Richard7
Well-known member
Still waiting for your truths, any time we are eagerly waiting ...
The prophesied Restoration
- Thread starter dberrie2020
- Start date
organgrinder
Well-known member
Go look it up. I don't believe it is on the Mormonism forum. The Mormonism forum is to discuss Mormonism. I am still awaiting what the Mormon Gospel is and how you explain it.
Richard7
Well-known member
I gave it to you, once more you're just trolling... since I gave it to you, tell me why I'm wrong, this could be the beginning of a two way conversation if that is applicable...
dberrie2020
Super Member
At least you acknowledge repentance and water baptism for the remission of sins is connected to the gospel.
So--does your church connect repentance and water baptism for the remission of sins--with the gospel of Jesus Christ?
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints preaches and practices just what is testified to in the scriptures, IE--
Acts 2:38---King James Version
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
organgrinder
Well-known member
Look it up or just actually answer the question. If not, maybe best you not speak any more of it since you have demonstrated you don't know.
organgrinder
Well-known member
I have never denied they are connected to the Gospel. Thye question to you Mormons is WHAT IS THE GOSPEL? That is what you guys can't or won't answer.
Richard7
Well-known member
Great, best words I heard all day, good luck good buddy...
Richard7
Well-known member
Josheb
Well-known member
Something that does not exist cannot be reformed. There is nothing to reform. By asking, "Then why the need for Reformation....?" you've implicitly acknowledged the correctness of Janice's statement (which I assume was something broached in another thread which you chose not to discuss there where and when it first occurred.
No, it is not. Restitution is not restoration.
Therefore, something that commonly occurs with you - a gross misreading of scripture - is no evidence right from the very beginning of a new thread!
The gospel is reforming.
So, once again, another gross misunderstanding of scripture.
Certainly, but God is not limited to adding people to just one method. The problem of "onlyism" should be avoided in any and all discussions of "prophesied restoration."
Well, the fact of history is the CoLDS prophesied Jesus would be returning in the 1800s and that did not happen.
Eschatologically speaking, EVERYTHING the Church of Latter Day Saints taught about the then coming restoration is demonstrably proven to be false. Rather than correct their teaching(s), they modified the timing and held onto the same presuppositional errors and basic mistakes, while also maintaining their separateness from the rest of Christendom.
There is no need for new denominations and different theologies. Ironically, the CoLDS is a new denomination and thereby evidence of the problem to be solved, not the solution.
NONE of the denominations or sects of the 19th century restoration movement proved correct. They were ALL wrong when it came to restoration and apocalypse. ALL OF THEM! The LDS included. They claimed restoration needed, they claimed to be restored, they all changed theology to suit their respective views, and none of them proved correct restoratively. Every single one of them ended up making things worse, not better.
Richard7
Well-known member
Chuckle, Restitution: the restoration of something to its original state:
Josheb
Well-known member
And scripturally speaking that occurs consequent to the loss of something like a debt or theft and not anything anywhere that is evolutionary.
Chuckle all you like but an astounding ignorance was put on display with that post. If we applied your extra-biblical secular Merriam's/Webster's definition we'd all have to be Jews because that is what the "original state" looked like in the Church.
Or should I read your post to indicate you think we should all be practicing the Jewish rituals? If not then you're contradicting yourself and I, for one, will expect more from you.
Think of restitution in this context:
- Confession (or acknowledgment of wrongdoing
- Repentance (or a sincere effort at change, especially in thought, word, and deed)
- Restitution (or making amends, repaying what was lost, damaged, or returning what was taken)
- Penalty (the additional costs inherent to the loss)
- Forgiveness (giving, receiving, canceling all debt or lien against another)
- Reconciliation (restoring the relationship to either its prior state of correctness or a state improved upon the prior good state because now the relationship is stronger having endured and overcome the prior loss).
Do not conflate or confuse restitution with reconciliation.
