QUESTIONS

&

ANSWERS

 

(RECENT UPDATES ARE ITALICIZED IN THE INDEX)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 (To link to the Answer, just click on the question in the Table of Contents)

(RECENT UPDATES ARE ITALIZED IN THE INDEX)

 

*AGES TO COME*

 

In the Ages to come, will the earth be destroyed or renewed?

            Who returns with the Lord at the second coming?

            What does it mean, ‘A child shall die a hundred years old’?

            What does it mean, ‘a sinner being a hundred years old shall be accursed’?

            Christ's Joint-Heirship: Rewards in Heaven

            Will there be a universal reconciliation?

            Is the Book of Hebrews for the Dispensation of Grace?

            Could you give us some bible references for “the ages to come?”

If our place is in the Heavens, will we ever see or visit the new earth?

            Who will inhabit the new earth for the thousand year reign?

            Clarification of the Kingdom Saints’ Resurrection

 

*BAPTISM*

           

            Why did Paul baptize some?

            Why was Paul Baptized?  

            Will Baptism be administered in the ages to come?

            What is Baptism for the dead?

            Knowing baptism doesn’t save, can any harm be done if they do so anyway?

Is Baptism an ordinance to be kept?  Should you get baptized to represent the death, burial and resurrection of Christ?

            Why wouldn’t water baptism be for today since Paul water baptized some people?

            Is baptism necessary for salvation?

            Is baptism a requirement for salvation?

            How do you explain baptism recorded in the New Testament?

            Is Israel saved by baptism and the blood of Christ?

            List of 12 Baptisms

 

*BODY OF CHRIST*

 

What does the bible teach about heirs and Joint heirs?  Is there a difference?  If so, how?  If not, how?

            Quick question, are we (the Body of Christ) the wild olive branches grafted in?

 

*BOOK SPECIFIC QUESTIONS*

 

            Galatians:  Are they lost or saved?

Genesis 6        

            Hebrews 6 and 10 has me terrified.  Is there any hope?

Book of Job

1 John

Romans 11

            Revelation:  Clarifying the “churches” in Revelation 1,2,3

            Revelation 12

 

*CALVINISM*

 

            What is Calvinism?

 

*CATHOLICISIM*

 

            Can Catholics be saved?

 

*CEREMONIES/ORDINANCES/OBSERVANCES*

 

            Since the Passover is to be observed forever shouldn’t we be observing Passover today?

            Is Tithing for today?

            Is Holy Communion for today?

            Should Easter and Christmas be treated as Holy Days?

            Please comment on fasting.

            What place does the Lord’s mother Mary have?

            Is fasting in the dispensation of grace?

            Should we view communion a sacremonial supper?

 

*CHRISTIAN LIVING*

 

What does it mean to suffer for Christ?

As a single person, if I have sex with someone, am I married to that person according to the Bible?

            How is a Christian to handle life tragedies?

            Marriage/Divorce

            Are we dead to the flesh?

            What’s the difference between “works of the law” and “deeds of the law”?

            What about drinking wine or smoking marijuana?

            Is it ok for Christians to drink wine?  I say no.  Any scripture will help.

            I’ve backslidden. Have I lost my salvation?

            Salvation assurance for Kingdom saints compared to Grace saints.

            Are we to judge people?

 

*CHURCH AFFILIATION*

 

            Which church to attend.

           

*END TIMES*

 

            Please explain what we’re judged for at the Judgment Seat of Christ.

            Are unbelievers judged for their sins or only for their unbelief?

            Four Blood Moons theory

            Who are the 144,000?

            Are we judged for our sins at the Judgement Seat of Christ?

            Please clarify exactly who is judged after the 1,000 year reign.

            Will we be raptured before the Tribulation?

            Is there any hope for salvation after the Rapture?

            Will we see the anti-Christ before the rapture?

            Is the body of Christ also His bride?  Are we the new Jerusalem?
           
Is the Book of Life and the Lamb’s book of Life the same?

            Heaven on earth

            What is the abomination of desolation?

            Whose names are in the book of life?

            If our place is in the Heavens, will we ever see or visit the new earth?

 

*ETERNAL SECURITY*

 

            If I’m saved by grace, do I have to confess my sins?

            When once saved, but then get caught up in works, are you still saved?

           

*ETERNITY*

 

            Where will we spend eternity?  Heaven or earth?

 

*EVANGELISM*

 

            Sharing the gospel with people who challenge the reliability of the KJV bible

           

*FAITH*

 

            Do I truly have faith?

            I need a better understanding of the word “faith” and “trust”

           

*FORGIVNESS*

 

Are Grace believers forgiven of their sins in totality?  Or will any be judged at the judgment seat of Christ?

            Are non-believers judged for their sins at the Great White Throne or are they only judged

for the sin of unbelief?

            What is “Forgiveness?”

 

*GOSPEL OF GRACE*

 

            When Paul mentions Apostles (Eph. 2: 19-20), is he referring to the twelve?

At what point did Scripture go from the Gospel of the Kingdom to the Gospel of Grace for the Jews?

*GOSPEL OF THE CIRCUMCISION*

 

            When Peter, James and John went to the Circumcision, what was their mission? Was it

to preach the gospel of the grace of God or to write tribulation books?

 

*GRACE, HISTORY OF*

 

            Recovery of the Dispensation of Grace

 

*GRACE BIBLE CHURCH*

 

            Please summarize what your church stands for.

            In your teaching, do you include teaching the Old Testament?

 

*HEALING*

Answer to a mother with sick children.

 

 

 

*HELL (DAMNATION)*

 

            Different levels of damnation

 

*ISRAEL TODAY*

 

            Should we support Israel financially today?

            Are the Jews lost today and is the Law running parallel to Grace today?

 

 

*JESUS*

 

            How can Jesus be the seed of David if he was born of the Holy Spirit and of a woman?

            Did Joseph adopt Jesus?

            By what name do we address God?

            Significance of Jesus sitting or standing

            Is it possible Jesus Christ could have sinned?

            The name of Jesus

            Was Jesus God in the flesh and knowing all things while in the flesh?

           

*KJV BIBLE*

 

            Is all the Bible for us?

            If all bibles are translations, why the preference for the KJV?

            Is the KJV the only bible accurately preserved for the English speaking people?

            Is the KJV really accurate?

            Is the KJV the inspired word of God?

 

*MYSTERY*

           

            When was the mystery revealed to Paul?

 

*OLD TESTAMENT SAINTS*

            Please clarify the resurrection of the Old Testament Saints

           

*PAUL*

           

            When was Paul saved?          

            Is Paul one of the twelve Apostles?

 

 

PETER VS PAUL

 

            Is Galatians 1:7-8 compatible with 1 John 5:12?

            What’s the difference between Peter and Paul’s message?

 

*PRAYER*

 

How do I pray, is it pray to God the Father in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ and beyond for there is still the Holy Spirit of God.

            How do we pray for difficult life circumstances?

            What is the controversy about prayer and what does Pastor Jordan teach that others warn against?

            What is the purpose of prayer and fasting in the dispensation of grace?

           

*RIGHT DIVISION*

 

            Can we apply truths from the Bible other than from Paul’s writings?

            Advice on where to begin teaching in the Bible to those just learning right division.

            Do we have to confess our sins to get forgiveness in the Dispensation of Grace?

            What’s wrong with the Acts 28 position?

 

*SALVATION*

 

            Does a person have to “Repent” and “Believe” in order to be saved?

            If a homosexual gets saved and doesn’t quit his life style and says Jesus is his Savior, is

he saved?

            Do I truly have faith?

            Is faith simply believing what God says?  What about trust?

            Will there be a universal reconciliation?

            What is salvation in the Old Testament?

            Is confessing my ongoing sins (1John 1:9) a requirement in the Age of Grace?

            In the Old Testament, who does god “cut off”?  Can a “cut off” person be restored?

            If once we are saved then get caught up in works, are you still saved?

            I’ve backslidden.  Have I lost my salvation? 

            Please explain “confess with your mouth.”

            I’m so confused!  Are all denominations wrong and going to Hell?

            Once saved, what’s the next step for the believer?

            What about people who believe, then at a later time change their mind?

            Clarification regarding everyday good people/bad people and their status with God and their destiny.

            Is conversion the same as “Born Again?”

            Are there any age requirements for a believing child to be sealed?

 

*SATAN*

 

            Satan confused God’s word to confuse people

            Was Satan kicked out of heaven twice?

 Is the army that follows Jesus at His return angels? Saints? Or both?

 

*SIN*

If a homosexual gets saved and doesn’t quit his life style and says Jesus is his savior, is he saved?

            If believers sin, do they lose their salvation?

            Is there an unpardonable sin?

 

*SPIRITUAL GIFTS*

           

            Are healings for today?

            Does Grace Bible Church practice speaking in tongues?

            Is speaking in tongues and prophesying included in the dispensation of grace?      

            Does Mark 16: 9-20 belong in the Bible?

 

*SUICIDE*

 

            If someone commits suicide, is this considered murder?

 

 

*TIME PAST ~ BEFORE THE LAW*

 

            Who were the “sons of God” and “daughters of men”?

            Is Noah’s Ark a fable?

            Where did the people of Nod come from?

            Jews and Gentiles relationship/obligation to the law prior to Jesus

            How old is the earth?  6,000 or billions of years?

            Why did God send Jonah to a Gentile city?

            Is Melchisedec Jehova? 

           

*UNCATEGORIZED*

 

            Please explain what it means to be “in Christ”.

            Jesus died for our sins “according to the scriptures.”  What scriptures in particular?

            Is Barnabas Paul’s Brother-in-Law?

            Since Barnabas and Mark are Kingdom saints, why did they minister with Paul?

            How are we supposed to finance the upkeep of a church if people are not even

giving close to 10%

            How should the term “his cross” and “the cross” in Mat. 16:24, Mrk. 8:35, 10:21, and

Lu. 9:23 be contextually understood?

            Where did the church begin, Pentecost or later?

            Is the gift of prophesying for today?

            Do black people originate from the curse of Ham or Canaan?

            Are the “Firstfruits” also the “Little Flock”?

            What is the difference between the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven?

            Who are the Sons of God?

            Under the Jewish program of circumcision were Gentiles saved to become Jews?

            What scriptures did the Bereans search?

            Clarification of the word “YE”

            If the word “stone” refers to Jesus why wouldn’t it always be capitalized?

            Please explain the Gospel of Christ and the Gospel of Grace

            Is there any significance to the writers of the four Gospels or Matthew and John, Mark, and Luke

 

 

*VERSE SPECIFIC EXPLAINATIONS*

 

                1 Corinthians 5

            1 Corinthians 11:23-26

Galatians 1:8-9

Genesis 3:15

Hebrews 4:12

Isiah 53:5

            James 1:5

John 11:46-52

1 John 1:9

Mark 16-20

Matthew 10:37-11:12

            II Peter 3:10

Philippians 2:12

Romans 3:1-5

Romans 10:9

Revelation 1:16

            Revelation 20:15

            2 Timothy 2:12           

            Acts 10

 

           

*WOMEN*

 

            Should a woman wear long hair?  Cover her head? Keep silent? And what does it mean

that a woman shall be saved in childbearing?

Can a woman cut her hair short?

 

*WORKS*

 

            Israel in the age of Grace:  Will God bless us if we support Israel in the Dispensation

of Grace?       

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*AGES TO COME*

 

 

In the Ages to come, will the earth be destroyed or renewed?

 

Will you please answer some questions for me? 1. In the above chapter and verse, do you believe the earth will be destroyed completely or maybe just the outer covering to make it new again? 2. If it is indeed destroyed completely, what happens to all the people on the earth? 3. If it is indeed destroyed completely, will there be another larger earth, because the New Jerusalem could never sit on the earth in its present size because of its huge size of the New Jerusalem? Thanks.

 

II Peter 3:10 sure sounds like the heavens and the earth that are now will be completely dissolved by the fire of God and then recreated as a new heaven and new earth.  Those who think it is just a purging of the earth's surface and the cleansing of the heavens relate it to II Peter 3:6 with the perishing of the world in the flood.  It is the verses in Isaiah that speak of a New Heaven and New Earth in context with the millennial reign that leads some to believe it is not a complete annihilation of the heaven and earth.

 

Supposing it is, God would have to preserve the Saints of all the ages perhaps in the third heaven, the heaven of heavens, until the New Heaven and New Earth are created (in the time it takes for God to speak).

 

We are not told the size of the new earth, but even if it were the same size, Isaiah 40:4 says "Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low."  Add to that Revelation 21:1 "no more sea" (even though I believe this is more than the earthly seas) we can see the geography of the New Earth is completely different.  Plenty of room for the New Jerusalem.

 

 

Who returns with the Lord at the second coming?

 

Thank you for answering our questions.  I have two more for you. The first one is this:  Who or what saints are returning with the Lord Jesus Christ at the second coming?  Where will Adam & Eve, Noah, Abraham be during the millennium?  Beside the one third of Israel who are saved, who else will be with the Lord during the millennium?

 

 

 I'm finally getting around to answering some of the email questions sent to me.  Thank you for your patience.

 

Since when we die, we are absent from the body and present with the Lord (II Corinthians 5:8), when the Lord returns to raise our bodies from the grave, those who have died in Christ will return with him.  In our case that would be I Thessalonians 4:14.

 

In Israel's case that will be at the Lord Jesus' second coming and the first resurrection which takes place before the 1,000 year reign - Revelation 20:4-6.  At that time all Old Testament Saints will be raised from the dead including Adam & Eve, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob (Matthew 8:11), Job (Job 19:25-27), Daniel (Daniel 12:13), The 12 Apostles (Matthew 19:27,28), as well as those who died in faith in the tribulation

 

 

What does it mean, 'A child shall die a hundred years old'? What does it mean, 'a sinner being a hundred years old shall be accursed'?

 

My colleagues have had many discussions about this verse. I am teaching Isaiah in a bible study, and I want to be able to teach it correctly. Thank you so much. I catch your program on Direct TV 367 as often as I can, which is almost every Saturday night.

 

I will tell you what I believe Isaiah 65:20 is talking about.  Beginning in verse 17 the Lord, speaking through Isaiah is prophesying the future blessings upon Israel.  Remember, this begins for them first in the Millennial Kingdom and extends into the Eternal Kingdom.  In that 1,000 year reign, it appears that a rebellious child will be given till he is 100 years old before being put to death as taught under the law in Deuteronomy 21:18-22.  In Moses day, God judged the Nation in the wilderness from 20 years old and up, so that those 19 and under were considered children.  In the Millennium, when people will live the whole 1000 years, or as Isaiah 65:22 says "for the days of a tree are the days of my people," a child is anyone under 100 years old and the age of accountability is age 100.

 

Christ's Joint-Heirship: Rewards in Heaven

 

Can you please comment on this article; I have highlighted several concerning parts in blue.  I believe that Romans 8:17 is teaching that joint-heirship is a gift that all people in the body of Christ receive. We will all have different positions in the heavenly places but as joint heirs.

 

Romans 8:17: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.  In Romans 8:17, the conditional statement that Christ is revealing to the Apostle Paul is that joint-heirship with Christ, which is available for all sons of God our Father has introduced here in Romans 8:17. This is the hall mark criteria which establishes the measured criteria for the reward of joint-heirship together with Christ Jesus during His reign in the heavenly places. This is God's Will for His sons, e.g. believer saints, that we all come to the perfect maturity through suffering for Christ's sake, which builds and grows inside our inner man the genuine attitude to follow Gods' curriculum of sonship education for the purpose of joint-heir reward in the heavenly places in Christ. The timing of this reward takes place after the appearing of Christ in the Rapture. 

God has promised a joint heirship rewards which is preserved for His Sons who follow His curriculum and mature as unto perfect believer saints into the Father's prescribed Son ship relationship. This is learned via a curriculum as set forth by God the Father for His sons of God, which is offered as a learning tool to all believers. However, believers must earnestly desire the Father's will in learning this curriculum which God established. Since this criteria in Romans 8:17 is a conditional statement, it behooves us all the more to genuine attitude change towards Gods' orientation to this topic.     

Today we are to be equipped in the Father's business on earth as a practice in our sanctification in order to prove to the Father that we are worthy to be trusted in His business inside the heavenly places. 

How do we then begin this journey to become assured of our joint-heir position / privilege in which we operate under the headship of Christ, yet operate together with Him as He has purposed for His sons and daughters? To start, first must have the proper and genuine orientation and attitude towards God's purpose for you. This starts with an initial salvation attitude that came about from a genuine fear and trembling in which you received Christ [see II Corinthians 7:15] for salvation. This is exactly the very same genuine orientation we must continue in. This was our initial motivation to be saved from the death and penalty of sin; this now is that same motivation to continue in our sanctification life on earth.      

II Corinthians 7:15: And his inward affection is more abundant toward you, whilst he remembereth the obedience of you all, how with fear and trembling ye received him. In Philippians 2:12, saved saints don't need to work out their salvation again. Philippians 2:12 pertains to the believers' sanctification, which is to be done with fear and trembling, in order to please God. This stems from the fact that the Philippians were believer saints already [See Philippians1:1]. Philippians 2:12: Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation [sanctification in scope, not salvation] with fear and trembling.

 

I agree with your thoughts.  The verse states first "if children, then heirs; heirs of god, and joint-heirs with Christ...".  If there is any condition implied in the verse, it applies to what is said after the pronouncement of our inheritance.

 

I understand the importance of our "son ship position" but like many who see an important doctrine in one passage, they end up building a chain of verses and look at verses from that view point rather than its natural context.  Then they make up a vocabulary that goes along with their teaching so that unless you are familiar with their teachings you would not understand their comments on verses like this.

 

 

Will there be a universal reconciliation?

 

I have some "Grace" friends who now believe that everyone will be saved in the end.  They say that the word eon is not everlasting.  Also I believe they are teaching soul sleep.  How do you answer someone who says they follow Paul but they don't believe  Eternal  means eternal.  I 'm very disappointed as this is the person that introduced my husband & I to grace. How do they explain Matt 25:46?  If the unsaved don't have everlasting punishment how can the saved have eternal life?  Any suggestions on how to refute their teaching?  I don't want to lose their friendship but this is very disturbing.  

 

 

This universal reconciliation teaching is spreading in every denomination and is even embraced by those who know how to rightly divide.  The verse you mentioned, Matthew 25:46 is a verse that tells us that the lost will suffer the same length of time the saved experience life.  If their time ends, so does ours.

 

I don't know if the people you know believe the lost suffer for a short time, like purgatory, or if they don't suffer at all because all get saved.  Some say since Paul does not use the word hell, then he did not believe in eternal punishment.  But he did.  Consider the following:

 

Romans 1:18  “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;”

 

Since wrath, hell, eternal punishment was already revealed Paul did not have to write about it.

 

Romans 2:3-9  “And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?  Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?  But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;  Who will render to every man according to his deeds:  To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:  But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,  Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;”

 

Paul believed in the great white throne judgment, the lake of fire, and the second death of Revelation 21:11-15.

 

Romans 12:19  “Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.”

 

God promised those who have suffered injustice that there will be justice.  Today a person kills several people, then kills himself to avoid punishment.  According to Romans 12:19 he did not escape justice.

 

II Thessalonians 1:6-9  “Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;  And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,  In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:  Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;”

 

Everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power,  is not the same as a person's destruction ending and coming into the presence of the Lord.

 

II Thessalonians 2:11,12  “And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:  That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”

 

Somebody is getting damned!

 

II Timothy 4:14  “Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works:”

 

Judgment according to a person’s works takes us back to Romans 2:3-9 and the great white throne.

 

There is a book that we will be adding to the web page of www.ForgottenTruths.com next week called: "The State and Place Of The Dead" by W. Edward Before who was the former President of Berean Bible Institute.  It is a good book on this subject written by a "Grace" Believer.

 

 

Is the Book of Hebrews for the Dispensation of Grace?

 

Concerning your question about verses in Hebrews which show that it is written about the future “age to come” and warns the Hebrews of losing their salvation (remember this is a reference to individual Jews in Israel, losing the opportunity to be a part of their promised Kingdom – their salvation); here are some verses to consider.

 

Hebrews 1:2  refers to the time as “these Last Days” which began in Acts 2:17.  Hebrews 2:1-5 speaks about the gospel our Lord preached which was “the gospel of the Kingdom” and was the same the Apostles preached when the Holy Spirit came (in Acts 2) and Hebrews 2:5 says it concerns “the world to come, whereof we speak.”

 

The whole theme of the book of Hebrews is leaving the temple and sacrifices, which is what the Anti-Christ will reinstate during the 7 year tribulation.  Hebrews 12:15-17 then warns of selling out as did Esau and lose out on the inheritance.  Hebrews 10:1 says that the law is a shadow of “things to come.”  Even the verse about “not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together” in Hebrews 10:25 goes on to say “so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.”  “The Day” is a reference to “the Day of the Lord” in which comes the deception of the Anti-Christ.  The “sinning willfully” of Hebrews 10:26-30 is a reference to the “mark of the Beast” which is to reject Jesus Christ and face “vengeance.”  “Drawing back unto perdition” in Hebrews 10:29 speaks of any in Israel who claim to believe, but return to the temple, the sacrifice and the Anti-Christ system.

 

In the same respect, Hebrews 12:25-29 is a warning for those who reject Jesus Christ’s words from heaven (which is where Jesus Christ is when Hebrews was written, waiting to return in Judgment).  Those who reject these warnings will not remain when He “shakes the Heavens and the Earth” – which is fulfilled in the book of Revelation.  Lastly, in the book of Hebrews, the Jews are told to “come to Christ without the camp;” to leave the city (as in Matthew 24:15), because here they “have no continuing city, but seek one to come.”

 

 

Could you give us some bible references for “the ages to come?”

 

Thanks for writing Forgotten Truths TV program featuring Pastor Richard Jordan.

We have sent you the additional free pack you requested.  I am Tom Bruscha.  I pastor Grace Bible Church here in Warren, MI.  We are the church that produces and airs Forgotten Truth.  Rather than forwarding your question to Pastor Jordan (who is lives in Chicago and is presently out of town) I will give you some references about “the ages to come.”

 

One reference concerning us, the Body of Christ, is Ephesians 2:6,7; which inform us where we will be in the ages to come.  “And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:  That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.”

 

Then, since all that remains to be fulfilled concerning Israel and Bible prophecy is the main emphasis of “the ages to come,” here are a few to consider:

 

Matthew 3:7  As early as John the Baptist, he had asked the Pharisees and Sadducees

“O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?”

 

Matthew 6:10  Israel is to pray  “Thy kingdom come.  Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.”

 

Matthew 12:32  warns that blasphemy against the Holy Ghost “shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.”

 

Matthew 24:3 and the whole chapter is an answer to the question about “the sign of thy coming and the end of the world.”

 

Acts 17:30,31 covers all three references to time:  “the times of this ignorance” – times past; then it says “but now…”; then warns “because he hath appointed a day in which he will judge the world…”. – That’s the ages to come!

 

Hebrews 2:3-5  reminds the readers of the salvation the Lord Jesus began to speak about and continued to be preached by the Apostles who witnessed with signs and wonders, concerning what verse 5 says is “the world to come, whereof we speak.”

 

Interestingly,  I Peter 1:9-13 Peter tells the scattered Jewish remnant believers of their salvation and (verse 10) “the grace that should come unto you.”  In verse 13, there hope is: “the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ.”  This is a future grace – not the present. It is a reference to Jesus Christ’s return and the Kingdom to come.

 

Lastly:  II Peter 3:9-16, Peter explains what has delayed those promises which he said would come (II Peter 31-3).  The delay was what Paul revealed in his writings about God’s longsuffering.  But then Peter says (verse 10) “But the day of the Lord will come” and goes on to say (verses 12&13) “Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?  Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”

 

And of course the whole book of Revelation is about the ages to come.

 

 

If our place is in the Heavens, will we ever see or visit the new earth?

 

I like your question.  It shows that you have put a lot of important facts together correctly about the Kingdom of God leaving you with a reasonable question.  While the Bible may not give a direct answer, I do believe it does give enough information to answer that question.  Consider these facts:

 

From Ephesians 1:9, 10 we know that God’s Eternal Kingdom will continue to have two locations – Heaven and Earth.  But those two places are one Kingdom under the reign of our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

According to Revelation 21:1-16, the Lord Jesus will reign over this Kingdom from the city of New Jerusalem which comes down out of heaven and (I believe) rests on the earth.  Interestingly, the dimensions of this city, includes its height.  It is 1500 miles high.  Outer space is less than 400 miles high.  So this city reaches into the heavens.

 

Then from John 1:49-51, after Nathanael acknowledged Jesus Christ as the King of Israel the Lord said:  “ … Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig tree, believest thou? thou shalt see greater things than these.  And he saith unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.”

 

This means when the Lord Jesus sits on His throne in the New Jerusalem on planet Earth that the angels will be sent out (commissioned) from the earth, “ascending” into their abode (heaven) and then “descending” back to earth, perhaps reporting to the Lord and waiting for their next assignment.  The Heavenly and Earthly portions of the Kingdom will be headquartered in the New Jerusalem here on Earth.

 

Therefore I believe that we too, will be required from time to time, to report to the Lord who will be here on earth and then leave to carry out our assignments in the heavens.  If we get any vacation time, I will ask permission to visit places in the new earth.  At least I think that will be possible.

 

 

 

 

 

Who will inhabit the new earth for the thousand year reign?

The Heavenly Kingdom is made up of Jewish and gentile believers, the Earthly Kingdom will be Jewish and gentile believers that come out of the Tribulation. Do Heavenly believers return to Earth with glorified bodies for the thousand years? If so where in the Bible can I find that and if not where in the Bible can I find that?

 

Many who make a distinction between Israel and the Body of Christ, but who do not make a clear distinction between the 12 Apostles and the Apostle Paul, often believe that the Body of Christ will return with the Lord Jesus after the tribulation and will reign with Him here on earth during the millennium.

 

By not rightly dividing Israel’s program form the current age of grace,  not recognizing this age began with the calling and commissioning of Paul, leads to mixing the two programs and purposes of God.

 

The purpose of the Body of Christ according Paul’s epistles is for the heavens.  II Corinthians 5:1 says our house and new home is “eternal in the heavens.”  I Thessalonians 4:13-18 says when the rapture occurs and we meet the Lord in the air – “so shall be ever be with the Lord.”  We are with Him in the heavens.  This is why I Corinthians 15:40, 49, 50-53 teaches we must be changed to “bear the image of the heavenly.”

 

Ephesians 2:5-7 says:  “Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: That in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.”

 

In the “ages to come” (plural) meaning the tribulation, the 1000 year reign and the eternal ages that follow we will be seated in heavenly places as a testimony of God’s grace.

 

It is God’s intent for the Body of Christ to fulfill His purpose in Christ to make Him preeminent in all things (heaven and earth) and to reconcile all things in heaven and earth to himself according to Colossians 1:15-20.  The heavens will be reconciled by the Body of Christ.  That is why we are raptured out of the earth and into heaven - see Ephesians 1:22, 23.

 

Revelations 12:7, 8 says:  “And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.”  The reason their place is no more found is because the Body of Christ has filled them.  This is in the middle of the tribulation.  Those places are not going to be vacated during the 1000 year reign of Christ.  We will be there as the glory of Jesus Christ in the heavens while He continues to fulfill His purpose in the earth - filling the earth with his glory.

 

 

Clarification of the Kingdom Saints’ Resurrection

 

I was listening on y'all's web re: resurrection, I understand our resurrection but is the kingdom saints resurrection at the coming of Christ after the tribulations and are they both counted as second resurrection?. In 2 Timothy 3-16 Paul says “all scripture” is that the whole bible or just his epistles?

 

 

Your first question, the answer is no.  The resurrection at Jesus Christ's second coming to the earth is called "the first resurrection" - Revelation 20:5,6.  The second resurrection, is the damned of all the ages, raised 1000 years later - Revelation 20:6,7...12-15.  The resurrection of the "Body of Christ" is a resurrection that takes place at least 7 years before Christ's return to earth.  It is a mystery resurrection in that it is part of the mystery revealed to Paul - I Corinthians 15:51,52;  I Thessalonians 4:13-18.  It is a resurrection of the Body of Christ into the air and into our Heavenly position - Ephesians 2:6; Colossians 1:5, in our heavenly bodies - I Corinthians 15:49.

