Does I Corinthians 13 teach certain gifts ceased with the closing of the canon?

[presidente]

This is possibly a radical departure from the popular pro and con views. But I think people fail to differentiate between Joel's Gift of the Holy Spirit and Jesus' Baptism of the Holy Spirit. In brief, all believers receive the gift of the Holy Spirit since Pentecost. But only those in the two outpourings, and those whom an apostle laid hands on received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit with speaking in tongues.
And the Baptism of the Holy Spirit ended with the death of the apostles. Being replaced with NT scripture.

Paul said we knew in part with tongues and prophecy. But now scripture thoroughly furnishes us.

I think you need to read some scriptures that you did not read, and also meditate on the ones you did.

The Corinthian former pagans Paul addressed in I Corinthians were likely not hanging around Jerusalem in the time described in Acts 2, or in Cornelius' house nearly 2000 km away. Yet Paul taught them that the Spirit gives gifts to the saints like the word of wisdom, word of knowledge, prophecy, healings, the working of miracles, etc., as he wills.

The Bible does not teach that scripture is all that is needed to thoroughly furnish us. It says that all scripture is given that the man of God might be thoroughly furnished, not that it is all that one needs to be thoroughly furnished. Give an atheist the Bible and he is not thoroughly furnished. He is not even a man of God. 'Man of God' is used as a near equivalent of 'prophet' in some Old Testament texts.

You can give a soldier a rifle so that he might be thoroughly equipped, but if you haven't given him a helmet or uniform, yet, he's not thoroughly equipped.

If you give someone a Bible, he's not thoroughly equipped unless he has faith and the grace of God in his life.

I also notice that some cessationists seem to get confused with the verse, wrongly thinking it says 'scripture is all that is given that..the man of God... thoroughly equipped. Instead of 'All scripture is given...'

The scriptures that say to covet to prophesy, and despise not prophesyings are profitable for doctrine also.

If II Timothy 3 were saying that scripture was all a man of God needed to be thoroughly equipped, then why was II Timothy 4 written? Timothy would have had all he needed at that point. Cessationists who use this as a prooftext use it to mean things that neither Paul or Timothy would have interpreted it to mean. Paul also exhorted Timothy to remember prophecies spoken over him to fight a good warfare by them.

 

[presidente]

The bible is way more than a book. The bible is the inspired word of God given to the church. The bible is given that the man of God may be thoroughly furnished unto good works.

2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

What God has given is sufficient or complete and supplies all we need to know God and to know ourselves as God wants us to know.

See my other post on this topic to Dave-L. That verse does not say that the Bible is all that is given that the man of God may be complete. Don't mix up the word order when you read.

Would you say that you don't need water baptism because you have the Bible?
Would you say that you don't need faith because you have the Bible?
Would you say that you don't need to abstain from fornication because you have the Bible?
Would you say that you don't need grace because you have the Bible?
Would you say that you don't need the gifts of the Spirit operating through other believers because you have the Bible?

The Bible teaches us that we need to be baptized, to have faith, to abstain from fornication, that we need the grace of God, and that one member of our body does not say to another member, "I have no need of thee.'

 

[Jackson123]

Are you saying that neither Paul nor the Corinthians knew God when Paul wrote I Corinthians? Paul wrote about knowing in part versus knowing fully. Paul knew God... but he knew in part, as we all do now.



Like us, believers in the first century were saved, were being saved and will be saved.


Partial knowledge will be replaced with complete knowledge. John says that we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is. We still await the salvation from heaven when Christ returns.


If our knowledge is complete, why do you disagree with basic historical doctrines of the church regarding Christ's return and the resurrection of the dead? Either the knowledge of the church is incomplete or your knowledge is incomplete.

Yep, 1 cor 13 Paul talk about Love is greater than anothr gift, because we use love forever even when we go to heaven. We love each other there.

We No longer need The gift of healing in heaven because No sickeness there.

There still sickness now, so we still need the gift of healing.

The perfect love is Jesus, and when He come to earth 2000 years ago he exercise the gift of Healing.

The gift of healing is a tool to exercise love.

Jesus SAW a sick man, He love that man than He heal that man.

Say I love a man, but I do not have the gift of healing or money to help him to go to the doctor, what can I do to love that man

So the gift of healin not work against love, but help love Being done.

 

[Noose]

Look at this quote from Judges,
And an angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you.

Your adding the words 'unity in love.' Paul wrote about coming to the full measure of the stature of Christ.