Now, I will assume you know the scriptural references and precedents for what I just outlined but if you want me to walk you through them I will gladly do so. I also, likewise, assume you intuitively know what I just posted is correct but if you're like a more substantive understanding I will, again, gladly walk through the scriptures.
The Church has always been messy. No one can read the letters to Corinth or Ephesus and think the Church was ever perfect. There has always been need for reformation but that has never meant the Church was not the Church or that it was wholly corrupt and in need of replacement. The latter is and has always been bad theology. It came to a head in the 1800s and we've been dealing with those errors for the better part of two centuries. It is the restoration movement that needed reformation.
Richard7
Well-known member
I see, so the following would not be a restoration: return of the authentic priesthood power, spiritual gifts, ordinances, living prophets and revelation of the primitive Church of Christ after a long period of apostasy and bringing the people of Judah back to the land of Judea from their 75 years of captivity in Babylon. Not evolutionary?
So how do you define apostasy? and is it biblical? if a person leaves the Church and Christ is that a apostasy? What if he is restored to all his former rights and privileges? restoration! to a former place, office or priesthood?
Really, so when did the Church actually begin? I don't see the humor in that... were not gentiles also part of the original state or Gospel?
Were the Gentiles made Jews?
Did the Church of Christ and Apostles practice Jewish rituals, or did not Christ say all things were fulfilled
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished” Matt. 5:17
“Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven” Matt 5:19
Looking forward to you comments.
Oh no I won't for they are not the same... Even though your statement above seems off..... You said,
Think of restitution in this context:
Reconciliation:
6). (restoring the relationship to either its prior state of correctness or a state improved upon the prior good state because now the relationship is stronger having endured and overcome the prior loss).
“‘Having made known unto us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He hath purposed in Himself: that in the dispensation of the fullness of times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him.’ [Ephesians 1:9–10.]
Oh no, just trying to figure out how you arrive at such a strange gospel...
The Church was corrupt? I don't understand. Who is the cornerstone of the Church? Is Christ corrupt? or are the men who strive to be part of the foundation corrupt or weak like unto man... hmm
dberrie2020
Super Member
The Gospel does not need to be reformed--it's perfect already.
The Reformers started whole new denominations--with a different theology. That takes a heavenly event, which the critics here have been unable to show for their denominations.
Then why the Reformation? Why the prophesied Restitution?
Restitution--Merriam Webster
1: an act of restoring or a condition of being restored: such as
Then what existing denomination was this pertinent to?
Acts 3:21---King James Version
21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.
Josheb
Well-known member
Can you see all the extra-biblical content in that sentence? Can you see how you're adding MORE, not less, biased definition?
The single point of discussion (debate or dissent, however you may construe it) is that for the definition of "restoration". Nothing more. An extra-biblical definition of restoration was asserted, and it was a definition that conflated with restitution. Extra-biblical. Conflated. Now, in addition to the secularized, extra-biblical definition there is added a plethora of sectarian views couched in eschatology.
And not a single scriptural reference was provided.
I trust you'll understand when I point all this out to you and the others readers and tell you I will have nothing to do with that.
Digressive.
Restoration, and specifically "prophesied" restoration is the topic. This op treats certain conditions as givens when it hasn't provided any evidence for doing so. Implicit among these assumptions and the fallacious question-begging are things like the presupposition the Church is corrupt and in need of "restoration," and restoration is explicitly defined in a extra-biblical, secularized way that is antithetical to the alternative I provided AND, ironically, inconsistent with what was prophesied, because it's based on a still relatively modern and sectarian view and NOT one couched in scripture.
So I won't be entertaining definitions of "apostasy" until the matter of restoration is agreed upon.
Understand that there are aspects of this that go all the way back to Eden, because we do not define something good by something not-good. We do not define the Church, restored or otherwise, by apostasy. The fact that you would ask the question is, imho, evidence of the problem to be solved.
No, of course not. Who would say apostasy is biblical?
What does scripture state?
