Questions of Reliability and/or Authorship

There will be no dropping of acid during these correspondences. You are a trip AM, I sware.You can equate the life that is in a tree with the supreme natural deity all day long, AM, demonstrating this absolutley is another task altogether. There are certain elements of life, no matter how obvious from a reality standpoint that require us to take a leap of faith to understand or believe in. Believing that the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the deep, is one of them. How in the world would you demonstrate this without there being some faith involved.Question AM. What would the specific facts or information that you do not have, as you did not actually see God do these things, be called? In other words, you were not there when this happened. What word beside Faith would you use to fill in this missing data.Again if the universe, cosmos or whatever, is eternal, do you know with absolute proof know that God is its source, could it (life within the universe}not be a product of itself and its eternal process of cosmological evolution?You employ terms such as the mystery of life and with the same breath indicate that faith is not required. This alone is nonsensical and contradictory. If you cannot explain the source or parts ofthe mystery itself, it doubtful you you can demonstrate it from a physical stand point. What do you say freakshow, ha ha I agree that you do not need faith to sustain what you can see, the physical, but please show me how without faith you can "literally" show me the spiritual. Remember these words AM, "show me hell and I will believe in it" AM, show me one particle of the spirit world or non-physical world and I will believe you. Now I agree and certainly believe in these things, I am simply trying to get you to acknowledge the necessity of faith. Why yes I would please. You made the contention that it is more than physical, or physical laws in motion. You seem to nearly be deifying nature. I say it is "material" in essence, it is limited in its usage and it nearly totally different than the spiritual. Hence Jesus' words, "what shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world (universe) and lose his own soul. Or what shall he give in exchange for his soul (spiritual)Your problem AM is that you are trying to make the physical tantamount with the spiritual. But you have no logical, rational, physical, material way of demonstrating this, other than employing words like "vitality" (wasnt that a hair cream at one time). These words may enhnce the physical but they will not elevate them to the spiritual or assist you in proving its existence, it takes a leap of faith, though not blind by definition. "Faith is the substance of things hoped for the EVIDENCE of things not seen"Please demonstrate using simply the material world AM any particle of the spiritual. Now, not just an argument that appears to inculcate the spiritual, but that shows me the essence of the spiritual. If you cannot you are walking by faith. To "physically" demonstrate that nature is more than material or physical.To Physically demonstrate that the physical cam from the spiritual.To show me without the exact information, as you were not there, the facts that prove God did these things.To demonstrate why you are not in the same boat as everyone else walking by faith.Does this help you? The above may be reasonable but it is not literally demonstratable. "Appear synonoumous" and are synonymous are two different things. "Actually" demonstrating this is even greater. Your above statment is frought with specualation and covered with "faith". Think about it AM and quit being stubborn.Nature is not absolute proof of the spiritual. As you have pointed out numerous times there is no way to demonstrate these things absolutley, now you seem to be moving backwards from your position.How do you demonstrate the "factual proof" of a mystery, that is nearly silly. If you cannot examine its parts and handle or see its make-up you are speculating Bravo acid boy, ha ha. Now demonstrate this to me physical, literally without the use of words, give me substance of the spiritual. Get it. "without faith it is IMMPOSIBLE to please God." When I said "it help us understand" I did not mean that we would. I meant that we could put into terms for use with ourselves and "understand" it from our perspecive. That is different from seeing, comprehending or grasping the spiritual. This distinction you are trying to make between these two does not exist. The cosmos and universe are the same, your illustration is therefore not valid. "In the beggining God created the heavens and the earth". You concept is imaginary, atleast according to the text itself. Not comprehending something AM and yet believing in it, is Faith. I know you are tired of hearing that but that is just the way it is.. These fellas that believe in biological evolution, did not see it happen but have faith that it did, atleast from thier perspective. How does this put anything outside of God? This was there after, "in the Beggining God created.....etc, etc. controlled substance are illegal in Colorado as well. The English attributes this to the word Spirit, because that is its meaning.I think I have clear picture of what is goin on here. You are sitting around a camp fire with some native americans smoking that proverbial peace pipe, trying to find your spirit guide, ha ha.You can interpret spirit any way you want and you can draw illustrations from anywhere you want. However, showing some connection and connecting "spirit" with breath involves the usage of words and the ones you have chosen make God "not" an actual being with personality and intelligence but a substance, unless you have a more amplified definiton of "spirit". In this instance you appear to have contradicted youself from earlier posts where you describe him as not only spirit but an actual personality. Now he appears to be inanimate and only breath and wind. It sounds by definiton you are making actually less than human and equating him strickly with the physical
Where do you derive you more amplified definiton of etheral? How do you know of these creatures, what is your source aside from the physical that they exist? Can you show me one? Can you demonstrate from any literal or physical property a particle of thier existence. Wow,this would be very helpful. I dont think you can carry your argument out any further, its getting ready to run into a logical empass, just as it started out, but I will wait and see what you can produce without "faith" This is one of the most beautiful expressions of faith I have ever heared. What do you say, ICANT? Forgive my bluntness AM, this is one of the single most contradictory statements I have ever seen. If we dont undersand it, why is it still a mystery to you? You see the obvious problem with equaing absolutes with uncertainties then claiming someone "really doesnt understand how it works, right. Come on AM atleast try and be logical. Can my friend tell weather or not my razor and lawnmower have a spirit, because I am getting ready to use them both and I do not want to tork them off. Now I know my dachschund and Jack Russlle I have are alive because one of them dropped a duce in here and I cant find it, but I know its there, if you know what I mean. Sorry that was tacky, what can I say I was raised in Alabama. We dont realy act like the characters in Talledaga Nights, probably more like the character "cousin Eddie" (Randy Quad), off the Vacation series, yeah like that much better.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

