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

[Danoh]

...NOWHERE in scripture are they teaching Judaism after the DBR.

For starters...

Acts 15:5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

Some years later...

Acts 21:20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:

 

[brewmama]

If I'm supposed to be a priest to unbelievers, per Peter, I was left no instructions on how to do that.

Someone who believes members of the Body are also priests want to tell us where to find our priestly instructions?

Actually there are plenty of instructions, you just ignore them and call them (evil) TRADITION! And tradition is totally biblical.

 

[brewmama]

For starters...

Acts 15:5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

Some years later...

Acts 21:20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:

Sure there were Judaizers, but they weren't the leaders of the Church...
and Paul went along with appeasing them, if you bothered to keep reading...

"Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow. 24 Take them and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law. 25 But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing, except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.”

26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day, having been purified with them, entered the temple to announce the expiration of the days of purification, at which time an offering should be made for each one of them.

 

[tetelestai]

For starters...

Acts 15:5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

Um.....that was wrongly teaching Judaism after the DBR.

People still wrongly teach Judaism today.

The point is that none of the Apostles taught Judaism after the cross.

 

[Danoh]

Sure there were Judaizers, but they weren't the leaders of the Church...
and Paul went along with appeasing them, if you bothered to keep reading...

"Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow. 24 Take them and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law. 25 But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing, except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.”

26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day, having been purified with them, entered the temple to announce the expiration of the days of purification, at which time an offering should be made for each one of them.

No; those were not the Judaizers - the Scripture says they "believed."

They were the Israel of God. Gal. 6:16.

Those in Acts 21 were these people - Rom. 2:

25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.

28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:

29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

They kept the Law...by faith; not merely outwardly.

 

[Danoh]

Um.....that was wrongly teaching Judaism after the DBR.

People still wrongly teach Judaism today.

The point is that none of the Apostles taught Judaism after the cross.

Respectfully, we differ on this one.

 

[tetelestai]

Respectfully, we differ on this one.

Why would a follower of Christ Jesus teach the law of Moses after the DBR?

The law called for animal sacrifices for sin atonement. Christ Jesus paid for all sins at the cross.

It would be a contradiction for someone in Christ to sacrifice an animal for sin atonement.

Nowhere in the NT can you provide a verse where Peter, Paul, or anyone else is teaching the law of Moses after the DBR.

 

[Danoh]

Why would a follower of Christ Jesus teach the law of Moses after the DBR?

The law called for animal sacrifices for sin atonement. Christ Jesus paid for all sins at the cross.

It would be a contradiction for someone in Christ to sacrifice an animal for sin atonement.

Nowhere in the NT can you provide a verse where Peter, Paul, or anyone else is teaching the law of Moses after the DBR.

Paul wouldn't. At the same time, he respected that the Israel of God was of the Law.

Per Jeremiah 3:33, the New Covenant's promise of the Spirit does not do away with the Law for Israel; rather, it enables them to be the sons of God, John 1:12; John 3:5, under the Law that they'd not been able to be prior to the gift of the Holy Ghost that Peter also relates in Acts 2.

Keep in mind that your paradigm and mine on these matters differs.

 

[musterion]

Still waiting on the chapter and verse where you read your instructions, Gentile priests.

 

[Interplanner]

Paul wouldn't. At the same time, he respected that the Israel of God was of the Law.

Per Jeremiah 3:33, the New Covenant's promise of the Spirit does not do away with the Law for Israel; rather, it enables them to be the sons of God, John 1:12; John 3:5, under the Law that they'd not been able to be prior to the gift of the Holy Ghost that Peter also relates in Acts 2.

Keep in mind that your paradigm and mine on these matters differs.

But it is not a law where you have to show people a list or keep track of that. It meant the law of Christ. That's the paradigm to keep in mind. You are doing Judaism.

What is your point about the Israel of God which is a phrase only found once in Gal 6 and where the connection that matters is that there is neither circumcision nor uncircumcision? That "Israel" has peace by keeping that rule ('kanoni').

 

[tetelestai]

Paul wouldn't. At the same time, he respected that the Israel of God was of the Law.

Paul used the phrase "The Israel of God" one time, in the epistle to the Galatians.

The epistle to the Galatians is all about how there is no longer a difference between Jew and Gentile.

Why would Paul finish his epistle to the Galatians by claiming there was a difference, after he just spent the whole time explaining how there no longer was a difference?

 

[brewmama]

No; those were not the Judaizers - the Scripture says they "believed."

They were the Israel of God. Gal. 6:16.

Those in Acts 21 were these people - Rom. 2:

25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.

28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:

29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

They kept the Law...by faith; not merely outwardly.

Who do you think the Judaizers were? They were believers. Who thought that Christians needed to follow Jewish law and customs. And they were not the Apostles.

 

[elohiym]

Nowhere in Paul's epistles are members of the body of Christ referred to as "priests"...

Paul described himself as a priest.

Romans 15:16 ...to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles, ministering as a priest the gospel of God, so that my offering of the Gentiles may become acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.…

 

[Lazy afternoon]

Still waiting on the chapter and verse where you read your instructions, Gentile priests.

1Pe 2:1 Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings,
1Pe 2:2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:
1Pe 2:3 If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious.
1Pe 2:4 To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,
1Pe 2:5 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.
1Pe 2:6 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.
1Pe 2:7 Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,
1Pe 2:8 And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
1Pe 2:9 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:
1Pe 2:10 Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.