Irrelevant, off-topic, and your problem, not mine.
Yes.
No. There is neither Jew nor Gentile in Christ (Gal. 3). The dividing wall of hostility has been removed and the two have been united into one people (Eph. 2). Gentiles did not replace the Jews, the Church does not replace Israel; the former have been grafted into an already-existing tree that is Christ (Romans 11).
False dichotomy.
I am unaware of any specific verse in which Jesus states "all things were fulfilled," but the gospel and epistolary writers did report Jesus saying various individual prophecies fulfilled and they did say things like, "After this, Jesus, knowing that all things had already been accomplished, in order that the Scripture would be fulfilled, said, 'I am thirsty.'" and "But the things which God announced beforehand by the mouth of all the prophets, that His Christ would suffer, He has thus fulfilled" (Acts 3:18)." If there is a specific verse that explicitly states, "All things are fulfilled," then please cite it. This is important. It's important because if, as you are implying, ALL things were fulfilled then there is nothing left to be fulfilled. If all things were fulfilled and there is nothing left to be fulfilled, then there is no prophesied restoration left to be fulfilled.
Cannot be had both ways.
Are you full-preterist?
Neither of those passages state, "All things were fulfilled."
So my first comment is to point out that fact. Everything built on a flawed premise is likely to also be flawed and lead to flawed conclusions. I direct you, and every reader to start first with what is explicitly stated and NOT add things nowhere stated because that risks apostasy AND is evident of a need for restoration. The irony then being the ones crying for restoration being the one most in need of it because of their failure to read scripture as written.
You've just made yourself culpable of the very things Matthew 5 is speaking against.
Stick with what is stated. Jesus came to fulfill the Law and the prophets. Do not fall prey to "onlyism," or the practice of inserting the word "only," into scripture where it is not mentioned. The author of this op does so often. Jesus came to fulfill the Law and the prophets. but Jesus did not come ONLY to fulfill the Law and the prophets. Jesus came for many reasons, some of which preceded both the Law and the prophets, some of which exceeded the Law and the prophets.
The Law and the prophets were fulfilled in Christ..... and a new standard and new prophecies were added
. Despite Christ fulfilling the Law and the prophets (they testified about him), the New Testament writers tell us,Acts 3:19-21
Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord; and that He may send Jesus, the Christ appointed for you, whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time.
Note this restoration is NOT a restoration ONLY of the Church, but a restoration of "all things."
Note also that this is the only mention of restoration in the New Testament outside of the gospels ?. Go ahead; look it up now. Verify what I just posted.
Then adjust your thinking, your doctrine, and your practice accordingly.
It turns out there is no mention of any restoration of the Church in the New Testament after the gospels
. How then did ALL of the restorationist sects of the 1800s get it so wrong????? My point was just proved, not disproved.
If you follow that Ephesians narrative on to its later conclusion Paul explicitly states these things have been reconciled. Furthermore, Paul believed and taught he and the first century Christians were living in the ends of the ages
.1 Corinthians 10:1-11
For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea; and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and all ate the same spiritual food; and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ. Nevertheless, with most of them God was not well-pleased; for they were laid low in the wilderness. Now these things happened as examples for us, so that we would not crave evil things as they also craved. Do not be idolaters, as some of them were; as it is written, "The people sat down to eat and drink, and stood up to play." Nor let us act immorally, as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in one day. Nor let us try the Lord, as some of them did, and were destroyed by the serpents. Nor grumble, as some of them did, and were destroyed by the destroyer. Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come.
The ends of the ages had come ?. That is what the text actually states.
Josheb
Well-known member
The ends of the ages had come ?. That is what the text actually states.
So how about we keep comments like "strange gospel" out of the discussion and stick to the matter of "prophesied restoration."
Working from an extra-biblical, secularized, conflated and apocalyptic definition largely invented in the 19th century and not consistent with the whole of scripture is always going to be a problem, no matter the sectarian views of those discussing the topic.