In I Corinthians 13, Paul writes about that which is in part being done away. He wrote that now we know in part, but then we shall know as we are fully known.

Paul does not say that the gift of knowledge will be done away with. Partialness of knowledge will be done away with. Knowing in part will be replaced with knowing fully. And he does not say that this will happen when love comes. He says at the end of the chapter that love already abides. Being perfected in love is a good and necessary thing, but that is not what Paul is talking about in I Corinthians 13. Paul's point when he says if he speaks with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love.... is not that tongues is unnecessary when there is love. Gifts must be exercised with love. He is exhorting them to love and explaining that the one who exercises gifts without love is nothing and is profited nothing. You are reading a strange idea into the passage that just is not there.

Since Paul likely did great miracles his readers does not, was that somehow proof that he lacked love? Jesus did great and powerful miracles. Would you criticize our Lord or His love? Greater love hath no man than this, than that a man lay down His life for His friends.


No, he does not say that. That is nearly as convoluted as the posts of our resident poster of convolution.

This is exactly what Eph 4 says:



Do you think John's readers were perfected in love, but since John himself was not, Jesus gave Him a book of prophecy? Prophecy is a gift, after all? Do you think Jesus doing miracles is a reason to doubt His love? Your strange theory can lead to some very bad conclusions. You are not understanding Paul's argument. You read your own theory into the text.

So now someone has to believe just as you do (have all knowledge, supposedly) to be a part of the church?

Let me ask you a question. If this is the case, is there anyone on the planet besides yourself who is a part of the church? That would make it very easy to love everyone else in the church as much as you love yourself.

1 Cor 13:8Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. 11When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. 12For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

Simple.

The gift of knowledge like all the other gifts, was meant to bring about the full knowledge of God. Means that the end game was to know God. Once there is this unity in faith through love, then there's no need for those with that knowledge to come and tell me about God because now i know God, there's no need for me to prophesy to them because they have also come to the unity of faith and now they also know God.

This is what it means to fully know as we are known. What it does not mean is that the gift of knowledge or any other gift will now be fully fledged. It doesn't mean that they prophesied in part and now they'll prophesy completely when the perfect comes. It certainly doesn't mean they spoke in tongues in part but now they fully speak in tongues when the perfect comes. Paul clearly says all these things (gifts) that are in part, will be done away with and only three remain; love, hope and faith.

The full knowledge of God is loving one another.

1 John 4:7Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

 

[Noose]

So you believe Paul and Peter resurrect is real not figurative,

How do you know, what verse in the bible tell the story that Paul and Peter was resurrected and life for 1230 days (you believe 1230 days is figurative). Than murder

I give you Example in matt 13

Jesus give parable
, soil in matt 13 is figurative for human.

You say 1230 days in rev 11 If figurative, for what?

2 Cor 4:
12So then, death is at work in us, but life is at work in you.

13It is written: “I believed; therefore I have spoken.” b Since we have that same spirit of c faith, we also believe and therefore speak, 14because we know that the one who raised the Lord Jesus from the dead will also raise us with Jesus and present us with you to himself. 15All this is for your benefit, so that the grace that is reaching more and more people may cause thanksgiving to overflow to the glory of God.

 

[Noose]

We know how gospel wrote don't we

Say the gospel of John.

John is witnesing what Jesus teach during His ministry oN earth. Than John wrote of what he SAW.

Not in the book of revelation. John SAW a visions or message from the angel

Revelation 1 King James Version (KJV)
1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

It say wich must shortly come to pass.

To me the book of revelation is not happen yet when the angel talk to john

But you believe Paul and Peter die and resurect in the first century and prophecy before angel asking John to wrote or canonized the book of revelation?

Can you explain in detail what the cronology was?

Revelation also talks of things that happened to set stage for things that were to happen shortly

Rev 12:7Then war broke out in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. 9The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.

will the above happen in the future?

 

[Jackson123]

Revelation also talks of things that happened to set stage for things that were to happen shortly

Rev 12:7Then war broke out in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. 9The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.

will the above happen in the future?

I don't know when that happen, because that verse not say when.

But rev 1:1 say that what angle tell to John in the book of revelation is shortly to come, mean not happen yet when the angel talk to him. And we have to Remember 2000 years ago the bible say I am coming back soon and now after 2000 years He is not coming yet

So the word shortly in revelation 1 can be 2000 years.

Revelation 1 King James Version (KJV)
1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:



But my question is, you believe Paul and Peter was resurrect and prophecy before Canon, where that story from? In what book and verse in the bible?

