 15:8 ?
- Thread starter DAN P
- Start date
Derf
Well-known member
It might explain your point quite well, but it is not attempting to explain the passage. Or, if it is attempting to do so, it is introducing concepts the passage doesn't deal with.
God's Truth
New member
Hebrews 7:25 Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.
You never seem to quote from Paul. I wonder why that is. . . . . . . . .
God's Truth
New member
Paul is not the only one who spoke about God.
Here is a scripture that says the same thing as the author of Hebrews:
Romans 8:34
Who is there to condemn us? For Christ Jesus, who died, and more than that was raised to life, is at the right hand of God--and He is interceding for us.
glorydaz
Well-known member
She's stuck on the wrong side of the cross. :chew:
Right Divider
Body part
Not true, what you said.
Right Divider
Body part
She's a Hebrew, apparently.
God's Truth
New member
Are you a Hebrew, or a Roman? Oh look, same message.
Romans 8:34
Who is there to condemn us? For Christ Jesus, who died, and more than that was raised to life, is at the right hand of God--and He is interceding for us.
Hebrews 7:25 Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.
Derf
Well-known member
Care to explain?
Right Divider
Body part
Paul's untimely birth is with reference to his kinsmen. This also applies to why Peter speaks of a future salvation, whereas Paul speaks about a present salvation.
1Pet 1:5 (AKJV/PCE)
(1:5) Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.
You never see Paul write anything like that to anyone.
Derf
Well-known member
Never?
[Tit 2:13 KJV] Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
As opposed to Peter, saying we already have that hope and an inheritance:
[1Pe 1:3 KJV] Blessed [be] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
[1Pe 1:4 KJV] To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,
Paul speaks of the future:
[Rom 5:9 KJV] Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
[Rom 5:10 KJV] For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.
Peter speaks of the present:
[1Pe 2:10 KJV] Which in time past [were] not a people, but [are] now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.
Paul, future:
[Rom 13:11 KJV] And that, knowing the time, that now [it is] high time to awake out of sleep: for now [is] our salvation nearer than when we believed.
Peter, present:
[1Pe 3:21 KJV] The like figure whereunto [even] baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
Obviously, if we don't cherry-pick, we can find that both Paul and Peter speak of both a present and a future salvation. And we recognize this ourselves, because we know that we have eternal life in Jesus Christ. But we also know that most or all of us, like most of those for the past 2000 years, will experience death. How can we both have eternal life and yet still have death in our future? We ARE saved, and yet we WILL BE saved. We have a promise of salvation from death that is as good as if it has already happened. Because the Promiser is faithful to His word.
Right Divider
Body part
There are different types of salvation and the one that Peter refers to in 1 Peter 1:5 is the same one here:
Luk 1:67-79 KJV And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying, (68) Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, (69) And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; (70) As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: (71) That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us; (72) To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant; (73) The oath which he sware to our father Abraham, (74) That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear, (75) In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life. (76) And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways; (77) To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins, (78) Through the tender mercy of our God; whereby the dayspring from on high hath visited us, (79) To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace.
Until you learn to allow ALL of scripture to be true, you will continue to try to mix things that should not be mixed. That leads to all kinds of confusion, though I'm fairy certain that you do not think that you are confused.
God has not reneged on His promises to His people Israel (Romans 11). [Please don't even try to give me the "all believers are 'spiritual' Israel nonsense].
Derf
Well-known member
I'm not trying to steal any of Israel's promises. Neither do I want to take away from the church what God has given to her. You can say that Peter was only speaking to Israel, but if he was saying the same kind of things to Israel that Paul said to the church, it seems like the distinction is arbitrary. Especially since both Paul and Peter considered themselves part of that church, as well as part of Israel.
If the church provokes Israel to jealousy, what is Israel jealous about? Isn't it about the relationship with Christ we have that they don't have? And if we have what they are supposed to have, then the salvation seems to be of a different sort than just in a position of worldly power. Again, this not to say there isn't a kingdom that Christ will reign over that is Israel, but it makes the distinction you've tried to highlight less evident in Peter's letters.
Peter is dealing with a group that had already received something of the salvation, like in these verses:
[1Pe 2:3 KJV] If so be ye have tasted that the Lord [is] gracious.
[1Pe 2:5 KJV] Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.
[1Pe 2:10 KJV] Which in time past [were] not a people, but [are] now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.
[1Pe 2:16 KJV] As free, and not using [your] liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.
And especially:
[1Pe 1:8 KJV] Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see [him] not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory:
[1Pe 1:9 KJV] Receiving the end of your faith, [even] the salvation of [your] souls.