Isa 56:3 Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the LORD, speak, saying, The LORD hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree.
Isa 56:4 For thus saith the LORD unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;
Isa 56:5 Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.
Isa 56:6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;
Isa 56:7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.
Isa 56:8 The Lord GOD which gathereth the outcasts of Israel saith, Yet will I gather others to him, beside those that are gathered unto him.

 

[Interplanner]

What do you think the Judaizers were? They were believers. Who thought that Christians needed to follow Jewish law and customs. And they were not the Apostles.

I don't think all Judaizers were believers, nor even most. that's the thing. the common denominator was the role of Judaism. You had something going on there that Paul had to leave, that he had to call the 'weak miserable principles of the world', that Peter was distracted to, and some of them called themselves Christians as well. This is why 'mid-Acts' is so unsatisfactory as a title. It is not about what part of Acts, but what specific doctrines were believed or which ones snatched people back into believing. We do have a Judeo-Christian faith, but there is a point where you must disconnect the Christian from that source.

The first doctrine that seems to be objectionable is that there is resurrection in Christ. 4:2. That is a doctrine that proves that Christ's work was perfect--his resurrection was his vindication and validation by God, 13:36. The question of whether it could happen was of much less impact than why it happened. That is where things disconnect with Judaism. It would take years before people even realized that was the issue; they would spend many years in 'familiar' issues in Judaism--circumcision, sabbath, diet.

 

[brewmama]

I don't think all Judaizers were believers, nor even most. that's the thing. the common denominator was the role of Judaism. You had something going on there that Paul had to leave, that he had to call the 'weak miserable principles of the world', that Peter was distracted to, and some of them called themselves Christians as well. This is why 'mid-Acts' is so unsatisfactory as a title. It is not about what part of Acts, but what specific doctrines were believed or which ones snatched people back into believing. We do have a Judeo-Christian faith, but there is a point where you must disconnect the Christian from that source.

The first doctrine that seems to be objectionable is that there is resurrection in Christ. 4:2. That is a doctrine that proves that Christ's work was perfect--his resurrection was his vindication and validation by God, 13:36. The question of whether it could happen was of much less impact than why it happened. That is where things disconnect with Judaism. It would take years before people even realized that was the issue; they would spend many years in 'familiar' issues in Judaism--circumcision, sabbath, diet.

Uh, no. Not correct.

So you are part of this cult too?

 

[john w]

No you don't, you are deceived

Yes, we do, as you've been shown it for years, you wicked Clavint/Calvinist, bedeviled mutt, but pappa satan tells you to just keep on spamming, as your were predestined to it, besides hell.

 

[beloved57]

Yes, we do, as you've been shown it for years, you wicked Clavint/Calvinist, deviled mutt, but pappa satan tells you to just keep on spamming, as your were predestined to it, besides hell.

You have no scripture proof, you just make up statements from your own mind.

 

[john w]

Why would a follower of Christ Jesus teach the law of Moses after the DBR?

The law called for animal sacrifices for sin atonement. Christ Jesus paid for all sins at the cross.

It would be a contradiction for someone in Christ to sacrifice an animal for sin atonement.

Nowhere in the NT can you provide a verse where Peter, Paul, or anyone else is teaching the law of Moses after the DBR.

Who taught all the Act believers to observe/attend Pentecost,according to the law, you filthy serpent? Who taught Peter, and John to go to the Temple, according to the law, you slug? Who taught Peter to observe the hour of prayer, and the dietary restrictions, and separation, according to the law, you punk?

"Nowhere in the NT can you provide a verse where Peter, Paul, or anyone else is teaching the law of Moses after the DBR"-PP Tellalie

Made up. You were given the verses, but your papa devil just tells you to assert that satanic lie.

You habitual liar, as I have your own words, you filthy little devil, where you admit that the law part of the Old Covenant, as was Pentecost, and that so was going to the temple, all post cross:



"But, remember, the Law of Moses was still in place after the cross...God didn't flick a lightswitch that in a split second switched the entire planet from OC to NC.Hebrews tells us that the OC was "waxing" and would soon be obsolete..... We know that the OC was completely gone in 70AD...Of course the law of Moses was part of the Old Covenant.... The unbelieving Jews had their temple and city destroyed for good in 70AD. That marked the end of the old covenant, the law and prophets, etc."-Preterist Plagiarizer Craigie


You filthy, habitual liar, PP.

 

[patrick jane]

Who taught all the Act believers to observe/attend Pentecost,according to the law, you filthy serpent? Who taught Peter, and John to go to the Temple, according to the law, you slug? Who taught Peter to observe the hour of prayer, and the dietary restrictions, and separation, according to the law, you punk?

"Nowhere in the NT can you provide a verse where Peter, Paul, or anyone else is teaching the law of Moses after the DBR"-PP Tellalie

Made up. You were given the verses, but your papa devil just tells you to assert that satanic lie.

You habitual liar, as I have your own words, you filthy little devil, where you admit that the law part of the Old Covenant, as was Pentecost, and that so was going to the temple, all post cross:



"But, remember, the Law of Moses was still in place after the cross...God didn't flick a lightswitch that in a split second switched the entire planet from OC to NC.Hebrews tells us that the OC was "waxing" and would soon be obsolete..... We know that the OC was completely gone in 70AD...Of course the law of Moses was part of the Old Covenant.... The unbelieving Jews had their temple and city destroyed for good in 70AD. That marked the end of the old covenant, the law and prophets, etc."-Preterist Plagiarizer Craigie


You filthy, habitual liar, PP.

Great post again. I had a few Natty Lights and it's awesome