Forums

CONTEXT MATTERS.  In Galatians why does Paul call them foolish? Because they having started out in the Spirit (Faith) were now in the Flesh (serving the Law) and the whole chapter is Paul chastising them because of that, he then shows how the law avails nothing, how the PROMISE came 430 years before THE LAW, how the law was just a schoolmaster to bring us unto Faith in Christ Jesus and now that Jesus has come the law is no longer needed etc. etc.  THEN....Paul says this and it confuses people enough that they get it all wrong, they turn Paul's message completely around and twist its meaning unknowingly. I can prove 100% Pal is not says there are no Jews and Gentiles now and we are all one in Christ.  Gal. 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. So, do you not see the point Paul is making here? By reading the FULL CONTEXT it becomes very, very clear my friend. But first I want to point out something hat should shake this misconception to the core. Are there still MALES & FEMALES in the world today? Of course, then that juxtaposition should get you and others to understand that CAN NOT be the point Paul was making with the whole, there are no Jews nor Greeks (Gentiles) because if he is also saying there are no Males nor Females then it can't mean what you gentlemen think it means, but how can we understand what it really means? By looking at the full context, of course. Paul is chastising the Galatians because they had listened to people, more than likely Jews whom had converted the Christianity, who were telling them you have to keep the Law in order to please God and make it to heaven. So, no doubt they started keeping the Sabbath, doing sacrifices et al. So, Paul was like WHAT ARE YOU DOING !!!!! Why did you start out in the Faith (Spirit) only to start serving The Law (Flesh)? Did you not know the Promise [of Jesus] came 430 years before the Law?  So, in essence what is Paul telling them? Quit trying to be "Jews" in order to make it into Heaven (WORKS of the FLESH). We are all ONE in Christ Jesus, both the Jew and Greek, Slave and Freeman, AND Male and Female.  This of course did nit mean there were no slaves at that time right? And it did not mean that there were no males and females right? And alas, it also NEVER MEANT there were now no Jews nor Gentiles either, that a misconception. Paul is chastising the Galatians because they thought they had to be Jew LIKE via serving the Laws in order to work their way to Heaven.  So, Paul is pointing to the one thing that ties ALL THREE things he mentioned together.......Male & Females, Jews & Gentiles and Slaves & Freemen... and that would be FAITH in  Christ Jesus. Paul is saying there is only ONE WAY to make it to heaven and that IS NOT the law, it is by FAITH ALONE that we make it to Heaven, both Jew and Greek, Male and Female et al.  When you grasp there are still Males and Females then it should hit you Paul is NOT SAYING we are all one, but is instead pointing unto how we all gain heaven in the EXACT SAME WAY.......Male & Female, Jew & Gentile,  and that is by FAITH ALONE. Anyone who thinks God just shows up and saves 1/3 of Israel at the very end are also not thinking correctly, they must come unto Christ by FAITH ALONE also, thus the 1/3 repent and the 2/3 will perish or die just as Zech. 13:8-9 says. This is how we get off-tracked and go down cul-de-sacs my friend. You actually think Paul meant there will be no Jews now, thus there will be no Kingdom Age as God promised Abraham, all because you have misunderstood what Paul meant here. Never let one verse or sentence override God's promises. When that happens, TAKE ANOTHER, DEEPER LOOK !! God never confuses us, we confuse ourselves. Jews are the people of Israel, the USA are not Israel. Paul was merely saying we are all going to come unto Christ Jesus in the EXACT SAME MANNER.   

In the Old Testament, prophets proclaimed messages from God. I could be wrong but nearly every prophet in scripture foretold predictions of the future. Even the prophet in Acts was there to warn Paul about what would happen to him. Prophets spoke God's word and warned the people about coming judgement.    Today we have a complete Bible with everything God wants humankind to know. It's illogical for there to be prophets when we already have a complete message from God. Plus even if there were prophets anything they would say would have to match what scripture already says, so it would be redundant anyway. There's no logical reason for a prophet to exist today. 