AM I know your on line now let me finish my response to your last one then if its ok you can give a response, give me time to get caught up. The rest of my responses will be in message 178.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.

NJ writes: NJ we have have been discussing these items a long time now and Your comments are appreciated. I would like to know your exact positon on the Bible, as you stated that you believed it had been perserved very well. Do you consider it a product of man or inspired by God or both,or are you not certain or do you even careThanks again for your comments, I know AM and ICANT appreciate them as well.D Bertot

NJ writesNJ, as I stated before myself and AM have a history here you are not aware of. It is an inside joke and one that requires you to know our history.These next few lines are going to be in "invisible" lettering so he cant see it, when you get your Decoder Ring undo it and read it, he shouldnt be able see it. It begins here. {{Just between you and me I think the boy is "touched", you know alot of mental problems, but lets work with him to see if we can help him.}}. Like I said he should not be able to see what I just wrote, as I put it in invisible lettering. I will respond to your post as soon as I can.D Bertot Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

It is nice to see one like this every now and then, the ole comic relief response. This was a good one, ICANT. A "brain in a jar", that pretty funny.D Bertot

You are not paying attention AM, comparing metaphors with physical reality is like trying to light a fire, that is already lit, whats the point, it does not demonstrate anything that is not already knowable or get you any closer to demonstrating the actual essense of the eternal or spiritual. It does not matter that it is literal or figurative, you cannot go get spiritual moon rocks. Reading these last two paragraphs, I think you see the obvious problem you are having. I dont even know how to respond to the above statements, other than to say that the words you chose involve the highest form of speculation and "conjecture" Double talk AM. If cosmological evolution is true then it can "infer" life, you would need to demonstrate that it did not take place that way, If the scriptures are only metaphorical and "conjecture", then this only complicates your problem, especially if they are a product of mans imagination. Extrapolation is no better a word than faith, if you were not there to witness it, your spinning your proverbial wheels. If the universe is infinite, then there would be no reason to believe that it could not produce some form of life. Now, I do not believe this, but not due to the fact that I understand everything in the universe but due to the fact that I "believe", there is reason to accept the scriptures as valid and truthful by evidence it contains both inside and out. However, Istill must admit an element or faith, inference or conjecture. "A rose by any other name is just as poky".Isnt it interesting that the words you chose are nearly synonoumous with the idea of faith.You can extrapolate all day long and only be "reasonably" certain that you are correct. Example, it is reasonable to extrapolate that there might be life on other planets, based on the information that you have presently and the fact that there is life here. However, this is not a foregone conclusion. Until that is touched, tasted and handled you are operating on faith, no matter how you cut it.I most certainly believe in he spiritual world, if for no other reason, just the ones you and NJ set out in your last posts, but I cannot touch, taste or handle that yet, therefore I am only reasonable certain (faith) of its existence. I am sorry, that is "reality" mountain boy, ha. This type of verbage and philosophizing is probably the closest anyone could come to almost avoiding that they really do not know or understand things, yet want to believe they do. Regardless of what you call someone or something, its "matter" and reality are there for you to see, touch and handle. Your argument falls way short of actually demonstrating anything ouside the five senses. I cant remember right now which philosopher, said, "its is impossible to experience anything outside the senses, or try and imagine or create anything outside the five senses that are not already in your experience or a combination of the same things". while a very simple concept it is very true. Your belief or faith, conjecture or what ever you want to call it, will always fall short of actual experience. Again, as much as you would like to