geegee, how do you get Paul talking about the body of a covenant out of this? Me thinks thou art reaching:

1Co 15:40 There are bodies celestial as well as bodies terrestrial. But a different glory, indeed, is that of the celestial, yet a different that of the terrestrial,
1Co 15:41 another glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars, for star is excelling star in glory."
1Co 15:42 Thus also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is roused in incorruption.
1Co 15:43 It is sown in dishonor; it is roused in glory. It is sown in infirmity; it is roused in power.
1Co 15:44 It is sown a soulish body; it is roused a spiritual body.
1Co 15:45 If there is a soulish body, there is a spiritual also. Thus it is written also, The first man, Adam, "became a living soul:the last Adam a vivifying Spirit."
1Co 15:46 But not first the spiritual, but the soulish, thereupon the spiritual."
1Co 15:47 The first man was out of the earth, soilish; the second Man is the Lord out of heaven."
1Co 15:48 Such as the soilish one is, such are those also who are soilish, and such as the Celestial One, such are those also who are celestials."
1Co 15:49 And according as we wear the image of the soilish, we should be wearing the image also of the Celestial."
1Co 15:50 Now this I am averring, brethren, that flesh and blood is not able to enjoy an allotment in the kingdom of God, neither is corruption enjoying the allotment of incorruption."
1Co 15:51 Lo! a secret to you am I telling! We all, indeed, shall not be put to repose, yet we all shall be changed,
1Co 15:52 in an instant, in the twinkle of an eye, at the last trump. For He will be trumpeting, and the dead will be roused incorruptible, and we shall be changed."
1Co 15:53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal put on immortality."
1Co 15:54 Now, whenever this corruptible should be putting on incorruption and this mortal should be putting on immortality, then shall come to pass the word which is written, Swallowed up was Death by Victory."
1Co 15:55 Where, O Death, is your victory? Where, O Death, is your sting?
1Co 15:56 Now the sting of Death is sin, yet the power of sin is the law."
1Co 15:57 Now thanks be to God, Who is giving us the victory, through our Lord Jesus Christ."
1Co 15:58 So that, my beloved brethren, become settled, unmovable, superabounding in the work of the Lord always, being aware that your toil is not for naught in the Lord."

I would add this to my last post concerning 1 Corinthians 15:40-58:

1Th 4:13 Now we do not want you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning those who are reposing, lest you may sorrow according as the rest, also, who have no expectation."
1Th 4:14 For, if we are believing that Jesus died and rose, thus also, those who are put to repose, will God, through Jesus, lead forth together with Him."
1Th 4:15 For this we are saying to you by the word of the Lord, that we, the living, who are surviving to the presence of the Lord, should by no means outstrip those who are put to repose,
1Th 4:16 for the Lord Himself will be descending from heaven with a shout of command, with the voice of the Chief Messenger, and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ shall be rising first,
1Th 4:17 Thereupon we, the living who are surviving, shall at the same time be snatched away together with them in clouds, to meet the Lord in the air. And thus shall we always be together with the Lord."
1Th 4:18 So that, console one another with these words."

Note the Corinthians passage 1 Corinthians 15:52 above concerning the trumpeting. This isn't about covenants being changed. It isn't about eggs and bacon. It is about believers Paul was writing to (the nations) since he was the apostle of the nations and wrote to them whereas Peter, James and John are for the Circumcision (Gal.2).

This is about we believers of the nations, (dead and living) meeting our Lord in the air.
Peter, James and John nor Mary the mother of our Lord etc. do not meet our Lord in the air. They meet Him on the earth. It takes simple faith to believe it.

The joint body composed of Jews who came over to Paul's evangel and those of the nations meet our Lord in the air.

Tony.  I feel it's important to address this "rapture" thing before I address anything else at this time.  That's fine?  Good!

I just want to say outright that there just isn't enough scripture to support any rapture idea for me to accept this as a scriptural teaching.

