ECT Acronyms for those debating MAD

[SaulToPaul 2]

Nope.

It clearly shows that Christ Jesus united the two houses together when He implemented the NC with His shed blood on the cross.

You aren't in either house.


:chuckle:

 

[tetelestai]

Its irrelevant to me.

Because you know it destroys your MAD.

There were 12 tribes however, and you AIN'T one of them.

No one is disputing the 12 tribes.

Why do you deny that the vast majority of the 10 tribes were divorced from God, told they weren't a people, and scattered amongst the Gentiles for over 700 years before the birth of Christ?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

No one is disputing the 12 tribes.

:chuckle:

You did. "The vast majority...."
How soon you forget the things you say when you lie.

 

[tetelestai]

You aren't in either house.


:chuckle:

That's not the point.

The point is that Christ Jesus joined the two houses together, and became the one King over them.

You can't have this because it destroys your MAD.

 

[tetelestai]

:chuckle:

You did. "The vast majority...."
How soon you forget the things you say when you lie.

Didn't lie. You just don't like what I have to say because it proves your MAD wrong.

Again, you should look up the definition of "remnant".

A remnant of Israelites returned to Jerusalem from the 10 tribes. The vast majority were divorced from God, told they were not a people, and then scattered amongst the Gentiles.

After the remnant from the 10 tribes returned to Jerusalem, the Bible tells us that one day the two houses would be joined together.

So, that means the remnant from the 10 tribes returning to Jerusalem was not the joining of the two houses together.

 

[Right Divider]

That's not the point.

The point is that Christ Jesus joined the two houses together, and became the one King over them.

You can't have this because it destroys your MAD.

I'm not seeing the problem....

MAD does not dispute the fact that the two houses will be joined. The NC is NOT in place today. I know that you think that it is. But you're wrong, just like you are on so many things.

 

[Interplanner]

Why is it that the longest interp of the New Covenant (Hebrews) has nothing to say about the land, but actually a stiff piece to say about how the existing land will be burnt? Including many quotes from the OT.

The tribes thing is non-issue in the NT, and the New Covenant is now enjoyed, not least of all in Rom 11 (quoting Isaiah).

Please refer to the enthronement of Christ in Acts 2 (and the thread on that) to see the how and why of the power of what has happened in the resurrection. The mere proclamation that Christ is now the enthroned Lord, and and how that is true in the fact of justification from sins is what 'turns the world upside down.'

To D'ism, early Acts is an innocuous passage for bickering over Judaic kingdoms and equipment that won't irritate anyone.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

The tribes thing is non-issue in the NT,

:chuckle:

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

You can't have this because it destroys your MAD.

Not being in either house, how do you get into the new covenant?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

To D'ism, early Acts is an innocuous passage for bickering over Judaic kingdoms and equipment that won't irritate anyone.

I feel certain, in light of Mt24A, Gen 24:64B and other extraneous but innocuous passages, that you are overlooking the aspect of all of this which brings us back to the spiritual enterprise and proper toology that was intended, in interpreting difficult ideas. Agreed?

 

[tetelestai]

Not being in either house, how do you get into the new covenant?

Paul explained it, and called it a mystery.

I've explained the mystery to you, but you deny it because it's a death knell to your MAD.

 

[Interplanner]

:chuckle:

Truly. I don't know one place where they say it matters. Show it. Where THEY say. Not you.

It's not Rom 9:24!

 

[patrick jane]

Paul explained it, and called it a mystery.

I've explained the mystery to you, but you deny it because it's a death knell to your MAD.

you hit 10,000 posts !!! Time to shut it down Tet

 

[Interplanner]

I feel certain, in light of Mt24A, Gen 24:64B and other extraneous but innocuous passages, that you are overlooking the aspect of all of this which brings us back to the spiritual enterprise and proper toology that was intended, in interpreting difficult ideas. Agreed?

You will be judged by the usefulness of your words STP. You can relegate to the nonsense category all you want or you can realize that the declaration that God had made Jesus Lord and Christ was bomb to how humans think of authority, and of their sins. While it does not call for the end of government like anarchists do, it is a total shock to the powers that be to learn that they are here to honor Christ, to 'do homage to the Son.' Ps 2.

You make the call about the nonsense, vs. the radical declarations of the apostles. They had Emperor Vespasian so rattled after the DofJ, that he tried (miserably) to make adultery illegal in ancient Rome. I'd say somebody woke up!