 

[Jackson123]

I don't know when that happen, because that verse not say when.

But rev 1:1 say that what angle tell to John in the book of revelation is shortly to come, mean not happen yet when the angel talk to him. And we have to Remember 2000 years ago the bible say I am coming back soon and now after 2000 years He is not coming yet

So the word shortly in revelation 1 can be 2000 years.

Revelation 1 King James Version (KJV)
1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:



But my question is, you believe Paul and Peter was resurrect and prophecy before Canon, where that story from? In what book and verse in the bible?

I forget to quote a verse that say I am coming back soon

Revelation 22:12-13 New International Version (NIV)
Epilogue: Invitation and Warning
12 “Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

 

[Noose]

I don't know when that happen, because that verse not say when.

But rev 1:1 say that what angle tell to John in the book of revelation is shortly to come, mean not happen yet when the angel talk to him. And we have to Remember 2000 years ago the bible say I am coming back soon and now after 2000 years He is not coming yet

So the word shortly in revelation 1 can be 2000 years.

Revelation 1 King James Version (KJV)
1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:



But my question is, you believe Paul and Peter was resurrect and prophecy before Canon, where that story from? In what book and verse in the bible?

I forget to quote a verse that say I am coming back soon

Revelation 22:12-13 New International Version (NIV)
Epilogue: Invitation and Warning
12 “Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

Rev 12:7 are things that happened long before Revelation was written.
Yes, Paul and Peter resurrected- i have given you a verse twice, look at it.

 

[Jackson123]

Rev 12:7 are things that happened long before Revelation was written.
Yes, Paul and Peter resurrected- i have given you a verse twice, look at it.

English Language Learners Definition of present participle

grammar : a verb form that ends in "-ing" and that is used with "be" to refer to action that is happening at the time of speaking or a time spoken of

Rev 12
Revelation 12 King James Version (KJV)
12 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:
2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.
3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.
4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.
6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

English is not my first language, but in These verse, Nothing say Paul and peter resurrect and prophecy for 1230 days

Also this verse use present participle, I check what is present participle, mean the story may happen in the time of speaking.

But If we read the context, I believe the story happen in the future when rev 12 :1 happen, and that is in the future when woman cloth sun appear.

 

[Jackson123]

This youtibe below is in Indonesian.
But I try to tell this story in english. This girl was muslim, she dream about Jesus and accept the Lord. Her muslim family sad, they ask her to do a ritual call rukiyah, ( deliverence) because muslim think that a person that she meet in a dream was an evil spirit. She refused doing that ritual because she believe the person she meet in her dream was God, Jesus not demon, but her uncle Said just do It, If He realy God, Nothing Will happen, He Will protect you.

The process was about an hour and Nothing happen, she was ok.

Some people here may think devil pretend to be Jesus come to her in a dream and ask her accept Jesus.

Why devil ask her to accept Jesus? Devil do not like people come to the Lord isn't It?

 

[Dave-L]

I think you need to read some scriptures that you did not read, and also meditate on the ones you did.

The Corinthian former pagans Paul addressed in I Corinthians were likely not hanging around Jerusalem in the time described in Acts 2, or in Cornelius' house nearly 2000 km away. Yet Paul taught them that the Spirit gives gifts to the saints like the word of wisdom, word of knowledge, prophecy, healings, the working of miracles, etc., as he wills.

The Bible does not teach that scripture is all that is needed to thoroughly furnish us. It says that all scripture is given that the man of God might be thoroughly furnished, not that it is all that one needs to be thoroughly furnished. Give an atheist the Bible and he is not thoroughly furnished. He is not even a man of God. 'Man of God' is used as a near equivalent of 'prophet' in some Old Testament texts.

You can give a soldier a rifle so that he might be thoroughly equipped, but if you haven't given him a helmet or uniform, yet, he's not thoroughly equipped.

If you give someone a Bible, he's not thoroughly equipped unless he has faith and the grace of God in his life.

I also notice that some cessationists seem to get confused with the verse, wrongly thinking it says 'scripture is all that is given that..the man of God... thoroughly equipped. Instead of 'All scripture is given...'

The scriptures that say to covet to prophesy, and despise not prophesyings are profitable for doctrine also.

If II Timothy 3 were saying that scripture was all a man of God needed to be thoroughly equipped, then why was II Timothy 4 written? Timothy would have had all he needed at that point. Cessationists who use this as a prooftext use it to mean things that neither Paul or Timothy would have interpreted it to mean. Paul also exhorted Timothy to remember prophecies spoken over him to fight a good warfare by them.