believe there is humanoid life on other planets, that is simply not within your experience yet, you can only speculate, which amounts to belief or faith. Who is talking about angles or demons, I thought you atleast believed God was an actual, living, intelligent real personality, regardless of what you think he is made of, spirit or physical material. Which is it, he is a real actual being or not? Do you believe God is an actual personality composed of spirit, I believe you said you did? AM inference is not demonstration, I can infer from that which exists the possibility of life on other planets, that however, is no showing you that life, no matter how good my argument isSurely or is not. Surely you can see this simple point, if you cannot I will elaborate.Observing something that is now not in the tree that was there before, is not the same as demonstrating where it "went". And Ibelieve you stated it goes back to God, can you demnstrate this to me, in the smallest possible fashion. You have faith that that is what happens.if that is "enough" for you, you have not supported your position that faith is not required. Actually, its not only "required", its all we have after the known facts, sorry thats just reality.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

AM writes Your problem here is a simple one. Actually, faith and belief are and can be the same thing. No where in the scriptures are we asked or required to have "blind" faith and that is the word you are trying to fit in this context. Faith like belief is supported by some evidence. "faith is the substance of things hoped for ,t he EVIDENCE of things not seen. You are employing the usual worldly understanding of the word "faith", it does not exist in the scriptures because it is not a biblical concept.I would challenge you produce one scripture or group of scriptures where the idea of blind faith is ask to be accepted. "Abraham believed God (had faith) and it was counted to him as righteousness".the proper understanding of Faith is the samthing as supported belief.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.

Essentially I agree with you, however faith or belief is not "taught', it is lived by experiential observation of some facts, believing in things you do not have "absolute" factual evidence for in other areas. "The Faith" is taught. There is much evidence to suggest God created but not evidence to show or tell us how exacally he creates something form nothing, we accept that by faith, correct?In Old Testament they needed some "evidence" from God through Moses that he actually recieved these commandments from a supreme being and this was accomplished by the confirmation of miracles through Moses. Imagine Moses coming down from the mountain and trying to convince the people that "Hey guys you can trust me, these are from God", without any confirmation whatsoever. I would not have believed him either.While Paul seems to indicate in 1Cor 13 that miracles, phrophcies and tounges have ceased presently, we do have the the physical world of vreation and the Word of God that, regardless of the perspective that it has been corrupted, is both supported by verifiable evidence and indication that it was perserved by intervention, even if one chooses not to believe this. However, even after all of this I still say that a certain amount of faith on our part remains. Like Abraham, we dont understand all the plans and times that God will do his Will and we wait with patience and faith, that no matter what the future holds we know who holds it, correct? Correct. Not because it was not necessary and that is why Jesus continuously rebuked them for a lack of faith, even when he was in thier presence. Many did not view him as God no matter what he did or said, correct? all the facts at times dont produce faith, even in the case of Dathan in the OT. I mostly agree with you but in a slightly different way. We believe the Holy Spirit is that witness throught the Word of God itself. Now the Holy Spirit can also do whatever, he wishes outside the Word as well, but whatever he does will not mislead the already existing truth in Gods word or add or subtract from it. These fellas usually igorne not only the direct evidence connected with Gods word but also generally reject the idea of direct inspiration and intervention, or they slowy and sytematically try and pooh pooh it away as nonsensical and impracticle, neither of whaich can be demonstrated. Iam in full agreement with you. Believe and Biblical faith are joined at the proverbial hipD BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