You are on the correct track by citing Christ. Christ is impeccable, not corrupt, and not corruptible. Since the Church is the body of Christ, we have that same quality commuted to us....... in spite of the fact we are not ontologically perfect. As I said before, the testimony of the epistolary shows the early Church was very messy. Not only are there leaders who teach bad doctrine, there were various heresies to be dealt with due to the influences of pagan religions and their converts coming to Christ, as well as behaviors contrary to Biblical standards of conduct (like the man who is having sex with his father's wife, and the Church's tolerance of these things.
Despite all of that the epistolary writers treat most of the wrongdoers as if they are in fact saints, bondservants of Christ, Christians who will one day be raised incorruptible and immortal. The great irony of those saying the modern Church needs to be restored to look like the first century Church is that they are implicitly calling for a congregation like that found in Corinth or Ephesus.
No.
Just say "No," to that.
A better, more consistent-with-scripture alternative would be to understand the ekklesia is the qahal restored and reconciled and those OT prophesies were being restored in the first century. It is because God kept His promises that we can believe, not blindly believe in hopes He will keep promises He hasn't yet kept. And none of it will be complete on this side of the grave because it is only in resurrection that we will be raised incorruptible and immortal (1 Cor. 15:35-54).
Corruptibility and mortality are the problems to be solved.
What I have posted is scripture. If your beliefs are other than what is stated in the text of scripture, then it is you who has the "strange gospel." This has ALWAYS been a problem for the CoLDS because Paul explicitly stated anyone teaching a gospel different than that which he taught is cursed. The CoLDS tries various ways to get around that, like claiming their revelation is the original revelation and the Bible has been corrupted but they undermine their own arguments because if the Church was never orthodox then there is no foundation upon which a "latter day" version might be justified.
So how about we keep comments like "strange gospel" out of the discussion and stick to the matter of "prophesied restoration."
Working from an extra-biblical, secularized, conflated and apocalyptic definition largely invented in the 19th century and not consistent with the whole of scripture is always going to be a problem, no matter the sectarian views of those discussing the topic.
Go back and re-read what I posted because I said the Church is NOT corrupt. The portion of my post you quoted was me summarizing opponents of this view; those who claim the Church is corrupt and in need of restoration.
You are on the correct track by citing Christ. Christ is impeccable, not corrupt, and not corruptible. Since the Church is the body of Christ, we have that same quality commuted to us....... in spite of the fact we are not ontologically perfect. As I said before, the testimony of the epistolary shows the early Church was very messy. Not only are there leaders who teach bad doctrine, there were various heresies to be dealt with due to the influences of pagan religions and their converts coming to Christ, as well as behaviors contrary to Biblical standards of conduct (like the man who is having sex with his father's wife, and the Church's tolerance of these things.
Despite all of that the epistolary writers treat most of the wrongdoers as if they are in fact saints, bondservants of Christ, Christians who will one day be raised incorruptible and immortal. The great irony of those saying the modern Church needs to be restored to look like the first century Church is that they are implicitly calling for a congregation like that found in Corinth or Ephesus.
No.
Just say "No," to that.
A better, more consistent-with-scripture alternative would be to understand the ekklesia is the qahal restored and reconciled and those OT prophesies were being restored in the first century. It is because God kept His promises that we can believe, not blindly believe in hopes He will keep promises He hasn't yet kept. And none of it will be complete on this side of the grave because it is only in resurrection that we will be raised incorruptible and immortal (1 Cor. 15:35-54).
Corruptibility and mortality are the problems to be solved.
Josheb
Well-known member
Non sequitur.
Not true at all. Most of the Reformers wished to remain Catholic. They did NOT set out to form new denominations and sects like those of the 19th century restorationist movement. Neither did the Reformers depart in frequency or magnitude like those in the 1800s, especially the LDS. The explosion of sects following the restorationist sects is exponential in comparison to what happened in the 16th century.