But let me pretend for a moment that what you say about that Thessalonian passage is true.  I would see no reason to see this as a Gentile hope ONLY.  Is it there in that passage quoted?  I do not see it stated that way at all.  Paul never mentions anywhere that this is the hope for the Gentile believer only.  But based on the information I shared so far, I bet we can properly assume that this is the hope for the believing Jew and Gentile.

Here is one scriptural proof for you to consider.

John 17:14-16  (KJV)

I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.  I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.  They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.

John 17:14-16  (CLT)

"I have given them Thy word. And the world hates them, for they are not of the world, according as I am not of the world.  I am not asking that Thou shouldst be taking them away out of the world, but that Thou shouldst be keeping them from the wicked one.  Of the world they are not, according as I am not of the world.

Now to solidify that the Gentiles are include in this prayer, we must go to verse 20:

Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word  (KJV)

Yet not concerning these only am I asking, but also concerning those who are believing in Me through their word (CLT)

Who believed through their word?  Both their fellow Jews and the Gentiles, right?

So we see that it is not the desire of Jesus that we, all believers, should be taken away or snatched off into some realm of safety or anything else that deals with any kind of seperation.  

But verse 21 shows us the desire of Jesus.  That "THEY ALL may be ONE".

Dear geegee,
please note the words which you quoted above. Here, I'll re-quote it:
"Yet not concerning these only am I asking, but also concerning those who are believing in Me through their word (CLT)"

Notice the words "in Me through **their** word."
"Their" is the disciples which does not include Paul. Peter, James and John  had the evangel OF the Circumcision and agreed with Paul and Barnabas that they (Peter, James and John) are to be for the Circumcision yet  Paul and Barnabas are to be for the nations. And Jesus told those disciples to not go to the nations (Matt.10:5).

Furthermore, none of the Jews of the Circumcision calling are to be "raptured" or snatched away. As a matter of fact, when the Lord comes back for them He will be  "dispatching His messengers, and they shall be culling out of His kingdom all the snares and those doing lawlessness" (Mat 13:41) and so shall come to pass what Christ said:
"I am saying to you, in this night there will be two on one couch; the one shall be taken along and the other shall be left."
There will be two grinding at the same place; the one shall be taken along, yet the other shall be left" (Luk 17:34, 35).

The one taken is taken out of the kingdom and cast outside while the one righteous will be left in the land.

However, please notice that the epistle written to those of the nations by "the apostle of the nations" (Rom.11:13; 2 Tim.1:11) and "teacher of the nations (1Tim.2:7) not a teacher of the Jews, in which he, the apostle Paul, taught us that we will defy gravity, we will be changed, we will meet the Lord in the air and we will have a celestial allotment just as the Jews have their allotment on the earth in the land promised to Abraham.

So Jesus' prayer will come to pass. God is not going to take His disciples out of the world like He will the believers of the nations.

Get it? No, you don't because, like Nicodemus, you are not even believing the earthly things so how will you believe when I tell you of heavenly things?

I just want to comment or question some of your last post, Tony.  I want to address some things more clearly without misunderstanding each other and getting lost in the translation!

Notice the words "in Me through **their** word."
"Their" is the disciples which does not include Paul.

Now.  Can you prove that assertion?  Did Jesus prayer did not have Pauls calling and preaching in mind?  Lets continue.

Paul. Peter, James and John had the evangel OF the Circumcision and agreed with Paul and Barnabas that they (Peter, James and John) are to be for the Circumcision yet Paul and Barnabas are to be for the nations. And Jesus told those disciples to not go to the nations (Matt.10:5).

I agree that there was this mutual respect for ministration.  But they shared the same gospel of faith in Christ Jesus based on the promise given to Abraham.  Even James goes into this faith (pointing to Abraham which Pauls does in his many letters).  Was James called to evangelize the circumcision?  Now what about Peter or John?  Peter himself included Abraham as the Covenant of promise.  This is the same message that Paul shared.  There is no difference between the message of Paul, Peter, James or John.  John is more interesting in his use of evagelizing.  I'll get to it more when it come to what that NEW JERUSALEM really is.  This NJ is borne in the heaven(s).

