What's your view on Hell?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968

Some of the most naturally minded people I know, are those who have the Holy Ghost. It's sad!

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
(Rom 8:9-11)

[1 God]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Really?

Wow.

No wonder this forum is dead as the doornails in a Baptist church.

So true. Brethren that preach and obey Acts 2:38 are not swine(pigs), but merely brethren with different opinions. This forum runs off great contributors with carnal insults of brethren.

[Nicodemus1968]

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister

Yes I don’t do three or four weeks of fasting.

The question was to you though.

Have you eaten anything in the last three or four weeks?

The reason the elders stomach grumbled is because he is in the flesh. It wasn’t his spirit that growled, it was his flesh.

Why did his flesh growl?

Because he is carnal. I guarantee that.

I will not answer the question on have I eaten in the past three to four weeks.

I Corinthians 3:1-3
And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.
3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

He could not speak nor teach unto the church the ways of the spiritual because they were STILL carnal. And I guarantee you that they were eating and drinking, yet Paul wasn't talking about them going out to *Sabbath Day Burgers and Fries.

That does have a nice ring to it.

[Nicodemus1968]

Originally Posted by 1 God

So true. Brethren that preach and obey Acts 2:38 are not swine(pigs), but merely brethren with different opinions. This forum runs off great contributors with carnal insults of brethren.

Do you even understand the verse he was talking about?

[1 God]

No, oink...snort,snort.

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968

I will not answer the question on have I eaten in the past three to four weeks.

Sorry! I asked a question that was too hard for you to answer. Let me make it easier.
Have you eaten in the last three or four months?

Years?

Let me know when I get it to a level that you can answer. I’m trying to make it easy for you. I’m trying to teach you something. You are pretending to be spiritual, and not at all carnal, which is hogwash. I’m not saying you aren’t spiritual, I’m just saying that you are carnal and pretend that you’re not. There are ways to tell: If you are eating or drinking, if you have a pulse, if you are not room temperature, all these are signs of carnality.

On the other hand, if you are not displaying any of these signs, it is a sign that we have a disembodied spirit posting on AFF. Or a liar. Or perhaps you don’t know what carnality is (which is a very real possibility). The options are really limited.

So, a really easy question for you (or it should be);

Are you carnal?

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968

I Corinthians 3:1-3
And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.
3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

I am basically telling you what Paul was saying. “Are ye not carnal?” I hope his audience received it better than you have. You are pretending (perhaps even believe) that you are not carnal. Or perhaps you believe that it is not possible to be both.

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968

He could not speak nor teach unto the church the ways of the spiritual because they were STILL carnal.

Of course they were still carnal. But you are wrong to say that he couldn’t teach them because they were still carnal. The reason he couldn’t teach them is because they were babes in Christ. Their spirituality had not developed, or matured. Paul merely pointed this out to them. All of Paul’s letters to the church were written to carnal men. They were not spirits exclusively. Much of Paul’s teaching was about the balance of the spiritual and the natural, and even the carnal man. You seem to have interpreted his teaching to mean:

Carnal=Bad

Spiritual=Good

That is not what he was teaching.

I know this is probably going to shock you but:

Paul himself was carnal!!!

And he admitted to being so!!!

Oh the scandal.

Rom.7

[14] For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

If you notice, Paul is saying “I am carnal” , he’s not saying I used to be carnal, before I was Spirit-filled. He is admitting to being carnal while he is writing his letter to Rome.

But you pretend to be other than carnal. I’m calling you out on that. As long as you live in the body that has physical needs, you are carnal. Saying otherwise is sowing confusion.

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968

And I guarantee you that they were eating and drinking, yet Paul wasn't talking about them going out to *Sabbath Day Burgers and Fries.

That does have a nice ring to it.

The reason it has a nice ring to it is why?

Because you are carnal!

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by Amanah

Wrong!

Originally Posted by Amanah

1 Cor 15

42So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: 43It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: 44It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

Originally Posted by Amanah

Your natural body is resurrected as a spiritual body, from mortal to immortal.

Do you believe in a spiritual resurrection? Will we be spirits or living glorified material human bodies?

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by coksiw

Do you believe in a spiritual resurrection? Will we be spirits or living glorified material human bodies?

1 Cor 15 gives the explanation

The Resurrection Body
35 But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?” 36 You foolish person! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37 And what you sow is not the body that is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain. 38 But God gives it a body as he has chosen, and to each kind of seed its own body. 39 For not all flesh is the same, but there is one kind for humans, another for animals, another for birds, and another for fish. 40 There are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is of one kind, and the glory of the earthly is of another. 41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory.

42 So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. 43 It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. 44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”;[e] the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual. 47 The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. 48 As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. 49 Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall[f] also bear the image of the man of heaven.

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by Amanah

1 Cor 15 gives the explanation

The Resurrection Body
35 But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?” 36 You foolish person! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37 And what you sow is not the body that is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain. 38 But God gives it a body as he has chosen, and to each kind of seed its own body. 39 For not all flesh is the same, but there is one kind for humans, another for animals, another for birds, and another for fish. 40 There are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is of one kind, and the glory of the earthly is of another. 41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory.

42 So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. 43 It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. 44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”;[e] the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual. 47 The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. 48 As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. 49 Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall[f] also bear the image of the man of heaven.

How do you understand it?

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Not one passage of which says three or third, you are reading that into the texts. See my post about an alternative explanation here ---> http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...&postcount=289





Nonsense. All of it.

By the way, I teach both dialectic and classical rhetoric (with Aphthonius, Cicero, and Quintillian as the primary source material for rhetoric) and I'm quite capable of recognising rhetorical devices and methods. Which you do not seem to be very aware of, as ALL COMMUNICATION IS RHETORICAL. I would say what you are falling victim to is classical sophistry, however.

Paul said he would not boast of himself having visions and revelations. His ethical proofs demand he be honest about that. Ergo, he is (unless he is a liar, which means he has no ethos, and the pathos of his epistle goes down the drain, wiped up with the parchment of his logos). So the person being described as having particular visions and revelations is someone other than himself.

I have NEVER read the passage any other way. When I found people claiming he was ackshuwally boasting about himself, I could only chalk it up to yet another example of standard "trinitarian style logic". Kind of like how some claim when God says He is One He ackshuwally means They are Three...

All communication have rhetorical aspects but not all communication puts rhetorical impact over accuracy. I am a scientist, in a field of applied mathematics.

Some biblical passages are clear cut, others are not that clear so the honest thing to do is to present it as the most plausible interpretation. There is nothing wrong with that. Your interpretation is actually less plausible and can be seen by the breaking of the cohesion of the passage it causes, making Paul’s communication very nonsensical with no a clear strong goal, not very typical of his Epistles sections addressing important concerns.