You really need to read some history because your claims are NOT factual.
Yes, new denominations did follow the Reformation but the Reformers did not start them. What's important here is that if you are going to complain about that then you cannot be part of a new denomination or sect, and you, dberrie, are part of a new and radically different denomination. You undermine your own argument and show a need for restoration in yourself.
The better alternative is to understand the Church has always been messy, always been contesting with the influences of sin while actively pursuing righteousness through the strength of Christ and the Spirit of God working in its members.
LOL. You have yet to prove there is a "prophesied restoration."
Neither of the Acts passages quoted in this op use the word "restoration." The KJV version you quoted uses the word, "restitution," which is what I argued, not you. Furthermore, even the verse cited plainly states the "restoration" mentioned is a restoration "of all things," not merely the adding of people to His Church. In addition, the Acts 3 text states God has been speaking about this since the world began (which would be before sin ever existed), implying the restitution or restoration is not ONLY a future event. And since the larger Acts 2 and 3 narratives report God actively doing His work at the time those two texts were written, there's no warrant for twisting it and perverting it into an apocalyptic doctrine.
You have, once again, shown a profound failure in your ability to read scripture as written.
As I pointed out to Richard7, note this is the only explicit mention of "restoration" in the New Testament after the gospels.
You have yet to prove there is a "prophesied restoration." Until you do so, this op is fatally flawed; a huge red herring, and thereby evidence the LDS is part of the problem to be solved.
LOL.
What does scripture say?
And what does what denominations say have to do with the matter of "prophesied restoration"?
God has been speaking of restitution since the world began. That means God has been speaking about restitution before any need for restitution existed. The restitution of which He was speaking is not a restitution of only His Church, or the addition of people to the Church, but the restitution of all things.
Do a study of the phrase, "all things" in scripture. Try your best to read what is written exactly as written without ANY denominational biases, especially those of the LDS restorationist and apocalyptic doctrines. You'll find the "all things" were being fulfilled in the NT era and the 21st century is never mentioned.
1 Peter 4:7-11
The end of all things is near; therefore, be of sound judgment and sober spirit for the purpose of prayer. Above all, keep fervent in your love for one another, because love covers a multitude of sins. Be hospitable to one another without complaint. As each one has received a special gift, employ it in serving one another as good stewards of the manifold grace of God. Whoever speaks, is to do so as one who is speaking the utterances of God; whoever serves is to do so as one who is serving by the strength which God supplies; so that in all things God may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom belongs the glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.
The end of all things is near? Near to the first century when Peter wrote his first epistle? Would that be the same Peter who was speaking in Acts 2 and 3 texts quoted in this thread's opening post?
Yep. That is what the text actually states.
You haven't proven there is a prophesied restoration like the one asserted in this op.
Josheb
Well-known member
None.
There were no denominations when Acts was written. There were the seeds of secatarianism and what we now call "denominations" existing in the NT era, but they did not look like what we now possess. We see these seeds, or origins, first in Paul's commentary about thos who claimed to follow different Church leaders.
1 Corinthians 1:10-17
Now I exhort you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be made complete in the same mind and in the same judgment. For I have been informed concerning you, my brethren, by Chloe's people, that there are quarrels among you. Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, "I am of Paul," and "I of Apollos," and "I of Cephas," and "I of Christ." Has Christ been divided? Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one would say you were baptized in my name. Now I did baptize also the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized any other. For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void.
1 Corinthians 3:1-9
And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to infants in Christ. I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able, for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men? For when one says, "I am of Paul," and another, "I am of Apollos," are you not mere men? What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, even as the Lord gave opportunity to each one. I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth. So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth. Now he who plants and he who waters are one; but each will receive his own reward according to his own labor. For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building.
Even in the first century the converts to Christ we self-identifying with various leaders and pitting themselves against one another. Before that the same thing happened in Judaism, especially in the intertestamental period when the sects of the Pharisees and Essenes parted ways with the Sadducees. It is what humans do. The problem described in 1 Corinthians is much different than that of folks like Hymeneaus and Alexander, or the Nicolaitans.