 

Your second question, "all scripture" in II Timothy 3:16 is a reference to both Old and New Testaments.  You know that from the statement of  II Timothy 3:14,15.  Timothy had what Paul taught him both verbally and in these two epistles, plus all his epistles (which Peter calls "scripture" - II Peter 3:16), and Timothy had the "Holy Scriptures" since he was a child, which is certainly the Old Testament.

 

*BAPTISM*

 

Why did Paul baptize some?

 

I have a question that is driving me NUTS.  I know that Paul made it very clear, to the Grace Church at Corinth, that he was NOT sent to baptize but to preach the Gospel.  However, he did state that he indeed did baptize a few people but was glad that he had not baptized anymore.  My question is simply this: Why did he baptize anyone in the first place?

Thanks in advance!

 

Good question, and a tough one to explain since the Bible does not say, but here is what it does say and from that we may have some understanding.  The following is an answer I gave to someone who was trying not to believe in the Pauline revelation.  Your answer will come at the end.

 

The question you asked:  If Paul already had a revelation of grace that required no baptism, why did Paul baptize ANY of the Corinthians in the name of Christ? "I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius...[and] the household of Stephanas." 1 Cor. 1:14-16."

 

There are answers to this question, however, I’ve notice that each of the questions begin with “if”.  There is no “if” concerning Paul having the revelation of grace and that his gospel message required no water baptism.  John the Baptist in Mark 1:4 and Peter in Acts 2:38 preached repentance and water baptism for the remission of sins.  Paul on the other hand preached the cross!  Prior to Paul the cross was not understood nor preached as good news.  Matthew 16:21 and following, Jesus “began” to tell his Apostles about his death and resurrection.  When he did, Peter rebuked him saying: “Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee”.  Remember Peter was already sent out to preach “the gospel of the Kingdom” in Matthew 10.  Water baptism is associated with the gospel of the Kingdom (Matthew 3:1,2…6; 4:17,23).  Concerning the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, Luke 18:34 says: “And they understood none of these things: and this saying was hid from them, neither knew they the things which were spoken.”

 

To Paul was given the good news of the cross.  He was the first to preach it as God’s means of salvation – I Corinthians 15:3,4; Acts 13:38,39; Romans 3:21-28.  It was the cross that made it possible for God to save all of man “freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”  Paul’s gospel is called “the gospel of the grace of God.”  According to that gospel there is no works for salvation – Romans 4:4,5; Ephesians 2:8,9.

 

With that said; it is interesting that the question of why Paul did baptize a few, quoting  I Corinthians 1:14 did not go on to quote verses 15 and 16 that tells us that he only baptized a few, lest they had said he baptized in his own name.  But then in verse 17 he explains why he could say “I thank God that I baptized none of you …” but the few he did.  If Christ sent him to baptize, like he did Peter, how could he be thankful he only baptized a few?  The answer is:  “For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.”

 

So there is no “if” about it.  Paul was not sent to baptize.  His commission and his message did not involve water baptism.  Then why did he baptize the few?  First, when you read Acts 18:1-8, you see that the Church of Corinth began with many Jews coming to know Jesus Christ as their savior.  And since water baptism was part of a Jew’s conversion it carried over into Paul’s ministry.  However, when Paul saw the confusion it caused he thanked God he only baptized a few and since Christ sent him not to baptize, he stopped.

 

You can also see the confusion about water baptism in Acts 10 when after Cornelius (a Gentle whom God sent Peter to preach to; which took a vision and the Spirit of God to convince Peter to go; and which also the eleven were upset with Peter for doing; and which became the means of the twelve coming to an understanding of Paul’s ministry in Acts 15) when Cornelius heard Peter says there was remission of sins in believing in the name of the Lord, “While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word  And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost” (Acts 10:44,45).  In Acts 2:38 Peter told the Jews that they had to repent and be baptized to receive the Holy Ghost.  But this Gentile got the Holy Ghost (the Spirit of life) without water baptism.  Peter not knowing what to do asked:  Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?”  And when no one objected: “he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord” (Acts 10:47,48).  So why was Cornelius baptized?  The answer is, because no one could see any reason why not.  But in I Corinthians Paul now sees the confusion it caused.  The same confusion exists today.

 

The remedy for the church today is to stop practicing water baptism and to keep the unity of the Spirit.  The unity of the Spirit is found in Ephesians 4:3-6 which includes only one baptism.  Since it is the unity of the Spirit, this is His baptism, which we read of in         I Corinthians 12:13.  “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.”  His unity unites all true believers today, even if we don’t obey this exhortation.

 

 

Why was Paul Baptized?

 

Thank you so much for replying to my question about "why did Paul Baptize anyone."  I have one more "tough one" for you.  Acts 22:16 absolutely frustrates me because it seems to say that Ananias baptized (water) Paul.  I know that some groups of Grace believers believe he did and did it on his own( not told to by God).  Others hold that there was no water in this baptism.  I thought that Paul was saved by grace on the road to Damascus so this "and wash away thy sins"  baffles me.  If you could shed any light on this subject, it would really be appreciated.

 

 

The gospel Paul preached to us is not the gospel Ananias preached to Saul.  It was afterwards, after Ananias was sent to Paul that the Lord revealed to Paul that gospel he was to preach to the Gentiles – Galatians 1:11,12; 2:1.

 

By God using Ananias to go to Paul, there is continuity or cohesion of the two programs of God in the sense that Paul did not just show up, separate from the Kingdom Saints with a separate Gospel and ministry to the Gentiles.  He first himself believed that Jesus is the Christ and taught this fact at Damascus.  Afterwards God calls him out to Arabia and gives him the gospel of grace, the gospel of the uncircumcision.  As Romans 1:1 says, “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God.”

 

When exactly Paul was saved is not told us.  What Ananias told Paul to do did not save Paul, at least not the baptism.  Certainly “calling on the name of the Lord” did.  Baptism was the step of faith in the Kingdom gospel, but when Paul wrote Romans 10 he said:

 

”But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;  That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.  For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.  For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.  For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. ”

 

Like you said, it was on the road to Damascus that Paul acknowledged Jesus as Lord and that God raised him from the dead – Acts 9:5,6   “And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutes; it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.  And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?”

 

When Paul learned the Gospel of Grace, I think he knew that he was saved on the road to Damascus.  That is when God showed him grace and when he believed on the risen Lord Jesus Christ.

 

It is interesting that when Paul went to Jerusalem to tell them that gospel he preached among the Gentiles, it was Peter who came to understand their salvation saying:  “But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they” (Acts 15:11).   This might not settle everything, but I think it might help.

 

 

 

 

Will Baptism be administered in ages to come?

 

I trust this e-mail finds you well!  I have heard you say that there is a possibility that water baptism may be over even in the Kingdom program (when it resumes)  because of advanced revelation (Hebrews-Revelation).  Do you have any further insight into this?  It would make a lot of sense to me that water baptism would be over for everyone - "Us" and "Them," now that both programs have completed revelation........  Thanks for your time!  By the way, I have learned so much from you!  I listen to you all the time!  I thank God for your ministry!  To be honest I consider you my mentor! 

  

Good to hear from you.  All is well here.  Sounds like you are keeping at the work.  I’m not sure what study you heard me say that, but when I am teaching at the home church, I feel free to think out loud, not realizing that the brethren are taking these studies and placing them on the Internet.  I do wonder how water baptism will be ministered in future ages.  I don’t think that the thought was an insight however, just a thought.  Certainly from Matthew 28:19 the Nations will be baptized into the Kingdom during the millennium.  The one that gives me most pause is the Tribulation period.  All those multitudes saved from all nations (Revelation 7:9);  Mark 16:15,16 seems to teach that they had to be baptized, but will there be time and availability in such a short and dangerous time?  Sorry, no more insights, just questions to be answered.

 

 

What is Baptism for the dead?

 

In I Corinthians 15:29 the people are being baptized for the dead.  Why?  What does this passage mean?

 

In I Corinthians 15:29 "Baptism for the dead" is a reference to being a martyr - dying for the benefit of another.  That is why Paul follows this statement with:  "And why stand we in jeopardy every hour?  I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily."  Paul is arguing, why would I put my life on the line if there was no resurrection from the dead.  Why be baptized into death for the spiritually dead if there is no resurrection.

 

Baptism into death is what the Lord was referring to in Luke 12:50 and Mark 10:38.   Again, I hope this helps.

 

 

Knowing baptism doesn’t save, can any harm be done if they do so anyway?

 

I sent you an email probably a month or two ago on baptism, talking about how I was against baptism. I have not changed my point of view really, but this is the best "pro baptism" argument I have seen. It doesn't refer to baptism as an ordinance, like most people try and pull. It was written by my dad, but I think he learned it from Dr. Dave Reese. (I am just guessing, it sounds like what Dr. Reese says in the appendix of his Hebrews study) When you find the time, could you tell me what you think of this "argument"? Which to me, the water baptism issue isn't a big deal, as long as you know it doesn't save you. (or make you win favor with God or anything else unscriptural). If someone does get water baptized, the most it could possibly be is just a testimony thing. Like I said, I haven't changed my mind really, but I think the whole issue causes too much division among believers, when it is not a big deal to me.   I have come to the conclusion, that you are not "out of Gods will" if you aren't baptized, nor in his will for getting baptized. If you want to do it as a testimony and picture of the death, burial, and resurrection, go ahead. But that's all it will be, and don't try and talk everybody into being baptized if they aren't, Paul didn't think it was a big deal nor did he emphasize it AT ALL. All anybody can scripturally say is that Paul is our pattern for this age, and he baptized new converts. However, we don't follow everything he DID, as much as what he taught and told us to do in his epistles. Do you agree with this last paragraph, and what do you think of my Dads view below? Thank you for your time sir.

 

 

Baptism is certainly not part of the gospel for this age.  If it was then it could not be called “Grace.”  Church attendance, giving to missions, studying the Bible, etc. are not part of the gospel either.  A person can be saved without attending church, giving an offering, or ever studying the Bible.  This, however, does not mean we should not participate in any of these things.  I do not see specific command to be water baptized under Grace.  We are told to be followers of Paul as he is of Christ.  Paul certainly water baptized during his ministry.  There is no specific statement of Paul stating that he is stopping the practice of water baptism.  Note what Paul says in the following about water baptism.

 1Cor.1

[13] Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

[14] I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;

[15] Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.

[16] And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.

[17] For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

 

Paul indicates in verse 13 that it would be wrong to be baptized in Paul’s name.  In verse 14 Paul names two people that he baptized.  In verse 15 Paul says that he thanks God that he baptized only these two, not because baptism was no longer for this age or was gradually fading out, but people would falsely accuse him of baptizing in his own name.   If verse 17 teaches that water baptism should not be practiced, then why did Paul baptize Crispus and Gaius?  If water baptism was wrong for this age wouldn’t Paul have said in verse 14 & 15, “I thank God I baptized only Crispus & Gaius, because the practice is not for this age or will cease in the future?”  This would have been the perfect place for Paul to state water baptism was not for this age or that this practice was going to cease.  Paul was careful to mention things that would cease in 1 Corinthians 13, “[8] Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.   
[9] For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.  
[10] But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.”  Water baptism is not in the list! 

The strongest argument against water baptism is the “one baptism” statement in Ephesians 4.  The problem with this argument is that Paul is not necessarily arguing about a number in relation to quantity but to quality.  Ephesians 4 states, “[4] There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;           
[5] One Lord, one faith, one baptism,           
[6] One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.” 

Is there more than one body  Yes.  Note in 1 Corinthians 15, “[39] All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.
[40] There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.”  Note there are celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies.

Is there more than one spirit?  There are at least two.  The spirit of man and the Spirit of God.  “1Cor.2

[11] For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

There is more than one faith.  Ephesians 1:15 speaks of personal faith in Christ.  Romans 3:22 mentions the faith of Christ. 

There is more than one Lord.  1Cor.8

[5] For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,). 

In Ephesians 4 Paul is referring to these different things as being one in the spiritual sense.  There are many physical bodies, but only one spiritual body of Christ.  Water baptism is a physical baptism, yet there is only one spiritual baptism.  A person could be baptized in water more than once, but he can only be spiritually baptized one time into the Body of Christ.

Most people over emphasize water baptism.  Some even equate or almost equate it with salvation.  This is wrong.  Many of the people that teach water baptism is not for this age over emphasize their position as well.  With many this seems to be a “hobby horse” doctrine.  My position is that since Paul water baptized after a person received the gospel of grace I am going to follow that same pattern, since Paul is our pattern (1 Tim 1:16).  Since Paul made no big deal out of the subject, neither will I.

 

When I first came into an understanding of Pauline Dispensational truth for the Body of Christ, I had the same point of view as your conclusion.  That was until I was teaching the book of Romans and got to chapter 6 where I learned that the power of living the Christian life was in knowing that I have been baptized into the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ.  In Him I have a new life and identity.  If that truth gets watered down by teaching water baptism is a picture (which is what most teach Romans 6 is about and what is put on most of the baptism certificates) then you've have just destroyed a new Believers growth.

 

There is also two other problems with that view.  The first is that it is unscriptural.  Water Baptism in the Bible was "for the remission of sins."  We cannot make up our own reason.  Either it is for the remission of sins or it has been superceded by the preaching of the cross.  When we make up a reason to continue the practice we are teaching others not to go by what the Bible says, we can also go by our own understanding.

 

The verse that finally got me to totally dismiss water baptism in the present age of grace is Ephesians 4:3-6.  After the teaching of Ephesians 1-3 - the doctrinal reason God formed the Body of Christ, Ephesians 4:3-6 tells us we are to endeavor to keep the unity the Spirit of God has created in this age of grace.  We do that by protecting (not adding to or taking away from) the perfect seven-fold unity of all members of the body of Christ.  One of those is "One Baptism."  If we add another baptism (other than 1 Corinthians 12:13 "by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body") we destroy God's unity for the sake of creating our own unity.  Hence "I'm a Baptist," I'm a Presbyterian," "I'm a Lutheran" ....etc.

 

As far as the teachings that follow your paragraph, 1 Corinthians 1:14 & 17 clearly state the reason Paul was glad he only baptized a few is because "Christ sent him not to baptize, but to preach the gospel."  So this person thinks Paul continued to do what Christ sent him not to do???

 

The horrible twisting of Ephesians 4:3-6 is self evident.  How dare someone say there is more than "one faith, one body, one Lord" contradicting the verses he just quoted and using the same words in another context for the sake of adding another baptism.  The context of Ephesians 4 is "UNITY" and the person says "ONE" is not an emphasis in the passage.  The error is self evident.

 

Give it some thought and be patient with those who still have not "heard of the dispensation of the grace of God" - Ephesians 3:2.

 

 

Is Baptism an ordinance to be kept?  Should you get baptized to represent the death, burial and resurrection of Christ?

 

Hello, I am 15 years old. I go to ***** Baptist church in Locust Grove, Ga. It is an independent King James Bible believing church. We are dispensational and our church tries to emphasize the books of the bible written to the Body of Christ, which were written by Paul. We believe in salvation by grace and not of works. Ephesians 2:8-9.  I do not believe baptism in water has anything to do with us in the Church Age. It is definitely not part of the gospel of the grace of God, 1 Corinthians 1:17, but why do even a lot of dispensationalist say "baptizing doesn't save you, but you should get baptized because it represents the death, burial, ad resurrection of Christ."? I haven't ever seen where Paul said that. (Jesus speaking to us through Paul's writing's that is) Paul said by inspiration, "Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things." -2 Timothy 2:7. I believe the King James Bible is Gods word, so I will look at what Paul said about baptism. Ephesians 4:5 says  "One Lord, one faith, one baptism,". Okay, so there is one baptism I need in the Grace Age. That one baptism is not with water, but when we got saved, God baptized us into the Body of Christ. My pastor and all the teachers I know and listen to say that "baptizing doesn't save you, but you should get baptized because it represents the death, burial, ad resurrection of Christ.", but why did  they say that? Also, why do people say that baptism is an ordinance? 1 Corinthians 11:2 - "Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you."  In the scripture Paul baptized in the Acts period, but in the scriptures he wrote he never delivered any ordinance for Church Age believers to get baptized in water.

 

 

The "ordinances" of  I Cor. 11:2 is not ordinances of the law, nor of baptism, not even of communion.  It is a reference to "order" as in "Let all things be done decently and in order" - I Cor. 14:40.  Chapters 11-15 have to do with order.  Even chapter 15 is the order of resurrections.  So you are right in your view of baptism.

 

Baptist Churches water baptize quoting Romans 6:3-5.  But even most of them know that Romans 6 is NOT water baptism.  They do it based on Baptist Doctrine as they were taught and defend.  Water baptism in the Bible was never symbolic of the death, burial and resurrection.  It was "for remission of sins" and was preached before the understanding of the cross revealed and explained by Paul.

 Keep up the good studies!

 

 

Why wouldn’t water baptism be for today since Paul water baptized some people?

 

I enjoyed browsing your web site but I had a couple of questions.  1-You say that Paul’s Acts Gospels are for the Body of Christ. I can see where you get that from BUT if you claim that head covering and the Lord’s Supper is for us today because it was done by Paul in 1 Corinthians then why wouldn’t water baptism be for today since Paul water baptized some people?

 

2-If we are to take 1 Corinthians as being for the Body of Christ then why is the gifts not also present today? Paul spoke in tongues more than anyone.

 

I believe that Paul was not given the revelation of the mystery all at the same time. I believe it was a progressive revelation and was completed when Paul finished 2 Timothy.

 

Think about these things.

1-Paul talked in tongues

2-Paul was water baptized

3-Paul water baptized people

4-Paul healed people.

5-Paul says in Colossians that the ordinances are nailed to the cross. He did not say that “except for head covering and the Lord’s Supper” that the rest all nailed to the cross. ALL are nailed to the cross.

 

Anyway, I just wanted to speak my piece whether it means anything or not. We are saved by grace through faith and NOTHING else. When we start adding even 1 ordinance then it is no longer grace but law.

 

 

Always good to hear from a fellow believer even if we have differences.  I don't think you need an explanation.  You probably know how I would answer your questions.  It is however interesting that the answers to all your questions - baptism, Paul water baptizing, tongues, healing ... are all answered in          I Corinthians - where Paul is glad he stopped baptizing and why; where he said tongues would cease and what their purpose was; even what sign gifts including healing is associated with.  And you could not be more right when you wrote: "When we start adding even 1 ordinance then it is not longer grace but law."  That is exactly what Romans 11:6 would teach us.  Thanks for writing,

 

 

Is baptism necessary for salvation?

 

I recently moved to the area and am searching for a new church.  After reading your beliefs, I have a quick question.  When you say that baptism has no place in God's spiritual program, do you mean that you don't believe baptism is necessary for salvation or you don't believe in any sort of baptism, including symbolic baptism as a testament of your new life in Christ?

 

 Thanks for checking out our ministry. I am glad you are looking closely at our doctrinal statement. We do not practice water baptism here at Grace Bible Church. We see that as a ministry to Israel and according to Mark 1:4; Acts 2:38.

 

Water baptism is associated with John who the Bible calls “the Baptist.” He was a prophet sent to the nation of Israel. Water baptism was part of the “gospel of the kingdom” and was required “for the remission of sins” (Matthew 3:1-3; Mark 1:4). The Gospel of the Kingdom was the good news that Israel’s King has come and will sit on the throne of David and reign over Israel and the world as prophesied and promised. Water baptism was the means of identifying who in Israel believed that gospel and who in Israel would be cleansed to go into that Kingdom (Luke 7:29,30; Mark 16:15,16; Acts 2:37,38).   Again: the "Gospel of the Kingdom" (Matthew 4:17,23) is distinctly different from the "Gospel of the Grace of God" (Acts 20:24).

 

John the Baptist "Preached baptism" (Mark 1:4; Acts 13:24) but in I Corinthians 1:17,18 Paul "Preached the Cross." Before Paul no one preached the "Good News" of the Cross. In Matthew 16:21,22; Luke 18:31-34 it is clear that the Apostles, during the life and ministry of Jesus Christ on earth, did not even know that he was going to die. Yet in Matthew 10:5-10 they were sent out to preach. They surely did not preach "the Blood," "the Cross"!

 

God began something new with Paul; the dispensation of the grace of God; a mystery; a secret revelation was given to him about how God postponed His dealings with Israel (until a future date) but in the mean time He has turned to the Gentiles in his grace and is forming “the Body of Christ.”  With the salvation and commissioning of Paul as the Apostle of the Gentiles (Romans 11:13) came "the preaching of the Cross."  Today we are saved by grace through faith in the finished work of the Lord Jesus in His death, burial and resurrection as the full, complete payment for our sins.

 

However there is a baptism today.  We are instructed to “keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Ephesians 4:3-6).  Today there is “one baptism.”  Since it is the Spirit’s unity this is a spiritual baptism, “by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body” – I Corinthians 12:13.  The verse in Colossians 2:12 and Romans 6:3,4 is a good case in point.  This baptism is the means whereby we are placed by the Spirit of God into Jesus Christ's death, burial and resurrection.  This is "the operation of God."

 

I'm sure this will bring up many other questions and it may be new to your thinking but I hope this helps you appreciate the unity we have in Christ.  Being water baptized into a denomination or church membership takes away that unity and actually causes divisions.

 

 

Is baptism a requirement for salvation?

 

Thanks for checking out our ministry. I am glad you are looking closely at our doctrinal statement. We do not practice water baptism here at Grace Bible Church. We see that as a ministry to Israel and according to Mark 1:4; Acts 2:38; and I Corinthians 1:17,18; it was required of them "For The Remission Of Sins." With the salvation and commissioning of Paul as the Apostle of the Gentiles (Romans 11:13) God not only postponed his dealings with Israel (until he resumes with the pouring out of His wrath) but in His grace turned to us Gentiles and revealed through Paul "The preaching of the Cross." No one preached the "good news" of the cross until Paul came on the scene in the Bible. Today we are saved by grace through faith in the finished work of the Lord Jesus in His death, burial and resurrection as the full, complete payment for our sins.

I'm sure this will bring up many other questions and you realize I could write a much longer answer but that is the short of it. I would love to talk more about this with you and your husband, or we could send you some literature. I hope you will let us minister further to you. Please let me know in what way you would be comfortable.

 

 

How do you explain baptism recorded in the New Testament?

 

I was looking for a church to attend that gave the Grace Word of God. Reading the information on your website I notice that you do not believe in water baptism. This disturbed me very much because most of everything else you teach I could say amen to. How do you explain the New Testament water baptism that took place in Acts 8:38 ??   Or in Acts 10:45-47? Also in Col 2:10-11 God gives us the new sign of the Covenant, not an outward sign, but an inward sign. This takes place when we are buried with Him in baptism. Your statement concerning the washing they gave priests in the Old Testament should direct you to the washing that we need as priests (Rev 1:6 & 10:5). We are called to the ministry of reconciliation. I know that our Lord is continually revealing Himself to us. When I think I have it all figured out, He shows me something else to take me deeper into the Word. Please help me to understand your position more clearly.

 

I Thessalonians 5:21 says "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." Check out what you've been taught about Water Baptism and see if it matches the Scriptures. Consider this: The failure of the average Bible student to recognize the differences between Peter and Paul, the Gospel of the Kingdom and the Gospel of the Grace of God, is the reason why there are so many churches and denominations. Paul was not one of the 12 Apostles (I Corinthians 15:5,8). Who then is Paul? If the Lord chose 12 Apostles and trained them for over 3 years, why then 1 year after He ascended into heaven did Jesus Christ saved and make Paul an Apostle? According to I Timothy 1:11-16; Romans 11:11-15; Ephesians 3:1-9; God began something new with Paul; the dispensation of the grace of God; a mystery; a secret revelation was given to him about how God postponed His dealings with Israel (until a future date) but in the mean time He has turned to the Gentiles in his grace and is forming “the Body of Christ.”

Water baptism is associated with John who the Bible calls “the Baptist.” He was a prophet sent to the nation of Israel. Water baptism was part of the “gospel of the kingdom” and was required “for the remission of sins” (Matthew 3:1-3; Mark 1:4). The Gospel of the Kingdom was the good news that Israel’s King has come and will sit on the throne of David and reign over Israel and the world as prophesied and promised. Water baptism was the means of identifying who in Israel believed that gospel and who in Israel would be cleansed to go into that Kingdom (Luke 7:29,30; Mark 16:15,16; Acts 2:37,38).

Again: the "Gospel of the Kingdom" (Matthew 4:17,23) is distinctly different from the "Gospel of the Grace of God" (Acts 20:24). Not knowing the difference is what brings so much confusion about works and grace (baptism, endurance, selling all, loosing life, and lordship salvation); all the issues which frustrate the grace of God.

John the Baptist "Preached baptism" (Mark 1:4; Acts 13:24) but in I Corinthians 1:17,18 Paul "Preached the Cross." Before Paul no one preached the "Good News" of the Cross. In Matthew 16:21,22; Luke 18:31-34 it is clear that the Apostles, during the life and ministry of Jesus Christ on earth, did not even know that he was going to die. Yet in Matthew 10:5-10 they were sent out to preach. They surely did not preach "the Blood," "the Cross"! With the salvation and commissioning of Paul as the Apostle of the Gentiles (Romans 11:13) God not only postponed his dealings with Israel (until he resumes with the pouring out of His wrath) but in His grace turned to us Gentiles and revealed through Paul "The preaching of the Cross.” The means by which ultimately Israel will be saved, but most assuredly the means by which today we (Gentiles) are saved by grace through faith in the finished work of the Lord Jesus. Faith in His death, burial and resurrection as the full, complete payment for our sins (I Corinthians 15:3,4; Romans 3:23-28; Ephesians 2:8,9).

The two references in Acts 10 and Acts 16 do not teach that a Believer in this age of grace should be water baptized. In Acts 10:47 Peter baptized Cornelius (a Gentile) out of confusion. It is a question more than a command. Peter does not understand why he is being sent to a Gentile. He does not know what to say to a Gentile (Acts 10:36,37). And finally he does not understand how this Gentile received the Holy Ghost without being baptized (compare Acts 2:38 with Acts 10:44-47). In Acts 16 Paul baptized Lydia and the Philippian Jailer’s family. It is not clear to me why he did, but I know from his words in I Corinthians 1:14-17 that the Lord Jesus Christ did not send Paul to baptize and that Paul was glad he only baptized a few. Instead he was to preach the gospel of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ for the propitiation, justification and remission of our sins. Paul first visited Corinth in Acts 18 and he wrote the letter of I Corinthians during his stay at Ephesus in Acts 19:10. There is no record of Paul water baptizing again. Instead he teaches that we are to “keep the unity of the Spirit” which requires “one baptism” today. Since it is the Spirit’s unity this is how “by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body” – I Corinthians 12:13. Water Baptism divides believers today into denominations and church memberships, thus breaking the unity of the Spirit. The verse in Colossians 2:12 is a good case in point. Here is how we are placed by the Spirit of God into Jesus Christ's death, burial and resurrection. It is called in the verse "the operation of God." No man can do this. And water baptism is not a picture of this. Man made that up. Romans 6:3-5 is a Spiritual fact, not a water ceremony. This is how God saves us and declares us righteous.

Just a couple more thoughts. By learning how to rightly divide the scriptures one can see more clearly the meaning of Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth." God's purpose for the nation of Israel is to restore His reign on planet earth. God's purpose for the Body of Christ is to restore his authority in the heavens (Ephesians 6:11,12). Now we can understand what God was doing, is doing and will do - Ephesians 1:9,10.

In failing to “rightly divide the scriptures most all denominations and churches start the Church - the Body of Christ at the day of Pentecost but then none actually practice the things that happened at Pentecost such as "having all things in common." They pick and chose which part of Pentecost they want to follow. They should pick none and follow Paul. Water baptism was part of that program. Leave it there. Keeping Israel's program separate from the Body of Christ, and by knowing what God is actually doing and accomplishing today will clarify what God's will and ministry is for us. If we preach the wrong gospel, or practice the wrong will of God we will not be approved and will be ashamed someday at the judgment seat of Christ - see II Timothy 2:15 and I Corinthians 3:10-12.