In scripture, the Baptism came only in the two outpourings or through an apostles hands. You can prove this in trying to find other ways to no avail. But in the same outpouring all believers receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

 

[presidente]

In scripture, the Baptism came only in the two outpourings or through an apostles hands.

I could say, "In the Bible, salvation only came to..." and then make a list of every individual or group of individuals the Bible indicates were saved. That's the same sort of reasoning, and it would lead to very bad doctrine.

I could say, "In the Bible, only Jesus and the disciples" (and whoever else mentioned) "ate fish. Therefore you shall not eat fish."

You are reading scripture with an a priori assumption that you should seek to limit the outpouring of the Spirit to certain events. Were all the people present at these two outpourings to whom John said, "He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire"? Peter quoted from Joel that in the last days, the Lord will pour out of His Spirit upon all flesh. He did not just say two outpourings. Your a priori assumption to limit outpourings of the Spirit contradicts prophecy and the teaching of the apostles.

Also, we see in the epistles that gifts and manifestations are given as the Spirit wills in I Corinthians. I Corinthians 14:13 tells the one who speaks in tongues to pray that he may interpret. It doesn't say to wait around for some apostolic hands to come to town to be laid on him. Timothy received one gift through prophecy with the laying on of hands of the elders.

You can prove this in trying to find other ways to no avail. But in the same outpouring all believers receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

Your line of reasoning here would lead to a really poor pneumatology. Paul wrote to the Romans that the love of God is poured out in our hearts through the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.

 

[Dave-L]

I could say, "In the Bible, salvation only came to..." and then make a list of every individual or group of individuals the Bible indicates were saved. That's the same sort of reasoning, and it would lead to very bad doctrine.

I could say, "In the Bible, only Jesus and the disciples" (and whoever else mentioned) "ate fish. Therefore you shall not eat fish."

You are reading scripture with an a priori assumption that you should seek to limit the outpouring of the Spirit to certain events. Were all the people present at these two outpourings to whom John said, "He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire"? Peter quoted from Joel that in the last days, the Lord will pour out of His Spirit upon all flesh. He did not just say two outpourings. Your a priori assumption to limit outpourings of the Spirit contradicts prophecy and the teaching of the apostles.

Also, we see in the epistles that gifts and manifestations are given as the Spirit wills in I Corinthians. I Corinthians 14:13 tells the one who speaks in tongues to pray that he may interpret. It doesn't say to wait around for some apostolic hands to come to town to be laid on him. Timothy received one gift through prophecy with the laying on of hands of the elders.



Your line of reasoning here would lead to a really poor pneumatology. Paul wrote to the Romans that the love of God is poured out in our hearts through the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.

All believers have the Holy Spirit. But the baptism happened in the first century through two outpourings or through an apostles hands. And ended with the death of the apostles. Scripture replaced tongues (the Baptism) with perfect (Complete) knowledge where tongues and prophecy were only in part.

 

[presidente]

This youtibe below is in Indonesian.
But I try to tell this story in english. This girl was muslim, she dream about Jesus and accept the Lord. Her muslim family sad, they ask her to do a ritual call rukiyah, ( deliverence) because muslim think that a person that she meet in a dream was an evil spirit. She refused doing that ritual because she believe the person she meet in her dream was God, Jesus not demon, but her uncle Said just do It, If He realy God, Nothing Will happen, He Will protect you.

The process was about an hour and Nothing happen, she was ok.

Some people here may think devil pretend to be Jesus come to her in a dream and ask her accept Jesus.

Why devil ask her to accept Jesus? Devil do not like people come to the Lord isn't It?

I got about halfway through, but it's hard for me since the music is so loud it's hard for me to hear her well, and it prevents speeding up the voice. She starts off talking about talking to her little brother or sister. Do you have a minute-marker on the dream?

I heard a testimony from a newly-appointed general who came to Christ in Indonesia partly through the witness of his wife and partly through a dream that drove home the seriousness of it for him.

Job 33 says,
15 In a dream, in a vision of the night,
When deep sleep falls upon men,
While slumbering on their beds,
16 Then He opens the ears of men,
And seals their instruction.
17 In order to turn man from his deed,
And conceal pride from man,
18 He keeps back his soul from the Pit,
And his life from perishing by the sword. (NKJV)

The Book of Job was written about a conversation between men from Uz at some unspecified time in the past. Uz was where Edomites lived and other people's prior to them. So God speaks to men... not just Jews, and not just kings, and not just prophets in a dream. Notice how dreams warn people. Peter quoting Joel says that in the last days the Lord will pour on His Spirit on all flesh. Among other things, your old men will dream dreams.

