Teachings at Midway Macedonia Baptist Church

[Mason]

Puddleglum wrote:

One other P.S. I hope this is the last. God healed my marriage and I am still married to the same gorgeous woman. We have seven children.

Thankyou my friend for sharing, I am sure someone somewhere at sometime, will take your witness and it will bring them some hope that God will do for them as he has done for you.

There is nothing that brings as much hope as a witness. That which God has done for us that caused us to have Faith in him.

[Sandra Barber Rabern]

Puddleglum,Your testomony is a wonderfull blessing,and a very hopefull witness for others to read.Thank you for sharing with us what the Lord has done for you.Someone will read it and think about their own life,and perhalps make a decision to say a prayer of their own.I am glad that you were vulnerable enough to tell us your story.

[Sandra Barber Rabern]

D.J.in V.R.,I am praying for you today during your surgery,Please let me know how you are feeling in a few days.Get ready for your miracle.

[Mason]

Puddleglum,
Question;
If Paul had never written his letters (the books in the New Testament), do you think that we would have the divisions that we have in the Protestant Church today?
I ask you this question because many were being saved long before the teachings of Grace were given to Paul.
These folks in Acts did not have the Grace teaching that Paul was given.
With this being a fact, can you show me a teaching in the Gospels or by one of the Lord’s disciples that backs the teaching that obedience to God is unnecessary in the receiving of his Grace.
I know that this is a hard question to answer, so I do not expect an answer right away.
I do not ask this question to cause argument, but only to give thought.
Also, why do you think the teachings of Grace were not given at the beginning of the Church ?

[Puddleglum]

Mason wrote:

Puddleglum,
Question;
If Paul had never written his letters (the books in the New Testament), do you think that we would have the divisions that we have in the Protestant Church today?
I ask you this question because many were being saved long before the teachings of Grace were given to Paul.
These folks in Acts did not have the Grace teaching that Paul was given.
With this being a fact, can you show me a teaching in the Gospels or by one of the Lord’s disciples that backs the teaching that obedience to God is unnecessary in the receiving of his Grace.
I know that this is a hard question to answer, so I do not expect an answer right away.
I do not ask this question to cause argument, but only to give thought.
Also, why do you think the teachings of Grace were not given at the beginning of the Church ?

Mason, As you read the Bible you will see that God tested man under several different situations. In the Garden of Eden it was simply not to eat of the tree. When they failed in that situation he gave them a conscience of what is right and wrong. The result was conscience was not enough restraint and he had to add capital punishment.

The world continued to drift away from God with the result of the truth being corrupted and mingled with myth. The Epic of Gilgamesh Et Al. God separated a people and put them under his direct laws so that they would keep alive the knowledge of the true God to the rest of the world.(Abraham and his seed) The law was written on tables of stone and not on the heart. The result was this very people rejected and crucified the promised Messiah. He gave them time to repent through the book of Acts but when they did not he turned to the Gentiles and brought in the age of grace. That ends the Old Testament story.

Now God is testing man under new circumstances. If they will simply accept his Son he will write the law on their hearts and give them the desire to keep his laws. God's laws are no longer a standard to try to live up to but a new nature to be attained that is in harmony with God's desires. It is this new nature that we are to cultivate and as we do we will have the power to live up to what he really wants.("The expulsive power of a new affection") If we turn back to trying to live up to standards in the power of the flesh we will fail. If we walk in the Spirit we will succeed. This is the dispensation of grace that began with Paul,the Church age. It too will end in failure because man will again fail to respond to God's grace and refuse to have their nature changed. The result will be the Antichrist.

[Puddleglum]

Let me illustrate the above. A doctrine is like a room and an illustration of the doctrine like a window in the room to let the light in.

There was a woman who was married to a very demanding and austere husband. He insisted that the house be spotless, his clothes ironed and his meals prepared on time and with variety. She was miserable. She felt like she spent every day of her life in bondage.

This man died and later she fell in love with a new man. He cherished her and always treated her with respect and appreciated every thing she worked so hard at. She realized one day that she was still doing all the things for this new man that she did for her fist husband. She did not feel in bondage, in fact she delighted in preparing his meals etc. The reason was she was now doing it out of love and not because of fear.

Romans 7:4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

[Mason]

Puddleglum wrote:

<quoted text>The world continued to drift away from God with the result of the truth being corrupted and mingled with myth. The Epic of Gilgamesh Et Al. God separated a people and put them under his direct laws so that they would keep alive the knowledge of the true God to the rest of the world.(Abraham and his seed) The law was written on tables of stone and not on the heart. The result was this very people rejected and crucified the promised Messiah. He gave them time to repent through the book of Acts but when they did not he turned to the Gentiles and brought in the age of grace. That ends the Old Testament story.
Now God is testing man under new circumstances. If they will simply accept his Son he will write the law on their hearts and give them the desire to keep his laws. God's laws are no longer a standard to try to live up to but a new nature to be attained that is in harmony with God's desires. It is this new nature that we are to cultivate and as we do we will have the power to live up to what he really wants.("The expulsive power of a new affection") If we turn back to trying to live up to standards in the power of the flesh we will fail. If we walk in the Spirit we will succeed. This is the dispensation of grace that began with Paul,the Church age. It too will end in failure because man will again fail to respond to God's grace and refuse to have their nature changed. The result will be the Antichrist.