I hope this will help you. If it is all new to you, print this out, study it by looking up the scripture references. Faithfully pray about it and may the Lord give thee light.

 

 

Is Israel saved by baptism and the blood of Christ?

 

How are you? I hope you are doing fine.

Again I have a question, because I am teaching Acts right now, but there are things which are difficult to grasp sometimes like this:

Nowhere in Acts can I find Peter talking about the blood of Christ. In 1 Peter 1:18 he does. In Acts 2:38 he talks about forgiveness of their sins (plural) by being baptized with water. I know that they had to repent in that one year extension for the crucifixion of their Messiah (Luke 13:6-9). But what about their personal sins? Peter speaks about their sins in plural. The crucifixion of their Messiah was one sin. So does he also talk in that verse about their personal sins?

But do they understand that it is by the blood of Jesus at that time?

Christ already said that to them about His blood with the last supper, and the letter of Hebrews also talks about the blood. But now, for many people it is difficult to understand about what they understood and when they understood about the blood of Christ. So, they have forgiveness by baptizing and by the blood. Of course, it is only by the blood and baptizing with water is a symbolic cleansing for the priesthood, but it remains confusing.

 

And Christ tells in Luke 12:50 and Matt.20:22 about the baptism in death, but do the apostles later understand this baptism like we understand it from Romans 6 the same as we do? That our sin nature is crucified with Christ we know from Paul, but do they know that too? Or do they only know about their sins in plural, then they need to ask for forgiveness after they sin or not?

I hope you can give an answer on this difficult subject. How it is for us, we do understand by Paul. But how they understand it in Acts and later on is difficult for us to grasp. I hope you can give a bit more light on this.

 

 

It is great to hear from you. I love the intensity of your study of the Word of God.  I am going to give you two short answers to your questions. Hopefully that will be enough for you to think it through.  In Israel there has always been individual personal salvation as well as national salvation. The baptism of repentance separated out those who would be saved in Israel. The understanding of how God would bring about His promise of salvation from sin was not understood until Paul. Galatians 3:23 says "before faith came...". Paul was the first to preach justification by faith through the cross. However in Acts 15 when he went to Jerusalem he explains "that gospel" and in Acts 15:11 Peter came to the conclusion: "But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they."

As for the understanding of the "crucified life" and the doctrine of Romans 6, read I Peter 4:1-4 and see if you see what I think I see Peter saying. It sounds like Romans 6 to me.

Thanks for staying in touch. I will be away all next week, but let me know if this was helpful.

 

How do you explain baptism recorded in the New Testament?

Is Israel saved by baptism and the blood of Christ?

 

 

 

 

LIST OF 12 BAPTISMS

 

Do you have a listing of all 12 baptisms you refer to in Dictionary of the Gospel?

 

I took the idea of 12 Baptisms from Charles Baker's book "Real Baptism."  On page 5 he lists these 12:

 

 1.  Christ Baptizing with the Holy Spirit

 2.  The Holy Spirit Baptizing into the Body of Christ

 3.  Death Baptism

 4.  The Baptism of Fire

 5.  The Typical Baptism of Noah's Ark

 6.  Baptism for the Dead

 7.  Baptism into Moses

 8.  The Divers Baptisms of the Law

 9.  Traditional Jewish Baptisms

10.  John's Baptism of Israel for the Remission of Sins

11.  Christ's Baptism by John to Fulfill All Righteousness

12.  The Pentecostal Baptism for the Remission of Sins

 

 

 

*BODY OF CHRIST*

 

What does the bible teach about heirs and joint heirs? Is there a difference? If so, how? If not, how? 

 

Sorry for the delay in returning your email.  I am just that far behind.  For that reason also I am just going to give you a short answer.

 

Being an heir of God is to be an heir of eternal life.  To be a joint heir with Christ is to share in His inheritance.  All who are a member of the Body of Christ will share in Jesus Christ's heavenly inheritance as the Kingdom Saints will in His earthly inheritance since He is "heir of all things" (Hebrews 1:2). 

 

 

Quick question, are we (the Body of Christ) the wild olive branches grafted in?

 

Actually the "wild olive tree" are the Gentiles.  Israel (believers & unbelievers) were in a place where they could have life.  In the fall of Israel it is the unbelievers who were cut off.  Now the Gentiles are grafted in the positional of life, but Paul warns them that they too would be cut off if they don't continue in the faith.  i.e. don't respond to God's offer in grace.  Then they will be cut off at the end of the age of grace.

 

Jesus Christ is the root (Revelation 22:16 comes to mind). He is the source of life and the promise of life. What we partake of today is the promise of life in Christ Jesus.

 

Here is something else to consider. In Romans 11:17 the words "WITH THEM," do they refer to the Branches still connected to the Olive Tree or to the Branches broken off. The last mention was to the broken off branches. And that agrees with the age of grace. We who were cut off Gentiles are now grafted in with the cut off Jews in One Body once we respond in faith.

 

 

*BOOK SPECIFIC QUESTIONS*

 

Genesis 6

 

Tom, what is your take on these verses? I have a friend who contends that these 'sons of God' were actually angels from heaven sent to mate with the women of the earth and this produced the giants spoken of here in verse four. I say that these 'sons of God' were the line of Seth who mated with Cain's line. Did I explain my question clearly? Thanks

 

Concerning your question about "The Sons of God" and "Daughters of Men" in Genesis 6 and whether that refers to godly and ungodly linage from Adam, or Angelic and human women marrying and having children who were giants, has been debated with much heat.  I've have been on both sides of the argument.  What settled it for me was to finally let the Bible define the terms.

 

Luke tracing the genealogy of Jesus Christ all the way back to Adam in Luke 3 keeps saying: "which was the son of" so and so, each begotten of his father until it comes to verse 38 where Adam being a created being by God is called "the son of God." 

 

No other human is called "a son of God" until after the death, burial, resurrection and ascension of the Lord Jesus Christ where He poured out the Holy Spirit.  Only then did Believers "become sons of God" (John 1:11,12) and John could write: "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... Beloved, now are we the sons of God, ..." (I John 3:1,2).

 

Prior to the regeneration of man only Angels were called "the sons of God" as seen in Job 1:6 and Job 2:1.  As Adam, Angels are created beings and therefore called "sons of God."

 

Therefore the "sons of God" in Genesis 6 can only be Angels.  Then comparing II Peter 2:4,5 with Jude 6, these Angels fell when they "left their first estate" and came down to the daughters of men.

 

Apparently Satan attached on the promised "seed of the woman" which would lead to the Lord Jesus Christ, but "...Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations" (Genesis 6:9) and God preserved the seed through him.

 

Give this some thought.  It persuaded me.

 

 

 

Revelation 12

 

First of all I just want to thank you again for the in depth study you bring that helps us search the Scriptures and study!!!  It's exciting to dig into the Word of Truth rightly divided. 

 

There is something that is puzzling J. and myself and we cannot come to a conclusion by studying on our own - so we need some insight from you.  We recently heard a "Grace" pastor teach on Revelation 12 and we have a question about that.  He said that the "man child" in verse 5 is the 144,000 and they would be caught to God in heaven.  J. and I have not really studied Revelation but we know enough to understand that we won't be here!!  Normally, we wouldn't give it a thought - but this has got us puzzled - we would like some clarification please.  Like I said, we are just very curious because we thought the man child was Jesus Christ.

 

 

It took me a while to write back because I kept thinking your question was going to take some time to answer but then I decided to give you the short version.  I do agree with the person you heard.  If John is caught up into the future Day of the Lord and is seeing events that are future, then the man child is not the Lord Jesus born of Mary in the past but someone who is identified with him in the future.  The 144,000 show up at the beginning of the tribulation, and are called the “firstfruits” unto God in Rev. 14.  Their preaching from the start brings about the birth of the nation.  In Rev.12 the man child is caught up unto God while the believing remnant flees into the wilderness.  In Rev. 14 the 144,000 are with the Lord in heaven, redeemed from the earth.  So it seems they are the man child who is caught up to God in Rev. 12.  Remember the 144,000 cannot die.  They seem to be a very special people.  I have attached a study I passed out when we studied the book of Revelation pointing out who I think the 144,000 are.  Perhaps this will give you even more to think about.  Study On!

 

 

Hebrews 6 and 10 has me terrified.  Is there any hope?

 

I have a question that has caused me quite some grief the past week and would really appreciate some biblical advice.  I have a brother-in-law who is insisting on calling Jesus by the Hebrew or Aramaic, untranslated name.  He has a lot of reasons why he is doing this, which is fine but he seems to think that those of us using the English translated name Jesus are not saved.  This has caused me a lot of grief.  I know that there is only one name given under heaven whereby we are to be saved and this has flipped me upside down.  There are many languages in the world and many pronunciations, does it matter what language we use to call upon Jesus?  He knows we are calling upon him whether it is in English, Greek or Hebrew right?  I was so sure in my salvation until this. In fact there is even controversy on the shortened verses long form of Christs Hebrew name to add to all the confusion. And now I’m just confused and fearful of being correct and not being deceived or accidentally denying my savior by using one name over the other.  Is this not the same Jesus who gave his life for us, whichever name we choose to use? Is this a non-issue? Can you lose you salvation by going back and forth like this.  I in no way ever meant to deny my savior, I just want to have his name right!! I guess I am just fearful because of Hebrews 6:6-9 and Hebrews 10:26.  Can someone unintentionally do this?  Could someone want to come to Christ but be told no by Him and therefore have to live the rest of their life with the knowledge of impending doom and hell?  I just feel so confused.  Any input to help me sort through this would be appreciated.  I want to rest again and rid myself of this fear. 

 

Second email request:

 

I apologize if I am coming off as annoying.  It's just that I am really hoping to speak with you for some spiritual advice. I am in what I call a spiritual crisis which is explained in my past email.  I am paralyzed with fear that is affecting my life.  I have a small child and another one on the way and just cannot function because of the excessive worry.  I have searched the Internet for answers to Hebrews 6 and 10 and most of interpretations are a death sentence.  I don't think I have done this, obviously I have not went elsewhere, but is this something that can happen by accident in the heart??  What if someone did do this, does that mean they are handed a death sentence and even if they desire to be restored they just never can? Their life would be lived with the fear of hell with each passing day?  Esau is usually the example I read about, he sought repentance and never found it.  Can someone really be outside of any grace and hope?

 

Sorry I could not get back to you sooner.  Let me assure you that you cannot committee the sins of Hebrews 6 & 10 for two reasons.  First you are not a Hebrew that these warnings are written to and secondly you do not live in the last days for which these warnings apply.

 

Since I do not now have the time to explain these verses to you, I have instead attached a survey study of the book of Hebrews.  When you understand what the book is about and the time it covers, you should be at rest.  Ephesians 1:12-14 makes it clear that when you trust the gospel of your salvation (I Corinthians 15:3,4 - that Jesus Christ died for your sins and rose again, and you trusted that alone for your salvation) you are eternally secure, sealed with God's Holy Spirit.  What is true for us in this age is not the same as when God again deals with Israel in the last days - the future 7 years (we call the tribulation) preceding the Lord Jesus Christ's return.

 

Revelation:  Clarifying the “churches” in Revelation 1,2,3

 

Recently I've been listening to Pastor Richard Jordan.

 

I think he is a wonderful teacher and I do understand the:  "Times Past"?..(O.T. up to 1st few chapters in Acts)?.."But Now" (Church age) (Romans to Philemon) ??."Ages to Come"  (Hebrews to Revelation) as God dealing again with the nation Israel.

 

Here's my question:  I thought Rev. was God picking up the program with Israel (after the rapture of the church)?..however when reading Rev.1:4?..it reads?. "JOHN?TO THE SEVEN CHURCHES?..

 

I remember you teaching "always look to see 'who is speaking?  'to whom is God speaking TO? and 'what is being said'?.in order to rightly divide the Word of truth.

 

So, when reading Revelation and I saw it's the Revelation OF Jesus?TO John??TO the 7 churches (1:4)??I was sort of confused.

 

Can you give me some clarity on this???   I know Chapters 2: and 3: are about the 7 churches?..is this who John was to tell?....

Yet?.after Chapter 4?.it's all about the tribulation and God's winding down with Israel and ushering His kingdom.

 

Appreciate your time and your teaching of the Word of God.   Many things are very clear now that hadn't been before.

Thanks so much and God bless you.

 

Thanks for watching Forgotten Truths.  I think the following will help you with your question.

 

There is a common error which causes much confusion.  The age in which we live today (the "But Now") is called "the dispensation of the grace of God" - Ephesians 3:2.  It is the age of "grace."  It is not the "church age" as so many say.  When the Apostle Paul refers to us as the "church" he is referring to what he said in Ephesians 1:22,23  "the church which is his body."  We are "the Body of Christ."  The reason Paul said "the church which is his body" is because there is a "church" which is not his body.

 

The Lord does have two churches.  "Church" is a called out assembly.  Acts 7:38 Moses led "the church in the wilderness" 

 

Matthew 16:18 the Lord told Peter "upon this rock I will build my church."  In the Gospels and the early part of Acts the Lord Jesus Christ and the Twelve Apostles were calling out a believing remnant from within Israel.  At Pentecost, this was the "church" they were "added to" (Acts 2:47).  This church is "the nation bearing forth the fruits," the nation the "Kingdom" shall be "given to."  Peter calls them "a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people" (I Peter 2:9).

 

When God postponed building the kingdom church, and sent Paul to the Gentiles, it was for the purpose of forming "the church which is his body" (Ephesians 1:22,23).  The "church which is his body" is God's called out assembly from Jews and Gentiles which, when saved, are no longer Jew or Gentile, but the "body of Christ."  We are called out, not to be a nation for the purpose of setting up God's Kingdom on the earth, but a "body" raptured and made to "sit in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Ephesians 2:6).

 

God has a two fold purpose according to Ephesians 1:10.  A purpose for the heavens and a purpose in the earth.  Both brought under the headship of the Lord Jesus Christ in the "dispensation of the fullness of times."

 

The age of grace interrupted God's calling out of the Kingdom church, and postponed their program.  However, Christ's earthly Kingdom is still their hope and the books of Hebrews - Revelation were written to  prepare those Saints (had the age of grace ended in their life time) and those who will live in the time of the future tribulation, to endure the events covered in the book of Revelation.  This is the next event in their program. Since Acts 8:1 and 11:19 we are told that the Kingdom Saints were scattered.  Eventually they were scattered as far as the places where they are when Peter writes to them in I Peter 1:1 and as James 1:1 simply says:  "to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad."  These are the Seven Churches John is writing to in Revelation 1-3 and in each case telling them of their strengths and weakness and what they need to do to "overcome."  It is the events that follow in Revelation 4-19 that they are being prepared to overcome.  They must endure to the end to be saved into the Kingdom.  Many must die in the process of overcoming the Anti-Christ and his mark.  In reading the letters to the Seven Churches it is easy to see that they are Jewish Kingdom Churches. 

 

Peter, James and John fulfilled their agreement with Paul in Galatians 2:9 that Paul "should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision."  The "circumcision" being the believing remnant of Israel.  That is exactly who Peter, James and John write to in their epistles.

 

 

CONTINUED  . . .

 

Thank you Tom for your detailed answer. 

I have never heard of "the Lord having two churches" but with the scriptures given, I was able to see somewhat what you meant.  I had always thought there was only the ONE church. 

I understand Peter, James and John writing to the circumcision and Paul writing to the Gentiles.

I have another question though regarding your statement re: John writing to the 7 churches in Revelation….. (see below)

These are the Seven Churches John is writing to in Revelation 1-3 and in each case telling them of their strengths and weakness and what they need to do to "overcome."  It is the events that follow in Revelation 4-19 that they are being prepared to overcome.  They must endure to the end to be saved into the Kingdom.  Many must die in the process of overcoming the Anti-Christ and his mark.  Reading the letters to the Seven Churches it is easy to see that they are Jewish Kingdom Churches.  (bold emphasis mine).

In one of Paul's epistle…he writes to the Church of Ephesus…..Is that considered the "church which is the Body of Christ?"  which would be 'raptured; and if so……then in the Book of Revelation where John is giving a message to the 7 Jewish Kingdom Churches….is this church of Ephesus a different church …that would be going to the tribulation and would have to overcome?……or ……..is it one and the same Church of Ephesus that Paul was writing to?????

Appreciate your time Tom in answering my questions.  I try to 'dig deep' into God's Word and I know all the answers are there.

Thanks so much for your answer.

 

(CONTINUED CLAIRIFICATION)

 

First just to point out the Jewish-ness of the 7 churches in Revelation consider the setting of the vision of Chapter 1:12-20.  The "Candlesticks" and the "Angels" who are the "Messengers to the 7 Churches."

 

The "Candlesticks" were the light of God in Israel's Temple.  "Angels" according to Hebrews 1:14 through 2:5 are "ministering spirits" to those who are "heirs" of the "world to come."  That is Israel's "salvation" - Hebrews; and the Kingdom the Lord Jesus began to preach unto them.

 

Then note:  "remove thy candlestick" - Rev 2:5; "synagogue of Satan" - Rev 2:9; "Balaam" and "children of Israel" - Rev 2:14; "Jezebel" and "my servants" - Rev 2:20; "the key of David" - Rev 3:7; "Jews and are not" - Rev 3:9; and the promise "grant to sit with me in my throne" - Rev 3:21; are all terms and promises concerning the nation of Israel.

 

Now concerning the "Churches" particularly "Ephesus."  Remember what Paul wrote in Romans 15:17-20

 

"I have therefore whereof I may glory through Jesus Christ in those things which pertain to God.  For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ hath not wrought by me, to make the Gentiles obedient, by word and deed, Through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ. Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation:"

 

When Paul launched his second apostolic journey in Acts 16:6-9, it is very interesting that after ministering in "the region of Galatia" the Holy Spirit guided Paul away from places.  Even "Galatia" being called a "region" that incorporated certain cities is interesting.  When you study that region there are two parts, a northern and southern.  Keep that in mind.

 

When Paul decided to go to Asia (where Ephesus is at) he was "forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia."  After that he thought to go to Bithynia (next to the Northern region of Galatia), but "the Spirit suffered them not " to go into Bithynia.  So eventually the Spirit guided them into Macedonia.

 

What makes that interesting is when you read  I Peter 1:1

 

"Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,"

 

Peter is writing the Jewish believers who are now scattered among the Gentiles.  The cities in bold are the places Paul was forbidden to go to.  I believe Peter's Galatia is different from Paul's Galatia.  However there is no question about Asia and the city of Ephesus.  There were Jewish Kingdom believers scattered there and Paul did not build on another man's foundation.

 

But some years later Paul finally did preach in Ephesus.  First for a short time in Acts 18:19-21, and then after that when he returned in Acts 19 "And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks" - verse 10. In fact the verses that follow indicate he stayed another year totaling a three year stay.  Here according to Romans 15:17-20 he preached to "Gentiles."  This is the church of Ephesus Paul wrote to.

 

John in the book of Revelation is witting to the Jewish assembly that Peter also wrote to. 

 

There is also one more important thing to consider about the 7 Churches of Revelation.  Since John is caught away "on the Lord's day" meaning the future "day of the Lord," then those 7 Churches are future Jewish Churches who must "overcome" the future day of the Lord.  It cannot be proven that all the 7 Churches mentioned in the book of Revelation existed in John's day.  Some did, but historians have not proven all 7 did.  I have never tried to prove it either way, because I know they will have to exist in the future to successfully make it through the tribulation.

 

Now you have even more to think about.

 

 

Romans 11

 

I've been looking at Romans 11 and I have some questions.

 

Rom 11:7  What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded

 

I’m trying to understand this verse. Does “Israel” here mean:

 

1. Israel as a nation / majority (unrepentant and now cut off), and “election” means those who still are in covenant relationship with God (a.k.a. little flock)?

 Or

 2. Israel as a nation / majority (unrepentant and now cut off), and “election” means those who are NO LONGER in covenant relationship with God, but are now part of the Jew and Gentile in the body of Christ because they believed the same gospel as us concerning the cross?

 

I assume you think scenario 2 is the correct one. But if so, doesn’t that leave out the little flock, and also, doesn’t verse 29 mean that “the election” in verse 28 are “beloved” because of the fathers’ covenant with God, thus making the election part of the covenant?

 

Also, did not some people in Israel trust the kingdom gospel? Christ’s apostles did. So, does verse 32 speak about the nation or maybe Israel as a majority? Otherwise it doesn’t make sense to me if it means every individual in Israel.

 

Rom 11:31  For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.

 

  

Wrong guess, I think scenario 1 is correct.  In the olive tree, verses 17 & 20 only "some" of the branches are broken off and they are those in Israel who were in "unbelief."  So Israel as a nation is now concluded in unbelief.  They are now enemies of God, nationally, but at the same time, as God's elect nation they are beloved for their father's sake and so in the future God will fulfill his promises to them, and "all Israel will be saved."  Since in verses 28 & 29 the pronoun "they" seem to be the same group I don't think the "election" here is the believing remnant but still speaking nationally.

 

 

Book of Job

 

I finished your ACTS study and have been looking for a study on the book of JOB. Do you have anything in your archives?  My primary question is about Job's children being restored. Were they "resurrected" or born to he and his wife---again?

 

 At the end of the book of Job everything Job lost at the beginning was restored double except for the number of children.  This is because a new child cannot replace the one who passed away, it is another child.  And since there is the hope of resurrection Job really never lost the first 10 children.  He will see them again in the resurrection.  God did double the number of children.  This is a reminder of the reunion in the resurrection.

 

 

1 John

 

Hello Pastor: Hopefully you'll recall me, I visited your church, and loved it, a number of times. Pastor you taught me too good. I can't get you folks off of my mind! I pray that you and your family and congregation are doing well. God is so good isn't He? I've not yet joined another church. I've been attending the same Baptist church since January '06. They are good folks and their Pastor and elders are learned and kind. Because of what you taught me though, and mimicking the Bereans searching the scriptures (plus using your "Rightly dividing the Scriptures”) I do have a concern regarding their following 1John 1:9. Christ said on the cross "it is finished" and that is burned in my mind and heart. Keeping "short accounts with God" in accordance with the above Bible passage doesn't sound Pauline to me but more kingdom talk. What do you say Pastor? Am I nitpicking? Am I one of those people looking for the perfect church and when I find it and attend it will no longer be perfect?!? Some points we can easily overlook, but I fear that the 1 John 1:9 and "short accounts" keeps me in a bondage of a type; I could easily fall back in Galatianism if you get my drift?! Thanks in advance for any input you may have. God bless and keep you safe always!

 

It is always good to hear from you. Not only do I remember you, but so does my wife (Songia) and Joyce and many of the others. Thanks for keeping in touch. I do not believe that everyone has to attend the same church, but we all have to believe the truth and right division is the only proper way to study the Bible and believe the truths of "grace." When we mix the programs, we mix the messages and pollute grace.

That is exactly what you are struggling with in I John 1:9. That is written to Israel. Not only that, chapter 1 of I John is written to the lost Jews who have not confessed that Jesus is the Christ. They make God a liar. Notice that I John chapter 2 begins "My little children" and now he address his converts. He does not tell them to confess to get forgiveness, he tells them that have an advocate and their sins are forgiven (see verses 1,2,12).   I'm glad your conscience is on the side of grace. Be strong in the grace of God.

 

 

Galatians:  Are they lost or saved?

 

Hello Pastor Tom:  Hope you are doing well.  I have a question and am a little embarrassed that I have to ask it.  Periodically I read through  the book called Galatians by C. R. Stam I purchased some time ago at GBC.  Now when I read Paul in his book of Galatians from the Bible he is saddened about all of the people having turned away from him, does he mean they are lost and were never saved?  Or, does he mean they were saved but now they won't enjoy their salvation because of adding works?  It seems to be that Pastor Stam does not consider them lost.  I'm thinking they are lost, but then maybe I am a different kind of strict legalist for grace!  I am constantly reminding two of my daughters who attend Lutheran churches that baptism, confirmation, sacraments, are not requirements to be saved and they must not believe they are.  The one family stays because they don't want the kids to go to secular school.  The other one attends church sporadically but her child will be going to a private school I think.  It seems to me that if a church requires baptism (even say a Baptist church that says: baptism is an outward show of an inward change" or something like that, it is better if one walks away from that assembly because if a church requires baptism for membership it automatically becomes a work at least in the mind of a church.  Especially so I would think those churches that believe only in the local church and not the universal church of God consisting of true believers as we know it at Grace.  So am I a legalizer of another breed?  This note sounds so stupid I know, but I am concerned for others especially in these various churches still participating in requirements of their religion.  Thanks in advance for your consideration in this question.  To me a little poison kills one just as dead.  Also in the gospels somewhere I remember hearing one cannot serve to Masters.  Then too, Pastor Fink mentioned about the wheelbarrow belief and I heard that a couple of years ago and think it is a good allegory of true belief.  Sincerely . . .

 

 

The statements in your email reflects the mind of Paul.  Whenever anyone brings into "grace" the works of the law there is a nullifying of grace (Romans 11:6) or as Galatians 5:4 says "... ye are fallen from grace."

 

Anyone who has first trusted in the gospel of grace to save them, they are saved but drawn away from the doctrine that not only saves, but also empowers the Christian life.  Galatians 3:1-3  "O foolish Galatians ... Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?"

 

But if someone did not get saved by the gospel of grace and from the beginning thought that a work was necessary for salvation, those have never been saved.  Since only God knows the heart, he would be the only one who knows for sure if they are saved.  We can only ask them.  And if their words do not match the gospel of grace we could never be sure if they were ever saved.  The Apostle Paul had this fear towards some in Galatia.  We see this in Galatians 4:9 where he writes: "But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God..."  As if he is not sure they do know God.  Again in Galatians 4:11  "I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain."

 

The one thing for sure is that Paul did not consider the doctrine of Judizers as truth, nor of them as saved brethren.  He calls them "false brethren" in Galatians 4:4.

 

So your confusion is shared by all who know the grace of God.  If anyone adds works of the law to grace that frustrates the grace of God and brings in confusion.

 

 

*CALVINISM*

 

What is Calvinism?

 

Thanks for checking out our web site and for your response.  Election as it was taught by John Calvin and by the 5 points of the TULIP seems to be a doctrine devised my men (perhaps by good men) who did not understand “Right Division” and the special revelation to Paul concerning the “dispensation of the grace of God” (Ephesians 3:1-5).  As a result they developed a system of theology that is inconsistent with the grace of God. 

 

Total depravity does not mean man is incapable of believing.  It means he is incapable of working and achieving his own salvation. 

 

Election is the fact that God chose to “save those that believe” – I Corinthians 1:21.  Then God chose those “In Christ,” “ to be holy and without blame before him in love” – Ephesians 1:4.  God chose to save only the believing remnant in Israel (Matthew 22:14).  And He chose to save all who would believe among the Gentiles and make them “the Body of Christ.”  Therefore what is called Unconditional Election, is wrong.  The condition is faith.

 

Limited Atonement is one of the worse perversions of grace.  The very revelation of Grace was the fact that Jesus Christ died for all (II Corinthians 5:14,15).  God’s will is for ALL to be saved – II Timothy 2:4-6.  So the Lord Jesus gave his life a ransom for all.  But God waited to reveal this truth when he revealed His grace to Paul – II Timothy 2:6,7.  Compare this verse to Matthew 20:28 where at that time Jesus Christ is said to be Israel’s Saviour.  He came to save His people from their sins, so he gave his life a ransom for many.  However, “in due time” Paul tells us how Jesus Christ gave his life a ransom for all.

 

Irresistible grace is also another unscriptural doctrine.   The testimony of Scripture is that men (for the most part) have “always resisted the Holy Ghost” – Acts 7:51.

 

Lastly, Perseverance of the Saints, if meant to be Eternal Security would be correct.  All Believers are eternally secure – Ephesians 1:12-14.  However the early reformers taught a “Lordship Salvation.”  Many of them taught that if you persevered faithful to the end of your life then you would be saved.  If you failed to live a consistent Christian life, then you did not make Jesus Lord of your life and were not truly saved.  This again makes man’s works the issue and leaves no room for “carnal” Saints, as were the Corinthians.

In God’s grace it is His faithfulness that secures our salvation, not ours – II Timothy 2:13. 