Three questions are asked in this op. I have answered all three of them, and I have done so with scripture.
Then why the need for a Reformation--with numerous new denominations--with a different theology? The need for reformation is constant. This is evident by reading the epistolary. The Reformation is not particularly novel in that sense and the increase in denominationalism is a red herring, especially since the CoLDS is part of an exponential expansion of denominationalism that makes the Reformation look sophomoric. Complaints against the Reformation based on that increase also indict the LDS.
And why the prophecy here? The prophesy there is the restoration of all things, not a restoration of the Church only. Do not abuse scripture to make it say things it does not state.
Does God add people to His church today--- the same way He did in the NT? Yes. I am unaware any Christian thinks, believes, or practices differently. Those who think their denomination or sect is superior in that way are part of the problem to be solved. They are in need or restoration.
Richard7
Well-known member
Not really, you have to explain Melchizedek, Aaronic Priesthood
Hebrews 7:24-28
(24) But He, because He continues forever, has an unchangeable priesthood. (25) Therefore He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them. (26) For such a High Priest was fitting for us, who isholy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and has become higher than the heavens; (27) who does not need daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the people’s, for this He did once for all when He offered up Himself. (28) For the law appoints as high priests men who have weakness, but the word of the oath, which came after the law, appoints the Son who has been perfected forever.
Give it a try, so far you seem to talking all around it... just saying, lots of words and little to no substance so far.
Huh?
Actually you have not addressed the problem, so yes most likely not your problem
Totally meaningless, can you get back on track? Please
Chuckle, the Mosaic law was fulfilled, Israel or the Jews did not understand... has nothing to do with the apostasy and restoration.
No, I'm a Ephraimitie,
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Ephraimite
"As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began." (Luke 1:70) "God will do nothing" except through "his servants the prophets" and He is, after all, "at hand" and not "afar off," and prophets have been "since the world began,"
So logically and common sense says to expect God to have the same relationship with us today...
.
Richard7
Well-known member
The Law and the prophets were fulfilled in Christ..... and a new standard and new prophecies were added
Acts 3:19-21
Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord; and that He may send Jesus, the Christ appointed for you, whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time.
He gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive. (Ephesians 4:11-14)
And because my words shall hiss forth–many of the Gentiles shall say: A Bible! A Bible! We have got a Bible, and there cannot be any more Bible. But thus saith the Lord God: O fools, they shall have a Bible; and it shall proceed forth from the Jews, mine ancient covenant people. … Thou fool, that shall say: A Bible, we have got a Bible, and we need no more Bible. Have ye obtained a Bible save it were by the Jews? Know ye not that there are more nations than one? Know ye not that I, the Lord your God, have created all men, and that I remember those who are upon the isles of the sea; and that I rule in the heavens above and in the earth beneath; and I bring forth my word unto the children of men, yea, even upon all the nations of the earth? (2 Nephi 29:3-4, 6-7)
Restoration of "all things" what? what was lost? keep going, give me more about why all things needed to be restored and if restored, what needs to be restored...
It turns out there is no mention of any restoration of the Church in the New Testament after the gospels
They did not understand the Key of the Kingdom as given to Peter and the apostles and did not understand that said keys were the authoization to act in His (God) name.
If you say so, but I did not see any proof at all... hmm
Romans 15]4For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.If you follow that Ephesians narrative on to its later conclusion Paul explicitly states these things have been reconciled. Furthermore, Paul believed and taught he and the first century Christians were living in the ends of the ages
1 Corinthians 10:1-11
The ends of the ages had come ?. That is what the text actually states.
Psalm 102:18
Let this be written for the generation to come, so that a people not yet created may praise the LORD.
brotherofJared
Well-known member
Yes. I thinking you're tired of eating dust.