The OT was a picture of what had happened, what was happening, and what would happen.
The NT does the same.
ECT Does Romans 9 support Individual Election?
- Thread starter Potter's Clay
- Start date
The NT does the same.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Why are you so obtuse and obstinately against what the NT says? The law was the shadow; Christ is the reality. That's what Col and Hebrews say together.
I have tried to tell you this for months. don't bother reexpressing the same thing over and over if you are going to treat the OT as though it was unveiled AS IS. It changes in Christ.
There are no 'pictures' in the NT!!! There is the tension between what we have not yet recieved and still hope for, but none of the things we have recieved now will be discarded. As is the case with the already set aside old covenant.
That is what I mean when the NT has no 'need' to do anything with Judaism or in Judea.
I'm not, you are.
I believe all of it right down to it telling us exactly, and point blank, whom the new covenant was made with.
Leaving no ambiguity or guesswork about it.
Have you tweeted to GOD that that is the only way He can do it?
I feel a whirlwind coming your way.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Tam that is the exact meaning of your fav passage which you site over and over again but have no idea what it is saying. The 'written on your heart' is an expression Paul used many times for the regenerative work of the spirit in Romans and so on, no matter what race the person was. You are continually out of touch with the text, with the inter-references, with the grammar, etc.
"no ambiguity", that's the word! ....and that's th' truth!
If GOD had meant for us to understand His word in some way other than the plain sense, He should have supplied a handbook for interpreting the Scriptures to find out that they don't really mean what they plainly say.
Interplanner
Well-known member
He did. It's in the commentary on ch 8 in chs 9-10 about which you are total clutzes. You are D'ist slaves and prooftexters. You find one line and shazzam you think D'ism is true instead of seeing HOW the passages was meant and meant to be fulfilled.
"Sacrifice and offering you did not desirre,
but a body you prepared for me...
Then I said, 'Here I am--It is written about me
in the scroll--
I have come to do your will, O God."
That is how the new covenant was fulfilled and enacted. You'd have to be insane to miss it. That is why at the last supper he spoke of the sacrifice of his BODY, broken for you. Not the 'body' of the state of Israel. Nor for the restoration of the state of Israel.
You do not have the 'right' of finding one prooftext and saying that is all the NT says. You have to put them all together on this topic and generalize what they say.
"Details without generalizations are bewildering and misguiding;
generalizations without exceptions are platitudes."
--Dennis Prager
Right Divider
Body part
You are a liar.
:french:
That's some funny stuff, right there.
Jesus died for all sin. But that does NOT cancel any of the promises that God made to Israel.
You can just KEEP ignoring the CLEAR and UNAMBIGUOUS text in Jeremiah and Hebrews if you like, but that just makes you dumb.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
:up: to RD.
RD provides Bible, while IP and Nang offer opinion, theory, and statements of faith.
RD provides Bible, while IP and Nang offer opinion, theory, and statements of faith.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Made up.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Intense irony...
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
"I shall cause them to walk in my statutes..."
You do not know anyone who God is causing to walk in his statutes. Fess up. Come clean.
Go back to the drawing board.
Interplanner
Well-known member
RD,
really. The reason for debating about the new covenant is that it was about the forgivenss of sins. You can't claim it to be for the land of Israel when it is observed everywhere in the NT as having to do with forgivenss of sins: the last supper, I cor 10, Heb 8-10.
Funny stuff?
There are only two options you can have in D'ism, as stated above:
the forgiveness is only for Israel
2, the new covenant is only about the restoration of Israel.
Neither of which are true. Because of their 'only's.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Sorry, STP with 1000 ignored posts. You may as well wait until there is reason to hear you. For me, there is not. You don't think clearly and you are not honest.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Nang
TOL Subscriber
All the Christians I have met in my lifetime, have walked in willing obedience. In fact, that is one of the ways we can know a person's faith is genuine, when obedience is evident.
Glaringly noticeable.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Nah. They don't walk in his statutes.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
You most probably are unable to define "statute."