 

 

*CATHOLICISM*

 

Can Catholics be saved?

You mailed me a couple of weeks ago and asked:  "Can Catholics be saved?"

 

The Answer is:  YES!

 

God will save anyone who will trust in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ to be the complete payment for their sins.  To believe, or trust, or have faith in the gospel, by definition, means that a person is not trusting in their works, good deeds, religious rituals or observances, including last rites or baptisms or confirmations.  They must trust, believe, have faith in what God said.  The work of salvation was completely done by Jesus Christ.  Salvation is now God's gift through Christ.  And it is our by faith what Jesus Christ has done in our behalf that God saved us, and not by our works.  Offering God our works is a rejection of the work of Jesus Christ.

 

So then, Yes God will save a person who calls themselves a Catholic, if they like any sinner will believe the gospel.  However, to do that, a Catholic cannot believe in Catholicism which teaches 7 sacraments of human works are required for salvation.

 

Years ago an insurance sales man visited me, we bought insurance from him, then I gave him the gospel (to give him God's insurance and assurance).  He told me he was saved.  He also told me he was a Catholic.  So I asked him how he knows he is saved, and he repeated to me the gospel.  I told him the Catholic church does not teach salvation is by grace through faith.  He agreed, but had decided to stay a Catholic anyhow.  I then asked him if he thought he was saved because he was a Catholic or despite the face that he was a Catholic?  He said:  "despite the fact he was a Catholic."  By that he convinced me he was a saved Catholic.

 

Instead of trying to change an apostate religion from within, the scriptures would instruct him to separate.

See II Corinthians 6:14-8;  Romans 16:17,18;  I Timothy 6:3-5.  I hope you understand this. 

 

 

*CEREMONIES/ORDINANCES/OBSERVANCES*

 

 

Since the Passover is to be observed forever shouldn't we be observing Passover today?

 

The statement of the Passover being observed forever is always directed to Israel, in the times in which God is dealing with them as a nation  - Exodus 12:1-13; 12:23-28.  In fact in Exodus 12:43-50 no Gentile was allowed to take the Passover unless he got circumcised.

 

This is certainly different than the age of Grace that we live in.  In Galatians 2:7 Paul preached "the gospel of the uncircumcision" to us Gentiles and therefore speaks against circumcision in Galatians 5:2 and 6:15.  He also instructed the Galatians (hence the Body of Christ - the New Creature) not to be observing days and months and times and years - Galatians 4:8-10.  Colossians 2:16,17 directly warns against someone spoiling us of the riches of God's grace and says:

 

                        "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday,

                         or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:  Which are a shadow of things to come;

                         but the body is of Christ."

 

Not only does it tell us not to respect holydays, it also tells us why.  They belong to Israel and are a shadow of things to come.  Not the present day.  In the present day God is dealing with the Body of Christ. Hope all that helps.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is Tithing for today?

 

How can you say tithing is not for today? Look at these facts:

While the practice of tithing and whether it is a biblical responsibility is still debated today, The Barna Group found that very few Americans, including Christians, give tithe.

Overall, only 5 percent of U.S. adults tithed in 2007, the survey released Monday showed. Since 2000, the proportion of adults who tithed has remained in the 5 percent to 7 percent range.

The most generous group was the evangelicals, with 24 percent having tithed last year. Other groups who were more likely to give at least 10 percent of their income include conservatives (12 percent); people who had prayed, read the Bible and attended a church service during the past week (12 percent); charismatic or Pentecostal Christians (11 percent); and registered Republicans (10 percent).

 

How do you expect for the daily running of the church-maintenance, electric and gas bills etc.? Our church has a food and clothes bank. We have a van that picks up food and provide for a ride to church. It takes gas and maintenance for the van as well as well the high electric bill for running the food bank five days a week. We are also on the radio on Christian radio stations.

 

So if you go by what you say give from the heart, then people are not giving even close to 10%.And if tithing in the Old Testament was grain and animals, that was what the Priest needed to survive. Gold and silver wound not have done them any good.

 

And if, like you said, it was only for the nation of Israel because it was in the Old Testament, then what about when it says -You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain, and -Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you. “You shall not murder. “You shall not commit adultery. “You shall not steal. “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. “You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.”   So those are only for the nation of Israel and not for us to follow???  So tell me just how are we supposed to finance the upkeep of the church if people are not even giving close to 10%?

 

We stay very busy in the ministry here.  I cannot keep up with all that there is to do.  Some people have waited a month before I could get to their email questions.

 

Concerning giving under grace consider these verses:

 

2 Corinthians 8:12  "For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not."

2 Corinthians 9:7  "Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver."

 

These verses instruct us how to give under grace.  It is not possible to practice these verses and the commands of tithing under the law.  Law and grace are opposites.  When God was dealing with Israel in the Old Testament they were under the law.  The tithe was required.  But understand two things.  Even while they were under the law which brought cursing if they did not keep it, they failed, showing that man in our fallen state cannot keep God's laws.  We need a Savior.  The second fact is that Israel in the Old Testament did not have the Holy Spirit, so God worked externally on them through the law.

 

Believers today have been given the Holy Spirit:


Romans 5:5 says: "And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us."   And: 

Galatians 4:3-6 explains:  "Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father."

 

God desires His Word and His Spirit to work in the hearts of the Believer, to live and motivate giving.  If it is of the flesh, by force, He does not want it.  God does not need money.  He is looking for people who out of liberty choose to love and serve one another (Galatians 5:13).

 

Most so call Christians don't know the difference between law and grace.  Most would say they believe in tithing.  However the surveys you quoted only proves that the law does not motivate people to give.  But  Titus 2:11,12 says that "Grace" does motivate.  And Romans 8:2-4 says:

 

"For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.  For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, 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."

One last thing to consider.  It is important for people to know we don't live under Israel's law, but under grace or they might try fulfilling Numbers 15:32-36.

 

Consider these things, and the Lord give thee understanding.

 

 

Is Holy Communion for today?

 

Looks like the apostle Paul is instructing the church at Corinth in chapter 11:23 - 26 to take holy communion.  We rightly divide, and love your program "Forgotten Truths".  We think that holy communion is a Time Past ordinance.  We don't do it.  So what should we make of this?  Should we do it, is it mandatory, optional, or non-applicable to us under grace?

 

As I begin most of my correspondence ... Sorry for taking so long to get back to you.  I am usually behind, always trying to catch up.

 

Your question about communion is common among those who have learned to rightly divide the Word of truth and there are many opposing answers.  I have heard and read several of the views that think communion (as in taking the bread and fruit of the vine together) is not for the Body of Christ.  None of those arguments have persuaded me.  I get the fact that churches make it a sacrament or a ritual, a means of getting closer to God, some think of it as a cleansing.  All of that makes me want to run from it as well.  However, I do believe it was Paul who introduced this practice to the Corinthians who were members of the Body of Christ (I Corinthians 12:13,27) and therefore something to be done as a time of reflection, in remembrance of Christ.

 

First of all Communion is not the Jewish Passover, nor is it an ordinance of the church in the sense that other churches teach water baptism and communion are ordinances.  Paul does set forth the order, the orderly fashion communion should be practiced.  But even in that he says in I Corinthians 11:26 "For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come."  He never said do this the first Sunday of every month, or any particular time.  It looks to me that it was part of a church dinner at Corinth.  One in which Paul could not praise them in their behavior one toward another.  Hence "not discerning the Lord's body."

 

Paul (like in most other chapters in the book of Corinthians) is correcting the manner in which they were eat and communing, yet not correcting the fact that they were having communion.  In reading  I Corinthians 10:16,17 and 11:23-26, it seems clear that Paul "delivered" this practice and meaning to them as he in  I Corinthians 15:3 "delivered" the gospel to them which he "received of the Lord" and as it is said in  I Thessalonians 4:15 Paul received and taught the catching up of the Body of Christ.

 

After correcting the Corinthians, Paul does not say to stop this practice but concludes with instructions on how to proceed (I Corinthians 11:33,34).

 

We at Grace Bible Church here in Warren try not to make communion a religious thing, but take a Sunday service once every few months and partake of communion reflecting on the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ and our common union together in Him.  In fact we will be doing that this week.  Since we live-stream our services on line, starting at about 11:15 EST you are welcome to watch the difference - www.rightlydividing.org.  I do realize that is 6:15 AM your time.

 

I know a lot more could be said.  I hope this is enough for now.

 

 

Should Easter and Christmas be treated as Holy Days?

 

My husband and I have started watching your show every Sunday.  We previously attended a Baptist church, but have stopped going for the past couple of years because of our disagreeing with some of the teachings. We left on good terms and were by no means disrespectful.

I wanted to ask your views on celebrating Easter and Christmas.  Even though the OT Holy Days are not observed today, I'm not sure if its ok for us to "create" our own, especially those with such pagan origins.

 Thanks for being a part of our ministry via the Internet.  The clarity of the gospel and the dispensation of grace in which we live is important and is worth taking a stand for.

 

As far as the celebration of Easter or Christmas, this is a topic of discussion that we have had in our ministry many times.  Some have decided not to recognize these days as anything special.  We know  the pagan origins but for the most part you have to teach people those origins in order for anyone to realize the paganism.  Therefore we treat them more as cultural holidays and enjoy the family times.  Ministry wise we take the opportunity to teach the truth of the resurrection and the actual time of Christ's birth.  This gives us opportunity to preach the gospel to those visitors who attend our services on those days.  Hope that helps.

 

 

Please comment on fasting.

 

Fasting was never a commandment of God, even under the law (except on the day of atonement). Fasting is a choice of a person who is so engrossed with a spiritual need that they would chose rather than eating to spend the time in God's word and prayer. It is never so that God would do something, but that we would do something. Those who think that God will answer their prayers if they can prove to him their sincerity or who think that by their much praying God will hear them are practicing paganism (Matthew 6:7).

The purpose of prayer is fellowship with God. Praying in the Spirit is praying in accordance to God's word and will as revealed in the Bible. Prayer is for peace and encouragement in doing those things God would have us do (Philippians 4:5-13).

 

 

What place does the Lord’s mother Mary have?

 

I got your note and here are some things to help you minister to your mother. Be careful not to attach Catholicism or to belittle Mary. This will only put your mother on the offense. Just show her the verses and remind her the Bible is the Word of God and the Lord taught us not to follow man’s traditions – Mark 7:1-13 and Romans 3:4.  Catholicism teaches that Mary herself was miraculously conceived and was therefore sinless and is now ascended as the queen of heaven. None of that is in the Bible. It is all the doctrine and tradition of men. It comes from paganism and is condemned in Jeremiah 7:18; 44:17-25… . There is no queen of heaven.

 

Now concerning Mary herself. Luke 1:28, she was blessed, to be chosen of God to bring His Son – The Lord Jesus Christ into this world. But God would have all eyes on HIM. Mary is “blessed” “among women” but note three things. First it is because “the Lord is with (her) thee.” Second she is blessed “among women” – she is not above all mankind, or sinless, but blessed among her kind, among other women. Third this was said also of Jael in the Old Testament – see Judges 5:24.

 

In Luke 1:27 Mary says: “And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.” Only sinners need a Saviour. Mary was acknowledging her need of a Saviour and taking her place among all of mankind – Romans 3:10-12; 3:23.

Mary was a virgin “TILL” the Lord Jesus was born – Matthew 1:25. Then Joseph and Mary had at least 6 children together – see Matthew 13:55-57 where four of the Lord’s (half) brothers are named and his “sisters” (plural – meaning at least two) are mentioned.

 

Finally, note in the following references, how the Lord himself, spoke against exalting his mother, and He himself put her on equal ground with all his other followers – see:  Matthew 12:46-50; and Luke 11:27,28; and John 2:1-5.

As Romans 3:24,25; 5:6-8; 6:23 says; It is through Jesus Christ and his payment for our sins in his death, burial and resurrection that saves. And by our faith in that, God saves us by his grace. Jesus Christ is the only mediator between a Holy God and sinful man through whom we can be saved – I Timothy 2:4-6. Prayerfully use these verses to teach your mother and give her the gospel.

Is fasting in the dispensation of grace?

I have been a Christian for a while, and have recently learned about dispensationalism and grace. God wants me to pray and fast to get rid of unbelief. However, prayer and fasting has become a stumbling block to me because of wrong teaching. Please help me to understand prayer and fasting in this dispensation of grace.  

Do I have to read the word when I pray and fast? Is this commanded in order for me to get rid of unbelief through prayer and  fasting ( like 1 hour for breakfast; 1 hour for lunch, etc.)  Do I have to give alms when I pray and fast?  Is fasting just abstaining from food, or food and water?  Can I watch TV when praying and fasting.   

Fasting has become legalistic for me, and I get really tired from the way I have been doing it through reading for hours from the word of God, interceding for others in prayer, and not eating food and drinking water. Please help me to know the truth about prayer and fasting.  
   

 

I got your question and can see your sincerity.  However, I would like you to first consider these things about fasting.

 

Fasting was never a commandment of God, even under the law (except on the day of atonement).

 

Fasting is a choice of a person who is so engrossed with a spiritual need that they would choose rather than eating to spend the time in God's word and prayer.

 

It is never so that God would do something, but that we would do something.

 

Those who think that God will answer their prayers if they can prove to him their sincerity or who think that by their much praying God will hear them are practicing paganism (Matthew 6:7).

 

The purpose of prayer is fellowship with God. Praying in the Spirit is praying in accordance to God's word and will as revealed in the Bible.

 

Prayer is for peace and encouragement in doing those things God would have us do (Philippians 4:5-13).

 

So, prayer and fasting is not for the purpose of getting rid of unbelief.  Romans 10:17 says that faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.  You get rid of unbelief by reading and believing what God said - particularly what God says to us in this age of grace.

 

Since fasting is not a command, there are no regulations requiring alms, or water, or even TV.  There is no requirements even to fast.

 

Rejoice in God's acceptance of you in Christ, by grace, through the cross.  Then live for him!

 

Hope this helps.

 

 

 

 

Should we view communion as a ceremonial symbolic supper?

 

I have become increasingly uncomfortable with the traditional view of the Lord's Supper.  I have been thinking about this issue for a long time and now have it pretty much settled in my mind. Some have strong convictions in favor of the traditional view that communion is a ceremonial symbolic supper.  What are your thoughts?

 

The subject of communion and the practice of communion have been troublesome to many true Bible Believers especially among those who “rightly divide the word of truth.”  No exception for me.  Most of what I’ve heard by those who do not believe we should practice communion has not been persuasive to me.

 

I’m not going to make this long, but share with you some conclusions I have come to.  Much of what you have written about the dinner and the phrase “the Lord’s supper” I agree with, but a couple of thoughts may add clarity.

 

You used the expression: “a ceremonial symbolic supper” sometimes against and other times as if communion is or was practiced by the Corinthians that way.  I don’t believe communion is or ever was a “ceremonial symbolic supper.”  The very thought of that plays into the religious, traditional, carnal, superstition taught by many churches as “the Lord’s supper” or “communion.”

 

Keeping all of that out of our mind, I have concluded that communion is the very fellowship, the gathering, the “coming together” of local Believers.  It seems apparent to me that when the early church got together they brought their dinner just as many did in rural areas back in horse and buggy days.  There is nothing ceremonial or religious about that. The fast pace we live our lives today with the advantage of motor vehicles where we can come and go to services quickly changed the way we come together.    

 

Many teaching Acts 20:7 think they must make the point that “the disciples coming together to break bread” is not communion.  But if real communion is the fellowship or coming together of the Saints, then it is.  Breaking of bread is always associated with fellowship, gathering and eating.  There is much which can be compared between I Corinthians 5 and I Corinthians 11.  There, in I Corinthians 5, a man is excommunicated from fellowship and the exhortation not to eat with such a one.  Both passages also speak of judging and teach chastening.

 

“Communion” is our common-union.  In the 60’s people were living in communes.  Communion in the Biblical sense of the word is defined in  I Corinthians 10:16,17 as:  “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?  For we being many are one bread, and one, body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.”

 

That expression “the Lord’s supper” is only found in I Corinthians 11:20 and it is used in a negative way, contrasting the way in which the Corinthians were coming together and eating. It’s not “the Lord’s supper” but their “own supper.”

 

“We do show forth the Lord’s death till he comes” is primarily in the fellowship of the Saints by their assembling.  Perhaps in the eating of their dinner they remembered that the breaking of bread is the communion of the Body of Christ that came about by His body which was broken for us; and the cup being the communion of the blood of Christ which was shed for us.

 

While we at Warren - Grace Bible Church do not do this at a dinner we do take the time 3 or 4 times a year to reflect how and why we gather each week; remembering it is the cross of Christ that made us one – communion of the Body of Christ.  We begin with an exhortation from scripture concerning an aspect of communion followed by testimonies while stopping to partake of the bread and later partaking of the cup together.  Rather than doing it around a dinner we take the liberty to do it without the dinner.  For us, it is not a ceremonial symbolic dinner, nor a religious ordinance.  It is a remembrance of who we are, why and when and how we became members of the Body of Christ.

 

I think we fight (even within ourselves) the false religious sentiment to the point that we cannot see it in its simplicity as the very fellowship of the Saints. If there was no religious tradition that has corrupted our minds, I don’t think we would be struggling with this passage.  In fact, the customs of the days in which the Corinthians lived dominates this chapter and having a dinner when they came together is one of those customs.  We don’t necessarily follow the customs the way they did, but there are Biblical truths taught in their customs which we are to follow.

 

 

 

*CHRISTIAN LIVING*

 

 

What does it mean to suffer for Christ?

 

What  does it mean to suffer for Christ? I've checked your website. I can not find anything that will give me a jumping off point to continue this study. It's important because I'm not sure if I  suffer for Christ. There are many others who feel the same.

Thank you.

 

 

The very message of God's grace revealed to Paul is a message that Satan hates and the world does not want to hear.  Acts 9:16; Colossians 1:24; II Timothy 1:12 and the record of the book of Acts along with the list in  II Corinthians 11:23-28 speak about Paul's sufferings in getting out God's message.  Then in  II Timothy 1:7,8 he encourages Timothy to be a "partaker of the afflictions of the gospel."

 

So too can you and I partake.  In Galatians 5:11 Paul writes "And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? then is the offence of the cross ceased."  And in Galatians 6:12 he writes about those who do not teach and preach grace:  "As many as desire to make a fair shew in the flesh, they constrain you to be circumcised; only lest they should suffer persecution for the cross of Christ."

 

This shows clearly that suffering comes when you preach the gospel of the grace of God purely.  If you tell family and friends that all their religious activities (ceremonies, baptism, infant baptism, communion, isle walking, confessing of sins, catechisms ...) cannot save them or make them closer to God; you will suffer their rejection.  But this we must do to get them saved.  If you tell them that their church does not teach the dispensation of the grace of God they will get upset with you.  Many in our assembly got kicked out of their church when graciously they tried to tell the Pastor about right division.

 

Then add to those sufferings the rejection you suffer when you stand for moral truths such as what God says about homosexuality, or fornication, or corrupt communication.  Just living for the Lord, not doing some things others want you to do or not going places they would ask you to go to will cause them to reject you.

 

Those things are things Believers suffer all the time here in the United States.  Now add the facts of what happens if you try to live and preach the gospel in other countries such as Iraq or Iran or China.  Now your very life is at stake.

 

Well you get the point.  Hope that helps.  

 

 

As a single person, if I have sex with someone, am I married to that person according to the Bible?


This website http://www.outsidethecamp.org/marriage.htm is what troubles me and leads me to believe I am bound by my sexual sins to being married. Paul said the harlot is one flesh with her john. According to some, this is marriage.  I am deeply troubled by this and want an answer, yet there doesn't seem to be one.  I have sinned sexually in the past and have since met a woman I would like to pursue a marriage with. Have I ruined my chance at this?
 

 

That "oneness" is a physical oneness.  As 1 Corinthians 6:18 says "...joined to an harlot is one body."  Verse 18 calls it a sin "against his own body."

 

The whole context is reasoning that our bodies are for serving God, not for "fornication."  Therefore being joined to a harlot is not marriage, but fornication.  If it was marriage then it would not be a sin.

 

Now most of all, you need to learn the truth of the gospel.  We who have believed that the Lord Jesus died for our sins and was raised for our justification (I Corinthians 15:3,4 & Romans 4:25), we know we are dead to sin (Romans 6:2).  This is also the greater context of I Corinthians 6:9-12  "Know ye not that ...fornicators ... And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God."

 

You are focused on your flesh and your sins and not on the fact that our Savior dealt with our sins, and before God we are "not in the flesh" (Romans 8:9).

 

If you know and believe these things it does not matter what you have done in the past, or what a website says.  It matters what God says.  Don't let any man (even yourself) put you under a yoke of bondage but "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free."

 

 

How is a Christian to handle life tragedies?

 

How should we react when something happens, illness, accidents, loss, whatever - .  What does the Bible teach?  Are we to put the concern on a bulletin board, a prayer list, an e-mail, or what?  I feel that when I advertise them I open the door to ridicule if things don't happen the way we would like it, or the way we think.  What is the answer?

 

Here are some thoughts concerning your question about prayer.

 

When things happen which cause concern such as illness, loss, or tragedy, these are things prayer is designed for.  Taking those concerns to our heavenly Father brings him into the situation.  The situation becomes a spiritual nature in that the Holy Spirit is involved in our prayers (Romans 8:26-28), God's Word in our hearts begin to come to mind, and in understanding "right division" we can know why things happen and that God's grace is sufficient (II Corinthians 12:8-10). 

 

This is what is taught in that wonderful passage of Philippians 4:6,7  "Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God.  And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus." 

 

So while you may desire to share your needs with others, it's not that God will be moved by more people praying, it is so that other members of the Body of Christ can help where they can, if only to comfort.

 

Philippians 4:11-13 is how God would have us handle those situations in life:

 

"Not that I speak in respect of want: for I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content.   I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound: every where and in all things I am instructed both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need.  I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.  .... But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus."

 

Hope this helps answer your questions on prayer.  At least it should guide your thoughts.

 

Thanks for your support for Forgotten Truths.  Prayer is one of those most confused issues that God's Word rightly divided clears up for us and provides the proper expectations of how God works in us and his promises to us, in this age of grace.

 

 

Marriage/Divorce

 

I suppose this is a typical question, but as I understand it, a divorce does not end a marriage. The parties are not free to remarry, but what if after a divorce one of the ex spouses dies? Is the surviving ex free to remarry? I know I may have worded that confusingly, maybe I can give an example.   Jane and John marry. They divorce. John passes away. Is Jane then free to seek a new marriage?        

Also, would sex be considered marriage? The Greek word Agamos used in 1 Cor. 11 is unmarried. Gamos seems to mean marriage. Gamo seems to mean sex...so is sex Biblically marriage? 

Last question, is our modern day engagement equal to Biblical betrothal?    

These questions may seem silly and maybe they are. I'm just so confused from what I've studied. I'm almost convinced there is no answer to these questions. If the answers are too long, we can talk. I'm not sure if the answers are simple and I'm making this harder than it is or not.         


I'm not sure it is correct to say "divorce does not end a marriage."  We are not under the law but even under the law Deuteronomy 24:1,2 says:  "When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.  And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife."

In his earthly ministry to Israel, under the law of His Kingdom, the Lord restricted divorce only for fornication, which is such a case divorce would end a marriage.

 

But to the point of your question, yes, death under any situation ends a marriage - Romans 7:1-3.

 

The Biblical use of the word "marry" is what we would call "consummate" or as you said "sex."  However even in scripture there is more to marriage than the consummation.  There was always a public announcement or celebration making known to others these two are joining in a holy matrimony.  Otherwise there would be no such thing as fornication, just a whole lot of marriages.  I Corinthians 7:2 says "to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife."  So when a woman became a man's wife they then marry in sanctification and honor; and at the same time everyone knows these two belong to each other.

 

Biblical betrothal is not the same as modern day engagements.  In Matthew 1:18  "when Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together..." in this verse and following (and others concerning them) we see that Mary is already considered to be Joseph's wife, even to the point that to "put her away" would be to divorce her even though they had not consummated the marriage.  In Bible times, a man and woman would be espoused and considered husband and wife, but waited a year to prove a woman's virginity.  This certainly is not the same as today's engagement to be married.  Today a man and woman wed and become husband and wife and consummate the marriage all within a 12 hour period.

 

 

 

Are we dead to the flesh?

 

I have another question when you get a moment. You mentioned in Bible study that we are dead to the flesh. You said Romans 8 teaches that.  I know that we are dead to sin(Rom 6:2,6:7) and dead to the law(Roman 7:4-6). But where does it say we are dead to the flesh?

 

The phrase "dead to the flesh" is not in Romans 8.  Verses 5-7 talk about walking after the flesh and after the Spirit.  Then in Romans 8:8-10 it says: 

 

"So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.  But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.  And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness."

 

The idea then is if we are not in the flesh and the body is dead, then as an explanation we can say we are dead to the flesh.  Perhaps more Biblically we should say we are dead to the body or the body is dead to us.  If we said it that way it may make Romans 7:24 clearer when it says "who shall deliver me from the body of this death?"

 

 

What’s the difference between ‘works of the law’ and ‘deeds of the law’?

 

The difference between the 'works of the law' and the 'deeds of the law'?  I have my thoughts but as always want your thoughts and your knowledge on it.

 

"Deeds of the Law" seem to be the accomplished acts, the "Works of the Law" may be a reference to the efforts to keep the law.  There may or may not be a difference, however Israel who was under the law tried to fulfill the deeds of the law, but even people today, Gentiles who were never under the law, even religious people are attempting to do the works of the law in order to placate God.  Either way, man is justified by neither.

 

What about drinking wine or smoking marijuana?

 

Could you please answer the question if its ok to drink alcohol as long as it’s in moderation and what do you think about smoking marijuana.  I watch your program all the time and am truly blessed and you changed the way I study the word.

 

I'm glad you feel free to ask a question such as this.  First of all, when saying "it is OK to drink alcohol" understand that it is OK in the sense that God's Word does not strictly forbid it.  Since  I Corinthians 6:12 and 10:23 makes a distinction between what is lawful and what it expedient, the goal of the Christian life should be what is expedient, or as Philippians 1:9 says "That ye may approve things that are excellent...." Therefore, many (like myself) would choose not to drink alcohol.

 

I could understand taking alcohol as a medicine or in medicine.  I also understand marijuana can be used for medical purposes.  But to smoke it to get high is certainly contrary to God's will for a Believer.  The same verse that would forbid alcohol for the sake of getting intoxicated would apply to any form of getting high.

Ephesians 5:18 says:  "And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit."

 

 

Is it ok for Christians to drink wine?  I say no.  Any scripture will help. 

 

Let me say that this subject carries a lot of emotion and convictions.  First of all, when asking "is OK to drink alcohol or to have a glass of wine" we must acknowledge that God's Word does not strictly forbid it.  Since  I Corinthians 6:12 and 10:23 makes a distinction between what is lawful and what it expedient, the goal of the Christian life should be what is expedient, or as Philippians 1:9 says "That ye may approve things that are excellent...."  Therefore, while some chose the liberty of having a glass of wine, many (like myself) would choose not to drink any alcohol.

 

I could understand taking alcohol as a medicine or in medicine.  The verse that would forbid alcohol for the sake of getting intoxicated would apply to any form of getting high.  Ephesians 5:18 says:  "And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit."

 

Drinking alcohol is not a sin.  Drunkenness is a sin.  However, a Believer should heed the warning of Proverbs 20:1  "Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise."  It is wise to stay away from it. 

 

God would have us under the control of His Spirit at all times and never under the control of anything else including "self" or wine, alcohol, marijuana, or any mind altering drug.  That's the goal of the Christian life.

 

 

I’ve backslidden.  Have I lost my salvation?

 

I'm in a struggle trying to get a grip on my walk with God. I feel that I've fallen away and it's a fight to get back , so many times I've heard and even used the word backslidden. Have I lost my salvation? What help can I receive to get back in right standing with God and grow?

 

Sorry it took so long to get back with you.  The great thing about the grace of God is that our salvation does not depend on us but on God.  The Lord Jesus died and paid for all your sins (past, present and even future).  God's gift to you is eternal life.  That gift of life is received by believing in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ as the payment of your sins and your acceptance with God.