Now in your use of Matthew 10:5?  Yes, I agree that this was the commandment of Jesus BEFORE his death and resurrection.  But what about Matthew 28:19 post resurrection?

"Go ye therefore, and teach ALL NATIONS...?"  What is your understanding of that verse?

I will stop there for now and address those gravity defying scriptures later.  We have enough to deal with without addressing that right now.

Oh, also this is interesting:

Rev 21:14 And the wall of the city has twelve foundations, and on them the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lambkin."

Paul's name nor any other apostle outside the circle of the 12 has their name on the foundation of the city. Matthias, in acts, completed the circle of the twelve.

Paul did not receive his apostleship through a man i.e. not through Peter or any of the 11 apostles.

There needs to be only 12 apostles of the Circumcision for there are only twelve tribes which they will be ruling over.

Neither Paul nor any Uncircumcision believers under Paul will be in the new city Jerusalem. We have much greater graces and allotment!

geegee, you wrote:
James asks his audience to show their faith by works. For faith without works is dead. Paul didn't say anything different. They both agree on this. I know that many attacking the bible pit Paul and James against each other when trying to discredit the message of the gospel. You think there is a difference there? Explain please.

Paul certainly did say quite a bit different.

We are not under law but under grace (Paul's words, not mine).
Rom 6:14 "For Sin shall not be lording it over you, for you are not under law, but under grace."

Paul even went so far as to say:
Rom 3:28 ". . . For we are reckoning a man to be justified by faith apart from works of law.

Tell me, geegee, what meanest this?:
Rom 11:6 Now if it is in grace, it is no longer out of works, else the grace is coming to be no longer grace. Now, if it is out of works, it is no longer grace, else the work is no longer work."

Gal 2:16 having perceived that a man is not being justified by works of law, except alone through the faith of Christ Jesus, we also believe in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by the faith of Christ and not by works of law, seeing that by works of law shall no flesh at all be justified."

Boasting anyone? . . .
Eph 2:8 For in grace, through faith, are you saved, and this is not out of you; it is God's approach present,
Eph 2:9 not of works, lest anyone should be boasting."

And yet James, who is under law states:
Jam 2:14 What is the benefit, my brethren, if anyone should be saying he has faith, yet may have no works? That faith can not save him."

Jam 2:24 You see that by works a man is being justified, and not by faith only."

James is definately talking about the law of Moses, i.e., "the royal law" above as it pertains to the "works" of that law .. .
Jam 2:8 Howbeit, if you are discharging the royal law, according to the scripture, "You shall be loving your associate as yourself,you are doing ideally."

I know, I know, you still think Paul and James are in full agreement even if they are as far apart in agreement as the North Pole is from the South Pole. Next you'll be telling me they were actually talking about frogs or some strange new thing I've never heard of before like "the old covenant being resurrected" LOL.

Tony

       

Dear geegee, no need to get upset.

Here are all the verses by Paul concerning us doing works. Of course he has already established that we are not justified nor saved by works, i.e. works of law or any works. So tell me geegee, where in all the verses below does Paul state.

Now to your question:
geegee asked: Let me ask you... Did Paul say that faith does not require works in any of his letters to the Gentiles? IF anything...I reallly do want you to respond to this one question.

You believe the Bible don't you? Look in the verses below and see if works are a requirement to faith . . .

2Co 9:8 Now God is able to lavish all grace on you, that, having all contentment in everything always, you may be superabounding in every good work,

Doesn't say you MUST be superabounding in every good work, or else."

Eph 2:10 For His achievement are we, being created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God makes ready beforehand, that we should be walking in them.

Doesn't say you MUST do good works, or else."

Phi 2:13 for it is God Who is operating in you to will as well as to work for the sake of His delight.

Doesn't say you MUST work for the sake of His delight, or else."