So what kind of salvation was Peter talking about? It appears to be something they have already received--"the salvation of your souls". That's not a national kind of salvation, is it?
Right Divider
Body part
You seem to be like so many folks that can only see similarities (and claim that they are identical) and cannot see differences.
Paul was BOTH an Israelite and a Roman. Peter was not. Peter clearly wrote his first epistle to his fellow tribesmen that were scattered in Acts 8.
1Pe 1:1 KJV Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
Just like another Hebrew author named James:
Jas 1:1 KJV James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
Peter continues to make it clear who his audience is here:
1Pe 2:9-12 KJV But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: (10) Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy. (11) Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul; (12) Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation.
1 Peter 2:9 is a reference to Exodus 19:6
Also note that he is admonishing THEM to have THEIR conversion honest AMONG the gentiles (i.e., THEIR being the twelve tribes scattered abroad).
The body of Christ has NO priesthood nor priests. That is strictly something related to Israel. The words "priest" and "priesthood" are completely absent from ALL of Paul's epistles.
Peter is talking about the salvation that THEY receive in THEIR kingdom.
1Pe 2:25 KJV For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.
1Pe 5:4 KJV And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.
Paul NEVER calls the Lord Jesus Christ a shepherd. That is another word that is completely absent from ALL of Paul's epistles.
Don't just look for similarities and claim that they are the same. Also compare the MANY differences in the ministries of the twelve and the one.
Last edited:
Derf
Well-known member
Yes, and every bit of that passage is talking about something that is currently happening, not something that is going to happen in the future. If (and I admit of the possibility) Peter is only addressing flesh and blood Israelites, then he is talking to them of something that was already the case. So there's no need to separate Jews from Gentiles, as Paul was fond of saying.
[1Co 12:2 KJV] Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.
But still, let's continue along the vein of thought that Peter was not addressing Gentiles, even when he said "...hath called you out of darkness.... Which in time past were NOT a people, but are NOW the people of God..." This must then be talking about a new thing among the Jewish people, where they must have STOPPED being the people of God, and then they started once again being the people of God. When did this happen? when did they stop being the people of God, and when did they become once again the people of God?
But Paul gives some answer here:
[2Co 6:16 KJV] And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in [them]; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
A people that were not God's, and now are? Why can Peter and Paul not be talking about the same people?
"Their" also having newly become the people of God.
Paul also talked about the church as being separate from the gentiles:
[1Co 10:32 KJV] Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:
Except here, where Paul said he was acting as a priest TO the gentiles:
[Rom 15:16 NASB] to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles, ministering as a priest the gospel of God, so that [my] offering of the Gentiles may become acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.
Maybe this helps to tie Paul's and Peter's words together: If Peter is telling the Jews (and just the Jews, if you are correct) that they are priests, and Paul considered himself a priest to the gentiles, perhaps Peter's target audience were to be priests to the gentiles as well. This certainly seems to be in keeping with what Jesus wanted, and why He was sent to the people of Israel--so that they could proclaim the truth of the gospel to the nations. And they can both be the same "people", even if one is more in the roll of priest, while the other is more in the role of laity.
Peter talked about what they were to be doing NOW, and what reward awaited them LATER. That sounds like a kingdom that is currently active, where the king has given tasks for his officers to do--like shepherding--and He will reward them when He returns.
Paul, too, should be counted as part of that same kingdom, shouldn't he? Even if he was the apostle to the gentiles, that doesn't mean he was less of a part of the kingdom than Peter or the others. And he expected rewards from the king when He returned:
[2Ti 4:8 KJV] Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.
But who else gets that crown? Not Paul only, but ALL that love His appearing.
Paul was a city boy, talking mostly to city folks. Why would he want to use a shepherd illustration? If you are so eager to find differences, why aren't you using those differences to help you to understand why they wrote that way?
The twelve took a little longer, but they, too, went out to be priests, as it were, to the gentiles.
What is a priest, anyway? Isn't it the one that brings the message of God to the people that need to receive it? Isn't that what Jesus wanted from the Israelites, for them to take the gospel to the rest of the world? Matthew 5:14 "You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden."
I think Christ wants and always wanted His people, the Jews/Israelites, to be a light to the gentiles. And if they don't do it, He is willing to work with the gentiles to be a light to the other gentiles. But perhaps the Jews might be driven by jealousy back the special role He has always had for them.
Right Divider
Body part
Who said otherwise?
Our course Peter is writing to the remnant of Israel. Do you think that Peter was writing to a different group of people scattered abroad than James was?