That’s what I like about you Puddleglum, you are one of a very small number of people that can actually articulate your beliefs.

So, let me see if I understand you correctly, you are saying that the Gospels are not the foundation on which we are to build, but Paul’s letters are the true foundation of the New Testament?

I don't agree, but it is a very intelligent analysis, with Biblical backing.
Thankyou for your time.

[Puddleglum]

Mason wrote:

<quoted text>
That’s what I like about you Puddleglum, you are one of a very small number of people that can actually articulate your beliefs.
So, let me see if I understand you correctly, you are saying that the Gospels are not the foundation on which we are to build, but Paul’s letters are the true foundation of the New Testament?
I don't agree, but it is a very intelligent analysis, with Biblical backing.
Thankyou for your time.

Your statement is negative sounding but I think it is correct. The gospels were for the Jews only.Matthew 10:5-6 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Here is what he told this Gentile even though he did show her mercy.
Math 15:22-24And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Here is another:
Mark 7:25 25-27 For a certain woman, whose young daughter had an unclean spirit, heard of him, and came and fell at his feet: The woman was a Greek, a Syrophenician by nation; and she besought him that he would cast forth the devil out of her daughter. But Jesus said unto her, Let the children first be filled: for it is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it unto the dogs.

Jesus knew he would be rejected by the Jews and that the Gentiles would accept him. This is what this verse is referring to. John 12:20-23 And there were certain Greeks among them that came up to worship at the feast: The same came therefore to Philip, which was of Bethsaida of Galilee, and desired him, saying, Sir, we would see Jesus. Philip cometh and telleth Andrew: and again Andrew and Philip tell Jesus. And Jesus answered them, saying, The hour is come, that the Son of man should be glorified.
The book of Acts is a transitional book. It starts out with the Gospel being sent to the Jews first and the when they had did not repent it was taken to the Gentiles .Paul was the Apostle who was trained after the resurrection. He is unique in that sense. Peter was the first to take the message to the Gentiles though.

This in no way means the Gospels are inferior just as the Gospels do not mean the Old Testament is inferior. The Old Testament is the New concealed and The New Testament is the Old revealed.

[Mason]

Puddleglum
Negativity was not my intention; it is only to gain understanding of what you believe and why you believe it. Your beliefs are very logical, and as I said, are clearly backed by the Bible.

Most people tell me what they believe, and then only have one or two verses in the whole Bible to back it up.
They sit in Churches for years and listen to those who call themselves teachers, and can not answer the simplest of questions.

I ask you questions my Brother, because I find that is the only way to cause thought in someone who disagrees, without it turning into an argument.
Arguments lead to anger and anger leads to hatred, when Brothers are to love one another.
Jesus never argued, he only asked questions of those who disagreed with him.
Even though I am not wise, I find it wise to stay in his footsteps.
My goal, though it may be lofty, is to unite those of differing faiths, to one belief, so that we truly are of one Family.

With that said, I have some more questions pertaining to the verses below.
Romans 15:19-21 (King James Version)
19Through 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.
20Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation

Since you believe that Paul’s letters are beginning or the foundation of the New Testament, why does he say what he says in these verses?
Why does he still peach the Gospels of Christ?
Why does he call the Gospels of Christ the foundation if his letters are the foundation of the New Testament?

Do you have any questions for me?

[Puddleglum]

Mason wrote:

Puddleglum
Do you have any questions for me?

What does this mean? 1 Peter 4:6 For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.

[Mason]

Puddleglum wrote:

<quoted text>What does this mean? 1 Peter 4:6 For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.

What do these verses mean?
Ephesians 3:6
This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus.

2 Thessalonians 1:8
He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.

[Mason]

Puddleglum
I have long wondered why some people don’t see what is clearly written in the Gospels of Jesus Christ, and now I understand that perhaps they just believe as you do.
I have tried my best to show these things to some of these folks like MMBC and Sandra, and noticed that they both tend to side with what you believe.
Thank you again for helping me to see that what I do, I do in vain.
So, I will bow out now and find those who do.

You and I are building on two different foundations, I the Gospel of Jesus Christ and you the Gospel of Paul. We therefore will not be able to convince the other of anything.
My brother my hope is that one day you will know the truth.
May God bless you all.
Goodbye.

[Joey]

Well I for one will miss you mason. I love to read your posts. I guess this thread will die now.