Col 1:10 you to walk worthily of the Lord for all pleasing, bearing fruit in every good work, and growing in the realization of God;"

Doesn't say you MUST bear fruit in every good work, or else."

2Th 2:17 be consoling your hearts and establish you in every good work and word.

Doesn't say you MUST be established in every good work, or else."

1Ti 2:10 but (what is becoming to women professing a reverence for God) with good works.

Doesn't say women MUST have good works, or else."

1Ti 5:10 attested by ideal acts: if she nourishes children, if she is hospitable, if she washes the saints' feet, if she relieves the afflicted, if she follows up with every good work."

The above is a requirement! But only to be listed to be taken care of by the ecclesia when she is too old to do so. She needs to be attested to by the good works she did but not for salvation or justification.

Tit 3:1 Remind them to be subject to sovereignties, to authorities; to be yielding, and to be ready for every good work,

Doesn't say you MUST be doing every good work, or else."

Tit 3:5 not for works which are wrought in righteousness which we do, but according to His mercy, He saves us, through the bath of renascence and renewal of holy spirit,

According to Titus 3:5 above, He doesn't save us because of any righteous works which we do. Yea, we do works of righteousness but not to be justified.
We don't do works of the law of Moses.

Did Paul ever say we are under law? Did James ever say the Circumcision believers were not under law?

P.S. just because it took me two days to answer you doesn't mean I didn't know how to answer you. Some people have to work. And some people like to really think and pray before answering.

Tony:

2Co 9:8 Now God is able to lavish all grace on you, that, having all contentment in everything always, you may be superabounding in every good work,

Doesn't say you MUST be superabounding in every good work, or else."

G: True.  But, nevertheless, they were expected to be abounding in "every good work".  That only makes sense to me because Paul does at times judge harshly the Gentile or Jew who does not obey that expectancy of faith.

Tony's reply: But Paul does not make a law that "Thou mustest superaboundeth in every good work OR ELSE! Does he?

Tony:

Eph 2:10 For His achievement are we, being created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God makes ready beforehand, that we should be walking in them.

Doesn't say you MUST do good works, or else."

True.  But Paul states the "we should" be walking in them.  Walking in what?  This only supports what I said previously...otherwise his corrections to the Church would not make sense.

Tony's reply:
Here "should" is the should of contingency. One thing is contingent upon another. "Should" here  is not to be taken as "Must." Our walking in them is contingent upon God preparing them and being His achievement.

Tony:

Phi 2:13 for it is God Who is operating in you to will as well as to work for the sake of His delight.

Doesn't say you MUST work for the sake of His delight, or else."

True.  But what is this Phillipian passage saying?  I have read that some of the scholarly works, concerning Pauls adddress to the Phillippians, and the conclusion is that this book is the most non-negative writings that Paul penned to the Churches.  With other words, this book didn't have much correction of any certian error for this particular Church.  

It is true that it s God Who was operating in their faith, yet Paul, in the very next verse, commands/admonishes them to do all things without murmerings or disputes.

Tony's reply:
If Paul was making a law that they must not murmer or dispute else they cannot be saved, then, he was laying down a law that they MUST be rejoicing also or else! . . .
Phi 2:18 Now, to be mutual, you also be rejoicing, and be rejoicing together with me." I can just hear those Uncircumcision believers saying, Gee (no relation to "geegee") Paul didn't want the Galatians to mix law with grace yet now he demands we rejoice so as to be saved. Well, O.K.!!! Paul!!! We will rejoice lest we be d--ned! Praise God!!! (all in a minor key of course)  
Nonetheless, if there are any works which we do it is due to God operating in us and not us trying to do the works of the law in order to be saved. James would not agree with this for Circumcision believers.




Tony:

Col 1:10 you to walk worthily of the Lord for all pleasing, bearing fruit in every good work, and growing in the realization of God;"

Doesn't say you MUST bear fruit in every good work, or else."

