ECT 1 Peter 2:9 KJV-not written to respective members of the body of Christ

[john w]

That's your assertion. I got that much. I am hoping you can square your assertion with Rev 5.

You are not "us."

Yes, and at that time they were the only ones to whom God offered that opportunity.

Fine. Obey Leviticus. Deuteronomy. Sell all you have.At that time they were the only ones to whom God offered that opportunity to obey.


Fun!

Interesting theory, where in the bible does it make this association?

Nice cliche. I don't provide "theories," Hop Sing-I gave you chapter, and verse, in which to soak your head,yet your Catholic priest, nun, Reverand, minister, Professor Nicodemas/Demas, with 16 titles before after his/her name tells you, "Well, no one taught you that before...So, it is false."

Now, how does any of this answer my question?

Poor you-that 2 Cor. 4:4 KJV, 1 Cor. 2:14 KJV problem. That's your problem, not mine.

Rev 5, which you haven't addressed yet,...

Not written to me.


Poor you.

So how does this apply to 1 Peter 2:9?

So the "us" really is us if we are in Christ.

Made up. Not written about members of the boc-not written to them.

So maybe you can try again with question one, why did Paul preach the gospel of grace to the same audience Peter is writing to in 1 Peter?

Maybe you can get saved?

Maybe you can tell us why you have not sold all that you have, since you assert all of the book is written specifically about you, for your obedience?


So there.

1. The only "priesthood" on earth that was(past tense)recognized by the LORD God was the Levitcal priesthood after the order of Aaron. The Mosaic law requires ministers of the Aaronic order to be descendants of Levi, and the high priest to descend from Aaron. You had to be born into the tribe of Levi to become a priest, and you had to be a male. If you do not meet both of these requirements, you are disqualified. Another result of failure to rightly divide-the priesthood. Nowhere in Paul's epistles, Romans-Philemon, which are the doctrine for the body of Christ in this "...dispensation of the grace of God...."(Eph. 3:2 KJV), are members of the body referred to as "priests", "kings", or "a holy nation"-this has application only to Israel. The body of Christ is not a mediatorial body in this dispensation.


2. The only mediator recognized in this dispensation is the Lord Jesus Christ: "There is one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus"-1 Tim. 2:5 KJV). Furthermore, his priesthood is in heaven("For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest..."-Hebrews 8:4 KJV) not earth,after the order of Melchizedek, which necessarily set aside the Levitical order. The Levitical priests were ordained of God under the Law. Their work was merely symbolic and typical of the true priestly work of the Lord Jesus Christ, our great high priest.

3. The only priesthood that will be recognized in the future on earth, during the millennial kingdom, will be from the nation of Israel-this has no reference to the Body Of Christ in this dispensation:

" And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel." Exodus 19:6 KJV

"Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ." 1 Peter 2:5 KJV

"But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light...." 1 Peter 2:9 KJV

"But ye shall be named the Priests of the LORD: men shall call you the Ministers of our God: ye shall eat the riches of the Gentiles, and in their glory shall ye boast yourselves." Isaiah 61:6 KJV

"But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light; "And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen." Revelation 1:6 KJV

"And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth." Rev. 5:10 KJV

"Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years." Rev. 20:6 KJV

"What was happening" when John the Baptist was baptizing?:

John's baptism was not something "new"-conversely, it was a ceremony thoroughly understood by those who read the scripture(or should have been understood-hence, the Lord Jesus Christ's piercing question to someone who should have understood: "...Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not of these things?"-John 3:10 KJV), and to whom he ministered.

Water baptism did not begin with John the Baptist. In the Holy Bible we are able to trace its development, and we discover that water baptism is a ceremonial cleansing pertaining exclusively to the kingdom promised to the nation Israel.

In Exodus 19:5-6 KJV, at the very giving of the Mosaic Covenant, the LORD-God's purpose in giving birth to the nation Israel is revealed. The LORD God's stated purpose concerning the nation Israel is that she is to be "a kingdom of priests and an holy nation," through whom the Gentile nations will draw nigh to God, i.e., the "channel/instrument" of blessing=service. Isaiah refers to this::

"But YE SHALL BE NAMED THE PRIESTS OF THE LORD: MEN SHALL CALL YOU THE MINISTERS OF OUR GOD." Isaiah 61:6 KJV.

Ultimately this will be realized during the kingdom reign of the Lord Jesus Christ, when Israel is dwelling in her land and the nations find salvation and blessing through her instrumentality. This also explains Zech. 8:23 KJV-Israel will be a nation of priests, the channel for blessings to the world:

"Thus saith the LORD of hosts; In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold out of all languages of the nations, even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you: for we have heard that God is with you."

=through Israel, as the LORD God's priests, ministers, channel, vessel, "holy"/set aside/sanctified nation, chosen/elect, for service(not salvation)nation, to be his witnesses..........For His glory(the end game).