[mike]

Sounds amazingly like Goliath's closing words when he found out others didn't see things the way he did. Methinks Mason has difficulty with people not believing the way he does-- not a good thing, but somewhat predictable. Puddlegum, he didn't answer your question about 1Peter 4:6
Paul understood that there would always be those who didn't have the chance to receive the Gospel of Jesus Christ in this life. He also understood the patent unfairness of condemning them, just because they didn't get to receive it here (would that be a loving and just Father?). The Gospel of Jesus Christ will be preached to those who never had full opportunity to hear it in this life, and they will have the opportunity to accept or reject it, same as we who receive it in this life.
Let's go a step further: 1Cor. 15:29 "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? Why are they then baptized for the dead?"
Baptism being essential and only in the flesh = vicarious baptisms; people in this life being vicariously baptized for those in the next life.
Too many people want to offhandedly reject that which they don't understand without regard for the possible essentiality of the matter. If it's hard to understand, or if it doesn't fit into the training they've already accepted or the knowledge set they've become comfortable with, they simply reject it. It's easier than facing the light.
It really is a simple matter.

[Puddleglum]

mike wrote:

Puddlegum, he didn't answer your question about 1Peter 4:6

This is not the first time he has not answered a question I asked. If you will read his questions and follow ups you will see he is always trying to paint you into a corner and put words in your mouth. He twists everything you say to try and make it into what he wanted you to say. He gets mad if the answer is not the one he wanted. I think this is his method of Bible study as well.

The question of 1 Peter 4:6 was to try and get him to see the meaning of the term " gospel". If you read 1 Peter in context it shows that through in the Spirit Chris preached the gospel through Noah to the antediluvians who are now dead but was alive when it was preached to them.

[Puddleglum]

Should be:..."through the Spirit Christ"...

[The Wizard]

mike wrote:

Methinks Mason has difficulty with people not believing the way he does-- not a good thing, but somewhat predictable.

We ALL can be accused of that. I will readily admit it drives me nuts to see otherwise intelligent people spend their time debating myths and fantasies. Just as it probably bothers some that I can't see things their way. This, too, is part of the human condition.

[Mike]

I enjoyed reading Mason's posts, but he did two things which irritated me and, in my eyes, depreciated his words:

1. He used two names and with those two names, he discussed matters.

That's how I read it, does it seem that way to any of you?

Well Mason, i agree with you.

Many people use two or more names on this blog, but I don't think I've ever heard anyone else bolster their own opinion by having one incarnation agree with the other incarnation... not very confidence building.

2. His claim to believe eveything in the bible, yet when faced with something he disagrees with, which is plainly written, he steps over it like it's a puddle of dog poop.

Too much inconsistency. I'm now bothered by his declaration that the Gospel of Christ and the words of Peter, Christ's main Prophet, are not the same. That's pretty contradictory to believe Christ called Peter to lead the church and then Peter chose to go a different way, while in charge of the Church. Sort of plays into the hands of those who argue against Christianity, doesn't it?

But I'm glad we can all still express our opinions.

All that aside, I don't see how you get that from your reference in 1 Peter. Please elaborate.

[Mike]

The Wizard wrote:

<quoted text>
We ALL can be accused of that. I will readily admit it drives me nuts to see otherwise intelligent people spend their time debating myths and fantasies. Just as it probably bothers some that I can't see things their way. This, too, is part of the human condition.

Wizard, what you call a myth, we see as the only good sense explanation of man's and the earth's origin. Too much about evolution and the scientific explanation of the "beginning" makes no good sense to me; I can't accept it. But I'd love to hear the explanation (not just the declaration) as to how we began. You probably understand the science better than I do.

The other aspect of this is, if you recognize the good sense and/or intelligence of the people you refer to as "debating fantasies", maybe it would be wise of you to consider the possibility they may simply know something you, as of this point in time, don't. I don't put much stock in what a fool says, but if I have confidence in their knowledge, I'll at least listen. If I'm not convinced, at least I've become more educated, about them if about nothing else. Make sense?

[The Wizard]

Mike wrote:

<quoted text>
Wizard, what you call a myth, we see as the only good sense explanation of man's and the earth's origin. Too much about evolution and the scientific explanation of the "beginning" makes no good sense to me; I can't accept it. But I'd love to hear the explanation (not just the declaration) as to how we began. You probably understand the science better than I do.
The other aspect of this is, if you recognize the good sense and/or intelligence of the people you refer to as "debating fantasies", maybe it would be wise of you to consider the possibility they may simply know something you, as of this point in time, don't. I don't put much stock in what a fool says, but if I have confidence in their knowledge, I'll at least listen. If I'm not convinced, at least I've become more educated, about them if about nothing else. Make sense?

Mike, simply put, I don't know how we all came to be here. That's where all of this religion started - trying to find answers to things we don't understand. What I DO know is that there are a whole lotta religions out there and they cannot all be right. And by applying a bit of commonsense, it's easy to see our holy books for what they are - a collection of legends put together to help us make sense of our world and, arguably, be better people. I refuse to fill gaps in my knowledge with a God, Christian or otherwise.