AM quotes and writes: No.Wow how neat, I dont think it is ironic that you quoted a verse that a Church of Christ member uses often, I could talk for days on this so-called spurious verse.I will be more than happy to respond to this verse from my position after you re-read what I wrote to you then read what ICANT wrote in post 196 and my response in 198. These are our positons on belief and faith.Secondly, if you will establish your point without simply asserting that this verse requires blind faith, I will be happy to respond. I dont know what your exact point is here.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.

Nobody questions the fact that Jesus and many others taught using parabales and metaphors, this is no shock or surprise and I am in no way speaking negatively of Christ in pointing out what I did. The difference between you and him is that both he and the audience he was addressing believed in the God of the Old Testamnet, his parables and metaphors were not used to deny Jehovahs existence but to point out his care and concern for his children.My position on the physical aspect of metaphors and there relationship to the physical world has only to do with ones ability to understand and identify the essence of the spiritual realm. You know my only point was to show that "one" could "not" identify any particle of the spiritual realm from the physical and that it takes a leap of "faith" to acccept the actual essence of the spiritual realm. this was my only implication and you totally misrepresented what I was doing.I might point out that it is you who is deliberatley deragatory of Christ by denying his Deity and Messiahship. You are the one who needs to "reconsider" your position, correct? Hey Jaywill, I believe we have convert here, glory be. So you are saying that you believe in Christs kingdom and Messiahship. The rest of the book of Hebrews is specifically for that purpose. Or are you saying as always that you only want pull out this one verse
of scripture and use it.Again, what is "not" taught in the scriptures is worldly understanding of "blind faith". Ofcourse faith is encouraged and instructed but this is exacally how we know what to have faith in, by Gods Word:
"Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God", For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ for it is the power of God unto salvation, for therein is the righteousness of God revealed from Faith unto Faith", Romans 1. It is revealed from the beggining of our walk of Faith to the end of our walk of Faith. It is a part of our lives to the end of our earthly days.AM writes: Wow this is tiresome, I hope you are picking up some debating techniques all the way here AM.. No body said we have "proof" of Christ being God. What we do have is demonstratable evidence that the scriptures are from God and directly inspired by him. This information causes one to have "faith" that God exists, Christ was his only beggoten Son and Christ was also God himself. This does not mean absolute proof but "faith" based on available evidence to make an informed decision on ones behalf, see the difference. There is a difference between "informed belief/faith" and proof absolutley.Now to the point of my illustration of all of the above information. You believe in God (or some form of God)and believe faith is not required to demonstrate this point. I say there is no way you can physically prove this point absolutley, even from the material world. My illustrations that I use are designed to point this part of our argument out, so try to stay on track. We are not discussing the deity of Christ here. There is nothing in the real natual world Am that will demonstrate that actual essence of the spiritual world either. Your position therefore is like ours "eventually", one of Faith.However, there is information that "supports" the idea of the existence of God and the miracles in the scriptures. You are wrong about this part of your quote. Even with this direct evidence some points are left to faith, but not blind faith, get it. I never said that you pooh pooh away the ancient scriptures