Paul is NOT talking about some transition from being a gentile to something else.He is simply talking about their previous state of being idol worshipers.
Peter, just like Jesus, was gathering the REMNANT of Israel. Israel has had many times throughout their history where they have fallen away and needed to be restored. There was a period of about four hundred years where God was silent with them before John the B came along.
You need to be very careful when you read Paul quoting OT scripture, as he often does so to teach a spiritual lesson and not necessarily to have the exact same meaning as the original. A really good example of this is Romans 8:36. Paul is quoting Psalm 44:22 to which he says NAY. He is quoting it and says NO, we are NOT sheep accounted for slaughter. It is the single, solitary time that Paul uses the word 'sheep' in ALL of his epistles.
The entire point of the passage from 2 Cor 16:14-18 is expressed in 2 Cor 16:14
2Co 6:14 KJV Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
Once again, he is using OT scripture to teach a spiritual lesson and NOT as a literal parallel.
Once again.... a spiritual lesson and not a literal parallel.
Paul also says that the church is separate from the Jews. Dig a little deeper to understand what he's talking about there.
That is a bogus translation. Paul NEVER uses the word priest in any of his epistles.
The kingdom has not been established yet and will not be until the King returns to sit on His throne in the kingdom.
Luk 19:11-12 KJV And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear. (12) He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.
Mat 25:31-34 KJV When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: (32) And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: (33) And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. (34) Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
There is an earthly kingdom and there is a heavenly kingdom. The earthly kingdom is what the gospel of the kingdom is about. They will one day be joined together.
AMEN!
Paul uses different language to describe the body of Christ. There is reason for that, but you are stubborn.
Their ministry was different. They knew nothing of the unique revelation given to Paul until Paul went to Jerusalem ~17 years later to explain it to them.
Israel had more than one priesthood. Perhaps you should learn more about it.
Prophecy described God's blessings to the gentiles through Israel's RISE and not their FALL. But Paul tells us that the gentiles receive salvation through Israel's FALL.
That is part of the mystery of Christ that was kept secret since the world began.
Last edited:
Derf
Well-known member
He associates "gentile" with bad behavior, saying that they need to not be like that anymore. Yes, he was saying there was a transition to something better than being an idol worshiper. If "gentile" means "idol worshiper", surely you aren't suggesting Paul was saying they were welcome to stay in that state, are you? And if they are now not idol worshipers, and thus not "gentiles" by that definition, what are they? Are they not worshipers of God? Isn't that another word for people of God? And "people of God" is an obvious antonym for "idol worshipers".
So I think you're saying that Peter was making an unsuccessful attempt to gather the remnant of Israel. But his letter doesn't seem to talk of gathering. It appears to be an exhortation to do good things. If there is a "gathering", as you say, it is a spiritual gathering only.
[1Pe 2:13 KJV] Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;
[1Pe 2:18 KJV] Servants, [be] subject to [your] masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.
And this verse points out that the gathering is already accomplished:
[1Pe 2:25 KJV] For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.
We all need to be careful what message we try to pour into the bible. Let's look at the passage in context.
[Rom 8:35 KJV] Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? [shall] tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?
[Rom 8:36 KJV] As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.
[Rom 8:37 KJV] Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.
[Rom 8:38 KJV] For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
[Rom 8:39 KJV] Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Paul asks "who shall separate us from the love of Christ", and then he lists a bunch of "whats", not "whos". These are the tools God's enemies can use against believers. Can they be successful against believers? Depends on what you mean by "successful". Yes, they can cause pain and hardship and death. Are you saying that's not the case? Is that what "Nay" means? I'd have to disagree. Paul follows up with a list of things that have no power to separate us from Christ's love: death, life, angels, principalities, powers, .... None of these things can separate us from the love of Christ, but these things can come against us.
Whether Paul was counting all of the church or just some in a separate category with himself, as sheep led to the slaughter, you can judge. But I'd rather keep the sheep-to-slaughter reference than lose the "Nothing can separate us" conclusion, since those two obviously go together, describing the same group.
And?
You sound like a Calvinist, saying the scripture doesn't really say what it is saying. That's what happens when a system takes precedence over the actual scripture. I hope that's not happening to you.
Quite a few translators disagree with you.
Strong's, which you've used authoritatively, does too:
| Strong’s Definitions ἱερουργέω hierourgéō, hee-er-oorg-eh'-o; from a compound of G2411 and the base of G2041; to be a temple-worker, i.e. officiate as a priest (figuratively):—minister. |
Then you must admit that sometimes it is difficult to understand which kingdom is being spoken of. And to say that Peter was only concerned about the earthly kingdom is probably quite short-sighted--as Peter was at one time, but didn't remain so. Why would we want to go back to what Peter originally thought?