There are also dreams that come from men's own hearts that Jeremiah warns about, too. But God can speak through dreams and warn people who are in error. So the stories of people whose hearts are opened to repent and believe in Jesus that I hear about Jews and Muslims having are in line with what I can expect from scripture.
Sometimes I come across a strawman argument that salvation comes through preaching, not dreams. That's a false dichotomy. I don't think I have ever heard of someone getting saved solely through hearing about Jesus in a dream. The testimonies I hear about are people who hear the gospel and then a dream opens their heart to the reality or seriousness of it, or else they have dreams that prepare their hearts for the gospel.

 

[presidente]

All believers have the Holy Spirit. But the baptism happened in the first century through two outpourings or through an apostles hands. And ended with the death of the apostles. Scripture replaced tongues (the Baptism) with perfect (Complete) knowledge where tongues and prophecy were only in part.

I already pointed out scriptures that disprove your viewpoint, since John's statement about baptism with the Holy Spirit was not only directed to the groups in the two outpourings and your conclusions contradict the scripture from Joel that Peter quoted on Pentecost. Acts 10 shows that imparting the Spirit was not limited to the laying on of the apostles hands. Ananias and Saul of Tarsus shows this also, since Ananias was not one of the 12, and he came that Paul might be healed and receive the Holy Ghost. Then later Saul/Paul was laying hands on people and the Spirit came upon them, even though the twelve added nothing to him. People could receive gifts of the Spirit without his being around.

If your knowledge is perfect and Paul's was incomplete, you would understand Paul's doctrine more fully than Paul did. Can you honestly say that you have never read Paul's writings at one time, come back to them later and gained some new insight that Paul clearly had when he wrote the epistle? Would you think Paul's knowledge of the mystery of Christ in about 54 AD was so little in comparison with yours, that it was like a child's understanding and yours was like an adult's? Your interpretation would put you in a superior position to the apostle Paul.

 

[Noose]

If your knowledge is perfect and Paul's was incomplete, you would understand Paul's doctrine more fully than Paul did. Can you honestly say that you have never read Paul's writings at one time, come back to them later and gained some new insight that Paul clearly had when he wrote the epistle? Would you think Paul's knowledge of the mystery of Christ in about 54 AD was so little in comparison with yours, that it was like a child's understanding and yours was like an adult's? Your interpretation would put you in a superior position to the apostle Paul.

Do you believe people are now speaking in tongues in part but when the perfect comes they will speak in tongues in full?

 

[presidente]

1 Cor 13:8Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. 11When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. 12For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
[/quote[

Look at the word 'now.' 'Now we see only a reflection as in a mirror,,," and "Now these three remain: faith hope and love...' Love is 'now', in 54 or AD or so, as it is now. It was there 'now' when the spiritual gifts were active, along with hope and faith.

The passage does not say that love replaces spiritual gifts. We are to walk in love now, as the Corinthians were when Paul wrote the epistle. All Christians are to be made complete in love.

In this passage, the characteristics of knowledge was that it passed away and that it was in part. When completness comes in, knowledge will be full. We will know fully.

 

[Noose]

Only these three remain; love, faith, hope, the greatest of these is LOVE.
If only these three remain, where are the gifts?

Love doesn't replace, it renders them useless because with love, we have come to maturity and have now fully known God.

 

[presidente]

Do you believe people are now speaking in tongues in part but when the perfect comes they will speak in tongues in full?

Paul does not go there, so I will not speculate. That statement would make more sense if you were talking about prophesying, but again, Paul does not state that. Of knowledge, we know that a characteristic of knowledge that it is in part, but when the perfect comes, it will be complete.

With the unique hodge-podge of beliefs that you hold to, against teaching while rejecting the idea of a literal bodily resurrection from the dust of the earth and a literal second coming of Christ, I would be surprised if you met with other people who believed like you. Surely, to hold to such beliefs, you would have to think that they were primitive church beliefs, the knowledge of which died out for the most part and need to be restored, right? But that would contradict your interpretation of this passage. A previous post of yours indicated that you did not seem to think those who disagreed with you are saved.

Is there a church, an assembly, or congregation that believes as you do, or do you think you are the only one who is saved? If you think they are out there but you do not know where they are, then how could that really be a church if you don't assemble?