but the idea of intervention and direct inspiraion in the formation and sustaing of His word, through the ages.To have "faith first" as you put it, is to be informed with certain facts and evidence even before you start interpreting, or atleast one could be informed before they start interpreting. I hope they do as well.The people that were given this instruction and information in Mark 16: actually did these things as a result of the spiritual gifts they recieved throught baptism of the Holy spirit and the laying on o the hands of the Apostles. They ha d witnessed Christ himself and his miracles,or the apostles in these instances, so no blind faith was required. They booth perfomed these miracles and in instances where say the Apostle Paul was struck by a viper in Acts this passage was also fulfilled, no blind faith required.However, the part B of this passage should not be understood the same way it was when it was given by Christ. the Apostle paul in 1Cor 13 makes it very clear that near the close to his lifetime, miraculous "Knowledge", "phrophecy" and"miracles" through the conduit of "men" would vanish away. That which is "perfect", Gods written Word, would replace the medium of miraculous spiritual gifts through men. 1Tim 3:1-17, "that the man of God may be perfect throughly furnished to every good work".If we today had those same miraculous workings of gifts described in 1Cor 12, there would be no need again for blind faith. Gods written perfect word replaces the medium of "miraculous imparted spiritual gifts", to assist in the building up of our "faith", to the end of our days. No blind faith required AM.The "spiritual gifts" through mans hands were only for a time, to confirm a New message, "New and Better Covenant". There has never (now lisen up)been a time when God revealed divine knowledge or Law without the confirmation of the miraculous, but only for a time to confirm its reliabilty and truthfullness, this is the biblical pattern, the Patriarchs had the gift or phrophecy and confirmation of mirales, Moses performed miracles through God, Christ and the Apostles new message was confirmed the same way. No new doctrine has been delivered since the time of the Apostles, "contend earnestly for the "faith", once for all delieverd to the saints". Jude. If someone today wants to claim "new" above and beyond the scriptures knowledge he or she better be prepared to demonstrate it.
The Apostole Paul stated,"I did not come to you in word or deed only, but in Power and Demonstration of the Holy Spirit."Let me clarify however. Even thoughGod does not appear to work through men in the exact same way he did then, Heb 1. This does not preclude God still intervining in the affairs of men today in the avenues of providence, intervention and prayer to acomplish his tasks, he is God he can do what he wants, correct? Miracles through men "faith healers", does not appear to be the case today, either from a practicle observation of the real world or the scriptures indicated.this should stir a few feathers, even though this is not my intention.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

ICANy writesI agree I ICANT. Doesnt he do this though his word? "faith comes by hearing the Word of God"ICANT writes:I esentially agree, i think we see it alittle different, not enough to start a whole argument over.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

The Apostle Paul said "the servant of the Lord must not strive, but be gentle twords all men, apt to teach, INSTRUCTING THOSE THAT OPPOSE THEMSELVES"It if werent so serious it would actually be sort of funny, but it is not. Not having a working knowlegde of a topic to the totality of scriptures, when you are trying to teach someone is indeed a stumbling block to instructing someone, but then this is how one gets instruction, correct? Here I do not mean to sound superior,due to the fact that you could fill up a whole lake with what I dont know. So I will keep in mind Pauls admonition above.I will get to this later today, thanks for you present response.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.