All of this awaits Israel's future redemption. The "If ye will obey...then ye shall be" principle of the law assured that the "knowledge of sin" would abound. Because of Israel's failure, the nation Israel soon found herself in need of a Redeemer. Thus while the hope of Israel looked to the promised coming kingdom, the need of the nation for cleansing must first be faced.

With this background, we need to remember that of all the people/ things to be "baptized", it was the priest who stood foremost. Exodus 29 sets forth the procedure for induction into the priest's office, the "initiation rights", if you will. Two very important steps of consecration are included:

First , cleansing-a washing with water:

"And Aaron and his sons thou shalt bring unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and SHALT WASH THEM WITH WATER." Exodus 29:4 KJV

Second, the anointing with oil:

"Then shalt thou TAKE THE ANOINTING OIL, AND POUR IT UPON HIS HEAD, AND ANOINT HIM." Exodus 29:7 KJV

Just as the sons of Aaron were the priests through whom the people of Israel could approach God, so the nation Israel itself will one day be "a kingdom of priests and an holy nation," through whom the Gentiles will draw near to God (Genesis 12:1-3 KJV; Gen. 22:17-18 KJV, Isaiah 60:1-3 KJV, Zechariah 8:20-23 KJV..............). It is in this light, and in this context, that "the Baptist" appears on the scene preaching his "...baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel" (Acts 13:24 KJV).

That is, John's "baptism of repentance for the remission of sins" (Mark 1:4 KJV) was a means of national repentance and preparation to fulfil their role, their honor, as the kingdom of priests God which graciously ordained that favored nation to be. Matthew 3:1-2 KJV is critical here:

"In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea, And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."

And how, in what manner, were they to thus prepare for this coming kingdom, this coming period referred to in Deuteronomy 11:21 KJV-"as the days of heaven upon the earth...."?

"Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan, And WERE BAPTIZED OF HIM IN JORDAN, CONFESSING THEIR SINS." Mt. 3:5-6. KJV

And:

And there went out unto him all the land of Judaea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins." Mk. 1:5 KJV

"…Now when all the people were baptized…." Luke 3:21 KJV

John's baptism was the only means of fleeing from "...the wrath to come" (Matthew 3:7 KJV).

And the Holy Bible shows what this wrath is about:

"Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance: And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. And now also THE AXE IS LAID UNTO THE ROOT OF THE TREES; THEREFORE EVERY TREE WHICH BRINGETH NOT FORTH GOOD FRUIT IS HEWN DOWN, AND CAST INTO THE FIRE. I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: HE SHALL BAPTIZE YOU WITH THE HOLY GHOST, AND WITH FIRE:
Whose fan is in his hand, and HE WILL THOROUGHLY PURGE HIS FLOOR, AND GATHER HIS WHEAT INTO THE GARNER; BUT HE WILL BURN UP THE CHAFF WITH UNQUENCHABLE FIRE" Mt. 3:8-12 KJV.

Notice the choice set before Israel was this: a judgment was imminent, and if they wanted to be the "wheat" safely carried into the barn, and not the "chaff" burned with the fire of judgment, they must be identified(the basic meaning of baptism) as the believing remnant through the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

Just as in Numbers 31:21-24 KJV, if they wanted to escape the fire, they must "go through the water!" And thus, they would be "purified with the water of separation" and identified together as the believing remnant in Israel-set apart as "an holy nation."

And notice the pattern: wash in water, oil, blood.

" And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,Take Aaron and his sons with him, and the garments, and the anointing oil, and a bullock for the sin offering, and two rams, and a basket of unleavened bread...And Moses brought Aaron and his sons, and washed them with water.... Lev. 8:1-2 KJV, Lev. 8:6 KJV , Lev. 8:12 KJV

"And Moses brought Aaron and his sons, and washed them with water" Lev. 8:6 KJV

"And he poured of the anointing oil upon Aaron's head, and anointed him, to sanctify him." Lev 8:12 KJV

"And he slew it; and Moses took of the blood of it, and put it upon the tip of Aaron's right ear, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot." Lev. 8:23 KJV

And notice this!:

The Lord Jesus Christ comes to the Jordan, is baptized(washed), the Holy Spirit comes upon him(oil), and later he is baptized on the cross with blood:

" But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? They say unto him, We are able. And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father. " Mt. 20:22-23 KJV

"And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father. And they said unto him, We can. And Jesus said unto them, Ye shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of; and with the baptism that I am baptized with shall ye be baptized". Mk 10:38,39

"And they said unto him, We can. And Jesus said unto them, Ye shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of; and with the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized:" Luke 12:50 KJV


In general Scriptural usage the word baptism indicates complete identification, whether with an element, a person or a group, for the purpose of union, oneness-the basic idea is IDENTIFICATION for the purpose of change in condition/identity. Again, the primary meaning is 'to change the nature, identity, condition, status, and to IDENTIFY something with its purpose' This is why Paul said in Romans 6:3 KJV, "As many of us as were baptized into Christ were baptized into his death. "In other words, the only way to become one with Christ is to be identified with Him in His death by faith.

Notice:

"And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water." Jn 1:31

The Lord Jesus Christ was being manifest, or IDENTIFIED, as THE PRIEST, to Israel.

And one of the other reasons for the Lord Jesus Christ submitting to "John's baptism"-this was part of the righteous requirements of the Law to enter the priesthood. The Lord Jesus Christ came to fulfill the rigtheous requirements of the entire Law, of which baptism was a part. This explains:

"And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness." Mt. 3:15 KJV

And this explains the following scriptures-the bible is a book of details:

"And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age…" Luke 3:23 KJV

"Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?" John 8:27 KJV

Ever wonder why the ages of 30 and 50 are emphasized? "Why the heck" would the Jewish leadership ask about "fifty years old?" And why does the Holy Bible take note "for our learning"(Romans 15:4 KJV) that the Lord Jesus Christ was "about thirty years of age"?

The answer:
"From thirty years old and upward even until fifty years old, all that enter into the host, to do the work in the tabernacle of the congregation." Numbers 4:3 KJV

"From thirty years old and upward until fifty years old shalt thou number them; all that enter in to perform the service, to do the work in the tabernacle of the congregation." Numbers 4:30 KJV

"From thirty years old and upward even unto fifty years old, every one that entereth into the service, for the work in the tabernacle of the congregation…" Numbers 4:35 KJV

"From thirty years old and upward even unto fifty years old, every one that entereth into the service, for the work in the tabernacle of the congregation…" Numbers 4:39 KJV

"From thirty years old and upward even unto fifty years old, every one that entereth into the service, for the work in the tabernacle of the congregation,…" Numbers 4:43 KJV

"From thirty years old and upward even unto fifty years old, every one that came to do the service of the ministry, and the service of the burden in the tabernacle of the congregation." Numbers 4:47 KJV

"And from the age of fifty years they shall cease waiting upon the service thereof, and shall serve no more…" Numbers 8:25 KJV

Age 30 was the beginning age for service for the Levitcal priests, and 50 was the ending age:

"And the LORD spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying, Take the sum of the sons of Kohath from among the sons of Levi, after their families, by the house of their fathers…" Numbers 4:1-2 KJV

And this explains all the Israelites at the Jordan being "baptized"-this was there intiation rite into being a "kingdom of priests". This has no reference to the body of Christ in this dispensation.


I know, I know.....A theory.



You are dismissed, Col, Klink.

 

[Danoh]

Great post, JohnW !

 

[Interplanner]

Great post, JohnW !

Why?

 

[Danoh]

Why?

One; most of those passages are the very ones I would have used.

Two; they fitly frame together like a glove.

Some us on here do not hold to Mid-Acts on every point in exactly the same way.

The above, however, is one of those points we all more or less recognize as sound when one of us brings it out like JohnW did, whether or not we may have even studied it out on our own beforehand.

Par for the coarse in all schools of thought, in all areas of life.

 

[Interplanner]

Would you please stop using the communication-damning name mid-Acts and explain what 'things' are in force or are changing? That's why I refer to 2P2P. There is no theological crap in the way of actually knowing what you are talking about.

 

[Danoh]

Would you please stop using the communication-damning name mid-Acts and explain what 'things' are in force or are changing? That's why I refer to 2P2P. There is no theological crap in the way of actually knowing what you are talking about.

Ever been asked what Matt.24a means? Yes you have.

Ever been asked what 2P2P means? Yes you have.

But what is it specifically that you want to know about?

And keep in mind that as with that article on the various shades of Preterism - a "communication damming name" - that I posted, you are likely to get different answers to your hopefully specific question.

 

[Interplanner]

What I want to know is what you think happened in the middle of Acts that deserves a 'school of theology' about?

We are here in this life to express, reinforce, spread the Gospel of our Lord Jesus, not a 'position' about something that may or may not have happened in the middle of Acts, the followers of which don't seem to be able to define anyway. If you can't define it, why do you speak more about it than the grace of God for justification from our sins that is in Christ?

 

[steko]

John W's post #361

Lots of words......good words!

 

[Danoh]

John W's post #361

Lots of words......good words!

Not fair - JohnW got all that from Scripture...

 

[Dialogos]

You are not "us."

Again, this is your assertion, I'm looking for biblical substantiation.

Fine. Obey Leviticus. Deuteronomy. Sell all you have.At that time they were the only ones to whom God offered that opportunity to obey.

First, wrong covenant.

Second, Those under the Old Covenant were not required to sell all they had, where are you getting this idea?

Perhaps you are referring to Jesus' words in Mark 10:21 which was not a command given to anyone else, there is a good reason why this man was asked to do this whereas, others were not. Not even Zaccheus was asked to sell all he had.

Would you like to know why Jesus told this one young ruler to sell all he had?

Third, are you claiming that God offered another nation the chance to become a kingdom of priests at the same time He was offering this to the Jews?

Fourth, this is really irrelevant to my question.

Your assertion is that 1 Peter can't be written to the body of Christ because the BOC isn't a royal priesthood or a holy nation.

You haven't substantiated that assertion.

I've pointed out that Revelation 5 shows that God has redeemed those from every nation to be kings and priests which disputes your claim.

Your reply to this is...

Made up.

I didn't make up Rev 5, its in the book.

Not written about members of the boc-not written to them.

What?

The BOC isn't redeemed by His blood?

Did Jesus redeem the BOC by his blood or not?

Hmmmm....

And we know its not Israel alone being spoken of here because the text is crystal clear that they came from every tribe and tongue and nation and people....

So, really. This question has gone unanswered, you've made a few quips designed to sidestep the question, but sidestepping a question does not constitute a good faith answer to a question.

Don't worry, I know why you can't/won't provide a direct answer.



Now, if you want to chat about your theory that Israel was baptized by passing over the Jordan river we can.

I personally think there are some holes in that theory, but the biggest issue I see is that you appear to run to the nearest phone booth and change into Captain Cranky Pants whenever someone asks you to provide some biblical evidence to substantiate your claim.

Namely...

Nice cliche. I don't provide "theories," Hop Sing-I gave you chapter, and verse, in which to soak your head,yet your Catholic priest, nun, Reverand, minister, Professor Nicodemas/Demas, with 16 titles before after his/her name tells you, "Well, no one taught you that before...So, it is false."

:chuckle:

Not all that informative, but mildly entertaining.

To your numbered points:

1. The only "priesthood" on earth that was(past tense)recognized by the LORD God was the Levitcal priesthood after the order of Aaron. The Mosaic law requires ministers of the Aaronic order to be descendants of Levi, and the high priest to descend from Aaron. You had to be born into the tribe of Levi to become a priest, and you had to be a male. If you do not meet both of these requirements, you are disqualified.

Not a big help to your own case given that you are arguing that non-levites were baptized as priests when they crossed the Jordan river.
Second, God gets to change the rules whenever He pleases and did so according to Hebrews 7:12, that's why Jesus can be (is) our Great High Priest being from the tribe of Judah.
Furthermore, we know that the priests that Rev 5 speaks of are not all levites because the 24 elders confess to being from every kindred, nation, tongue, etc...

Another result of failure to rightly divide-the priesthood. Nowhere in Paul's epistles, Romans-Philemon, which are the doctrine for the body of Christ in this "...dispensation of the grace of God...."(Eph. 3:2 KJV), are members of the body referred to as "priests", "kings", or "a holy nation"-this has application only to Israel. The body of Christ is not a mediatorial body in this dispensation.

Circular reasoning...

I dispute the erroneous notion that only Pauline epistles are for the Body of Christ and cite obvious errors like the ones you are committing in this thread as evidence.

2. The only mediator recognized in this dispensation is the Lord Jesus Christ: "There is one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus"-1 Tim. 2:5 KJV).

I'll leave the improper use of the word dispensation aside.

I have news for you, the only Mediator who can make peace between God and man is the Lord Jesus Christ and that's true from the fall to eternity future.

Furthermore, his priesthood is in heaven("For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest..."-Hebrews 8:4 KJV) not earth,after the order of Melchizedek, which necessarily set aside the Levitical order. The Levitical priests were ordained of God under the Law. Their work was merely symbolic and typical of the true priestly work of the Lord Jesus Christ, our great high priest.

Good.

And now that we have such a High Priest, what need is there for a re-institution of the types and shadows of the Levitical system?

:think:

3. The only priesthood that will be recognized in the future on earth, during the millennial kingdom, will be from the nation of Israel-this has no reference to the Body Of Christ in this dispensation:

The only High Priest that will be recognized ever again is the Lord Jesus Christ. Since there is no longer any sacrifice available for sin (Jesus is the only sacrifice that takes sin away) the mediatorial work of the priesthood is done.

Jesus is the only Mediator anyone will ever need.

That's why the elder's in Rev 5 aren't mediating for anyone, they aren't performing sacrifices. The Best Sacrifice has already been slain and any other than the Lamb would fall short. So all that is left for priests in glory is to serving at the Lord's temple, they are serving and honoring God, which is the only role left for a priest; to make offerings of praise, the fruit of our lips that confess Him (Hebrews 13:15).

And I am 100% certain that this is a job that everyone in the BOC is called to do.


Which fits the Job description of 1 Peter 2:5 quite nicely.

"Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ." 1 Peter 2:5 KJV​

What kind of sacrifices, John?

I find it quite peculiar that you cited Rev 1:6

"But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light; "And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen." Revelation 1:6 KJV​

Especially since John is clearly writing to churches of both Jews and Gentiles. The seven churches in Asia were mostly gentile including the church in Ephesus to which Paul wrote a letter.

:think:

I also find it quite strange that you think that only Jews will be part of the first resurrection.

"Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years." Rev. 20:6 KJV​

When Paul clearly says in 2 Tim 2:12 that the BOC will do exactly what Rev 20:6 promises.

And this explains all the Israelites at the Jordan being "baptized"-this was there intiation rite into being a "kingdom of priests". This has no reference to the body of Christ in this dispensation.

I know, I know.....A theory.

Except that the whole miracle of Joshua leading through the parted Jordan River was that they "didn't" get wet... Take a look at Joshua 3 and pay careful attention to Joshua 3:17...

Dry ground....

Did Jesus get wet during His Baptism in the Jordan?

Hmmmm.

:think:

All things to think about as you work out your "theory."

:chuckle:

I prefer to stick to the main and plain things. And one of those is that you are dead wrong about 1 Peter 2:9.

And if the reasons I have given you aren't convincing enough.

Compare 1 Peter 2:5-6 to Ephesians 2:19-21.

"Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. (1 Peter 2:5-6 KJV)

"So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. (Ephesians 2:19-21 ESV)"

You are dismissed...

 

[Danoh]

What I want to know is what you think happened in the middle of Acts that deserves a 'school of theology' about?

We are here in this life to express, reinforce, spread the Gospel of our Lord Jesus, not a 'position' about something that may or may not have happened in the middle of Acts, the followers of which don't seem to be able to define anyway. If you can't define it, why do you speak more about it than the grace of God for justification from our sins that is in Christ?

It is both sad and fascinating how that you actually touch on it but cannot see it due to what you have learned to reason into it.

What happened mid way through Acts was the salvation and commissioning of Paul; and with that an entire body of truth that is vastly distinct from God's dealings with Israel.

Paul refers to it as "the form of sound words."

Just look at all that teaching in Romans thru Philemonand on so many areas having to do with God's Mystery Grace in Christ Jesus.

There is just too much, and too much that is interconnected, as to that within Romans thru Philemon for sound bytes here and there to give it the needed coverage.

The gospel of the grace of God is much more than simply about keeping one out of hell, or of them spreading that to others - much more.

It is...an entire theology...

It is a Pauline Based, thus, Mid-Acts Based, Mystery Grace Theology that is as systematic, as all encompassing, as complete as Genesis thru Deuteronomy are to Israel.

Where Hebrews thru Revelation build on those five books of Moses, Romans thru Philemon are self-contained and deal with that church which is His Body.

To understand all this, it is neccessary to study Genesis thru Revelation in light of Romans thru Philemon.

That, is a whole lot of theology.

This is the result many years sorting all that out in Scripture through the Scripture.

 

[john w]

Again, this is your assertion, I'm looking for biblical substantiation.

Translation: IMO-signed, Oprah. You were given, verse by verse, "substantiation. That 2 Cor. 4:4 KJV problem of yours.

First, wrong covenant.

Irrelevant-spam.

Second, Those under the Old Covenant were not required to sell all they had, where are you getting this idea?

Irrelevant-spam.
Luke 18:22 KJV and scores of other verses.

Perhaps you are referring to Jesus' words in Mark 10:21 which was not a command given to anyone else, there is a good reason why this man was asked to do this whereas, others were not. Not even Zaccheus was asked to sell all he had.

Would you like to know why Jesus told this one young ruler to sell all he had?

You, teaching me? Good one. I will pass on your "offer."

Made up. They were told to sell all they had. The 12 "left all." Acts 2-sold all-all things in common-communism.

Translation: IMO-signed, Oprah.

Third, are you claiming that God offered another nation the chance to become a kingdom of priests at the same time He was offering this to the Jews?

Translation: IMO-signed, Oprah. Humanism=what I cannot understand, I will not believe.

Fourth, this is really irrelevant to my question.

Translated: 2 Cor. 4:4 KJV/
"assert/pond the podium/declare victory/return to sound byte echo chamber

Your assertion is that 1 Peter can't be written to the body of Christ because the BOC isn't a royal priesthood or a holy nation.

You haven't substantiated that assertion.

Yes I have. 2 Cor. 4:4 KJV. It is written in 6th grade English, Jethro.


Translated:assert/pond the podium/declare victory/return to sound byte echo chamber"

I've pointed out that Revelation 5 shows that God has redeemed those from every nation to be kings and priests which disputes your claim.

Your reply to this is...


I didn't make up Rev 5, its in the book.

I did not say that you made up Rev. 5-knock it off. Not written to the body of Christ.

What?

The BOC isn't redeemed by His blood?

Never said that. Rabbit trail.

Did Jesus redeem the BOC by his blood or not?

Yes. Quite irrelevant.

Hmmmm....

Translated Filler....cliche....Ssssssss...hiss..snort.....grunt....


Weighty.

And we know its not Israel alone being spoken of here because the text is crystal clear that they came from every tribe and tongue and nation and people....

Made up. Not written to the boc. "'crystal clear"=debating tactic, that means you are losing the debate, and it is not "crystal clear."

So, really.

Oh.

This question has gone unanswered, you've made a few quips designed to sidestep the question, but sidestepping a question does not constitute a good faith answer to a question.

Sidestepped? Made up. Your 2 Cor. 4:4 KJV problem.


Translated: I, Diablo, due to 2 Cor. 4:4 KJV, 1 Cor. 2:14 KJV, and due to my lack of reading comprehension skills, do not understand what John W explained, chapter and verse, so I will assert that he is wrong/ did not answer. QED.

Don't worry, I know why you can't/won't provide a direct answer.

Impressive. Cliche. Spam "I know why you can't/won't provide a direct answer" stumper, which can be employed o "answer" any premise..

And, if you would kindly provide, chapter, verse, where I am required to answer any and all questions directed to me, especially from drones, such yourself, who ask loaded/trap/irrelevant questions, will oblige you, Gomer.

Now, if you want to chat about your theory that Israel was baptized by passing over the Jordan river we can.

Translated: I, Diablo, due to 2 Cor. 4:4 KJV, 1 Cor. 214 KJV, and due to my lack of reading comprehension skills, do not understand what John W explained, chapter and verse, so I will assert that it is a "theory."

Thanks for all the scripture, Oprah. Quite impressive. Brilliant.

I personally think there are some holes in that theory, but the biggest issue I see is that you appear to run to the nearest phone booth and change into Captain Cranky Pants whenever someone asks you to provide some biblical evidence to substantiate your claim.

Translated I, Oprah, IMO......


I gave you chapter, verse, from the book.


Vs. You?: Personally...IMO...emotional diatribe...."

Contrasts.

Namely...


:chuckle:

Not all that informative, but mildly entertaining.

To your numbered points:

Translated: IMO...

Thanks, Oprah.

Not a big help to your own case given that you are arguing that non-levites were baptized as priests when they crossed the Jordan river.

Translated: IMO...

Thanks, Oprah.

2 Cor. 4:4 KJV

Second, God gets to change the rules whenever He pleases and did so according to Hebrews 7:12, that's why Jesus can be (is) our Great High Priest being from the tribe of Judah.

Translated: IMO...

Thanks, Oprah.

2 Cor. 4:4 KJV

And throw in "God gets to change the rules whenever He pleases", which can be employed, to "prove" anything.

Furthermore, we know that the priests that Rev 5 speaks of are not all levites because the 24 elders confess to being from every kindred, nation, tongue, etc...

Irrelevant-Exodus 19...."kingdom of priests"

Circular reasoning...

Translated: Spam "Circular reasoning...straw man.........equivocation........." to try to impress the audience, when you are clueless.

I dispute the erroneous notion that only Pauline epistles are for the Body of Christ and cite obvious errors like the ones you are committing in this thread as evidence.

Made up/2 Cor 4:4 KJV/Assert...pound the podium....declare victory.....return to "all of the book is written to me, is abut me.." echo chamber.

I'll leave the improper use of the word dispensation aside.

Oh. Weighty.

I have news for you,

Translated: Cliche #666.

the only Mediator who can make peace between God and man is the Lord Jesus Christ and that's true from the fall to eternity future.

=assert, pound the table.


True, now, in this dispensation, but not in "time past.". In "time past," the only way through the LORD God was through Israel, as the channel.....Hence, "salvation is of the Jews..." In the future, this will be the case again, when the LORD God "picks up," resumes the prophetic program, center on His elect nation, for service, when they will be "the head," not the "tail.

And now that we have such a High Priest, what need is there for a re-institution of the types and shadows of the Levitical system?

1.Quite irrelevant-rabbit trail . In this dispensation, one mediator. In the future, through Israel, as the channel, blessing, and there is NADA, that you, your father, the devil, and all other satanic "replacement theology" demons can do about it.

2. Only sinners need a High Priest, mediator-N/A to forever justified saints, such as myself.

The only High Priest that will be recognized ever again is the Lord Jesus Christ. Since there is no longer any sacrifice available for sin (Jesus is the only sacrifice that takes sin away) the mediatorial work of the priesthood is done.

Jesus is the only Mediator anyone will ever need.

See above. Oh.Stunning.

That's why the elder's in Rev 5 aren't mediating for anyone, they aren't performing sacrifices. The Best Sacrifice has already been slain and any other than the Lamb would fall short. So all that is left for priests in glory is to serving at the Lord's temple, they are serving and honoring God, which is the only role left for a priest; to make offerings of praise, the fruit of our lips that confess Him (Hebrews 13:15).

And I am 100% certain that this is a job that everyone in the BOC is called to do.

Quite irrelevant. Not written to the boc.

Which fits the Job description of 1 Peter 2:5 quite nicely.

Quiye irelevant. Not written to the boc.

What kind of sacrifices, John?

Translated:I, Diablo, will try to act oh so "spiritual," and think, "That should clinch it."

Weighty. TOL is mesmerized....

I find it quite peculiar that you cited Rev 1:6

We know-2 Cor. 4:4 KJV.

[Especially since John is clearly writing to churches of both Jews and Gentiles. The seven churches in Asia were mostly gentile including the church in Ephesus to which Paul wrote a letter.

"clearly"=it is not clear. Not written to the boc.

I also find it quite strange that you think that only Jews will be part of the first resurrection.

Translated: Rabbit trail, change the subject, in hopes that your opponent will forget what the subject was, to begin with.

When Paul clearly says in 2 Tim 2:12 that the BOC will do exactly what Rev 20:6 promises.

Translated: When you are losing the debate, again pepper your response with "clearly."

Except that the whole miracle of Joshua leading through the parted Jordan River was that they "didn't" get wet... Take a look at Joshua 3 and pay careful attention to Joshua 3:17...

Dry ground....

Quite irrelevant. Priests had to "go through water."

Did Jesus get wet during His Baptism in the Jordan?

Yes. He was sprinkled, not "immersed," with water.

All things to think about as you work out your "theory."

Translated: IMO, Oprah Diablo....Sound byte...Throw in "theory" again...grunt, snort,speculate....

Vs.

The great saint John W's, verse by verse,"..here a little...there a little...."

Contrasts.

I prefer to stick to the main and plain things.

Sound byte....cliche....filler....

And one of those is that you are dead wrong about 1 Peter 2:9.

Translated: Assert...pound the podium...declared victory...return to "I showed him a few opinions of mine...." echo chamber.

And if the reasons I have given you aren't convincing enough.

Let us know when you decide to give us those reasons, Hop Sing.

Compare 1 Peter 2:5-6 to Ephesians 2:19-21.

Quite impressive. Monkeys can use that old reliable "compare"stumper. And I gave you, chapter and verse, outlining that 1 Peter is not written to the boc.

You are dismissed...

I'm honored, that you are imitating me, as your father, the devil, the great imitator, taught you well. However, knock it off, as you do not have my clout, charisma, to pull it off.

Dig? Now, have a seat, in the back row, as I teach.

 

[Dialogos]

John W,

Your reply here is such a jumble of nonsense that it is hard to ferret out responses worthy of a reply.

I don’t know why you insist on acting juvenile when you are capable of better argumentation but your reply looks like something written by a middle school child trying to look “cool” for his friends.
I’ll try and separate the wheat from the chaff.

First, making the false claim that 2 Cor 4:4 applies to me is not substantiation of your claims that 1 and 2 Peter are not written to the body of Christ. Not only is it incorrect, as I am a believer and 2 Cor 4:4 is talking about non-believers…

“In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, (2Co 4:4 KJV)”

Furthermore, It is incorrect because it isn’t “substantiation.”
It is a failed attempt at the logical fallacy of poisoning the well, but it doesn’t prove your claims about 1 and 2 Peter in the least.

Second, your claim that selling all one had was a commandment of the gospel Jesus and the 12 preached is simply wrong.
Lazarus was not told to sell all he had, he was praised for giving away half.

Peter and the 12 left all that they had but they didn’t sell it and Peter is shown going back to his home, his boat and his nets after Jesus was crucified before the Lord restores him (see John 21:3).

The early disciples shared all things in common, but didn’t sell all they had (if they did, they wouldn’t have anything to hold in common :duh: ), and retained house wherein they met “from house to house.” If you sell your house you don’t have a house to meet in anymore now do ya?
:doh:
John encourages the “elect lady” not to let heretical teachers into “her house.” (2 John 1:10).

And finally, no one, other than the rich young ruler is commanded to sell all their stuff.

All of this leads to the conclusion that you are simply in error.

Second, you are also dead wrong on Revelation 5.

You keep parroting your conclusions as if doing so makes them correct. For example:

I did not say that you made up Rev. 5-knock it off. Not written to the body of Christ….
Made up. Not written to the boc. "'crystal clear"=debating tactic, that means you are losing the debate, and it is not "crystal clear."

I don’t agree that Rev 5 isn’t written to the body of Christ and no one should. There is no exegetical reason to conclude that John didn’t write the book of revelation for all Christians. Simply parroting your errant conclusions won’t make them true. But even if there was some reason to assume that Rev 5 wasn’t written to the body of Christ, it would be irrelevant. Whomever it is written to, it is true for everyone.

And again, what it says is that Jesus has ransomed, by His blood, people from every tribe, tongue and nation to be kings and priests.
Case closed.

Your assertion that only Jewish people can be kings and priests is soundly refuted by scripture.

Now, you can appeal all day long to the fact that in the OT, the only ones given that privilege were Jewish.