 

Ephesians 1:6,7 says you are "To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.  In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace."

 

You may feel more close to Him at times and far away at other times, but God is always faithful, you are always in his favor, you are always accepted in his Son, you stand forgiven.

 

Now concerning your growth.  That comes by learning to walk in the Sprit, in the truth of who God has made you in His Son.  That comes through reading the scriptures (especially Romans - Philemon), speaking to God is prayer - as your Father, and fellowshipping with the Saints - both in Bible study and other times as well.  When you fail, get back to doing these things that will help you grow.  Learn to mind the things of the Spirit of God.  Read Romans chapters 3-8 to get started.

 

 

Salvation assurance for Kingdom saints compared to the Grace saints.

 

"Did the Old Testament and kingdom saints (future ones also) have assurance of salvation and how does it compare with the assurance we have in the dispensation of grace?"

 

It will be easier for me to attach a study of salvation in the OT and concept of salvation in the Kingdom program which will help your understanding.

 

When you read this you should see the answer to your question.  But let me add to this by saying:  No one possessed eternal life in their soul until the Holy Spirit came.  Then the Kingdom Saint was "born again" of the Spirit of God.  John 1:11-13 says it this way:

 

"He came unto his own, and his own received him not.  But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:  Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."

 

Jesus Christ came and was rejected in His earthly ministry, up to and including the cross.

He gave them power to become the sons of God when He poured out the Holy Spirit in Acts 2.

It is then, for the first time, Believers possessed eternal life in their soul.  Before that it was the promise of eternal life.

 

Now then, according to  I John 2:18-20...25-27;  the Holy Spirit will secure them - even through the future time we call the tribulation.

 

"Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.  They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.  But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things...... And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life.  These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you.  But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him."

 

Hope this much helps.  If you cannot bring in the attachment, let me know and I will send it as an email.

 

 

Are we to judge people?

 

What is your take on what the bible says about judging someone or not to? Can you help me out with this please?


The Bible says a lot about judging.  Most think of Matthew 7:1-5 where under the law a person will be judged by God in the same way they judged others.  But even there, after they have judged themselves they can then judge another to help them.

           
We can never judge another persons motives, nor are we their judge as in the place of God;
but we are to judge their actions, their words, whether they are right or wrong or hurtful or helpful.

Brandon Smith recently taught on two Sundays on this very question.  You should listen to the CD or DVD.

A lot more should be said but hopefully this is enough for now.      

 

 

 

 

 

*CHURCH AFFILIATION*

 

Which church to attend.

 

Dear Pastor: Thank you so very much in being so kind to respond to my inquiring about 1John 1:9. For a few months I have been listening on am 560 radio at 4:30 p.m. to a program which basically espouses God's total grace. The program is called "People To People". Their website is informative also: realanswers.net. It is from that I am mailing the webpage. Along with what you wrote and other referrals and this site as well and praying for wisdom in understanding I have to agree with you and the others over what this independent Baptist church believes. Now this church doesn't believe occasional sin diminishes salvation at all, simply fellowship with God. When I first heard it my spirit couldn't quite take it in as being correct. Pastor doesn't mention the "short accounts" and "losing fellowship with God" often but when he does I sort of shrink inside because he does state how grateful he is to God for this cleansing. I hate the idea of leaving this church. In every other way they are edifying, and I appreciate the humbleness I see in the children as well as the adults. The location is close to my home; only approx. a ten minute drive. I'm in a pickle and really cannot figure out how much concern I should have. However, I've spent so much time trying to discover truth this last couple of years and so desiring to discern truth in God's Word I'm not quite sure if I can ignore this particular stumbling block. Any input would be great if you ever get a chance. Thank you. I remain in Him.

 

I have mixed thoughts on how to advise you myself. You know that I believe the path of truth is where a Believer needs to be following. It is sound doctrine that builds us up and also produces the life of Christ in us. On the other hand, humility is a great attribute. To see this in the Saints where you fellowship says there are some good things being taught there. I would know no other place for you to go in this area. Pauline, mid-act, dispensational Bible study is the only way to accurately understand the Bible and purely be grounded in grace. Our church is not perfect. We surely have many characters in our fellowship. But we are the only church in the area that teaches "right division." I do not say this to tell you to come here. I said this to tell you if you like where you are going, stay there a while yet until you get more uncomfortable with the doctrine, because wherever you go, if they do not teach God's Word "rightly divided" there is going to be a mixed message of law and grace.

 

 

I have been watching Forgotten Truths for some time now. I live in Tifton, GA and am searching for a church that rightly divides the Word of Truth and uses Paul's Epistles as our church doctrine for today. The problem is that I have been looking online at all the church websites for this area and I haven't found a single one. I would like to raise my small children in a church setting, so should I just be satisfied with, say a Baptist church, even though my beliefs differ so much from their beliefs.



Thanks for writing and for watching our program "Forgotten Truths."  Your question is a tough one many are faced with. It is hard to know where all the "grace" churches are or even "grace" home studies are seeing that each one is independent. You may know how to search for them better than I do but the two places I know to look is the directories of either: www.enjoythebible.org or www.dispensationalberean.com/links.

 

If you cannot find a local assembly that teaches the Bible from a Pauline dispensational viewpoint, then I would look for a church that at least preaches clearly the gospel of grace and believes that the "Body of Christ" is distinct from Israel and that God will in the future full literally his promises to Israel.

 

Then I would try to find one that is more Bible oriented than denominational. If possible one, that still holds to the KJV and would allow you to have a different view of the beginning of grace than they without attack or condemnation. Sometimes an independent Baptist church that is Bible and local church oriented will be that way and if so it is better to be with the Saints than alone.

 

 

*END TIMES*

 

 

Please explain what we’re judged for at the Judgment Seat of Christ.

 

Hello, my husband watches the program every Sunday night at 9:00 Pacific time on Dish channel 82. This past Sunday, Jan. 3rd, 2016 Richard was saying that in 2nd Corinthians we will stand in front of Gods judgement seat for what we did in the body,  both good and bad.   My question is, is Paul talking about the physical body or the body of the church? Also, my husband says that once we accept Christ as our Lord and Savior all our sins are forgiven and God does not look at those sins any longer, so how can we be judged for the bad we did in the body? I am CONFUSED. I have always thought the when we stand in front of God/Christ we will be given crowns for the good we did, and how faithful we were to Him, the things we did not do, we would receive less crowns.  Would you please clarify this matter for me?

Thanks for watching Forgotten Truths!

 

Perhaps I can help with your questions.  When we get saved we are given spiritual life by the Holy Spirit which quickens us, seals and indwells us.  This is the "inward man" which is renewed day by day while the "outward man" perishes (II Corinthians 4:16).  God's purpose for us in this life is to manifest the life of Jesus in our body - our mortal flesh (II Corinthians 4:10,11).  What have we done in these bodies of flesh after given the life of Christ?  That is what we will receive (rewards or loss of rewards) at the Judgment Seat of Christ (II Corinthians 5:10;  I Corinthians 3:12-15;  Romans 14:7-12).

 

Your husband is absolutely correct.  Sin has been dealt with by our Lord Jesus Christ upon the cross.  No sins are dealt with at the Judgment Seat of Christ.  It is our service that will be examined and rewarded for good and faithful service.  For those who lived for themselves, who did not put on the new man, did not let the word of Christ dwell in them richly, did not let God work in them to will and to do of his good pleasure, and those who were workmen that need to be shamed because they did not rightly divide the Word of truth; their service was "bad."  They will suffer loss and yet they are saved because the fire will burn away the wood, hay and stubble of their bad service, they will be left standing in the righteousness of Christ, "and then shall every man have praise of God" (I Corinthians 4:5).

 

 

Are unbelievers judged for their sins or only for their unbelief?     

Are non- believers judged for their sins at the Great White Throne or are they only judged for the sin of unbelief? Are there scriptural references that answer this question? Does Revelation 20:12-13 answer that question? Does Les Feldick’s statement answer that question on pages 56 and 57 of his questions and answers from the Bible book? 

We are attending Bible studies with C.C. and he is in disagreement with the Berean Bible Society over the issue of whether those who die in unbelief are judged for their sins or judged only for their unbelief (Berean Searchlight April and May issues). Ricky Kurth at BBS thinks this teaching is suspect because it leans toward universalism. C.C. is stressing this issue and we are unsure why it is so important or why there is disagreement among people who rightly divide the Bible.   

One passage C.C. uses is II Corinthians 5:18-19 which seems to say the world is reconciled to God, all sin has been forgiven and it is our ministry to tell this to the world. It also seems to say that none of the sins of unbelievers will be brought up again. C.C. says ‘sin is off the table.’        

We will continue to study with C.C. but we are interested in your view on this matter. And we would be very interested to see Richard Jordan do a TV presentation on it, or if he has already addressed this issue, which program is it?


 

II Corinthians 5:16-21 explains what is true presently in the age of grace.  Today God in not imputing their trespasses unto them.  He is holding back his wrath and dispensing grace.  But we also know that will not last forever, II Thessalonians 2:5-12.  When God withdraws his grace, by taking away the Body of Christ, he will send "strong delusion" "that all might be damned who believed not the truth," "who loved not the truths that they might be saved."  Not being saved they will fall under his wrath, damnation and judgment.  According to II Corinthians 5:18,19 the ministry and word for today is "reconciliation."  It is the offer of reconciliation.  That is why II Corinthians 5:20,21 is God's message through his ambassadors to the world - "be ye reconciled to God."  Reconciliation is made possible by the cross.  The world is not reconciled to God, but is offered reconciliation on his part.  When it is not accepted they will suffer the consequence of facing a Holy Just God without Christ, without salvation, with no reconciliation possible.

 

The scriptures make it clear that only the Believer is "redeemed" (freed from sin) and "justified" (declared righteous by God) and therefore "forgiven" - Acts 13:38,39; Acts 26:18 (forgiveness is received by believing the gospel); Ephesians 1:7; Colossians 1:14.

 

Remember, those who blaspheme the Holy Ghost "hath never forgiveness" (Mark 3:29) and those who will not believe in Jesus Christ "shall die in their sins" (John 8:24) because they remain in sin and under sin (Romans 3:9).

 

Only the Believer is "Justified" - meaning "declared righteous by God" - Romans 3:22,26; 4:22-25; Galatians 2:16.

 

If a person is not declared righteous, he is unrighteous.  The "unrighteous" are said to be: "fornications, Idolaters, Adulterers, effeminate, abusers of themselves with mankind" - I Corinthians 6:19.  They are identified with their sins.  "All unrighteousness is sin" says I John 5:17.  And that is the beginning of preaching the gospel.  A person needs to believe they are a sinner who needs to be saved from their sins.

 

God's wrath is against all ungodliness and unrighteousness -Romans 1:18; 2:8,9; 3:5.  "The wages of sin is death" (Romans 6:23) and those who do not receive the gift of God will receive the just reward for their deeds - II Peter 2:13.  Jesus Christ will execute judgment upon all their ungodly deeds and speeches of ungodly sinners - Jude 15.  In I John 1:9 Israel had to confess their sins and if (and only if) they did, God would be faithful and just to forgive their sins and cleanse them form all unrighteousness.  So those who did not, were not forgiven nor cleansed from unrighteousness.  The same is true for us in the age of grace.  Only the Believer is justified and therefore declared righteous.  The Believer is saved from sin and its penalty.  The unbeliever is not.  He is not saved from the penalty of his sins - Romans 2:8,9; 5:6-9; 12:19;  I Timothy 1:15.

 

Hell and the Lake of Fire is the punishment for all unrighteous sinful deeds - Matthew 25:46; II Thessalonians 1:9; Ephesians 5:5,6; II Peter 2:9.  That is why in the great white throne judgment the "books" recording the "works" of those who are not in "the book of life" will be judged and damned with degrees of punishment for their works - sinful deeds: Revelation 20:11-15; Matthew 23:14; John 5:29; Romans 3:8; II Peter 2:3.

 

 

Four Blood Moons theory

 

Can you shed some light on the blood moons and the last blood moon coming this fall ~  If the rapture was to happen between now and then??? Maybe this eclipse and blood moon could pertain to the sun going black and the moon turning red??? I do get nervous and I hope it's okay that I do. God is Big and Big scares me a bit.

 

I only heard about the blood moons from a person at our assembly.  I had to go to the Internet to find out what people were saying.  I downloaded a couple of articles I thought were helpful and will include them with this email.  But first let me say that If you have trusted in the Lord Jesus Christ and His work on the cross for your salvation, then there is never anything to fear.  Especially God who is now your Father.  The Thessalonians were fearful that they were on Earth in the day of God's wrath and Paul begins by telling them:

 

"Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand." - II Thessalonians 2:1,2

 

When that day comes, we will be gathered together unto Him!

 

Now here are some things I found that may help you: 

 

Problems With the Four Blood Moons Theory.  Despite the popularity of the blood moons books, several problems exist.

 

First, the four blood moons theory was thought up by Mark Biltz.  It is not stated anywhere in the Bible. 

 

Second, contrary to what Biltz and Hagee imply, past blood moon tetrads did not neatly coincide with the events they mention.  For example, the Alhambra Decree came down in 1492 but the blood moons happened a year after that. The tetrad near the state of Israel's 1948 independence occurred in 1949-1950, one and two years after the event.

 

Third, other tetrads happened throughout history, but there were no major events affecting Jews at those times, reflecting inconsistency, at the least. 

 

Fourth, two of the most significant catastrophes for Jews had no tetrad activity at all:  the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in 70 A.D. by Roman legions, leading to the deaths of 1 million Jews; and the 20th century Holocaust, which resulted in the deaths of more than 6 million Jews.

 

Fifth, some of the events Biltz and Hagee cite were favorable to Jews (Israel's independence in 1948 and the Six-Day War), while the expulsion from Spain was unfavorable.  With no sign whether an event would be good or bad, the prophetic value of tetrads would be confusing.

 

Finally, many people assume the four 2014-2015 blood moons will precede Jesus Christ's second coming, but Jesus himself warned against trying to predict when he will return:

 

“But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.  Take ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is.” – Mark 13:32,33

 

And another adds:

 

You really have to rip scripture out of its context and know nothing about the Day of the Lord to think that these 2014 and 2015 eclipses fulfill the prophecy in Joel and Revelation. Pastor Mark Biltz says the second coming of the Lord will occur on Sukkot and he implies 2015. That is impossible. We would have to already be in the 3 1/2 year Day of the Lord and the Jews would have already fled from the Antichrist. Of course, not everyone takes all Bible prophecy literally, some pick and choose only what fits their theory and they ignore or allegorize all the rest.

 

 

Who are the 144,000?

 

First of all just want to thank you again for the in depth study you bring that helps us search the Scriptures and study!!!  It's exciting to dig into the Word of Truth rightly divided. 

 

There is something that is puzzling my friend and I  and we cannot come to a conclusion by studying on our own - so we need some insight from you.  We recently heard a "Grace" pastor teach on Revelation 12 and we have a question about that.  He said that the "man child" in verse 5 is the 144,000 and they would be caught to God in heaven.  My friend and I have not really studied Revelation but we know enough to understand that we won't be here!!  Normally, we wouldn't give it a thought - but this has got us puzzled - we would like some clarification please.  Like I said, we are just very curious because we thought the man child was Jesus Christ. 

 

It took me a while to write back because I kept thinking your question was going to take some time to answer but then I decided to give you the short version.  I do agree with the person you heard.  If John is caught up into the future Day of The Lord and is seeing events that are future, then the man child is not the Lord Jesus born of Mary in the past but someone who is identified with him in the future.  The 144,000 show up at the beginning of the tribulation, and are called the “firstfruits” unto God in Rev. 14.  Their preaching from the start brings about the birth of the nation.  In Rev 12 the man child is caught up unto God while the believing remnant flees into the wilderness.  In Rev 14 the 144,000 are with the Lord in heaven, redeemed from the earth.  So it seems they are the man child who is caught up to God in Rev 12.  Remember the 144,000 cannot die.  They seem to be a very special people.  I have attached a study I passed out when we studied the book of Revelation pointing out who I think the 144,000 are.  Perhaps this will give you even more to think about.  Study On!

 

 

Are we judged for our sins at the Judgement Seat of Christ?

 

I hope this message finds you well.  I don't know if you are aware of it or not but it seems your message from the April Meeting has stirred up the brethren in CA.  I was sent the following link to a video done by R.K. this past Sunday (5/3) critiquing your message from the April Meeting.  I have listened to the video, unfortunately it’s very ugly.  I am sending it to you as an FYI of what is being said.

 

Words cannot express how much I value your ministry.  I stand with you, our sins ARE NOT judged at the Judgement Seat of Christ. After listing to this video I kind of wonder if these brothers still believe in TOTAL FORGIVENESS on account of the fact that they have believers pay for their own sins at JSC. 

 

(continuation)

 

I just wanted to pass along Part 2 of CA's critique of your message from the conference.  Where you able to watch the first part?  If so what were your thoughts?

 

 

Just now got a change to view part 2.  I watched part 1 right after your first email.  I find it hard to keep listening.  After a while I have to start skipping through the message.  It was such a messed up, misuse of  verses, to support his supposition, it was hard to watch.

 

Just three comments:

 

1.   His whole argument started with  1Timothy 5:24,25 where he makes the "judgment" the Judgment Seat of Christ.  The context is clear that the judgment is by man, particularly Timothy who after two or three witnesses must rebuke an Elder before all, without preferring and partiality.  That is why he was not to lay hand on someone suddenly, and why he may experience stomach problems.  The sins going before, is before you ever laid hands on him.  Some follow after you lay hands on them and now have to judge.  If R. was correct in using these verses to speak of the Judgement Seat of Christ, some men's sins will come after the Judgment Seat of Christ.

 

The point being R.’s foundation verse that he built everything else upon was misused and twisted.  It was extremely hard to keep listening afterwards.

 

2.  After laying an incorrect foundation, every verse that he used, where Paul corrects a Believer's walk, Ron interjects his false assumption that if not corrected it will go to the Judgement Seat of Christ where Jesus Christ will judge you for your sins, avenge you, and destroy you.  Wow, what grace!

 

3. Then after piling sins on the Believer and taking them to the Judgment Seat of Christ, he then offers a Believer a way that they can cleanse themselves by remorse and repentance, so that they don't appear at the Judgment Seat.  No Christ, No Cross, Do it yourself!

 

Nothing else needs to be said.

 

Thanks for informing me of what is out there. 

 

 

Please clarify exactly who is judged after the 1,000 year reign.

 

I was looking to get some tracts, and in looking at the "Am I Going To Heaven" one, I noticed it does not seem to be correct in what it states:

 

"Anyone who is found not written in the book of life..." Rev. 20:15

 

The body of Christ will have been long raptured, when the book of life is opened, and not subject to such judgment! I am a bit puzzled that this be used as a means to teach any new believer.

Am I incorrect?

 

 

While the Body of Christ will be raptured long before the Great White Throne Judgment, so will all the Old Testament and Kingdom Saints.  Even they will be raised 1000 years before this judgment.  The resurrection and judgment after the 1000 year reign is for all the damned of all the ages.  They shall all be cast into the lake of fire.  This will include every lost person who died without salvation in the age of grace.  So it is a proper warning to lost people to encourage them to be saved while they can. 

 

Will we be raptured before the Tribulation?

 

I am concerned by your chart because you are sure we will be raptured before tribulation starts. I am hopeful you are correct but after going through the John Shorey book, The Window of the Lords Return 2012-2020, I would like you to compare his conclusion with yours.

 

I have looked at the link you sent to the Lord's return book.  The author does not distinguish Paul's Apostleship from the 12 Apostles.  Certainly what the Lord taught them was that they were facing the tribulation because they were looking for and preaching the gospel of the Kingdom - Jesus Christ setting up his Kingdom here on earth and sitting on the throne of David in Jerusalem.

 

Paul was given the revelation of the Dispensation of the Grace of God for us Gentiles who live in this age.  According to Ephesians and Colossians (even all of Paul's Epistles) "we are made to sit together in heavenly places that in the ages to come ..." (Ephesians 2:6,7).  The reason for the rapture is to take us into the "heavenly places."  According to Revelation 12 in the middle of the tribulation Satan and his angels are cast out of heaven and their place is no more found.  That is because we have replaced them.  We are there before they are cast out because God prepared us for those positions so they would not be left void.  Keep looking for the blessed hope (Titus 2:13,14) not for a sign.

 

 

Is there any hope for salvation after the Rapture?

 

"I've been following Pastor Richard Jordan's teachings on television and have been blessed with the knowledge of Rightly Dividing. I do have a question though on the rapture.

 

What happens to the gentiles that are left behind? Will they have another chance like in the "Left Behind" movies I've see?  To my understanding of Rightly Dividing, there is Time Past, But now, and Ages to come.

 

We are living in the dispensation of grace and after the rapture comes the Ages to come which will end grace, is that right? So is there any hope for salvation after the rapture? Thanks for your time and hope to hear from you soon." 

 

Sorry I have not got back to you sooner.  II Thessalonians 2 says that God will send strong delusion so that those who have not loved the truth in the age of grace will be deceived and damned after the rapture.  Those would be people who have heard the gospel of grace and did not choose to believe and be saved.

 

When you read Revelation such as chapter 7, there seems to be many who will get saved during the tribulation.  It must be those who had not heard the gospel of grace in this age.  However those in the tribulation must endure to the end to be saved into the Kingdom, or as Revelation 2&3 says "overcome."

 

 

Will we see the anti-Christ before the rapture?

 

A friend of mine showed me your program on Direct TV and gave me a DVD of the show, which I am starting to understand some new things. But I have a question about the Rapture and the Bible.  When I read this passage, I believe this says we will see the anti-Christ before the rapture, but I am told by my friend no we will be taken / raptured before the anti-Christ. Can you help please Sir.  See II Thessalonians 2

 

Thanks for the question.  Please consider the following

 

II Thessalonians 1:3-11 teaches that the Believer will “rest with us” (the whole Body of Christ) “When the Lord Jesus Christ is revealed” and while he is “taking vengeance” on the lost world, who later suffer “everlasting destruction.”

 

Then in II Thessalonians 2:1-14 Paul corrects a false teaching that caused the Thessalonians to think their present tribulation was the presence of “the day of Christ” on earth.  They thought that day was “at hand,” or had “come.”  But Paul assures them that is had not “come.”

 

First he assures them based on the fact that the “coming of our Lord Jesus Christ” is our “gathering unto him” so there is no need to be troubled.

 

Secondly, the day they thought was here, is not, and will not come until there is “a falling away first and the man of sin revealed.”  When those two things take place then the tribulation present will be that which is coming from the Lord.  But those two things are being hindered.  II Thessalonians 2:6, 7 says:  “And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.  For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.”  It is the work of God by His Spirit in the Body of Christ – the age of grace that interrupted the prophet program that is hindering Satan from having his way in the earth.  But once we “are taking out of the way” the next verse says: “And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.”

 

Lastly in II Thessalonians 2:13 Paul givse thanks “because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:  Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.”   This is our salvation from the wrath to come.  “The beginning” in the context is the beginning of coming of the anti-Christ and those days on the earth.

 

 

Is the body of Christ also His bride? And are we the new Jerusalem?        

 

Sorry for waiting so long to write back.  It has been busy and this question can take a long answer.  However, for the sake of getting back to you I am going to make it short.

 

The doctrine concerning the bride is found in the parables of Jesus Christ concerning His second coming to the nation of Israel (as in Matthew 25), as in the prophecy of Isaiah 61:10-11 and Isaiah 62:1-5, and the future fulfillment of Revelation 19:7-9 and Revelation 21:1-10.  The Lord Jesus shall return and join Himself to (or marry) the nation of Israel.  That is a future marriage in which the Lord Jesus shall be joined to the remnant who has kept themselves pure from the Anti-Christ.  It is the time also in which Jesus Christ will join Himself to the land also, which shall then be called: “Beulah” (meaning: married) – Isaiah 62:4.

 

 

Paul never wrote to the Corinthians or anyone else telling them that they are “a virgin bride.”  Paul never used the word “bride” in any of his epistles.  That alone should inform us that we are not the bride of Christ.

 

Paul did however tell the Corinthians that he had “espoused” them “to one husband” (II Corinthians 11:2).  Espoused: means joined.  Notice it is past tense.  It is already done!  As in Ephesians 5:30-32  “For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.  For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.  This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.”  The great mystery is that we ARE bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh.  We ARE one with Him.  We ARE joined with Him.  We ARE the Body of Christ!

 

So the "Body of Christ" (US) is not the future "Bride."  We are one with the Groom!

 

 

Is the Book of Life and the Lamb’s Book of Life the same?

 

Is the Book of Life the same as the Lamb’s book of life and how could we as saints of the age of grace be written in it since this age was a mystery?

 

I will have to give some thought to your question. My first thoughts however is that since both are called "The Book of Life" that they would be the same. I have always thought that when Israel was in covenant relationship with God they were born into this covenant (especially if circumcised at 8 days). Therefore their names were automatically entered into the book of life. The indications from Moses when they worshipped the golden calf is that their names would then be taken out of the book. Since we are a new creation, our names do not go into the book until we believe the gospel where they can never be taken out (Philippians 4:3). Then there are those in Revelation 17:8 whose names never were in this book - most likely Gentiles whose names never got in.

 

 

 

 

 

Heaven on earth

 

I have always understood that when the beautiful new city of Jerusalem came down from Heaven and our Lord Jesus reigned forever and ever that the murderers, sorcerers, etc. would be gone from the new earth. Please explain this for me.

 

Thanks for your prayers and encouragement. If your question about the New Jerusalem is in regards to Revelation 22:15, I take that to be a general statement that applies not just to the City but the whole of the earth because of Revelation 21:1-8. I think like you do as you said; "when the beautiful new city of Jerusalem came down from Heaven and our Lord Jesus reigned forever and ever that the murderers, sorcerers, etc. would be gone from the new earth." Now the 1000 years before that, while the Lord is putting down all rule and authority and power (I Corinthians 15:23-25), then there will still be sinners who upon swift righteous judgment will be "cast alive" in the lake of fire which will be visible on the earth during that time.

 

 

What is the abomination of desolation?

 

What exactly does the abomination of desolation mean?   Is it the same as the abomination that causes desolation?

 

Daniel 8:11-13,14 speaks of the "transgression of desolation" in the context of the "little horn" (who we call the Anti-Christ) setting up the sacrifice and ending it, followed by the destruction of the sanctuary and also the city of Jerusalem.  The Gentiles will overrun the city.

 

Daniel 9:27 says that the sacrifice will cease for the overspreading of abominations and for that cause he will make it desolate (speaking of its destruction, the destruction of the temple).  Daniel 9:26 just spoke of the destruction of both the city and the sanctuary.  The abomination is the declaration that he is God. (II Thessalonians 2:4).  Daniel 11:31 and 12:11 also deals with this event.

 

In Matthew 24:2 the Lord Jesus spoke of the destruction of the temple and when asked when, he further explained the events that lead up to and follow "the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet."  Not only will the temple be destroyed but Jerusalem shall fall to the hands of the Gentiles - see Luke 2120-24 and Revelation 11:1,2.

 

All this takes place in the second half of the 70th week of Daniel, the last 3 1/2 years of the 7 years preceding the second coming of Jesus Christ.

 

 

 

Whose names are in the book of life?

 

Explain the Book of Life.  He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment, and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my father, and before his angels.  Is this talking about Israel?  Rev 3:5.

 

When God is dealing with Israel (in the past or future), since Israel was in covenant relationship with God, a child was born into this covenant relationship (especially when they were circumcised at 8 days). Therefore their names were automatically entered into the book of life. The indications from Moses, when they worshipped the golden calf, is that their names would then be taken out of the book (Exodus 32:30-33). Since we are a new creature, our names did not go into the book of life until we believed the gospel and where they can never be taken out (Philippians 4:3).  Interestingly, the passage in Revelation 17:8 where it speaks of those whose names never were in this book, is most likely speaking of Gentiles whose names never got in.  Your passage, Revelation 3:5 is certainly referring to the Nation of Israel, but especially the believing remnant whose names will not be blotted out.  These are those who will endure faithful through the great tribulation and overcome the hour of temptation.

