Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeadingLady
Unfortunately, there were no Irish people that he knew of back in those days, and so he used a current example...e.g.
"There is neither Jew nor Greek" Why is there no longer any Jew or Greek?
".. BECAUSE... ye are all ONE in Christ"
That last part simply means 'I am a CHRISTIAN'. So, how does what Paul say differ significantly from what a modern person would say today?
'.. there is neither Jew nor Irish, for we are all Christian (i.e. 'one in Christ') OR 'I used to be Irish, but now I'm Christian
|
Ma'am,
I have to respectfully disagree with you.
Don't you think you are oversimplifying the verse you've quoted above?
In that verse, the writer also mentions 'slaves and free', 'male and female' as well as 'jews and gentiles'
I don't see how your..forgive me..oversimplification applies to these other categories. I'm sure you left them out in your example so that you might better serve your point, I can see that.
But still, I can't see how you can pick that verse to serve your argument in isolation to the other parts of the verse.
If there are no longer 'male and female', for example, then why does the epistle to Timothy say that 'women should stay silent in the churches'; that 'women should not teach', and that 'women should have no authority over men'? Isn't that a contradiction?
Also, if there are no more 'slaves and free', then why does the epistle to the Colossians say that slaves should obey their masters, and that masters should treat their slaves fairly? Wouldn't that be another contradiction?
Also, if there are no more 'jews and gentiles', then why does the book to the Acts show that all the jews in Jerusalem were 'zealous for the Law', including Paul (he took a vow and shaved his head according to the Law, and he also circumcised Timothy), and including James, the leader, and also Jesus' own brother?
The book to the acts shows clearly, then, that believers in Christ are two people, not one. The Jews who believe in the resurrection of Jesus, but who also keep the whole Law, on the one hand; and gentiles, on the other hand, who also believe in Jesus resurrection, but are exempted from keeping the Law. TWO PEOPLE, NOT ONE...in Christ, I say.
I believe this is the revelation of the book to the acts, but I think you need to have the special eyes and the special understanding in order to see and appreciate it.
Witness Lee, the so-called Seer of the Age did not see this and completely missed it. It was not revealed to him as it is to a handpicked few who now see this.
In fact, just to nail this in, if you go to the epistle to the Ephesians, the writer drives the point home. Apostle Paul, the writer, says that..
.. 'in Christ Jesus [the gentiles] who were at one time far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For [Christ] is our peace who has made BOTH one, and has broken down the middle wall of partition [between the TWO], having abolished in his flesh the hostility, that is, the Law of Commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of TWO one new man, so making peace; and that he might reconcile BOTH unto God in one body on the tree'
... Ephesians 2:13-16...
I have capitalized the 'crucial' and 'critical' words in this portion of Scripture that give the key to unlocking the grand revelation of the NT. That there are two people in Christ: jews and gentiles.
Don't you see how Apostle Paul keeps mentioning the words BOTH and TWO? Would he have mentioned the number 'Two' if God did not intend for there to be 'two' peoples? No, of course not. This has to be the economy of God, doesn't it?
It is just like having two legs on a man walking together in carefully coordinated fashion. There are two legs, not one. If there was only one how would he walk on only one leg? Likewise, if there is truly "neither Jew nor Gentile" as Galatians says, how will Christ walk? It has to be wrong! That's just plain common sense ! ! !