søndag 16. juli 2017

No. 1579: I warned against the book to TB Barratt as a divorce and reprieve, as this was a book that, when it was first published, was stopped when it was declared "unbiblical" by the elders council in Filadelfia Oslo!

No. 1579:
I warned against the book to TB Barratt as a divorce and reprieve, as this was a book that, when it was first published, was stopped when it was declared "unbiblical" by the elders council in Filadelfia Oslo!

Picture of fool Apostle Jan Aage Torp (and his then wife Ann-Christin Düring Woll) who claims he is the so-called innocent.
 And has taken this book to his heart as it undoubtedly suits the "apostle's" way of life where it is free from the flesh and the old man.

While his former wife Ann-Christin has also got married again.
 Which of these two is the innocent party?
Of course, none of the two is true, as both of them are as innocent or guilty. The whole idea of ​​a guilty and innocent party is both utopian and unbiblical. There is something that is not mentioned in God's Word when it comes to remorse. There is something that applies to the Jews and if they break the wedding ceremony, then it is given for some opening to find a new partner. Not for Christians, it is only death that "ceases" a marriage, nothing else.
Got this post written "against me":
You communicate almost as unclear as Scripture ;-) Readers must guess and interpret.
What do you mean here? What did Barratt mean about remarriage? What did the critics of the elders council mean? Was he or they against or for? You are not clear about that.
I think I understand. And many people know this thing even better than you do.
They do not need any explanation. They need no clarification.
(Quote ending).
You have obviously not followed when you write as you do.
To me, all this is very clear.
What is my main point that you do not comment on.
Is the reflection group in the Pentecostal Movement and other Pentecostals / Charismatics such as NarreApostelen Jan Aage Torp builds much of his defense on the reprisal of this book by TB Barratt where he writes that the so-called innocent party is allowed to marry again!
In fact, marriage with life is not a major topic of war among the Christians until the present time in the last 20-30 years.
Before that, of course, at least, preachers were not up to date.
My point with this article was not to show that I had the most idea of ​​what happened and why that book was not released until 1991.
But building a defense with this book for remorse is jelly-thin!
Do not think I write much like a sign of emotion, but that I've had a lot of life for years in my heart that has been shut up!
Then, the Heavenly Blog and the opportunities I have there and on other web sites we have given me a speaker chair that I know to appreciate and use!
(Quote ending).
When people will misinterpret me, it's not easy to make everyone happy!
My point with the articles, that is to make the book to TB Barratt "invalid" when that book was never approved in 1938 when it was first tried to be released on the Philadelphian publishing house of the Pentecostal Movement!
Why is it obvious that the book TB Barratt tried to give out where reprisals were so-called "allowed" for the so-called "innocent" party who was really unknown to evangelical believers to practice.
Now, this view was not entirely new when Luther tried to promote this. But for the Christians through 2,000 years, the true remission of Christians has been seen as mad as long as the other lives.
In other words, the permissible reunification after divorce is something that obviously violates what the Christian congregation has learned and practiced in 2000 years.
When Barratt tried to introduce this to the Pentecostal Movement in 1938 shortly before his death, there was luckily a watchful eldership in Philadelphia City, which stopped him.
That the book was extracted from the drawer and published as a separate book in 1991 and today's liberal Christian uses it for all its worth. It's no surprise.
Satan always makes use of such crazy and bad tricks to bring forth his will and purpose.
Final Comment:
This is writing this anonymous sender:
"And many know this thing even better than you do."
I think there are many who know this thing better than me. But I think there are few that have such a good overview of developments in the church of God in the last 2000 years. I know the history of the church reasonably well, if that's what to take off.
My point was really two things with this article I wrote:
"The truth about the book to TB Barratt about divorce and remarriage is that it was rejected by the elders council in Filadelfia and was thus never released!"
It was:
  1. That it should never be released in 1991 when it was stopped in 1938.
  1. TB Barratts liberal views about remarriage, it's really something that was "new" and ubibelskt.

Ingen kommentarer:

Legg inn en kommentar