 

 

 

If our place is in the Heavens, will we ever see or visit the new earth?

 

I like your question.  It shows that you have put a lot of important facts together correctly about the Kingdom of God leaving you with a reasonable question.  While the Bible may not give a direct answer, I do believe it does give enough information to answer that question.  Consider these facts:

 

From Ephesians 1:9, 10 we know that God’s Eternal Kingdom will continue to have two locations – Heaven and Earth.  But those two places are one Kingdom under the reign of our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

According to Revelation 21:1-16, the Lord Jesus will reign over this Kingdom from the city of New Jerusalem which comes down out of heaven and (I believe) rests on the earth.  Interestingly, the dimensions of this city, includes its height.  It is 1500 miles high.  Outer space is less than 400 miles high.  So this city reaches into the heavens.

 

Then from John 1:49-51, after Nathanael acknowledged Jesus Christ as the King of Israel the Lord said:  “ … Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig tree, believest thou? thou shalt see greater things than these.  And he saith unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.”

 

This means when the Lord Jesus sits on His throne in the New Jerusalem on planet Earth that the angels will be sent out (commissioned) from the earth, “ascending” into their abode (heaven) and then “descending” back to earth, perhaps reporting to the Lord and waiting for their next assignment.  The Heavenly and Earthly portions of the Kingdom will be headquartered in the New Jerusalem here on Earth.

 

Therefore I believe that we too, will be required from time to time, to report to the Lord who will be here on earth and then leave to carry out our assignments in the heavens.  If we get any vacation time, I will ask permission to visit places in the new earth.  At least I think that will be possible.

 

 

*ETERNAL SECURITY*

 

If I’m saved by grace, do I have to confess my sins?

 

Can you please explain John 1-9, I'm not sure why I would have to confess my sins if I'm already eternally forgiven and Christ has paid my sin debt.  Thank you!

 

You are right!  I John 1:9 is not to you, about you, and surely not about you getting any more forgiveness from God than you already have through Christ and the redemption through His blood.

 

Many have misunderstood this book, incorrectly teaching and applying the doctrines of  I John, all because they have not paid attention to whom it was written and the time for which it applies.  Those to whom Peter, James and John writes are Jewish Kingdom Saints who were taught by Jesus Christ that they must endure to the end of the tribulation to be saved (Matthew 24).  See all the reference to Anti-Christ in chapters 2 & 4.  This book was not written to those in the age of Grace, saved by the ministry of the Apostle Paul, called to be part of the Body of Christ and promised to be caught up unto Christ, saved from the “wrath to come.” 

 

When he states in  I John 1:3 “that ye also may have fellowship with us and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ,” apparently he is referring to those who were not in this fellowship.  To be in “fellowship” means to be in union with God, or as John says it in this epistles some 23 times, it is to be “in him” or “in the Son” which is eternal life ( see: 1:3,5; 2:5,6,10,24,27; 3:5,6,15,24; 4:13,15,16; 5:11,12,20).  The context of  I John 1:9 is not to the believer but to those who “deceive” themselves and “lie” saying “we have not sinned.”  This speaks of those in Israel who had not yet confessed (agreed with God) that they have killed their Messiah, they have not yet “believed in the name of the Son of God.”  Israel’s repentance has always required confession – see Leviticus 26:40; II Chronicles 6:24,25,36,37; 7:14; Daniel 9:20; Matthew 3:6.  The point then is, chapter one is a call to those who have not yet acknowledged the truth to confess and believe the truth so that they may be in fellowship with the believers and with the Father and with his Son.  Afterwards,    I John 2:1 addresses “My little children,” who are John’s disciples and when they sin they don't need to confess their sins because they "have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:  And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world."

 

 

When once saved, but then get caught up in works, are you still saved?

 

Hope you are doing well.  I have a question and am a little embarrassed that I have to ask it.  Periodically I read through the book called Galatians by C. R. Stam I purchased some time ago at GBC.  Now when I read Paul in his book of Galatians from the Bible he is saddened about all of the people having turned away from him, does he mean they are lost and were never saved?  Or, does he mean they were saved but now they won't enjoy their salvation because of adding works?  It seems to be that Pastor Stam does not consider them lost.  I'm thinking they are lost, but then maybe I am a different kind of strict legalist for grace!  I am constantly reminding two of my daughters who attend Lutheran churches that baptism, confirmation, sacraments, are not requirements to be saved and they must not believe they are.  The one family stays because they don't want the kids to go to secular school.  The other one attends church sporadically but her child will be going to a private school I think.  It seems to me that if a church requires baptism (even say a Baptist church that says: baptism is an outward show of an inward change or something like that), it is better if one walks away from that assembly because if a church requires baptism for membership it automatically becomes a work at least in the mind of a church.  Especially so I would think those churches that believe only in the local church and not the universal church of God consisting of true believers as we know it at Grace.  So am I a legalizer of another breed?  This note sounds so stupid I know, but I am concerned for others especially in these various churches still participating in requirements of their religion.  Thanks in advance for your consideration in this question.  To me a little poison kills one just as dead.  Also in the gospels somewhere I remember hearing one cannot serve to Masters.  Then too, Pastor Fink mentioned about the wheelbarrow belief and I heard that a couple of years ago and think it is a good allegory of true belief. 

 

The statements in your email reflects the mind of Paul.  Whenever anyone brings into "grace" the works of the law there is a nullifying of grace (Romans 11:6) or as Galatians 5:4 says "... ye are fallen from grace."

 

Anyone who has first trusted in the gospel of grace to save them, they are saved but drawn away from the doctrine that not only saves, but also empowers the Christian life.  Galatians 3:1-3  "O foolish Galatians ... Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?"

 

But if someone did not get saved by the gospel of grace and from the beginning thought that a work was necessary for salvation, those have never been saved.  Since only God knows the heart, he would be the only one who knows for sure if they are saved.  We can only ask them.  And if their words do not match the gospel of grace we could never be sure if they were ever saved.  The Apostle Paul had this fear towards some in Galatia.  We see this in Galatians 4:9 where he writes: "But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God..."  As if he is not sure they do know God.  Again in Galatians 4:11 "I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain."

 

The one thing for sure is that Paul did not consider the doctrine of Judizers as truth, nor of them as saved brethren.  He calls them "false brethren" in Galatians 4:4.

 

So your confusion is shared by all who know the grace of God.  If anyone adds works of the law to grace that frustrates the grace of God and brings in confusion.

 

 

*ETERNITY*

 

Where will we spend eternity?  Heaven or earth?

 

Last night I heard Pastor Gregg Laurie (sp.) on one of his sort of PSA’s at the end of someone else's programs; that the default place for Christian believers is NOT Heaven.  Please tell me I am right in thinking he is incorrect about that. The ‘default’ place for people that  believe the message of Paul – is Heaven.  He added (sort of sublimely imho) that you then must choose to ‘follow’ Christ in order to get to Heaven.    I think this goes against what us Grace believers believe. Please don’t think I’m promoting “license”... I just want some assurance that Pastor Gregg’s doctrine is incorrect. I realize that what keeps Christians on the right path is the new desire of their heart and maybe a little help from the Holy Spirit.

 

 

The great thing about "rightly dividing the word of truth" is the clarity it gives on all the scripture.

 

God's purpose in and through the Nation of Israel is the earth and placing His Kingdom on the earth.  That is clear even from the prayer the Lord Jesus taught in Matthew 6:10.

 

On the other hand, God's purpose for the Body of Christ (who we are) involves reconciling the heavens back to his authority.

 

The purpose of the Body of Christ according Paul’s epistles is for the heavens.  II Corinthians 5:1 says our house and new home is “eternal in the heavens.”  I Thessalonians 4:13-18 says when the rapture occurs and we meet the Lord in the air – “so shall be ever be with the Lord.”  We are with Him in the heavens.  This is why I Corinthians 15:40, 49, 50-53 teaches we must be changed to “bear the image of the heavenly.”

 

Ephesians 2:5-7 says:  “Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: That in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.”

 

In the “ages to come” (plural) meaning the tribulation, the 1000 year reign and the eternal ages that follow we will be seated in heavenly places as a testimony of God’s grace.

 

It is God’s intent for the Body of Christ to fulfill His purpose in Christ to make Him preeminent in all things (heaven and earth) and to reconcile all things in heaven and earth to himself according to Colossians 1:15-20.  The heavens will be reconciled by the Body of Christ.  That is why we are raptured out of the earth and into heaven - see Ephesians 1:22, 23.

 

Revelations 12:7, 8 says:  “And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.”  The reason their place is no more found is because the Body of Christ has filled them.

 

Now concerning salvation.  You are right!  According to Ephesians 3:1-5 this is "the dispensation of the grace of God."  Grace is God's undeserved, unmerited favor toward us.  We don't earn it.  God's favor comes through Christ and His work on the cross.  In order for it to be grace, it cannot be of works - see Romans 11:6.  And since it is by grace, faith is the only way of receiving God's salvation - see Romans 4:4,5.

 

Both of your questions come together in Ephesians 2:5-10.  We are seated together in heavenly places in Christ as a display of God's grace (to the angelic beings) and in order to be a display of grace we can only be saved by grace.  That is why Ephesians 2:8,9 begins with the word "For."

 

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:  Not of works, lest any man should boast."

 

 

*EVANGELISM*

 

 

Sharing the gospel with people who challenge the reliability of the KJV bible

 

I have a question regarding sharing the grace message.  How do you share when the first thing that comes out of their mouth is that they do not believe the Bible is the Inspired Word of God?  I am constantly being told by them (non-catholics), most do not use the KJV, that it was written by men and therefore you can’t believe everything in it.

 

 

When someone says they do not believe the Bible, they are usually defending their right to be ignorant.  The truth is they know the Bible is the Word of God.  There are three things you can do.

 

1.  Ignore the fact they said they do not believe the Bible and just give them the truth they need to know, quoting the scriptures that say its true.  If they are lost, give them the gospel.  If they are in false doctrine, give them the truth.

 

2.  It is good to learn the proofs from within the Bible that proves it is the Word of God.  There are scientific proofs such as the world being round and suspended in space and hanging on nothing.  There are historic facts.  Then there are hundreds of prophecy which have already come to pass, which God gave to prove his Prophets were speaking and writing His Word (as in Isaiah 48:4-8).  (Our Volume 13 makes some of these points.)

 

3. Lastly, if they just want left to their ignorance, even God will let them have their way, so there comes a time to practice  I Corinthians 14:23  "But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant."  

 

 

*FAITH*

 

Do I truly have faith?

 

I'm glad that in giving up "church" you did not give up "Christ."  I can tell by your concern about your salvation that you desire to know God and His salvation.  There is a very simple solution to you confusion.  Salvation is not in a prayer for God to save you.  Salvation is putting your faith and truth in God; that is, in God's Word; in what God has said; and that being, Jesus Christ died for your sins (for all your sins, for the penalty of all your sins) and that he was buried and that he rose from the dead for your justification.

 

From what you said, I think you know all this, but I think you are putting too much trust in your faith.  There is nothing special about faith.  Faith is just believing what someone said or did is true.  Your faith is only as good as the trust-worthiness of the person you are putting your faith in.  When your faith is in the Lord Jesus Christ or in what God said Jesus Christ did, then it is powerful in that you can trust God to be true.

 

Faith can be defined this way:  Faith is taking God at his Word, and leaving the consequences rest on his faithfulness.  I Corinthians 15:2 says you are saved if you believe verses 3 & 4.  God said that.  You know it is true because God said so.  If you have decided to believe that, trust in the DBR of Jesus Christ for the full payment of your sins, God said you are saved.  Now it depends on His faithfulness, not yours. The consequence of your salvation rests on his faithfulness.   If he indeed cannot lie, then you are saved.  If he can lie, and if Jesus Christ did not pay for all your sins, then you are not saved.  The point is, your faith is only as good as the trustworthiness of the object of your faith.  Don't put faith in your faith, how much you believe, but in who and what you believe.

 

There is also a difference between being saved, security and assurance of your salvation.  A person is saved when they trust the gospel (Ephesians 1:13; 2:8,9).  They are secure in Christ by the sealing of the Holy Spirit whether they know it or not, according to Ephesians 1:13,14 as well as Romans 5:1,2; and 8:31-39.  Assurance comes when you read these and all other gospel verses over and over, till the truth of those verses are confirmed in your conscience.  Assurance seems to be your problem, not salvation.  A person is saved when they believe the gospel.  They are then secure whether they believe it or not and they are saved whether they have assurance or not; all because God will save them as He said he would, because He is faithful.  I think this should help you.

 

I need a better understanding of the word “faith” and “trust”

 

Thank you for your reply Thomas. Basically what you are telling me that faith is simply me believing what God says? God said Christ shed his blood, died, and rose from the dead and if I believe in this event God will save me? So how does "trust" fit in the picture? I hear a lot of brethren say to trust Christ as Savior. This may sound silly but what exactly does it mean to "trust Christ"? Is it the same as believe?

 

One other question. Does a person have to know the day they are saved? I hear a lot of folks say if you can't point back to a definite day and time when you were saved then you aren't saved. Just curious about this. Thanks again.

 

Its been some time since you wrote, but I did not want to let your questions go unanswered.

 

You were saying things correctly until you said "if I believe in this event God will save me?"  It is not just the event that you are to believe in, it is what God said was accomplished by that event; that Jesus Christ in dying on the cross completely paid for all your sins!  This explains where "trust" fits in.  If you believe in this accomplishment, you are committing your trust in what God said about it, in Jesus Christ as your Savior.  It means you are not going to trust anything else for your eternal soul's salvation.

 

I hope you caught the difference, and have made that decision.  Concerning having to know when that decision was first made is not important.  But it is important to ask yourself - is that what I am trusting?  My mother once wondered if she had really trusted the gospel when she was young.  After a long discussion I told her, whether she had or not, if she is unsure, decide right now to believe the gospel and trust in the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ for her salvation.  She did and that settled the issue eternally!

 

*FORGIVENESS*

 

 

Are Grace believers forgiven of their sins in totality? Or will any be judged at the Judgment Seat of Christ?

 

I hope this message finds you well.  I don't know if you are aware of it or not but it seems your message from the April Meeting has stirred up the brethren in CA.  I was sent the following link to a video done by R.K. this past Sunday (5/3) critiquing your message from the April Meeting.  I have listened to the video, unfortunately it’s very ugly.  I am sending it to you as an FYI of what is being said.

 

Words cannot express how much I value your ministry.  I stand with you, our sins ARE NOT judged at the Judgement Seat of Christ. After listing to this video I kind of wonder if these brothers still believe in TOTAL FORGIVENESS on account of the fact that they have believers pay for their own sins at JSC.  https://youtu.be/Vd4Fp57lq8A

 

(Continuation)

I just wanted to pass along Part 2 of CA's critique of your message from the conference.  Where you able to watch the first part?  If so what were your thoughts?

 

I just now got a change to view part 2.  I watched part 1 right after your first email.  I find it hard to keep listening.  After a while I have to start skipping through the message.  It was such a messed up, misuse of  verses, to support his supposition, it was hard to watch.

 

Just three comments:

 

1   His whole argument started with  1Timothy 5:24,25 where he makes the "judgment" the Judgment Seat of Christ.  The context is clear that the judgment is by man, particularly Timothy who after two or three witnesses must rebuke an Elder before all, without preferring and partiality.  That is why he was not to lay hand on someone suddenly, and why he may experience stomach problems.  The sins going before, is before you ever laid hands on him.  Some follow after you lay hands on them and now have to judge.  If R. was correct in using these verses to speak of the Judgement Seat of Christ, some men's sins will come after the Judgment Seat of Christ.

 

The point being R.’s foundation verse that he built everything else upon was misused and twisted.  It was extremely hard to keep listening afterwards.

 

2.  After laying an incorrect foundation, every verse that he used, where Paul corrects a Believer's walk, R. interjects his false assumption that if not corrected it will go to the Judgement Seat of Christ where Jesus Christ will judge you for your sins, avenge you, and destroy you.  Wow, what grace!

 

3. Then after piling sins on the Believer and taking them to the Judgment Seat of Christ, he then offers a Believer a way that they can cleanse themselves by remorse and repentance, so that they don't appear at the Judgment Seat.  No Christ, No Cross, Do it yourself!

 

Nothing else needs to be said.

 

Thanks for informing me of what is out there.

 

 

Are non-believers judged for their sins at the Great White Throne or are they only judged for the sin of unbelief?

 

Are there scriptural references that answer this question? Does Revelation 20:12-13 answer that question? Does Les Feldick’s statement answer that question on pages 56 and 57 of his questions and answers from the Bible book? 

We are attending Bible studies with C.C. and he is in disagreement with the Berean Bible Society over the issue of whether those who die in unbelief are judged for their sins or judged only for their unbelief (Berean Searchlight April and May issues). Ricky K. at BBS thinks this teaching is suspect because it leans toward universalism. C.C. is stressing this issue and we are unsure why it is so important or why there is disagreement among people who rightly divide the Bible.

 

 One passage C.C. uses is II Corinthians 5:18-19 which seems to say the world is reconciled to God, all sin has been forgiven and it is our ministry to tell this to the world. It also seems to say that none of the sins of unbelievers will be brought up again. Curt says ‘sin is off the table.’

 

 We will continue to study with Curt but we are interested in your view on this matter. And we would be very interested to see Richard Jordan do a TV presentation on it, or if he has already addressed this issue, which program is it?

 

II Corinthians 5:16-21 explains what is true presently in the age of grace.  Today God is not imputing their trespasses unto them.  He is holding back his wrath and dispensing grace.  But we also know that will not last forever.  II Thessalonians 2:5-12.  When God withdraws his grace, by taking away the Body of Christ, he will send "strong delusion" "that all might be damned who believed not the truth," "who loved not the truth that they might be saved."  Not being saved they will fall under his wrath, damnation and judgment.  According to II Corinthians 5:18,19 the ministry and word for today is "reconciliation."  It is the offer of reconciliation.  That is why II Corinthians 5:20,21 is God's message through his ambassadors to the world - "be ye reconciled to God."  Reconciliation is made possible by the cross.  The world is not reconciled to God, but is offered reconciliation on his part.  When it is not accepted they will suffer the consequence of facing a Holy Just God without Christ, without salvation, with no reconciliation possible.

 

The scriptures make it clear that only the Believer is "redeemed" (freed from sin) and "justified" (declared righteous by God) and therefore "forgiven" - Acts 13:38,39; Acts 26:18 (forgiveness is received by believing the gospel); Ephesians 1:7; Colossians 1:14.

 

Remember, those who blaspheme the Holy Ghost "hath never forgiveness" (Mark 3:29) and those who will not believe in Jesus Christ "shall die in their sins" (John 8:24) because they remain in sin and under sin (Romans 3:9).

 

Only the Believer is "Justified" - meaning "declared righteous by God" - Romans 3:22,26; 4:22-25; Galatians 2:16.

 

If a person is not declared righteous, he is unrighteous.  The "unrighteous" are said to be: "fornications, Idolaters, Adulterers, effeminate, abusers of themselves with mankind" - I Corinthians 6:19.  They are identified with their sins.  "All unrighteousness is sin" says I John 5:17.  And that is the beginning of preaching the gospel.  A person needs to believe they are a sinner who needs to be saved from their sins.

 

God's wrath is against all ungodliness and unrighteousness -Romans 1:18; 2:8,9; 3:5.  "The wages of sin is death" (Romans 6:23) and those who do not receive the gift of God will receive the just reward for their deeds - II Peter 2:13.  Jesus Christ will execute judgment upon all their ungodly deeds and speeches of ungodly sinners - Jude 15.  In I John 1:9 Israel had to confess their sins and if (and only if) they did, God would be faithful and just to forgive their sins and cleanse them form all unrighteousness.  So those who did not, were not forgiven nor cleansed from unrighteousness.  The same is true for us in the age of grace.  Only the Believer is justified and therefore declared righteous.  The Believer is saved from sin and its penalty.  The unbeliever is not.  He is not saved from the penalty of his sins - Romans 2:8,9; 5:6-9; 12:19;  I Timothy 1:15.

 

Hell and the Lake of Fire is the punishment for all unrighteous sinful deeds - Matthew 25:46; II Thessalonians 1:9; Ephesians 5:5,6; II Peter 2:9.  That is why in the great white throne judgment the "books" recording the "works" of those who are not in "the book of life" will be judged and damned with degrees of punishment for their works - sinful deeds: Revelation 20:11-15; Matthew 23:14; John 5:29; Romans 3:8; II Peter 2:3.

 

 

What is “Forgiveness?”

 

Forgiveness (as used in the Bible) means to pardon. Not to hold someone's wrongs against them. In Jeremiah 31:34 God promises Israel in the New Covenant that he would "forgive" and "remember their sins no more." Sometimes people say: to forgive means to forget. But that is not quite true because no one can really forget. Even when the Lord says he will remember no more, it does not mean he forgot, but that he forgave; meaning he will not bring them up again. Their sins are removed, put away, never to be brought up or held against them forever. Thank the Lord, that is what we have: "forgiveness" which is made possible "through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (Ephesians 1:7). Because He paid for our sins, God can put them away (on Him) and pardon us - eternally. I hope that helps.

 

I was thinking yesterday about your prayer request and statements you made. You and your family can learn to forgive your sister, but she must earn your trust. That will take time and ought to because she has proven that she cannot be trusted. You can give her a clean slate, but your trust she must earn over time.

 

 

*GOSPEL OF GRACE*

 

 

When Paul mentions Apostles (Eph. 2: 19-20), is he referring to the twelve?

 

 Can you help me explain Eph. 2:19-20 . If I tell people that Paul's gospel differs from kingdom gospel some say these verses refer to Peter in Matt. 16. When Paul mentions Apostles, is he referring to the 12?

 

When Paul wrote of the Body of Christ and said:  “Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;” he was not saying we are built on what Peter and the 12 taught.  Notice the order “apostles and prophets.”  When God formed the Body of Christ according to  I Corinthans 12:28 “God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets”  Paul was the first and foremost apostle but even in Ephesians 4:8 and 4:11  “When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men….And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers.”  Notice the order and that he did this after he ascended into heaven.  But when God was dealing with Israel he first gave them prophets (the Old Testament) and in Jesus Christ’s earthly ministry he gave them apostles.  That is why the order differs in Luke 11:49 where it says “Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute.”  We are not built on them but on the apostles and prophets Jesus Christ gave after he ascended to heaven starting with Paul and the information found in his epistles.

 

Now concerning the gospel Paul preached.  According to I Corinthians 15:3,4 the elements of the gospel and the promise of Christ and eternal life was not a mystery.  That is why it says: “For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures.”  However, what was a mystery is the details of how the cross saved sinners, that God can now justify sinners by faith.  That God would dispense his grace in this age to Gentiles apart from Israel and the fulfillment of their promises and through the fall of Israel, from out of all nations the Body of Christ.  This is what Paul calls “the mystery of the gospel” in Ephesians 6:19. 

 

 

At what point did Scripture go from the Gospel of the Kingdom to the Gospel of Grace for the Jews?

 

I watch your program every week, and Les Feldick every day.  I know we are in the age of Grace.   In Gal: 2:9 it says  Paul and Barnabas  should go unto the Gentiles and James, Peter and John unto the circumcision.  At which point did it go from the gospel of the Kingdom  to the Gospel of Grace for the Jews?? I can’t find the Scripture.  Please provide Scripture.

 

You asked a good question that many have searched for an answer to.  This may help.

 

In the agreement of Galatians 2:9 that Paul and Barnabas should go to the heathen while James, Cephas and John would go to the circumcision, it is important to understand who Paul considered to be heathen and who were the circumcision.  If the Galatians 2 agreement is the recounting of the Acts 15 council, then notice right after this agreement Paul sets out on his second apostolic journey and Acts 17:1,2 says:  “Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews: And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures.”  Apparently, Paul considered lost Jews as heathen and “the Circumcision” as the believing remnant prior to him.

 

In Galatians 1 Paul gives a detailed account of his gospel, as to how he received it and his limited contact with the other Apostles before him.  The three years in Damascus/Arabia/ back to Damascus is certainly when he received his gospel.  As early as Galatians 1:21 he had made known that gospel in Syria and Cilicia.  That is why the council in Acts 15 addressed their letter to “the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia.”  Paul’s first recorded preaching in Acts 13 is after the time spent in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia.  There is where we find his gospel message:  “Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:  And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses” (Acts 13:38,39); but he had certainly preached that message already in those other places.  So Acts 9 is where Paul’s gospel of the grace of God began to be preached.

 

We know that Peter’s gospel of the Kingdom was preached during Christ’s earthly ministry (Matthew 4:17,23; 10:2-7).  Note it will be preached again during the future tribulation (or 70th week of Daniel) as seen in Matthew 24:14.  The Twelve Apostles began to preach this good news in Acts 1-7, but in Acts 7:54-60 when the Lord Jesus stood and the “day of the Lord’s wrath” did not begin, that Kingdom was postponed.  The good news that it was “at hand” could not longer be proclaimed.  However, these promises to the believing remnant (the circumcision) continued to be affirmed by James, Peter and John as they agree and as they wrote in their epistles to them – “Wherefore I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth.  Yea, I think it meet, as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up by putting you in remembrance;  Knowing that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, even as our Lord Jesus Christ hath showed me. Moreover I will endeavour that ye may be able after my decease to have these things always in remembrance.  For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.  For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.  And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.  We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:” (II Peter 1:12-19).

 

So while the good news of the Kingdom being at hand could no longer be preached and the offer of the Kingdom postponed there was still a ministry to the circumcision, confirming their hope and with greater light received from Paul concerning the accomplishments of the cross.

 

While all of us would like to see an immediate end of one ministry and the beginning of another, the Holy Spirit inspiring the book of Acts simply drops following the Kingdom ministry and directs our attention to Paul’s ministry of the gospel of the grace of God and the calling out of Jews and Gentiles alike, believers who form the Body of Christ.  In my simple view of things, one program was postponed in Acts 7 and the other began in Acts 9.

 

Hope that helps you.

 

 

*GOSPEL OF THE CIRCUMCISION*

 

 

When Peter, James and John went to the Circumcision, what was their mission?  Was it to preach the gospel of the grace of God or to write tribulation books?

 

My question today is on Galatians 2:9.  When the three went to the circumcision what was their mission?  Was it to preach the gospel of the grace of God or to write tribulation books?  Since they knew the gospel has changed and Peter referenced Paul’s epistles in his 2nd book is he speaking as looking back from a tribulation point of  view since Peter, James and John are tribulation books?

 

It makes sense that Hebrews was written in early Acts and it is now pushed out after we are out of here. I understand there is two gospels and the great commission is gone so why would James, Peter & John not preach the gospel of the grace of God to the Jews?

 

The part that throws me is Peter referencing Paul’s epistles so the three must have known the gospel had changed yet their books are all of a tribulation point of view.  What am I missing here?  I hope my questions are posed correctly.  Thank you.

 

Thanks for your patience.  I am going to answer your questions one at a time and hope this will help you.

 

First you asked:  "My question today is on Galatians 2:9.  When the three went to the circumcision what was their mission?"

 

After leaving the council at Jerusalem (Acts 15 & Galatians 2) Peter, James & John went back to ministering to the circumcision believers and according to II Peter 1:12-19 he (they) confirmed the promises God made to them while waiting for the coming of Jesus Christ after the trial of their faith (James 1:3,12;  I Peter 1:6-9).  Since no one knew how long this "grace" to the gentiles would last, 3-7-10 years (no one foresaw 2000 years) they were preparing for the tribulation that would follow when their program continued.

Second:  "Was it to preach the gospel of the grace of God or to write tribulation books?"

They did both.  Certainly according to  Acts 15:11 the Kingdom Saints became aware of justification by faith (see Galatians 2:15,16 Paul speaking to Peter); and also the one time sacrifice of Jesus Christ for all sins for all man as taught in the book of Hebrews was now preached to the circumcision Believers.  And yet in every book from Hebrews to Revelation, endurance to the end is still required and would be made possible by the Holy Spirit given them.

Third:  "Since they knew the gospel has changed and Peter referenced Paul’s epistles in his 2nd book is he speaking as looking back from a tribulation point of view since Peter, James and John are tribulation books?"