G: True.  But the desire was the they should bear fruit.  That is only in keeping with the faith they had.  Pauls concern was that these Colossian believers "walk worthily" and bear fruit and to grow in the realization of God.

Tony's repl:
But nonetheless, Paul does not make it a law they they must bear fruit in every good work or else. The Circumcision believers had to produce fruit worthy or repentance or else. The Un[/i]circumcision believer is saved gratuitously (they did nothing to merit it) and thus can do nothing to lose the "gracious gift of eonian life."

Tony:

1Ti 2:10 but (what is becoming to women professing a reverence for God) with good works.

Doesn't say women MUST have good works, or else."

G: True.  I agree.  It surely "doesn't say women MUST"...

I will become more clear why I do agree with you and yet reject the reason why you lay your argument in this manner.

Tony's reply:
I can't wait!  

Tony:

1Ti 5:10 attested by ideal acts: if she nourishes children, if she is hospitable, if she washes the saints' feet, if she relieves the afflicted, if she follows up with every good work."

The above is a requirement! But only to be listed to be taken care of by the ecclesia when she is too old to do so. She needs to be attested to by the good works she did but not for salvation or justification.

g: Yeah?!!  There is alot of "IFs" there????  With other words, Paul is agreeing with the other Jews that FIATH has a pattern.  Don't you think?  I will eventually say what I think is the eventual point..and as a matter of fact..it may be very close or very similar to your points!!!!

Tony's reply:
The "ifs" you refer to point back to the point of being put on the list of  widows to be cared for by the church.  If she actually did those things then she gets on the list to be cared for. If she didn't do those things then she doesn't make the list. It doesn't mean she loses her salvation.

Tony:

Tit 3:5 not for works which are wrought in righteousness which we do, but according to His mercy, He saves us, through the bath of renascence and renewal of holy spirit,

According to Titus 3:5 above, He doesn't save us because of any righteous works which we do. Yea, we do works of righteousness but not to be justified.
We don't do works of the law of Moses.

G: I agree.  Strange isn't it.  I continue to agree with, yet I disagree?  I'm sure you are wondering about this by now?

Tony's reply:
I believe you are unstable Jam 1:8 due to being double-minded.

Tony:

Did Paul ever say we are under law? Did James ever say the Circumcision believers were not under law?

That is a good question.  I can answer that.  Paul confirmed that the Gentile was not under the Law as the Jew.  And yes, James confirms this too.  Paul and James do agree.  And this is what I have been trying to say to you.

Tony's reply:
That makes no sense. Paul and James to not agree that they both have the exact same message that both Circumcision and Uncircumcision believe must adhere to.

Tony:

P.S. just because it took me two days to answer you doesn't mean I didn't know how to answer you. Some people have to work. And some people like to really think and pray before answering.

G: I understand...I know.  I was just upset.  You called me on it.  Forgive me my brother?

I answered you last post in a certian way.  Did you notice that I did agree with everything just about said?  And did you notice that I also disagreed with everything (or at least most) said?

Why do you think I did that?  Hint:  Think of the way I believe...you should be getting familiar with my world view by now? [/quote]

Tony's reply:
Ah yes, I see your predicament now, friend. . .  The reason for your instability is due to this: Jam 1:8.

You need to quit your fence sitting and get on one side or the other.

To the crux of the matter, once again:
I asked before:
"Did Paul ever say we are under law? Did James ever say the Circumcision believers were not under law?"

To which you replied:

That is a good question.  I can answer that.  Paul confirmed that the Gentile was not under the Law as the Jew.  And yes, James confirms this too.  Paul and James do agree.  And this is what I have been trying to say to you.  

Tony's reply:
So you are saying that you agree with me that Paul and the nations are not under law but that James and the Circumcision believers are under law?

Please confirm.