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

you hit 10,000 posts !!! Time to shut it down Tet

:chuckle:

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

You will be judged by the usefulness of your words STP. You can relegate to the nonsense category all you want or you can realize that the declaration that God had made Jesus Lord and Christ was bomb to how humans think of authority, and of their sins. While it does not call for the end of government like anarchists do, it is a total shock to the powers that be to learn that they are here to honor Christ, to 'do homage to the Son.' Ps 2.

You make the call about the nonsense, vs. the radical declarations of the apostles. They had Emperor Vespasian so rattled after the DofJ, that he tried (miserably) to make adultery illegal in ancient Rome. I'd say somebody woke up!

This is gobbledy gook to me...

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Paul explained it, and called it a mystery.

I've explained the mystery to you, but you deny it because it's a death knell to your MAD.

Which tribe are you?

 

[Right Divider]

Which tribe are you?

He's probably Comanche or Cherokee ....

 

[MarleneJ]

Hi MarleneJ,

Also known as Acts 9 Dispensationalism, A9D, and MAD, this latter is an acronym that stands for Mid Acts Dispensationalism.

The basic premise of which is that the Body of Christ actually began with the saving of its' first Body member: the Apostle Paul.

It is a position that was arrived at through study of the Scripture as to who the Believer is in Christ - which greatly differs from God's relationship with the nation Israel (the nation back then, not now).

Men like Martin Luther, way back in the Middle Ages, began to see that distinction but it soon gave way to their own reasoning into a thing.

Likewise others in between then and now.

The result?

Two major schools of thought: the Reformed and the Dispensational - each with the various denominations those two have resulted in, as men continue to assert they alone have the truth.

If you attempt to read about MAD online from its opponents, you will consistently find its' opponents all attempt to look at the position in the same erroneous way by which they have continued to look at both Scripture and Dispensationalism in general - through the same error they have been looking at things from all along.

Where one runs off to endless books supposedly based on the Scripture that are actually no more than a constant retread of men parroting what they themselves read about in earlier books "about" all the way back to when such first picked up a writing instrument.

Even some Mads end up not too well convinced of the need to go by the example of a passage like Acts 17:11-12's three fold principle - being willing to receive a thing with all readiness of mind, searching the Scriptures daily whether those things being asserted are so, and only thetefore believing the Word of God on an issue is actually what is being preached.

Not to mention that it not only takes time to both properly learn first, and apply the principles needing to be applied as one studies the Scripture, but time applying them properly before one should consider taking on the study of any subject in Scripture on one's own.

For the fact of the matter is that the Scripture was meant to be taught by one proven "apt to teach" it.

No other profession on the planet is populated by so many expert amateurs as the world of the so called Bible "expert."

In the end, each individual is left with just the individual, the Book their your lap (Scripture) and the hope that each has enough sense to conclude "this Bible is not that easy to comprehend; I wonder what GENERIC principles might its various assertions be based on and where in Scripture might those be found?"

As good a state of mind to be in...as not.

Thank you for this answer. Sorry I did not get back to you earlier!

Certainly, this is one of the more bizarre interpretations of Scripture I have heard! I know there are anti-Paul amateur theologians, but who could imagine there were people who thought that Paul, and not Jesus was the founder of the church?

Hermeneutically speaking, you should never make a doctrine out of just one verse. Although you may have more, you have not posted them.

In my 36 years of reading the Bible through, studying it extensively, in Seminary and out, to say nothing of reading the Bible in the original languages, I have never come across such an absurd doctrine.

You say you do not read books, so then one must assume you have internet sites, or maybe real life places where you pick up this nonsense.

Well, another fringe heresy! I appreciate your post, as now I know what new nonsense has popped up on the internet!

 

[Right Divider]

Thank you for this answer. Sorry I did not get back to you earlier!

Certainly, this is one of the more bizarre interpretations of Scripture I have heard! I know there are anti-Paul amateur theologians, but who could imagine there were people who thought that Paul, and not Jesus was the founder of the church?

Hermeneutically speaking, you should never make a doctrine out of just one verse. Although you may have more, you have not posted them.

In my 36 years of reading the Bible through, studying it extensively, in Seminary and out, to say nothing of reading the Bible in the original languages, I have never come across such an absurd doctrine.

You say you do not read books, so then one must assume you have internet sites, or maybe real life places where you pick up this nonsense.

Well, another fringe heresy! I appreciate your post, as now I know what new nonsense has popped up on the internet!

Another Seminary know-it-all gonna teach us good....

We're really impressed with your years and your extensive study.... etc. etc. etc.

Perhaps you're the genius that can tell us why God called Paul in the first place, when He had already sent twelve apostles to "all nations".