Their gospel had not changed.  Paul's gospel of the uncircumcision for the Gentiles have given them further light of how God can justify sinners, but the promises of God to them, salvation into the Christ's earthly Kingdom is still their hope and the books of Hebrews - Jude prepare them to endure the events of Revelation.  This is what they continue to expect. 

Forth:  "It makes sense that Hebrews was written in early Acts and it is now pushed out after we are out of here.  I understand there is two gospels and the great commission is gone so why would James, Peter & John not preach the gospel of the grace of God to the Jews?"

Reading  I Peter we can see Peter preached "salvation ready to be revealed in the last time" (I Peter 1:5) and "the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ" ( I Peter 1:13).  This is a future salvation and a future grace.  Their commission (the so called great commission) is not gone.  It is postponed by the "longsuffering of our Lord" ( II Peter 3:15).  Their promises and commission will resume as soon as this grace is over. 

Fifth:  The part that throws me is Peter referencing Paul’s epistles so the three must have known the gospel has changed yet their books are all tribulational.

The gospel has not changed for them!  Their commission is on hold while Paul takes the gospel of the grace of God to the Gentiles for the purpose of forming "the body of Christ" in the dispensation of grace.  When this dispensation ends, they were prepared and ready to continue their gospel and commission.

Sixth:  "What am I missing here?"

If you are missing anything, it seems to be the fact that no one knew how long the age of grace would last.  There are indications, when Paul speaks of the rapture, using the words "we which are alive and remain," that even Paul expected the dispensation of grace to end in his lifetime.  Had that happened the Kingdom program would have continued right where it left off in Acts 8.  I hope this will help your understanding.

 

 

*GRACE, HISTORY OF*

 

 

Recovery of the Dispensation of Grace

 

I hope your grandfather told you to e-mail Brother Jordan also. I have some ideas about how I would write such a paper, but the documentation would take me a lot of hunting to find. Pastor Jordan may be able to direct you to the written material you will need.

 

I was telling Brother Taylor that it would be good to start with I & II Timothy where the saints were turning from Grace back to the Law. They did not turn from Christ but they did turn from Paul. This led to the dark ages where the apostate church tried to rule in order to bring in the Kingdom and claimed to be the successors of Peter and set up a non-Jewish priesthood.

 

During those dark ages there were small groups who did preach and teach salvation by grace. John Huss was one of those. There were also a group who called themselves "Paulinist" because they followed the teachings of the Apostle Paul.

 

It is enlightening to point out that when Martin Luther brought about the Protestant reformation it all began as he was reading the book of ROMANS. There he rediscovered Justification by faith. He did not realize that the reason he discovered it in Romans is because that was the first epistle of Paul in the Bible or that Paul was given the revelation of Grace. But enlightenment began with turning back to Paul's epistles as recorded by church history. Martin Luther thought that the book of James should not be in the Bible because he saw how it contradicted Romans 4. However, he should have read James 1:1.

 

The next major person in the recovery of truth was C. I. Scofield. Some have called him the father of Dispensationalism. If you have an Old Scofield Bible see his note on Ephesians 3 at the bottom of the page. You should be able to find a lot of information on him. He taught that the Church, the Body of Christ, did not replace Israel, that God will fulfill his promises to them in the future after the age of grace. Then you will want to ask Pastor Jordan what you can read about J.C. O'Hair who began to preach Pauline dispensationalism as we do today.

 

 

 

 

 

 

*GRACE BIBLE CHURCH*

 

 

Please summarize what your church stands for.

 

Hello, my wife and I are searching for a church in the area and I have come across your website.  I have a few questions that I was wondering if you would answer so that I can get a feel for whether or not you and your body are of like-mind.  My first question is on your music.  I would like to know what hymn books that you use, and whether or not your church uses music of the sovereign grace or contemporary Christian music genre.  I am also curious if your church is connected to any other organization or affiliation.  I would also like to know where you stand on Calvinism?  And finally, what is your view on the importance of Repentance within Salvation?  Thank you so much.  I look forward to hearing from you! 

 

Thanks you for checking out Grace Bible Church.  I am glad to answer your questions.

 

We use a hymn book put together by the Brethren back in 1963 called:  “Choice Hymns of the Faith.”  It has some excellent old hymns.  While our Minister of Music may sometimes sing a more contemporary song as special, for the most part we sing from the hymn book.

 

We are an independent Bible church and not affiliated with any organization or church.  However, I personally fellowship with several other independence pastors and our church works in cooperation with Grace School of the Bible and produces a TV program called “Forgotten Truths” featuring Richard Jordan who is president of that school.

 

We are not Calvinistic, but neither are we Armenian.  We are strong Dispensationalist.  We study the Bible from a Pauline dispensational view point, meaning that with the calling and commissioning of the Apostle Paul, God temporarily postponed his dealings with Israel until the future day of His wrath.  We live in the dispensation of the grace of God (Ephesians 3:1-11) in which God is forming the Body of Christ; those from all nations who believe the gospel of the grace of God.

 

Repentance is a change of mind.  The Gentiles who worshipped idols needed to change their mind and put their faith in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ who died for their sins.  Religious people need to change their mind from trusting their religion and religious works which cannot save them, and trust the Work of the Cross.  Salvation is by grace through faith.

 

That should give you a good understanding of our ministry.  Again, thanks for asking.  If you would like a packet of more detailed information we would be glad to send it to you if you give us your address.

 

 

 

In your teaching, do you include teaching the Old Testament?                                           

I noticed in your mission statement that you say, "The mission and commission of the Church is to follow the Apostle Paul and the revelation of the truth, which our Lord Jesus Christ in glory gave to him for us."  Are you saying that this does not include the Old Testament and the rest of the New Testament teachings?  I only ask this because there are other writers of the New Testament too.                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

Thanks for your question.  All scripture is for us (II Timothy 3:16,17), but not all scripture is to us.  We are the church which is his body (Ephesians 1:22,23).  God's purpose for the Body of Christ is different than his purpose for the Nation of Israel.  God's purpose and instructions for us is found in Paul's epistles (Ephesians 3:1-11 & Romans 11:13).  For instance in the four gospels the gospel is called "the gospel of the kingdom."  This was the good news that the promised Kingdom was at hand because the Son of David, the King was here.  In Matthew 10 the 12 were sent out to preach, but  Matthew 16:21,22 is the first time the Lord told them he was going to die and rise again.  They never knew this.  This is why Peter mistakenly rebuked the Lord.  Our gospel is the good news of the cross (I Corinthians 1:18-24 & 15:1-4).  And that difference is just for starters.

 

 

 

*HEALING*

 

 

Answer to a mother with sick children.

 

Sorry to hear about C. and N. and the tough times you are going through. I know that life can throw so much at us we think we cannot handle any more, but we do. That is a testimony to the fact that God does not allow more than we can handle. And the reason we think we cannot and yet do is because we can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth us.

 

I could hear your pain and could surely sympathize with you, but only the Lord can strengthen you. Your case is like three other families in our church. You know the recent struggles of the C.M. family, but you may not know that L. H. had to watch her son M.day and night, at home and many nights in the hospital not knowing if he was going to make it to adulthood because of severe asthma. The same was true for K.P. Her oldest son J. not only suffered severe asthma but also extreme allergies. Many a night she held him all night praying. Back then she believed in faith healing and took him to many healers only to be disappointed. Finally she decided to become (in her words) "a heathen." Right division brought her back to faith.

 

I know their struggles do not change your situation, but if it is good to know who has faced the same problems and that things do work out, M.H. is now 16 years old and doing fine. J.is over 30 years old (still suffers with asthma) but has his own family and coping and enjoying life. We'll keep you in our prayers.

 

 

*HELL/DAMNATION*

 

Different levels of damnation

 

A friend that I sent your email to asked if there were different levels of Hell. I know that there are because Dr Jordan taught it but I don't remember where in the Bible they are located. Can you provide me this information.

 

The verses about the "Great White Throne Judgment" - Revelation 20:11-15, where the lost are judged according to their works, indicates levels of damnation.

 

One other quick reference would be Matthew 23:14   where it says "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation."

 

 

 

 

*ISRAEL TODAY*

 

 

Should we support Israel financially today?

 

In response to your letter and question about giving to Israel today, it is good to see that the doctrine of grace is clearing up your thinking about how God views Israel today and how that relates to the verse in Genesis 12:3,

 

“And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.”

 

In prophecy, after the great tribulation is over, the Lord Jesus Christ will judge the nations (gentiles) on how they treated Israel (especially during that time) - did they help them or work against them?  This is what Matthew 25:31-46 is about.  Notice especially verses 34 & 41

 

“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: … Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.”

 

“Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:”

 

Genesis 12:3 is the prophetic program which will be fulfilled in prophecy.  Romans 11 is explaining what changes have occurred in the age of grace.  The phrase in Romans 3:22 and 10:12 which say “For there is no difference” makes the point that both are under sin but both, by the grace of God can be saved today.  Yet since there is “no difference,” Israel has no special status in God’s reckoning today.  In fact, Israel as a Christ rejecting nation has been brought down to the status of the God rejecting nations (Gentiles) during this age of grace.  It is now individuals that God is calling and saving, not any nation.

 

Consider these verses concerning God’s attitude toward Israel as a nation today, and these will answer your question as to whether God is blessing those who help Israel today:

 

 “Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?   For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:”   Romans 11:12,13

 

 “For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.  Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.”                                               Romans 11:21,22

 

“As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.” Romans 11:28

 

 “For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.” Romans 11:32

                                                                                         

 

These verses say that during this age of grace, Israel as a nation has fallen, is cut off, not spared, under severity and even enemies of God for the gospel sake.  Supporting that nation would be support a nation that God thinks of this way.

 

Now, understand as well, any gift to help the poor and needy in any nation is a good thing.  God did say “remember the poor.”  So giving to a worthy cause is always good and right, but there is not special blessing of God today if those being helped are Jews.  Hope this helps you.

 

 

 

Are the Jews lost today and is the Law running parallel to Grace today?


What happens to practicing Jews after the Cross?  Are they lost today? Is the Law nailed to the Cross, or is it still running parallel to Grace, as Jesus said, "Not one jot or tittle shall fall from the law until all be fulfilled"?  

 

After the cross, the Lord gave the Jews one more chance to believe that Jesus is the Christ (their Messiah).  That is what is happening in Acts chapters 1-7.

 

In their continued rejection, they "fell" (Romans 11:11,12) and God cast them away temporarily (Romans 11:15,25) and they became "enemies" (Romans 11:28).  That is what Romans 3:23 means when it says "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God." 

 

So Yes, they are now lost.  But now, in God's grace they too, like us Gentiles can be saved by believing the gospel (I Corinthians 15:3,4).  See Romans 6:23; 10:12,13; 11:13,14; 11:30-32.

 

In the age of grace, the law is nailed to the cross and "we are not under the law but under grace" - Romans 6:14.  The Lord Jesus Christ fulfilled the law for us!  Being justified by grace we have His righteousness - Romans 3:21-28.

 

In the future the Holy Spirit will fulfill the law in the believing Jews as promised under the New Covenant, and in their future Kingdom.  See Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Ezekiel 36:26,27.

 

 

 

*JESUS*

 

 

How can Jesus be the seed of David if he was born of the Holy Spirt and of a woman?

 

Hello, I enjoy your program on Sat.  Can you answer this question I have?  Roman's 1:3 says that Jesus is the seed of David.  How can that be if he was born of the Holy Spirit and the mother a human young woman.  She was not from the seed of David either.  Joseph was not involved with the birth of Jesus.  Thank you for your help with this.

 

 

The genealogy in Matthew 1 goes from David all the way down to Joseph the husband of Mary, through Solomon the son of David (Matthew 1:6).  However the genealogy in Luke 3:23-38 starts with Jesus and works its way back to Adam.  When the genealogy in Luke gets to David (Luke 3:31,32) it is not through Solomon but through Nathan, another son of David.  Therefore this genealogy is not Joseph's.  It is Mary's!  Luke 3:23 Jesus was wrongly "supposed" to be the son of Joseph, but he was correctly "the son of Heli;" who must have been the father of Mary.  And so the miracle of Luke 1:35 took place and yet the Lord Jesus is the Son of David.

 

 

Did Joseph adopt Jesus?

For the first time I heard someone state that Jesus was adopted by Joseph the husband of Mary.  Is this correct Biblical doctrine? Have you and or Pastor Jordon taught anything specific to this belief either pro or con? If yes, would you please share it with me?  In the event that what you may have to share is for sale please kindly let me know the charge.

My wife and I just got back from a trip, so I am just now catching up on my emails.  I have often heard that Joseph adopted Jesus (and surely I've said it that way) but I never took that as an official adoption.  I only thought of it in the sense that Joseph raised Jesus as his son.  In Luke 2:48 Mary referred to Joseph as his father.  The Lord's response was a reminder of who his real Father was as an explanation of why he did not follow them home.

 

If pressed for Biblical proof that Joseph adopted Jesus, I don't know of any and I don't know that I have read anything where someone was proving or disproving this as a doctrine.  So I don't think I can help you look into this any further.

 

 

 

 

 

 

By what name do we address God?

 

My name is T. R.  I came to church last Sunday with M.E..  I believe my husband has been influenced by incorrect doctrine.  He asked me the following question about John 17:11-12, 26, specifically about “thine own name” and “thy name”  What is the name that Christ proclaimed? And kept them through?  I’m not sure how to answer this question.  Here was my response:

…that was the Kingdom age.  They did not know (understand) Jesus Christ and him crucified.  That is why Christ asked them…who do you say that I am?  They just had to have faith that He was who He said he was.  Now “we” have to by faith through grace believe that Jesus died for our sins.

 

Sorry it took all week to get back with you.  We have had a busy week.  I don't always understand what is behind the question people ask, but the simple answer concerning the Father's name is found in Exodus 6:3 where God is known as "God Almighty" or "Jehovah."  The Lord Jesus taught the disciples to address God as "Our Father" in Matthew 6:9, as he did in John 17:1.

 

It should be noted as well that the Lord Jesus said that he himself came in the Father's name - John 5:48.  The name "Jesus" means "Jehovah who saves."  That is why the angel said: "thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins" - Matthew 1:21.

 

The Lord Jesus is God with us, God in the flesh.  He is Jesus the Christ, the anointed one, the Messiah.

 

I was impressed by your answer.  You are right.  What the Jews in Matthew - John were to believe is that Jesus is the Christ.  As the anointed one he is their prophet, priest and king.  According to Matthew 16:13-18 this is the Rock the Kingdom is build on.  Believing this got them into the Kingdom.  In the same chapter however - Matthew 16:21,22, they had no idea the Lord was going to die for our sins, be buried and rise again.  Their faith was in who he was.

 

With the preaching of the cross that began with the rising up of the Apostle Paul (1 Corinthians 1:17,18; 2:2,7,8; 15:1-4) our faith must be in who He is and what He accomplished on the Cross in our behalf.

 

 

Significance of Jesus sitting or standing

I got into a discussion with a coworker today about Jesus sitting/standing at the right hand of the Father. Wondered if you had some sort of study notes on this, that you could send my way.

I seem to remember the significance of Him standing when Stephen sees Him, as being something about the judgement. Do you have a study that contains the verses comparing standing and sitting and the difference?

 

I could not locate a written study explaining the Lord Jesus sitting and then standing, but here is a quick explanation.

 

In Acts 1 Jesus Christ ascended back into heaven.  In explaining the death, burial, resurrection and ascension to the nation of Israel, Peter said in Acts 2:34-36,

 

"For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,  Until I make thy foes thy footstool.  Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ."

So at this point Jesus Christ is sitting on the right hand of God.  The verses say he will sit there "Until" his enemies are "make thy foes thy footstool."

After a year of preaching to Israel, giving them another opportunity to receive Jesus Christ as their Messiah, Stephen was brought before the council and declares (Acts 7:51-53):

 

"Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.  Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which showed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:  Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it."


In Israel's rejection of the preaching of Stephen by the Spirit of God, they stoned him.  And while they are stoning him he see Jesus "standing" and declares it (Acts 7:54-60): 

 

"When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth.  But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,  And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.  Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord,  And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was Saul.  And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.  And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep."

Since Jesus is seen standing, it was time for his enemies to be made his footstool.  A time for judgment to fall.  In the book of Revelation 5:6 Jesus is seen "standing."  According to Isaiah 2:19,21 and 3:13  Jesus Christ will "arise to shake terribly the earth" and to "judge the people."

 

However in Acts 7:58 we see there a man "whose name was Saul."  And in Acts 9 God saved Saul and commissioned Saul to be Paul the Apostle of the Gentiles and revealed to him the dispensation of the grace of God.  Instead, God postponed His wrath, and dispensed grace, ushering in the mystery of the age we now live in.

 

Hope that is enough information for you for now.

 

 

Is it possible Jesus Christ could have sinned?

 

You have given me some input from your study of the scripture on water baptism in the past, and I was wondering if when you had the time if you could send me your input on the impeccability/peccability of Christ. My mom thinks that Christ could have sinned, but I think that the scripture supports that he couldn't have. What is your view from the scripture?

 

 

Your question is one of those trapping questions.  The scriptures cannot be broken and they declared that Jesus Christ would bear our sins, so he could not have any sins of his own. 

 

However the unique nature of Jesus Christ is that he is Fully Man and Fully God.  For him to be tempted in all points as we are, in his humanity he was given free will and a choice.  Born of the virgin he was not born with a sin nature.  In life he chose to walk by faith during the temptations of Matthew 4 and throughout all his life.  He did not rely on his deity.  In his temptations he was without sin.  Thus he became the last Adam.

 

In his Deity he is holy-holy-holy.  That may not fully answer your question, but perhaps it will help.

 

 

The Name of Jesus

 

There is a wide movement to refer to the name Jesus in the Hebrew language. Some even say if you call the Lord "Jesus" you are speaking about the wrong person. I asked a man that if I believed Jesus Christ died and rose again for my sins am I saved or lost? He backed down from his position to say that I was still saved. I get really confused on why I have to use a Hebrew name.  The New Testament was mostly written in Greek. "Christ" is Greek for "Messiah" but we call Jesus "the Christ." Think about it. When the Lord walked about Galilee and Judea and spoke, he was speaking Hebrew, but the only way we know what he said is because the original writers wrote it down in Greek and God preserved it in the Bible which gets translated in (hopefully) every language of the world. Why then would we have to refer to Jesus as Yaway (I know that is not spelled right)? Just some thoughts.

 

 

 

Was Jesus God in the flesh and knowing all things while in the flesh?

 

Does Brother Richard believe Jesus was God in the Flesh and that He knew all things even thought He was in the flesh?

 

The question you asked leads to much discussion and sometimes misunderstanding, and some people get very upset.  I was looking for a document that has a full study on this but cannot seem to find it so I will give you a brief statement.

 

Yes, Pastor Jordan believes that Jesus Christ was God in the flesh.  But he also believes that when the Lord took on flesh, he temporally gave up the use of His infinite knowledge to walk by faith and to be the Prophet of God and to become the Perfect man who was obedient in all things, even the death of the cross.

 

Remember we are saying "temporally" while he walked the earth as a man.

 

I hope I said this correctly because while this is what I believe (also), I realize I'm answering for Brother Jordan.

 

 

 

*KJV BIBLE*

 

Is all the Bible for us?

 

If you have a moment, I'd like to ask a fairly (perhaps overly) simple question:  Do the Psalms and Proverbs, being that they are part of the Old Testament, apply to believers? 

 

Let me add a little specificity to that question:  I am a believer.  I have been listening to your sermons on YouTube for a month or so.  I listened to "The Silence of God" this evening, and found that I could relate to the notion that when God seems silent, it is that he only SEEMS silent, but has spoken volumes and all I have to do is go back to those volumes to have God "speak" to me.  I have experienced the Bible provide me answers to my questions a number of times. 

 

But as I listened (and hopefully I'm not misquoting you here), you said that all we have to do is go back to the portion of the Bible constituted by Romans through Philemon to hear God "speak" when he is "silent."  Well, there have been many times when I felt the Psalms, for example, were speaking powerfully to me.  Case in point, there was a time when I was sort of tormenting myself with the question of "what if God is simply lying to us about all of this (everything - his word, his Son, the atonement, etc.)?"  Well, within a day or two of me asking God for some counsel on this, I came across Psalm 12, specifically verse 6: 

 

(Psalms 12:6)  The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

 

That is not PROOF that God is not lying, but it sure seemed to address my question, and in a powerful way, attesting to the purity of his words.  It was very nice to read this verse, a verse that I had probably overlooked in the then past, but that I felt had been quickened to my heart by the Spirit in light of my doubting God's truthfulness and that had more than answered my doubts.  It was a very nice "Bible experience." 

 

Thus, you can see why I would ask you the question I asked above. 

 

I am new to what one might call "dispensationalism" and though I have been a Christian for over 30 years, I will confess that mining the Bible for its truth has unfortunately not always been my priority, but that has been changing over the last 3 or 4 years.  I've enjoyed your sermons on YouTube.  Maybe I won't enjoy your answer to my question, but that is the risk I'll take.  Thanks for reading my email, and I look forward to your response. 

 

Always keep in mind both II Timothy 2:15 and 3:16,17.  All scripture is profitable, but without rightly dividing you will adopt doctrine and promises that are not given to you.  Take for example the Psalms.  In grace we would not pray the prayer of David in Psalms 51:11  "Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me" or Psalms 7:8 "The LORD shall judge the people: judge me, O LORD, according to my righteousness, and according to mine integrity that is in me."   Then there are all the Psalms calling on God to avenge and destroy the enemy.  We would not pray that in the age of grace.

 

Yes all scripture is profitable and gives us instruction in righteousness, but all must be read in the light of what God is doing today in the dispensation of His grace as found in Paul's epistles.  Since today is the longsuffering of God so that men can be saved, we would not pray like John in Revelation "even so, come Lord Jesus."  Its one thing to bring an end to wrath and another thing to bring an end to grace.

 

Thanks for watching our videos.  The Lord give you understanding in all things.

 

 

If all Bibles are translations, why the preference for the KJV?

 

My wife  and I enjoyed the Ohio Bible Conference in May.  I read with interest the paper given to us concerning the translation of the 1611 King James Bible also known as " the Authorized Version."   I love a one page summary.

 

  I have long held unanswered questions on this subject.  Perhaps you can help me out.  I have talked to many people over the years and received many conflicting answers.

 

 I understand that all Scripture is given by the inspiration of God and would therefore be inerrant in it's original writings. Of course any exact copies made after that could also be inerrant.

 My questions begin with claims made about subsequent translations.  There are obviously good translations and not so good translations, but are they not all translations?  The paper given to us at the conference told how the 1611 version came into existence. It required six companies of translators ( not sure how many people in each company) plus the insights of previous translators. This new translation also acknowledged it's debt to its predecessors, the Tyndale Bible and the Geneva Bible. In other words, other translations.

 

 Instructions were given to these companies of translators by James I and the bishop of London to be sure that this translation would conform to the theology of the Church of England. It also included the Apocrypha which was later removed.  The Bishop of Gloucester set out the hope that " Out of many good ones (translations) there would now be one principal good one."

 

 I have also no reason to doubt that this information given to us is accurate except for one small point which I will make later.

 Most of the King James only people to whom I have spoken seem to be unaware of its origin.  They told me that the translators of this version were inspired by God and therefore it is inerrant. All other versions, even the New King James , are not inspired and therefore should not be used because they contain error. This line of thinking leaves  me with several questions and when I try to discuss this with them I am usually met with argumentative responses and then a refusal to continue the discussion. It is difficult to receive valid answers.

 

1.  If the 1611 version is inspired and therefore inerrant, why did it take 6 companies of translators?

 

2.  Why is there a 1613 & 1615 version ?

 

3.  Why did these translators need to refer back to previous English translations and other translators?

 

4.  Why was the Apocrypha included and then later removed ?

 

5.  Why should inspired translators need to conform to the theology of the Church of England? In other words, which came first     the chicken or the egg?

 

6.  What happened to scripture between the original manuscripts and the 1611 Version?

 

7.  Are there other inspired translations in other languages?

 

  8.  Even the Bishop of Gloucester stated the 1611 version to be a good version which came out of other good versions.  My understanding of the word "good" is not the same as perfect or inerrant. A major league ball player with a batting average of 300 is considered to be very good. I believe the original manuscripts would have a batting average of 1000.

 

9.  Is not the "authorized King James Version" which we use today different from the 1611 King James English?  I tried to read some of that one and was quickly frustrated.

 

I love to read scripture and learn God's Word. I love fellowship with other believers but am disappointed when a discussion turns into an argument. There are too few of us now.

 

 The information given to us at the conference leads me to continue to believe that the KJV is a very good translation but the translators were not inspired by God. I hope you can help me out.  I like the phrase "King James preferred" rather than " King James Only" 

I was saved 34 years ago using an "American Standard Bible" A KJV only person told me I could not have been saved using an uninspired Bible but I know what happened to me.

 I do believe an error was made (inadvertently) in the last paragraph of the paper given to us.  1620: "The Pilgrim Fathers set sail to  America, taking the English Bible with them." This statement is correct in and of itself but in the context of the paragraph it leaves the impression they took the KJV with them If recorded history is correct the Pilgrims took the Geneva Bible with them.

Marge and I will be traveling through Massachusetts in September on vacation. We are going to the Plymouth Hall Museum to view the Bible carried by William Bradford. If it is not the Geneva Bible we will let you know.

 

Sorry it took so long to respond to your email.  It has been that busy around here.  Even still I am only going to give you a short answer to a long and complex series of questions.  Please forgive me it I am simplifying it too much.

 

First let me say there are so many voices out there for and against the KJV that are saying things that only add to confusion, such as saying "the KJV translators were inspired by God."  I can see why you would be confused.  It was the "scriptures" that were inspired by God, not even the original penman.  Along with all the confusing statements there is much emotional heat on both sides.  Certainly this is a subject that is very important and every person must come to a persuasion where they stand because in order for there to be truth, there must be an authority, and if there is an authority, where is it!

 

The first 7 questions you asked are based upon the belief that the KJV translators were inspired of God.  Since I do not believe they were, then someone who does would have to answer those questions.  And I think they would have a hard time.

 

Question 8 quoted the Bishop of Gloucester stating that the 1611 version was "good."  But as you say, that does not mean perfect.  But this is where the doctrine of preservation comes into play.  One cannot read the scriptures without seeing that God intended to communicate to us through His written Word.  Babel was the perversion of God's witness in the stars and one of God's purposes for calling out Abraham and creating of him the nation of Israel was to commit to them "the oracles of God."  His Word was put in a book to be preserved forever - Isaiah 34:16.  For 1500 years till the coming of the Lord Jesus the scribes preserved the Old Testament to the point that the Lord Jesus Christ never question "what is written."  In fact he questioned the religious authorities over six times asking the "have ye not read."  In fact in Matthew 22:31 he asked them "have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying...".  He expected those who read the copy of scripture they had in his day to read it believing that was God speaking to them.  This is what Paul expected as well - I Thessalonians 2:13, II Timothy 3:16,17.

 

Knowing that  I Timothy 3:15 says the church is the "the house of God, ... the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth;"  I know that God working in the Body of Christ would preserve the truth.  So all through the dark ages it was there but not always assessable because of the evil church that ruled.  As that church weakened and Believers gave their life, God working in them, collected and identified the pure Word of God and translated it into English (the upcoming language that would become the language of the world).  The KJV was the finishing touch.  Those commissioned for the translating incorporated both Theologians from the Church of England but also from the Puritans and those outside the Church of England.  Neither could have their way, but were held to the truth.  Therefore the KJV became the standard for 400 years until the late 1800's when liberal, unbelieving scholars thought they could correct the scriptures.

 

Now I know you know all this but for me it comes down to a matter of faith.  Does God expect me to stand along on the Word of God, the B-I-B-L-E, as I have always been taught?  And if so I must decide where that authority is.  I know that man and Satan will oppose God's Word, even "good" men will change God's Word to defend their point of view on a doctrine.  For me the KJV is the Word of God in the English Language for a lot more reasons that I have expressed here.  It is upon this conviction that I choose to believe it is without error.  If there was even one error, then another authority would have to override it and then I would have to ask as Pilot, "What is truth?"