This is not to say there is no earthly kingdom! I agree with you that there is a spiritual and an earthly kingdom, and I think Christ will sit on a physical throne on earth some day. I think we do ourselves and the Jewish people a disservice when we relegate them to a different kingdom than ours, or think of them as not meant to be part of the church. Such was not Christ's intent.
Of course there's a reason for it. I gave a reason for it. Mine might be the wrong reason, but so might yours. I'll be stubborn on it until there's reasonable evidence for your reason. So far, I haven't seen it. But you can keep trying.
And some of them still struggled with it, I agree. But both parties (Jerusalem church made up of Jews and the other churches made up of mostly, but not all, non-Jews) accepted each other as part of the same body of Christ. This is evident in numerous ways, including that Paul, a Jew, was actually there in Jerusalem, as you pointed out, speaking for non-Jews, and that the result of his visit was a recognition of the gentile churches as being "in the club" whatever you decide to call "the club". Was that club called "the kingdom of God/heaven" or was it called "the body of Christ"? I'd say the answer is "yes".
I'm not so stubborn I can't be taught. Teach me, o great one.
Ok. I get that. But how does that mean that Peter was only talking about the earthly kingdom?
And how is it that His enemies are being put under his feet while He is sitting at God's right hand? [Psalm 110:1] The LORD said to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet." Who's in charge? Is there not a kingdom during this time? 1 Cor 15 says it a little different: [1Co 15:25 KJV] For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
So Christ is reigning...while He is waiting to reign, as explained here:
[1Co 15:27 KJV] For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under [him, it is] manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.
Right Divider
Body part
Pagan gentiles sure.
Do you not know that many Isralite's also followed other gods making themselves also idol worshipers?
Once again, Paul is using a quote from the OT as an EXAMPLE of something and not the LITERAL thing.
Peter is writing SPECIFICALLY to the REMNANT in his epistles. Paul never, ever describes Jesus as our shepherd nor bishop.
Note well that I NEVER said that Peter was trying to gather the remnant in his EPISTLES, but in his ACTIONS described by Luke in the early chapters of the book of Acts. Peter disappears about half way through the book of Acts.
Paul's NAY belongs to ALL of that, including his quote about sheep to the slaughter. This is clear in what he says immediately thereafter "we are more than conquerors". That definitely CANNOT be speaking about sheep. And, once again, that is the SOLE instance of Paul using the word "sheep" in ALL of his epistles. Therefore it is clear that the body of Christ is NOT sheep.
If you really want to understand Jesus' references to sheep and the good shepherd, see Ezekiel 34.
That's silly.
And what? It is once again CLEAR that Paul is NOT literally applying those scripture to the body of Christ but is using them as a SPIRITUAL LESSON.
You must think that Jesus is made of wood (John 10:7)
I don't care what those bogus translations say. The word is just not there.
The word in not in the Greek text.
Please stop trying to put words in my mouth. I have NEVER says that "Peter was only concerned about the earthly kingdom".
Now you jump to the false dichotomy of "earthly and spiritual". I NEVER made that distinction. The earthly kingdom will be quite spiritual when the LORD Jesus Christ returns to remove all of the corruption.
Please do yourself a favor and study Isaiah 60 along with Revelation 21 so that you can see that in the future, gentiles will serve Israel and their King and all will be blessed.
:carryon:
Eph 1:10 KJV That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
Teach yourself. I don't have to time to personally walk you through the entire Bible.
Christ is not reigning in the earthly kingdom YET. He will when He returns.
Mat 25:31-34 KJV When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: (32) And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: (33) And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. (34) Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
Note how it is at THAT time that "ye blessed of my Father" inherit the kingdom.
Last edited:
HI and checked several translations and they translated minister as LIEROURGEO and HEIROURGEO differently !!
NIV translated it LIEROURGEO and the NASB translates it HIEROURGEO !!
If you look at all the verses where MINISTER is used , Paul is NOT TALKING ABOUT PRIESTS
I agree with Right Divider and all should realize that translation are NOT INSPIRED and need to check the REAL Greek Text !!
san p
NIV translated it LIEROURGEO and the NASB translates it HIEROURGEO !!
If you look at all the verses where MINISTER is used , Paul is NOT TALKING ABOUT PRIESTS
I agree with Right Divider and all should realize that translation are NOT INSPIRED and need to check the REAL Greek Text !!
san p
Last edited: