Wednesday, July 2, 2014


Below is correspondence between Acts 28 advocate Mark Phillips and myself, his comments in red and mine in green.

Also note he accuses Mid-Acts Dispensationalists (MAD's) of taking 1 Thessalonians 2:16 out of context. However, it is plainly stated that Israel fell in the Acts period and were being diminished.

Romans 11:
[1] I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
[2] God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,
[3] Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.
[4] But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.
[5] Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
[6] And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
[7] What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded
[8] (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.
[9] And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumbling block, and a recompence unto them:
[10] Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
[11] I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
[12] Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?
[13] For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
[14] If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.
[15] For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?

[25] For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
[26] And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
[27] For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
[28] As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.
[29] For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
[30] For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:
[31] Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.
[32] For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
[33] O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!
[34] For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counseller?
[35] Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?
[36] For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

As you can see, during the Acts period Israel was blinded because of their unbelief. They are "diminshed", "cast away", and the Gentiles were blessed through their fall. In the kingdom program the Gentiles were supposed to get blessed through Israel's rise. The kingdom program is not in view. Also note that in verses 26-28 Paul contrasts himself and his converts from Israel.  See

 See what kind of mess the Acts 28 position gets into when trying to prove their fantasy, star wars mysticism. What are "ions"? What is "Dias"? Why do Acts 28ers not believe in hell? Why do some of them hold to polygamist views? How come they do not use the Authorized King James Bible? You won't get any straight answers from them, they are Church Belch parrots. (Charles Welch)

As you will see in this correspondence, I presented irrefutable Bible facts and the Acts 28 advocate made claims without scripture to back them up. I don't accept Chuck Belch cliches as fact. Pretty much all brother Phillips can produce is "um, I uh, well the body of Christ was hid in God, uh, um, the Acts period had signs and tongues in it, um, no I don't believe in two bodies, um, your gonna be ashamed for believing the Bible instead of Chuck Belch at "dias". So um, hahaha." But that ain't gonna cut it! No Acts 28er has been able to handle my anti-Acts 28 position points. Not Kelson, not Phillips.

See for yourself the pathetic attempt to "refute" the Bible facts. He never addressed any of my points.      

Greetings brother Mark. I am a Mid-Acts Dispensational (MAD) friend of Mrs. Deborah Collins.

I have been MAD for three years but earlier this year I found Mrs. Collins blog and heavily considered the Acts 28 position and corresponded much with Mr. Brian R. Kelson of Acts However, I stayed MAD for quite a few reasons. Here I am pasting a comment I made to Mrs. Collins blog.

"I have noticed that most Acts 28 works say "when did the church that has Christ as the Head start?" (emphasis on Christ as Head of the body)

Is that worded like that on purpose or is it just a coincidence? Because I know that some Acts 28 teachers will say that the body of Christ in Acts did not have Christ as the Head.

I am not sure I believe that Christ has bodies that He is not the Head of. For example, if I am "the body of Christ" (1 Cor. 12:27) and a "member of Christ" (1 Cor. 6:15) who would be my head? I would guess Christ would be the Head. You?

In Acts they are the members of Christ...

1 Corinthians 6:15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.

They are the body of Christ by partaking of His death ("one bread" is Christ on the cross(also see Romans 6:3-4, same as Colossians 2:12)......

1 Corinthians 10:17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

And it appears I was right, these "members of Christ" have Christ as their Head.....

1 Corinthians 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

Then we have the plain statements from Paul that Christ is one body with many members and that the Holy Spirit baptized these members into Christ.

1 Corinthians 12:
[12] For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
[13] For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

[27] Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

Just a few reasons while the one body with Christ as the Head that puts people in Christ's death, burial, and resurrection started before Acts 28. There is only one of those (1 Corinthians 12:12, Ephesians 4:4)

In Christ
--Eli "Hoss" Caldwell

P.S. Yes, I know 1 Corinthians 10:17 is in the context of taking the Lord's supper."

I might also add that Paul said in Ephesians 6:19-20 and Colossians 4:3 Paul says that the mystery of the gospel (Eph. 3:1-9) is the reason he is in bonds. Would that not be an impossibility if Christ had not yet revealed it to him when he was put in bonds in Acts 22-28?

Those are just some of the things that kept me from going to the Acts 28 position.

Can it be disproven that the believers in Acts were memebers of Christ with Christ as the head and them being His body? As it stands, I have to believe that they were.

Thank you very much for your time Sir, --Eli "Hoss" Caldwell

Now, let us consider the things which differ about our subject matter: the corporate body of Christ from within the Mystery as opposed to the body of Christ in the Acts Period ( a time when the New Covenant was offered to Israel). We make a major point of the distinctions, because to treat these two as synonymous compounds the already existing error.

Our comments on the corporate body, along with the scriptures, Eph. 4:14-16; Col. 3:11, declare and demonstrate an equality not found in the descriptions of the body in I Cor. 12. When you read from the prophets concerning the fulfillment of that body, you will discover that the Gentiles are actually second-class citizens (humanly speaking), even though they seem to be satisfied (Isaiah Chapters 60 and 61, Jer. 31:31-37). Whereas, the members of the corporate body are already exalted to the place where Christ is now seated: far above all principalities and powers, etc. (Eph. 1:20-23; 2:6,etc).

Moreover, in the body of the New Covenant, its head has eyes and ears in its membership. In the corporate body, Christ, the Head, is ALL -- period! When you think about it, the most outstanding vision of the New Covenant body is in the Holy City New Jerusalem (Rev. 21 and 22). Please observe, even here the Gentile must come into that city through one of the Twelve Tribes of Israel. Whereas in the corporate body, only ONE WAY, through CHRIST, into blessing is ever even hinted! (I Tim. 2:5)

Lastly -- Fruit is Fruit -- but you should never confuse apples with some other fruit. Hence, it is written: "where there is no vision, the people perish" (Prov. 29:18)! It is therefore required to rightly divide (cut) the Word of God!

Pray about it!

Thanks brother Mark!

Mr. Kelson pointed out the eyes and ears in 1 Corinthians 11 to me, but after much prayer and study I found that Paul is likening the body of Christ to the physical human body. That each member has a different job, but are still the same body. Nobody was literally an eye ball I don't think, LOL.

Mr. Kelson also gave me the point about the Gentiles being second-class. So I studied that out heavily and found that God was "diminishing Israel", that they had "fall[en]", and "blinded". But then I saw that even though they were fallen and being diminished, that God has a "remnant according to grace" that God wanted Paul to reach. (Romans 11)

So I then realized that that is why the Gentiles were told to not offend the Jews with what they ate (Rom. 14, 1 Cor. 9), and that is why Paul went to the Jew first (Rom. 1:16), not because they were second class but because God wanted the elect remnant saved.

This belief was affirmed by these verses on the Gentiles standing.

1 Corinthians 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

Galatians 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.

Romans 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

1 Thessalonians 2:
[14] For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews:
[15] Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men:
[16] *Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost*.

From Bible study and prayer I can't believe that the Gentiles were second class but only that God was specifically trying to reach an elect remnant of Israel. (and God used the Gentiles to provoke them to jealousy, Rom. 11:11, 14)

Do you think that this conclusion is wrong? How would that interfere with the body of Christ in Acts being different from the post-Acts body of Christ? With there only being "one body" I would think that this would effect it (1 Cor. 12:12, Eph. 4:4)

Thanks again brother! --Eli "Hoss" Caldwell

If one cannot see things that differ in the Acts epistles and in Eph and Col, and one tries to drag things that belong in Eph back to Acts, confusion reigns . Signs and miracles were to prove to the nation of Israel that the Messiah had come. Clearly they rejected these sights and their a Messiah and we're cut off temporarily in Acts 28:28. There are clear differences in the church which is His body and the body in Cor.

Rom 15:17-19I have, then, a boast in Christ Jesus, in that which is toward God." 18 For I am not daring to speak any of what Christ does not effect through me for the obedience of the nations, in word and work,
19 (in the power of signs and miracles,) ........NOT FOR TODAY
in the power of God's spirit, so that, from Jerusalem and around unto Illyricum, I have completed the evangel of the Christ."

Gal 3:27
27 For whoever are baptized into Christ, put on Christ, 28 in Whom there is no Jew nor yet Greek, there is no slave nor yet free, there is no male and female, for you all are one in Christ Jesus." 29 Now if you are Christ's, consequently you are of Abraham's seed, enjoyers of the allotment according to the promise." AN EARTHLY promise. Ours is Heavenly.

I Cor 12:
" 27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members of a part, 28 whom also God, indeed, placed in the ecclesia, first, apostles, second, prophets, third, teachers, thereupon (powers, )
(thereupon graces of healing, ). Not for the church which is His body today ....these things are a PAST AWAY .....!
supports, pilotage, species of languages."

Acts 28 does not believe all the letters of Paul are about the church which is His Body and thus MUST be rightly divided.
Acts 28 believes the MAs brethren confuse dispensational truths by dragging the later ones back into the Acts period.
This is the very basis of the Mid-Acts accusation that Acts 28 believes in two bodies.
By wrongly dividing the Word of Truth;
dragging later dispensational truth back into the Acts period,
MAs has created a set of dispensational conflicts.
These they need to explain away and many of their followers are less than convinced by their length explanations and their isolated use of Scripture. Wrath to the uttermost of 1Thess.2:16 is a classic example of Mid-Acts isolated eisogesis. They believe this proves Israel was nationally cast aside early in Acts whereas the context of Thessalonians proves otherwise.

I see how Acts 28 advocates get some of their teaching on Paul having the kingdom program in view, but I see it as an impossibility that the body of Christ (with Christ as the head) started AFTER Acts 28 when it is plainly stated that it was around DURING Acts (1 Cor. 6:15, 10:17, 11:3, 12:12-27).

Though I see a few reasons to consider that maybe the kingdom program was in view from Acts 9-28, I just can't go that far.

Paul said in Ephesians 6:19-20 and Colossians 4:3 that the "mystery of the gospel" (Eph. 3:1-9) is the reason he is in bonds. Would that not be an impossibility if Christ had not yet revealed it to him when he was put in bonds in Acts 22-28 as the Acts 28 position says? Supported by Paul's clear statement about him preaching the mystery in Romans 16:25-26. How could Paul be in bonds for a program that was not yet revealed to him?

Paul said in 1 Corinthians 1:17 that Christ sent him NOT to baptize. The kingdom program required a baptized nation of priests (Matt. 28:19, Mark 16:15-16, 1 Pet. 3:21, Heb. 10:22, Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3, Acts 2:38, Acts 3:19, Acts 22:16, Ezk. 36:24-26, Isa. 52:15, Rev. 5:10, Rev. 20:6, 1 Pet. 2:5-9, John 3:25-26, Num. 8:6-7). It can't be the same program because water baptism was a big part of the kingdom commission and was apparently a requirement, but Paul said he was sent not to baptize and he didn't even baptize all his converts.

Those are just a few strong points on why I believe that Paul preached the mystery before Acts 28.

Yes, I am familiar with the Acts 28 positions opinion on the sign gifts and Galatians 3-4.

When I know the body of Christ with Christ as the head started in Acts and that Paul said he was preaching the mystery (the reason he got in bonds) those things do not bother me.

See these posts I did on brother Kelson's and my correspondence.



Acts 28 is notorious for taking scripture out of context, particularly in Galatians. Then there is the gross misinterpretation of Romans 11 and 1 Corinthians 13.

Paul said in Ephesians 6:19-20 and Colossians 4:3 that the "mystery of the gospel" (Eph. 3:1-9) is the reason he is in bonds. Would that not be an impossibility if Christ had not yet revealed it to him when he was put in bonds in Acts 22-28 as the Acts 28 position says? Supported by Paul's clear statement about him preaching the mystery in Romans 16:25-26. How could Paul be in bonds for a program that was not yet revealed to him?

I have listened to a good bit of brother Kelson's material about "two bodies".

ACTS: A body of Christ that has members in it that have been baptized into Christ by the Spirit and have Christ as the head. (1 Cor. 6:15, 10:17, 11:3, 12:12-27)

POST ACTS 28: A body of Christ with Christ as the head and have been baptized into Christ by God. (Eph. 4:1-6, 3:1-9, Col. 2:12)

1+1=2 (I think) LOL

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

Everything about the church which Jesus is head today, was a secret hid in the mind of a God since before the foundation of the eons. Every thing about the body in Acts was prophesy and written about in the OT. The Body you think is the same is not. Even Satan did not know the secret hid in God about the one New Man after Acts. It was first revealed to Paul in prison after Israel was set aside . I judge no man if He cannot recognize the church which Jesus is head or if he or she is ashamed of Paul's prison epistles that reveal our church age. Either God has caused us to see it now or see it at the Dias. In either case the truth will be revealed. Some will be made manifest with Christ in Glory, many will be ashamed. Amen

No comments:

Post a Comment

Your questions or comments welcome.