Another difference between Circumcision believers and Uncircumcision believers of the nations is this:

The Circumcision believers  MUST not sleep and be waiting till the end or will not be saved. And . . . The Circumcision believers must, yes MUST endure to the end or can't be saved: Mat 24:13  But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
The Uncircumcision believers of the nation have it differently:  1Th 5:10 Who died for our sakes, that, whether we (believers of the nations) may be watching or drowsing, we should be living at the same time together with Him."

I know, I know, you'll probably say: Tony, I agree. The Circumcision and the Uncircumcision agree that they have to endure but they don't have to endure.    They have to watch but they don't.  Is that about right?

Oh heck, how 'bout one more:
Act 21:20 Now those who hear glorified God. Besides, they said to him, "You are beholding, brother, how many tens of thousands there are among the Jews who have believed, and all are inherently zealous for the law?
I believe it was James that said the above to Paul (Acts 21:18).
tens of thousands of believing Jews (Circumcisionists) and ALL zealous for the law.

How many Uncircumcision were zealous for the law?

geegee asked:
Before I come back to respond to your latest post, can you answer me this one question. Did I at any time disagree with your belief that you brought up in your last post?

Tony's reply:
If words have any meaning, then yes you disagreed here:

Tony: Quote:
Tit 3:5 not for works which are wrought in righteousness which we do, but according to His mercy, He saves us, through the bath of renascence and renewal of holy spirit,

According to Titus 3:5 above, He doesn't save us because of any righteous works which we do. Yea, we do works of righteousness but not to be justified.
We don't do works of the law of Moses.


G: I agree. Strange isn't it. I continue to agree with, yet I disagree? I'm sure you are wondering about this by now?

Tony's reply:
I believe you are unstable Jam 1:8 due to being double-minded.

============
Tony new:
geegee, what about our (believers of the nations) heavenly destiny as opposed to the believers of Israel under the 12 destiny on the earth?

Why in all the writings of the OT and NT outside of Paul's writings is it never stated a belief in "going to heaven"? Why is their destiny always on the earth? Why in Paul's epistles is our destiny never on the earth?

geegee asked:
what else is different concerning the gospel to the Jew and Gentile?

Tony's reply:
You have the New Testament. Why don't you see for yourself what is different? It's not that hard to find the differences, you know.  

But just in case you don't care to . . .

Another difference is that the nation of believers of the Circumcision are to be "born again" or "begotten anew." The believers of the Uncircumcision are to be a "new creation."

Looking at Revelation, we see certain Jewish believers having a right to the fruit of the tree of life. That keeps them living through the duration of that final eon. The believers of the Uncircumcision don't need any fruit or leaves from a tree to keep them from sickness or keep them living. We put on immortality when Christ comes for us to fit us for the heavenlies.

P.S. has it ever occurred to you that there just might be a difference between Circumcision believers and Uncircumcision believers based solely on the name that names their respective group? I mean, come on geegee, that has been staring people in the face and they still miss it!

P.S. you (geegee) wrote:
Think about, Tony. If I am a fellow universalist, then, how can I believe that anyone will get saved by works? It suprises me you thought the salvation question was what I was arguing against!

geegee, that is great that you give proper glory to God and Christ for what they have done for all mankind! I thank God He has given you that understanding. I too believe He will save all. But that does not mean that I would automatically believe one cannot be saved (for the kingdom to come on the earth) by works mixed with faith as the Circumcision are. As I stated before, did not Jesus say that if one is not enduring (a work) till the consummation, the same cannot be saved (for the eon to come)? (Matt.10:22).

Yet those of us of the nations are under no such formal decree or edict.

There are yet two eons/ages to go after this eon ends.
Obviously, James, who was of the Circumcision, believed that faith alone cannot save a person:
What is the benefit, my brethren, if anyone should be saying he has faith, yet may have no works? That faith can not save him" (Jam 2:14 )

The question now should be per what you wrote above: "That faith cannot save him for what?" Save him for the kingdom to come in the next eon/age. Of course such a one that does not make it into that salvific position due to not having works of the law mixed with faith will eventually be saved after the eons/ages have ended.