Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Debelak
1) Churches "operated" just fine without the Spirit. See Galatians. Just because they embraced a doctrine contrary to the New Covenant, does not mean there wasn't "order" or at least an appearance of "order." In fact, I would argue, it is easier to manufacture an "orderly assembly" than it is to follow the Spirit. A corollary to this is what appears to be "confusion" may in fact be God's wisdom that is bigger than ours. A lack of human order requires faith and prayer. A rigorous human order does not necessarily require faith. This is not an argument for confusion, but an argument about entailment.
|
I don't understand what you are saying here.
Galatians
3:1 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
3:3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
3:4 Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain.
3:5 He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
Sounds to me like Paul is saying their Christian life began when they received the Spirit. I thought we could all agree that this was a basic NT teaching.
Second, verse 5 appears to be a rhetorical question. It seems to my understanding of Galatians that Paul is saying that we began in the Spirit and the entire Christian life should be one of receiving the Spirit and ministering the Spirit, and that this is not accomplished by the works of the law. However, setting up an orderly administration could be accomplished by the works of the law. Obeying and submitting to church leaders could also be viewed as something that is "works of the law".
What does "an argument for entailment" mean?