Not exacally. Let me show you the difference. No where in the rest of the NT do we see the idea that "preaching the Gospel" would cease or an instruction to "quit" preaching the Gospel, as we do with the Spiritual Gifts administered through men, 1Cor 13. In other words the only reason I believe this about the gifts is because this is the Apostle's indication through inspiration of the Holy Spirit, that the gifts of the spirit administered through men would eventually fade in favor of the written/inspired Word, which suplanted "that which was in part".The people of Corinth had actually started bragging about what gift they had and Paul says guys you missing the point. He says, that now abides Faith, hope and Love and these are going to be the things that matter after your individual gifts vanish or fade, so focus on the correct thing people. Actually, he is saying that the purpose of the gifts themselves is to produce, Faith, Hope and Love, so dont focus on the "medium" but the result of the medium or result the gift produces, Faith, hope and love.Now I cannot explain why God chose to have us presently without this type of confirmation. I suspect that even with them, people would still find ways to not believe. It depends on what a person has not seen initially. Thomas had already been with Christ and witnessed the miracles and should have believed that Christ would rise from the dead as he had indicated he would. Actually this is the import that Christ meant when he said, "Thomas you have seen me and believed, blessed are they which have not seen me, yet believed".However, his indication is not that we would be left with nothing to support this, he has not left us without any information or evidence at all, if we consider our surroundings and his written Word, history and archeology, etc, etc, etc. AM, remember our lessons on logic, if this is required for us then it would be for yourself as well. Your position on God, existence and these things cannot be proven absolutley, much of it, especially with regard to the "human product" Eden narrative, would have no way of demonstrating that which you require of us, think about it.Absolute proof exists for nothing. Also, it depends on what a person considers "absolute proof"or proof for that matter Is this a statement or a question? How do you know about Pauls conversion, if you say the book of Acts, then I would say do you accept the rest of what it has to say about Pauls conversion, that Christ commisioned him. We can talk more about this later, but think about it for now.D BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.

AM thanks for your recent response in post 211 and this is a perfect example of what Iwas saying in post 207, it is fraught with complete misunderstanding of doctrine and scriptural unity and the such like.I have got to work to day and will be happy to respond to it this evening, for it has much to be corrected scripturally and logicallyThanks againD BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.