 

Your ninth question asked about the difference between the 1611 and today's KJV.  Certainly the spelling has changed.  I too have a 1611.  Those who argue over the different updates of the KJV say there are changes, and others say those changes are only in spelling and punctuation, over a capital "S" on spirit or a small "s."  Again, for me, I trust the copy I have.  If there were changes, they were minute and to my benefit.

 

Many are saved using the other translations, just as many people are saved by reading the gospel in books or in a tract, but I would not trust any of those translations to be my authority.  They are the reason many do not come to understand right division or even dispensational truth.

 

Lastly, I believe you are right.  The Pilgrims brought over the Geneva Bible.  The KJV followed later. 

 

 

Is the KJV the only bible accurately preserved for the English speaking people?

 

Just stumbled upon your website!  Noticed, from the home page, under "About Us" —> "What We Believe" —> "The Bible" it states:   

The entire Bible (consisting of 66 books) in it's original writings is verbally inspired of God; and accurately preserved, according to the promise of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit in the Church -- the Body of Christ, and known today in English as the King James Version, which is an accurate reliable translation, making it of plenary authority.  (Ex.17:14; Psalms 12:6,7; Isaiah 30:8; Matt. 24:15,35; John 16:12,13; Col. 1:24,25; II Tim. 3:16,17; I Peter 1:23-25; II Peter 1:15,19-21; Rev. 22:18,19)

I am failing to see Scriptural support for the "King James Version" as being "of plenary authority."

Am I missing something?  Having been saved for some twenty years and having been a diligent Bible student for MOST of that time,      

I cannot recall any teaching from the Word of God for a "KJVO" position.   

Is this a doctrine of man or of Scripture?       


 

I'm not sure how aware you are of the attacks against the Word of God and the new source of all the new Bible versions.  I assume that since you looked very closely at our statement of faith, you are not new to this subject.  So I will give you 4 scriptural premises which led me to the stand we have taken.

 

1.  With the coming of the Holy Spirit, one of God's purposes was to complete His written Word by giving to us what we call the New Testament.  Through the written Word, God chose to communicate with man for the past 2000 years.

 

2.  As in the Old Testament, so it is promised in the New Testament, that God would preserve His Word.  It was not God's intent to inspire His perfect Word, only for it to be lost immediately afterward, or at any time for that matter.

 

3.  The first thing God demonstrated when the Holy Spirit came is that He can speak in all the languages of the world.  God who confused the languages could send His Apostles with the ability to speak those languages.  Once the written Word of God was complete, even when the gift of tongues ceased, the Church would be the pillar and ground of the truth.  God's Word is the truth, the church of the living God would be the means of God's preservation and translation into the languages of the world.

 

4.  The foundational truth that keeps every true believer from the snare of the Devil is the fact that God's Word is the final authority in faith and duty.  "Let God be true and every man a liar."  Accordingly, then, there must be a Bible I can trust 100% even if a man tells me I cannot.

 

Coming out of the reformation we were left with a purified English translation - the KJV.  It was the final authority for English speaking people for over 400 years.  Then at the end of the nineteenth century and beginning of the twentieth, liberal critical scholars decided to correct the Greek text and then give us English translations of what they thought the Word of God should have said.  That text and those translations changed God's Word and are proven incorrect when compared to the KJV.

 

The truth of God has always been narrow and even today while there are many corruptions, there is one English translation that can be trusted.  We believe the KJV is God's preserved Word for English speaking people.

 

 

Is the KJV really accurate?

 

…. But there was one statement that my niece Rhoda made that I wasn't sure how to respond to. She said that a Jewish person had told her that it was not possible to accurately translate Greek into English. I know that the Greek language has many more words than the English language. I also know about the Greek idioms don't make sense in English. How would you respond to this?

 

Translation from any language to another is difficult but not impossible, nor inaccurate. Presidents meet with other heads of state and speak about very complex issues of peace, or muscular weapons, ideologies, and they do it all through interpreters. Remember it was God who gave the nations diverse languages and it was God who gave the gift of tongues and so God can still use believers to translate His word into all the languages of the world, and to do it accurately. The idioms are sometimes self explanatory or is sometimes why we must do more than "read," we are told to "study."

 

 

Is the KJV the inspired word of God?

 

Hello ! ... question ? Do YOU believe that the KJV Bible 1611 is the INSPIRED written word OF God , and that it is inerrant , and infallible ? ... if your answer is " no ", then which Bible is ? Also what Bible do You preach and teach from? Or, on  the other hand , if your answer is " yes " ... then what do you tell those who believe and say that it is not ? Thank you ! and look forward to hearing from you .

 

In answer to your questions about the KJV -I believe the KJV is an accurate, reliable translation of the verbally inspired word of God preserved for English speaking people.  Since I believe it to be God's Word preserved for me, then I believe it to be without error.

 

To those who do not believe it to be without error, they do not have a Bible.  They do not have God's complete Word.  They do not have a final authority.  Wherever they disagree with the KJV, they have made themselves the final authority over the Bible.

 

 

I have a question regarding sharing the grace message?.  How do you share when the first thing that comes out of their mouth is that they do not believe the Bible is the Inspired Word of God?  I am constantly being told by them (non-catholics), most do not use the KJV, that it was written by men and therefore you can’t believe everything in it.

 

When someone says they do not believe the Bible, they are usually defending their right to be ignorant.  The truth is they know the Bible is the Word of God.  There are three things you can do.

 

1.  Ignore the fact they said they do not believe the Bible and just give them the truth they need to know, quoting the scriptures that say its true.  If they are lost, give them the gospel.  If they are in false doctrine, give them the truth.

 

2.  It is good to learn the proofs from within the Bible that proves it is the Word of God.  There are scientific proofs such as the world being round and suspended in space and hanging on nothing.  There are historic facts  Then there are hundreds of prophecy which have already come to pass, which God gave to prove his Prophets were speaking and writing His Word (as in Isaiah 48:4-8).  (Our Volume 13 makes some of these points.)

 

3. Lastly, if they just want left to their ignorance, even God will let them have their way, so their comes a time to practice  I Corinthians 14:23  "But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant." 

 

 

 

*MYSTERY*

 

When was the mystery revealed to Paul?

 

You have truly help me understand the Bible more clearly by your teaching to rightly divide.   I do have a question for my "group it altogether friends".  What chapter and verse in ACTS did Jesus reveal the "mystery" to Paul?  Thank you for your help and may God richly bless you and your ministry.

 

Thanks for your patience in waiting for me to get to your question.

 

First know that according to Acts 26:16 – which took place at Paul’s conversion on the road to Damascus, Paul is told that his revelation would be progressive (not all at once).

 

“But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee.”

 

II Corinthians 12:1  Paul declares it himself:  “It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord.”

 

Now if you following the events laid out in Acts 9 which follow the conversion of Saul (or Paul), he is in Damascus from verse 17-25, then in Jerusalem from verse 26-29, and then sent from Ceasarea to Tarsus in verse 30.  Prior to verse 22 he only taught that Jesus is the Christ.  Then in verses 22 & 23 we read: “But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ. And after that many days were fulfilled, the Jews took counsel to kill him.”

 

Most of the time the Jews tried to kill Paul because of his Gentile ministry, however these verses do not say that, but they do speak of Paul increasing in his spiritual understanding.  Remember he is in Damascus, Syria. 

 

When we compare these events with Paul’s recounting of them in Galatians 1:11-24, we learn that from his conversion till he left Damascus, a total of 3 years passed.  During that time Paul had gone into Arabia and back.  According to Galatians 4:25, this is where Moses received the Law.  As the 12 Apostles were trained by Jesus Christ for 3 years, so it appears that Paul was given “the gospel of the grace of God – the gospel of the uncircumcision” over the space of those 3 years.  His first recorded preaching is in Acts 13:38,39, where we see him preaching “justification by faith to all who believe.”  Certainly this is not the first time he knew of it or preached it.  He had already been ministering for over a year in Antioch (Acts 12:26) and had also preached in the cities of Salamis and Paphos in Cyprus.

 

Another interesting event that took place is in Acts 14:19,20 where Paul was stoned and left for dead.  No one can be sure if he was dead or not but either way a miracle of resurrection or healing took place when he stood up, waked back into the city and traveled the next day.  The timing of that event (which would take too long for me to write out) fourteen years later Paul refers to in II Corinthians 12:1-8

 

“It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord.  I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.  And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;)  How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.  Of such an one will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory, but in mine infirmities.  For though I would desire to glory, I shall not be a fool; for I will say the truth: but now I forbear, lest any man should think of me above that which he seeth me to be, or that he heareth of me.  And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.  For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me.”

 

There in Acts 14:19 Paul received more revelation regarding the heavenly places for the “Body of Christ.”

 

Even more, here again is where Paul received additional revelation.  It would appear from the reading of Ephesians and Colossians where Paul prays that we might be filled with knowledge and all wisdom, that Paul’s revelations had been completed and is being written for our learning in his prison epistles.  This occurs after Acts 28.  Read the prayers of Ephesians 1:16-20 and Colossians 1:9-12.

 

I hope this will help you and guide you in your study of this important question.

 

 

*OLD TESTAMENT SAINTS*

 

Please clarify the resurrection of the Old Testament Saints

 

Good day to you.  Been awhile since asked a question.  Hope you doing fine.  My question is do the O.T saints get resurrected at end of tribulation period to go into Kingdom with the saved of Nation of Israel or were they resurrected when Jesus arose from the grave to take them to heaven?

 

 Those that came out of their graves in Matthew 27:52,53 did not go into heaven.  They walked the earth.  They were not resurrected in glorified bodies, but raised as was Lazarus was (and others) who eventually died again, waiting for the hope of the first resurrection in Revelation 20:6.

 

In the case of Kingdom Saints (Israel's hope and OT Saints), when the Lord Jesus comes in the second coming and the first resurrection which takes place before the 1,000 year reign - Revelation 20:4-6.  At that time all Old Testament Saints will be raised from the dead including Adam & Eve, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob (Matthew 8:11), Job (Job 19:25-27), Daniel (Daniel 12:13), The 12 Apostles (Matthew 19:27,28), as well as those who died in faith in the tribulation.

 

 

 

*PAUL*

 

When was Paul saved?

 

Thank you so much for replying to my question about "why did Paul Baptize anyone."  I have one more "tough one" for you.  Acts 22:16 absolutely frustrates me because it seems to say that Ananias baptized (water) Paul.  I know that some groups of Grace believers believe he did and did it on his own (not told to by God).  Others hold that there was no water in this baptism.  I thought that Paul was saved by grace on the road to Damascus so this "and wash away thy sins" baffles me.  If you could shed any light on this subject, it would really be appreciated.

 

The gospel Paul preached to us is not the gospel Ananias preached to Saul.  It was afterwards, after Ananias was sent to Paul that the Lord revealed to Paul that gospel he was to preach to the Gentiles – Galatians 1:11,12; 2:1.

 

By God using Ananias to go to Paul, there is continuity or cohesion of the two programs of God in the sense that Paul did not just show up, separate from the Kingdom Saints with a separate Gospel and ministry to the Gentiles.  He first himself believed that Jesus is the Christ and taught this fact at Damascus.  Afterwards God calls him out to Arabia and gives him the gospel of grace, the gospel of the uncircumcision.  As Romans 1:1 says, “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God.”

 

When exactly Paul was saved is not told us.  What Ananias told Paul to do did not save Paul, at least not the baptism.  Certainly “calling on the name of the Lord” did.  Baptism was the step of faith in the Kingdom gospel, but when Paul wrote Romans 10 he said:

 

”But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;  That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.  For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.  For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.   For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. ”

 

Like you said, it was on the road to Damascus that Paul acknowledged Jesus as Lord and that God raised him from the dead – Acts 9:5,6   “And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutes; it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.  And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?”

 

When Paul learned the Gospel of Grace, I think he knew that he was saved on the road to Damascus.  That is when God showed him grace and when he believed on the risen Lord Jesus Christ.  It is interesting that when Paul went to Jerusalem to tell them that gospel he  preached among the Gentiles, it was Peter who came to understand their salvation saying:  “But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they” (Acts 15:11).

 

This might not settle everything, but I think it might help.

 

 

Is Paul one of the twelve Apostles?

 

My father first challenged me to see that Paul was not one of the 12 Apostles (I Corinthians 15:5,8).  Now I needed to know, who then is Paul?  If the Lord chose 12 Apostles and trained them for over 3 years, why then 1 year after He ascended into heaven did Jesus Christ save and make Paul an Apostle?  Then I learned that he gave a new revelation to Paul about a new dispensation - Ephesians 3:1-11.  This opened up much light and understanding.  I learned about grace in the Baptist circles but what I failed to learn was what was going on before the dispensation of grace.  When I learned what the "Gospel of the Kingdom" was (Matthew 4:17,23) and how distinctly different that is from the "Gospel of the Grace of God" (Acts 20:24) much confusion about works and grace (baptism, endurance, selling all, loosing life, even many of the Hebrew verses) were all cleared up so I could see and preach pure grace!

 

By learning how to rightly divide the scriptures I see more clearly the meaning of Genesis 1:1,  "In the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth."  God's purpose for the nation of Israel is His reign restored on planet earth.  God's purpose for the Body of Christ is to restore his authority in the heavens (Ephesians 6:11,12).  I now have understanding of what God was doing, is doing and will do - Ephesians 1:9,10.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*PETER VS PAUL*

 

 

Is Galatians 1:7-8 compatible with 1 John 5:12?

 

Is Paul referring to the gospel of the kingdom in Gal 1,7-8? I've found a grace church and the pastor quotes this verse when teaching correctly about our salvation doctrine being found in Paul's epistles only but he also throws in 1John 5:12 .He proclaims to be dispensational but by the looks of the church web site I'd say not really . He makes the distinction between the 2 gospels but proceeds to mix them up.   I'm meeting with him and hope to share the truth. Thanks.

 

Yes. Galatians 1:7,8  "another gospel" other than what Paul preached unto them would include the gospel of the Kingdom as well as any false gospel of works.  In the following verses Paul confronts Peter not for preaching the gospel of the Kingdom but for acting as if the Gentiles were still unclean as they were under the Kingdom program.  Peter's actions did not represent the truth of the gospel.

 

 

What’s the difference between Peter and Paul’s message?

 

Thanks for the note of encouragement. It is great to hear from those who are watching. Your brother's question is why we work and spend so much putting this message on TV. There are dozens of reasons it is important to know the difference of Peter and Paul's ministries. It is the difference between Catholicism (built on Peter) and Protestantism (built on Paul - as Martin Luther discovered "Justification by Faith alone" by reading the first epistle of Paul in the Bible, the book of Romans).

 

Your answer was very good. It clarifies the gospel of the grace of God. Acts 13:24 John "Preached baptism" but in I Corinthians 1:17,18 Paul "Preached the Cross." Before Paul no one preached the "Good News" of the Cross. In Matthew 16:21,22; Luke 18:31-34 it is clear that the Apostles, during the life and ministry of Jesus Christ on earth, did not even know that he was going to die. Yet in Matthew 10:5-10 they were sent out to preach. They surely did not preach "the Blood," "the Cross"!

 

Well, before I keep going, just a couple more thoughts. The differences between Peter and Paul, the Gospel of the Kingdom and the Gospel of the Grace of God, and the failure of the average Bible student to recognize the differences is the reason why there are so many churches and denominations. They all start the Church - the Body of Christ at the day of Pentecost but none actually practices "having all things in common." They pick and chose which part of Pentecost they want to follow. They should pick none and follow Paul. Also, not only is the gospel clarified by keeping Israel's program separate from the Body of Christ, but as well by knowing what God is actually doing and accomplishing today will clarify what God's will and ministry is for us. If we preach the wrong gospel, or practice the wrong will of God we will not be approved and will be ashamed someday at the judgment seat of Christ - see II Timothy 2:15 and I Corinthians 3:10-12. Hope these help your father and brother to take this issue more seriously. Thanks again for writing.

 

 

*PRAYER*

 
How do I pray, is it pray to God the Father in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ and beyond for there is still the Holy Spirit of God? 

While Ephesians 2:18 is not a prayer, the access to God the Father is declared.  I begin quoting Ephesians 2 with verse 13 and part of 14 so that you can see that "Through Him" is a reference to the Lord Jesus Christ.  It says:  "But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.  For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us .... For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father."

 

So prayer is made "unto the Father" and it is "by" the Spirit, "through" the Lord Jesus.  We pray through Jesus Christ, by the Spirit, unto the Father.  Prayer is always addressed to God the Father.

 

 

How do we pray for difficult life circumstances?

 

How should we react when something happens, illness, accidents, loss, whatever - .  What does the Bible teach?  Are we to put the concern on a bulletin board, a prayer list, an e-mail, or what?  I feel that when I advertise them I open the door to ridicule if things don't happen the way we would like it, or the way we think.  What is the answer?

 

Here are some thoughts concerning your question about prayer.

 

When things happen which cause concern such as illness, loss, or tragedy, these are things prayer is designed for.  Taking those concerns to our heavenly Father brings him into the situation.  The situation becomes a spiritual nature in that the Holy Spirit is involved in our prayers (Romans 8:26-28), God's Word in our hearts begin to come to mind, and in understanding "right division" we can know why things happen and that God's grace is sufficient (II Corinthians 12:8-10). 

 

This is what is taught in that wonderful passage of Philippians 4:6,7  "Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God.  And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus." 

 

So while you may desire to share your needs with others, it's not that God will be moved by more people praying, it is so that other members of the Body of Christ can help where they can, if only to comfort.

 

Philippians 4:11-13 is how God would have us handle those situations in life:

 

"Not that I speak in respect of want: for I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content.   I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound: every where and in all things I am instructed both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need.  I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.  .... But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus."

 

Hope this helps answer your questions on prayer.  At least it should guide your thoughts.

 

Thanks for your support for Forgotten Truths.  Prayer is one of those most confused issues that God's Word rightly divided clears for us and provides the proper expectations of how God works in us and his promises to us, in this age of grace.

 

 

What is the controversy about prayer and what does Pastor Jordan teach that others warn against?

 

I gave you a link below where you can read an article from Pastor Jordan about prayer and see for yourself what he teaches. Many people learn to rightly divide and then get upset when the doctrine changes what they have been praying for and more importantly what they expect God to do concerning their prayers.

Just an example of this is the doctrine of healing. If miraculous healing was associated with the gospel of the Kingdom (and it was) and since we live in the age of the longsuffering of God in which we also suffer (and we do; Romans 8:18; II Corinthians 4:17,18; II Corinthians 12:7-10) then while we pray for one another, we would not pray for healing, but for comfort, strength, wisdom and even that by going to the doctor and taking medicine they may get better.  We can let our requests known to God and there is great peace in that, but at the same time we know and understand what God is doing today in our inner man and understand too why we suffer until the rapture (Philippians 4:6,7; Romans 8:22-27). Here is that link to Pastor Jordan's article:  

 

What is the purpose of prayer and fasting in the dispensation of grace?

 

I have been a Christian for a while, and have recently learned about dispensationalism and grace. God wants me to pray and fast to get rid of unbelief. However, prayer and fasting has become a stumbling block to me because of wrong teaching. Please help me to understand prayer and fasting in this dispensation of grace.  

Do I have to read the word when I pray and fast? Is this commanded in order for me to get rid of unbelief through prayer and fasting. (i.e. like 1 hour for breakfast; 1 hour for lunch, etc.) Do I have to give alms when I pray and fast? Is fasting just abstaining from food, or food and water? Can I watch TV when praying and fasting.     

Fasting has become legalistic for me, and I get really tired from the way I have been doing it through reading for hours from the word of God, interceding for others in prayer, and not eating food and drinking water. Please help me to know the truth about prayer and fasting.

I  got your question and can see your sincerity.  However I would like you to first consider these things about fasting.

Fasting was never a commandment of God, even under the law (except on the day of atonement).

 

Fasting is a choice of a person who is so engrossed with a spiritual need that they would choose rather than eating to spend the time in God's word and prayer.

 

It is never so that God would do something, but that we would do something.

 

Those who think that God will answer their prayers if they can prove to him their sincerity or who think that by their much praying God will hear them are practicing paganism (Matthew 6:7).

 

The purpose of prayer is fellowship with God. Praying in the Spirit is praying in accordance to God's word and will as revealed in the Bible.

 

Prayer is for peace and encouragement in doing those thing God would have us do (Philippians 4:5-13).

 

So, prayer and fasting is not for the purpose of getting rid of unbelief.  Romans 10:17 says that faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.  You get rid of unbelief by reading and believing what God said - particularly what God says to us in this age of grace.

 

Since fasting is not a command, there are no regulations requiring alms, or water, or even TV.  There is no requirements even to fast.

 

Rejoice in God's acceptance of you in Christ, by grace, through the cross.  Then live for him!

 

 

 

 

*RIGHT DIVISION*

 

Can we apply truths from the Bible other than from Paul’s writings?

 

How do we use the 1st chapter of James when it says let any man ask God who giveth to all liberally and upbraideth not. (concerning wisdom.) But then says but ask in faith nothing wavering , and next vs for let not that man think he shall receive anything from God. Sometimes I'm more of asking, knowing God can, but don't know if my will is in agreement with HIS.  Please help me know when reading the words to Israel how to apply in my life. Thank you for your faithfulness to the word of God.

 

I know it has been over a month since you wrote.  Sorry to take so long in responding.  Besides being busy, I kept thinking about how to answer your question.  A few weeks ago, in another message I preached I did a similar thing.  I thought later this would be a good example to share with you, but now it’s been too long to remember.  So let me give you the short of it.

 

There are truths that transcend all dispensations such as the character of God.  He never changes.  He may change the way he deals with man, but he is the same in respect to his character and attributes.  When we make an application from outside the Pauline Epistles the speaker and listener must be careful to evaluate if the thing said is a universal truth or not.

 

Another way of evaluating the application is to ask, can this be supported from within Paul’s Epistles.  If not, then we better think twice.

 

Advice on where to begin teaching in the Bible to those just learning right division.

My wife and I are ministering to a small group of "Christians" who are searching. We have completed 4 weeks of studies. We began our studies by watching Keith Blades "Basic Bible Comprehension" series but I'm wondering which direction to take the group after we're done with that series.

I'm inclined to move to an Old Testament Survey or perhaps Romans.  My wife thinks we should do a series on Acts.

I have the entire GSB course, all of Keith's programs, all of Forgotten Truths DVDs and have downloaded every series on your web site, Shorewood’s site (for 3 years) and many, many more.

My question to you is: What would a good syllabus look like for people just learning about right division?

We’ve been encouraged by comments from the group like “I’ve learned more tonight than I learned my whole life in my church”.

 

When you teach the Bible and teach it "rightly divided" those who want to know and understand the Bible almost always make those comments you are hearing.  It is wonderful to be a part of adding clarity and truth as opposed to those who are teaching falsely, adding confusion.

 

There is no doubt in my mind that the book of Romans is an important foundational book to teach.  Romans 1:11 Paul wrote "to the end ye may be established."  When he concluded he said:  "Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel,..." (Romans 16:25).  This makes the book of Romans the most import book for a young believer to learn.

 

Pastor Jordan's introduction to the book of Romans in his GBS classes bring this out.  After teaching justification, identification, Romans 9-11 teaches "dispensation."  Romans 11 lays it all out.  That would be my advice.

 

 

Do we have to confess our sins to get forgiveness in the Dispensation of Grace?

 

Hello Pastor: I visited your church, and loved it, a number of times. Pastor you taught me too good. I can't get you folks off of my mind! I pray that you and your family and congregation are doing well. God is so good isn't He? I've not yet joined another church. I've been attending the same Baptist church since January '06. They are good folks and their Pastor and elders are learned and kind. Because of what you taught me though, and mimicking the Bereans searching the scriptures (plus using your Rightly dividing the Scriptures) I do have a concern regarding their following 1John 1:9. Christ said on the cross "it is finished" and that is burned in my mind and heart. Keeping "short accounts with God" in accordance with the above Bible passage doesn't sound Pauline to me but more kingdom talk. What do you say Pastor? Am I nitpicking? Am I one of those people looking for the perfect church and when I find it and attend it will no longer be perfect?!? Some points we can easily overlook, but I fear that the 1 John 1:9 and "short accounts" keeps me in a bondage of a type; I could easily fall back in Galatianism if you get my drift?! Thanks in advance for any input you may have. God bless and keep you safe always!

 

 

It is always good to hear from you. Not only do I remember you, but so does my wife and many of the others. Thanks for keeping in touch. I do not believe that everyone has to attend the same church, but we all have to believe the truth and right division is the only proper way to study the Bible and believe the truths of "grace." When we mix the programs, we mix the messages and pollute grace.

 

That is exactly what you are struggling with in I John 1:9. That is written to Israel. Not only that chapter 1 of I John is written to the lost Jews who have not confessed that Jesus is the Christ. They make God a liar. Notice that I John chapter 2 begins "My little children" and now he address his converts. He does not tell them to confess to get forgiveness, he tells them they have an advocate and their sins are forgiven (see verses 1,2,12). I'm glad your conscience is on the side of grace. Be strong in the grace of God.

 

 

What’s wrong with the Acts 28 position?

 

Please watch this video teaching the Acts 28 position.  I have watched it 7 times and see no problem.

 

I watched it last night.  The problem was when he tried to explain Acts 8-28 trying to say Paul preached to the Jews and Greek but not the Gentiles.  The book of Romans was written by Paul in the three month stay in Greece spoken of in Acts 20:3.  It is in Romans that we see "there is no difference" between the Jews and the "Gentiles" (Romans 3:9,22); and where he writes "I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles" (Romans 11:13); and that Israel is fallen, cast away and enemies of God (Romans 11:11,15,28).  Then also it is in Romans 11:25 that speaks of the "Mystery" of this age of grace and Romans 16:25 the "preaching of Jesus Christ according to the revelation of the mystery."  What this man teaches about what God is doing from Acts 8-28 is wrong.  Even the testimony of Acts is not that Paul preached only to Gentiles that sought Israel's God.  No one in Athens was doing that (Acts 17), nor was Sergius Paulus, nor was the Philippians Jailer, nor was the whole city of Antioch (Acts 13:44), nor the heathen on the Island of Melita.  The book of Acts is written to the Nation of Israel as an indictment, demonstrating their blindness and the fact that God turned from them to the Gentiles beginning with Paul.  Paul's epistles are written to the Body of Christ explaining the dispensation of the grace of God.  Paul's pre-prison epistles written in the book of Acts are to the body of Christ about the dispensation of the grace of God and are our epistles.

 

*SALVATION*

 

 

Does a person have to "Repent" and "Believe" in order to be saved?

 

Repentance is a change of mind.  For the Gentiles it means to "turned to God from idols" (Thessalonians 1:9); as seen in Acts 17:16...29-31 which says:

 

"Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry. ... Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

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."  

 

And as a result of Paul's preaching verse 34 says: "Howbeit certain men clave unto him, and believed ..."

 

The Apostle Paul never says "repent and believe."  When a person believes, they are changing their mind from whatever they previously thought to believe in the truth of the gospel.

 

The first recording of Apostle Paul's message when preaching the gospel is also the first time "justification" is preached in the Bible, is Acts 13:38,39:

 

"Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses."

 

"Believe" is always the only thing he called on sinners to do to be saved.  Here is a sample list:

 

Act 14:1  "And it came to pass in Iconium, that they went both together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so spake, that a great multitude both of the Jews and also of the Greeks believed."

 

Act 16:30,31  "And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?  And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house."

 

Romans 1:16  "For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek."

 

Romans 3:21,22  "But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;  Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:"

 

Romans 3:28  "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law."

 

Romans 4:3  and jumping to the end of the chapter, Romans 4:23-25 says:  "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. ... Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;  Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification."

 

Then Romans 5:1 concludes:  "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:"

 

1Corinthians 1:20,21  "Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?  For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe."

 

The Gospel in its essence and simplicity is found in  I Corinthians 15:1-4 which says:

 

"Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;  By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.  For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;  And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

 

To "believe in vain" according to  I Corinthians 15:14 & 17 is to not believe that Jesus Christ rose from the dead - "And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. ... And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins."

 

But according to verse 2, if you believe verses 3&4, then "ye are saved."