Back to the original questions; what does the Bible state is said about a prophet?  A phrase out of a sentence needs to be read in context. That  is important of course, but what of this statement by Jesus that "no prophet is accepted in his own country." ? No prophet, none, are accepted  in their own homeland. Fast forward to today, whom speaking  as though a prophet are rejected at their own homeland? Are any? My Lord was speaking prophecy and was rejected, and is today too. He was speaking of himself and his fulfillment of God's word. He also stated  "this is not my kingdom if it were my servants would fight".  So is this ( the world) his homeland, or not? Seems to me that those called out of this world to be servants of God do not have a home here, but are in it nonetheless. There is no need of new prophecy that tells of the need of Jesus. It has already been said by Jesus. There may be need of witnesses to testify of Jesus  each having been turned about to Him by the comforter the Holy Spirit, but there is no new prophecy needed; only a removing of the scales before individual's eyes. That is not prophecy it is  a gift of sight and insight into the faith of Jesus that saves all those foreknown and predestined to be with God the father son and Holy Spirit for eternity  forward as has always been known to God.

I think your view is spot-on. The audience was messianic Jews, and the apparent subject was animal sacrifice, reverting (or continuing), the Law, and Judaism. As a Gentile, I asked a question to paraphrase and expand upon: Is there a personal application for me here, or does it also apply to the churches and this age? As I prepared to discuss this further with you, another thought popped into my head. Continual sacrifice: who would do this in the modern age, omitting orthodox Jewry? The Catholic doctrine on the Eucharist is outlined by the Council of Trent, emphasizing it as both a sacrament and a sacrifice. The Eucharist is believed to be the true body and blood of Christ under the appearance of bread and wine. The doctrine includes the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the concept of transubstantiation, and the mode of Christ's presence. The article also discusses the institution of the Eucharist as a sacrifice, fulfilling Old Testament prophecies and continuing the sacrificial worship in the Church. Adoration, reservation, and reverence for the Blessed Sacrament are highlighted, emphasizing the supreme worship due to the Eucharist as the presence of God. The article provides insights from various theologians and historical perspectives on the Eucharistic doctrine within the Catholic Church.1 1 A Catholic Dictionary This practice is disturbing. In other words, Catholicism believes they are eating the flesh of Jesus and drinking His blood. They must partake of their Eucharist frequently to remain saved. It is NOT a commemorative act of "do this in remembrance of Me." In effigy, they are sacrificing the Lord over, over, and over again, in cannibalism.   As mentioned, in my mind, the more I study God's word, the more I am grappling with the OSAS doctrine. As quoted in my sample listing of biblical verses in my original post, these are conjunctions conditional clauses to obtain something, if, and continue. The question is: what if NOT, or not until the end? The unpardonable sin: But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils. (Matthew 12:24) I envision three unpardonable sins: The miracles of Jesus were performed through the power of the Holy Spirit, therefore calling God the Devil. Many Pharisees were eyewitnesses to His teachings and miracles of God, and they were without excuse. Can the unpardonable sin be committed today? Based on the definition of blasphemy, I believe so: Blasphemy is more than just swearing, encompassing contempt or slander towards God. In the Old Testament, blasphemy is viewed as speaking of God with contempt or acting as if He is irrelevant. In the New Testament, blasphemy indicates a hostile attitude towards God expressed in contemptuous or slanderous ways. Jesus was accused of blasphemy for claiming rights and powers belonging to God. Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is considered an unforgivable sin, as seen in rejecting God's presence and power displayed through Christ. The unforgivable sin is not limited to Jesus' time but remains a danger for those who show contempt towards God. It is crucial for believers to honor God in their lives to avoid eliciting contempt towards Him.2 2 New International Encyclopedia of Bible Words In the singular sense, we speak of the unpardonable sin as only one. What about those who take the mark of the Beast. Are they still eligible for repentance and Salvation? Absolutely not; this, too, is an unpardonable sin, and I have a suspicion why. There are people in cults, entertainment, politics, and sports who have sold their souls to the Devil and worshipped him for fame, wealth, power, glory, talent, and ability. There are testimonies of some who saw the light, repented, turned to Christianity, and were saved. To name two, the testimonies of Ozzy Osbourne and Alice Cooper are interesting. Therefore, if this is true, devil worship is not an unpardonable sin. Lastly, some outright reject the Gospel, and some procrastinate, sitting on the fence trying to decide. At their last breath, their last heartbeat, their fate is sealed for all eternity. This is also an unforgivable sin, the rejection of Christ, with no second chances of repentance or changing one's mind.

I think this is a stretch. At the meetings I have attended the words were edifying and accurate.