Thanks for your last two mostly sarcastic responses, in turn I would like to say, I sure hope you are playing the "dumb" card in your trying to convince me that you do not understand what I am saying in the above quote. If you are not then I think we have bigger problems than I imagined. The Gospel message would continue until the end of time, the "spiritual gifts", would cease, fade and vanish, 1Cor 13. Really AM, I dont think anyone could not understand that simple principle or statement. If however, you need further explanation, I will be happy to provide it.1Cor13:
1.If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.
2.If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.
3.If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.
4.Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.
5.It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.
6.Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.
7.It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
8.Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away.
9.For we know in part and we prophesy in part,
10.but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears.
11.When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.
12.Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13.And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.[/qs]In verse 9 the Apostle uses two examples (synecdoche) of spiritual gifts, to represent all of them. In verse 10 he clarifies between the two and shows what would remain. The Word of God teaches us how to have perfect love and that is that which would remain and our means of understanding it.Here is another passage that is akin to 1Cor., Ephesians 4:1-161.As a prisoner for the Lord, then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received.
2.Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love.
3.Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace.
4.There is one body and one Spirit--just as you were called to one hope when you were called--
5.one Lord, one faith, one baptism;
6.one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.
7.But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it.
8.This is why it says: "When he ascended on high, he led captives in his train and gave gifts to men."
9.(What does "he ascended" mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions ?
10.He who descended is the very one who ascended higher than all the heavens, in order to fill the whole universe.)
11.It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers,
12.to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up
13.until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.
14.Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming.
15.Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ.
16.From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work.In these passages (8-14)the Apostle is pointing out that Christ after his ascension, gave (the Church) specific "gifts", to men, some Apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some teachers, for the perfecing of the body, until we reach the "unity of the Faith". This passage is nearly paralell to 1Cor 13., where the Apostle tells us that these "gifts" would fade, cease and vanish.Now the gifts here under consideration are miraculous in nature, if we follow the context of chapter 12 of 1Cor straight into chapter thirteen. In Ehesians the Apostle through "inspiration" of the Holy Spirit, informs us that the purpose of these gifts was to "build up the Chruch" "until", we come into the "unity of the Faith" in the full knowledge of Christ to attain maturity (the complete, perfect word of God, accomplishes this task,1Tim 3:16-17). And the further purpose of the "unity of the Faith", would keep the church from being tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine and cunning craftiness of men, in thier decietful scheming. The Word of God accomplishes this task. Knowledge through the medium of the gifts faded and it was transfered to a written document through inspiration of the Holy Spirit.The unity of the faith in this passage cannot refer to everyone understanding things correctly and in perfect harmony, for this has not and will not happen. It is not refering to Heaven, because it is to happen while (during) a time when winds of false docrine are still presen and to prevent the cunning craftiness of men from preverting the Church. The unity of the faith in Ephesians 4, no doubt refers to the completed, perfect Word of God. As the books of the NT came into existence, several of them existed simaltaneously with the spiritual gifts. For a time the gifts and the written word were together along with verbal and oral tradition. As the Apostles and individuals that had had the Apostles hands laid on them died, so went the gifts with them. As the books were authored and completed they took the place of the gifts as a medium of Gods word. No this verse says just the opposite of what you are conveying. It is saying that it will be preached unto "all" the world. Now since people are growing daily and coming into the age of accountability daily, it remains to and needs to be preached daily and until such time God himself deems it necessary to intervine again. The expression, "all the world" does not have to have a geographic interprtation as much as it does a human perspective. It will be a witness to the"nations" (people AM.)The Biblical pattern has always been that God would change things when man became so corrupt that there was no more reason to continue with thier presence. Since there are clearly still good people accomplishing his will, it seems as though "the end" "may" be postponed.However, I could be wrong here on this point and there could be other reasons that will motivate him to return sooner. But this seems to be the way it has culminated in his Word, Noah, Sodom and Cananan, etc. Am everything does not have to happen at once in an organization. If we look at the the Gospel, Church and its people in this manner,maybe this will help you to understand what we are saying. that is if you are not playing the dumb card here.Christ is the CEO, he sets the rules for the group. At present there were certain members, Peter, John and Matthew, etc. Later on someone else joins, say, Paul. Christ makes contact with this member of the buisness and gives him instructions to carry out that are different from the others. Now as a member he has full priveledges and rights to speak on behalf of the CEO. He elaborates on the things the CEO has said at an earlier date, per the instructions (inspiration of the Holy Spirit, John 16:13) of the CEO.Come on AM do I really need to do this? I never said anything about this only being spoken to the Apostles or only for them, your statement above makes no sense and warrents no response. Christ spoke and taught mutitudes of people, that does not mean that how we and they got that info had to stay the same. Would you really AM, or would you find a way to explain it away as the Pharisees did or accuse him of being possessed, drunk or ignorant. You dont even believe one tenth of the doctrines in the scriptures, would you really believe someone that was raised from the dead, or would you say, well he was never dead in the first place, that cant be the same person or that is a look alike, etc, etc, etc."They have Moses and the prophets, if they will not belive them, they will not believe one raised from the dead". Anyone who never saw Christ or his life and yet believes. You have a unique way of approaching "evidence". If it is your positon you set aside any doubt and assume no faith is required, as if your positions on God, God being a spirit (your statement), the Spirit world, what happens to life before and after death (it goes back to God) ( your statement again), the Eden narrative, your application of the physical to the eternal, your comparison of the physical to the eternaland all of these things as if they are FOREGONE CONCLUSIONS. What exacally does "reality" do to remove your positions from the category of Faith or blind Faith. I maintain that if any portion of your positions can be considered less than "Blind", I can present the evidence to demonstrate my position more than blind as well, what do you say?Yesterday AM said: Today AM said: Hmmmmmm.Bertot writes: What is stated in Pauls letters is a repeat at times and an extention at others through inspiration of the Holy Spirit sanctioned by thorough and directly from Christ. How did you learn of Pauls conversion?To the question you asked I must say, whaaaaaat? You aint kidding loser McphersonD BertotEdited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Bertot, : No reason given.