Irrelevant-Exodus 19...."kingdom of priests"

I agree, in Exodus 19 the Jews were called to be a kingdom of priests, why do you assume that they are the only ones throughout all eternity called to such an office? There are a lot of aspects of Israel’s calling that were exclusive to the Jews in the OT that are nevertheless now extended to the whole world in the NT because of the cross including:

• Being sons and daughters of the promise. (Gal 4:28)
• Being considered sons of the living God and member of God’s household. (Gal 3:26)
• Being considered citizens of God’s kingdom (Eph 2:19)
• Being considered a people of God’s own possession. (Titus 2:14)

Incidentally, this is something that Peter conjoins with being a royal priesthood and a holy nation in 1 Peter 2:9.

Before Christ, only the Jews could claim any of these, but in the NT Christians are included, and Rev 5 makes it clear that in addition to being sons of Abraham / children of the promise, members of God’s household, citizens of God’s kingdom and a people of God’s own possession, those who are ransomed by Jesus’ blood are also part of the royal priesthood and holy nation that Peter is talking about. Ergo the distinction you are trying to maintain no longer exists because of Jesus (Gal 3:28).

You can ignore this but it doesn’t go away and I count it noteworthy that you refuse to acknowledge this fact.

BTW, its humorous you claim to critique my “debate” tactic. You made use of poor debating tactics throughout your last post, including being non-responsive in general as well as employing a litany of logical fallacies. Basically, your last post would have received a failing grade in a debate class.

Third, your responses about Jesus being Mediator are truly disturbing.
Your response was as follows:

1.Quite irrelevant-rabbit trail . In this dispensation, one mediator. In the future, through Israel, as the channel, blessing, and there is NADA, that you, your father, the devil, and all other satanic "replacement theology" demons can do about it.

2. Only sinners need a High Priest, mediator-N/A to forever justified saints, such as myself.

Concerning one; your perverted doctrine that elevates Israel over Jesus in any “dispensation” brings Jesus down and therefore needs to be soundly rebuked.

Nowhere in the texts your ilk would consider to be “circumcision gospel” do you have Jesus stepping aside in deference to the Levitical priesthood. 1 John 2:1, a text you would consider to be part of the circumcision gospel, points out that Jesus is “still” the Mediator and advocate we have with the Father, not the Levitical priest.

Furthermore, Hebrews makes clear that the blood of bulls and goats can’t take away sin (Hebrews 10:4). The blood of bulls and goats never did take away sins, and it never will. The curtain has been torn and law has been changed, 1 Tim 2:5 is harmonious with Hebrews 7:25 and Jesus is the only Mediator anyone will ever need again. You will one day be ashamed that you wanted to take the glory belonging only to the Lamb of God and share it with men.

Concerning your second comment, you prove yourself a liar per 1 John 1:8. Being made a saint positionally does not exempt you from honestly evaluating your need for a Savior in humility.

Fourth, you attempt to prove that Israel was “baptized” when Joshua led them across the Jordan. My question is simply, where does it say this in the bible? You can post dozens of scriptures, none of which say this, and it still will fail to convince me until you post one that does.
Until you can show me a scripture that says this, I won’t believe it, and neither should you.

So there are still a number of questions left unanswered by your diatribe.
1. Why does Rev 5 say that members of all nations are kings and priests before God when you say that can’t be.
2. Why did Paul preach the gospel of grace to the same folks that Peter is addressing?
3. How do you explain (or in your case, explain away) the similarity between 1 Peter 2:5-6 and Ephesians 2:19-21?

 

[john w]

John W,

Your reply here is such a jumble of nonsense that it is hard to ferret out responses worthy of a reply.

Move on, you wicked, disgusting troll, as you swoop in here, weeks later, after I picked your satanic dung apart.

 

[Dialogos]

Move on, you wicked, disgusting troll.

And there it is folks, John W retreats to what John W does best. Name-calling and avoidance tactics.

:nono:

Disappointing really.

Just another reason why the only thing you are qualified to teach is clown college.

:zakath:

..as you swoop in here, weeks later,

8 days does not qualify as weeks....

:chuckle:

Some of us have jobs, wives and responsibilities.

after I picked your satanic dung apart.

:nono:

Unnecessarily offensive.

:nono:

 

[john w]

And there it is folks, John W retreats to what John W does best. Name-calling and avoidance tactics.

Diablo, to the Lord Jesus Christ, John The Baptist, Peter, Paul:

And there it is folks, "Jesus", John The Baptist, Peter, Paul retreats to what they do best. Name-calling and avoidance tactics. Stop it, you meanies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


You wicked child of the devil.

Some of us have jobs, wives and responsibilities.

Such brilliance, with that cliche. Yes, punk, I'm a stock trader, and you are the only one that is "busy," eh, sport? Want to compare W-2's?

I thought so.


I told you to have a seat.