Pagans adore you. They prefer fiction too.
ECT Get On the Road To Emmaus With Cleopas And His Friend Again
- Thread starter northwye
- Start date
Exactly. We don't have to rewrite scripture into what we want to believe.
We take it at it's word.
Their being pagans means what?
That they don't know the Scripture.
Which in turn means what?
That they are relying on the fact that they don't know they are relying on your say so, of all people; for their "understanding."
You - Mr. Book Report.
No, thanks.
In the spirit of the longsuffering of Romans 5:8.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Interplanner
Well-known member
The declarations about the resurrection are not rewrites. Instead you and the club resist what it actually says. Grand Master Adept STP, the fastestpostinthewest, refuses to deal with Acts 13:32 and thinks he has dealt with it at v23! Clod!
Here's the point from passage about which this post is concerned:
THE OT IS NOT OPENED UNLESS CHRIST IS PREACHED, v32. This is declared in this chapter by angels, by the two on the road, and by Christ.
A preoccupation with a restoration of Israel and Judaism DOES NOT OPEN THE SCRIPTURES. Only the preaching of the Gospel and glorification and mission of Christ.
And as a bonus we learn the divine plan all along: I'm going to send you what the Father promised. Not the land. The power of the Spirit for the mission.
Now do you realize what the OT is for? How the NT reads the OT? What matters about the restoration?
Interplanner
Well-known member
It's not that they adore me; I wouldn't accept that. it's that when a verse says the Seed was Christ meaning one person, they don't tangle about 'many people.' They see that the whole Bible has a unified message, and is not a headache.
No - you take it at YOUR understanding of it.
As does everyone else.
And there is nothing new about the fact of this tendency..
John 11:11 These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. 11:12 Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. 11:13 Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. 11:14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.
Question is, is our understandung of one thing or another sound?
Which is a question of...study approach.
Case in point...
Matthew 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. 22:31 But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, 22:32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. 22:33 And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine.
And yet, all He was doing was what they had obviously failed to do - properly compare the things that differ within the Prophetic aspect of God's Two-Fold Purpose.
His own assertions there were based on what - on other Scriptures they had obviously failed to consider, and thus, to compare not with other Scriptures, but against their own understanding, before allowing themselves said understanding.
"...meaning one person" - in other words, you can't even see you could not either but have influenced their perception to where their's ended up yours, or to sway them to consider comparing passages for intended sense; for that is not your approach.
In either case, they were left either to sorting out a thing before they knew how to, or left to your obvious incompetence at same.
Ten to one you failed to go into that other also valid aspect of that "seed" mentioned, say, at the very end of Acts 3.
Because your own understanding now has you blind to even being able consider looking at any of this with fresh eyes.
Nevertheless, Romans 5:8.
People that know their bibles know that any promise made to a singular seed is obviously different from any promise made to a plural seed.
They may both have similarities to each other, but there are differences.
You can count on the completion of any promise made to a singular seed, and you can count on the completion of any promise made to a plural seed.
Disagree all you want.
I'm used to it from you and IP.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Right Divider
Body part
Why would they start the "mission to the gentiles" at THAT time when the LORD Jesus Christ had told them THIS?
Matt 10:23 (AKJV/PCE)
(10:23) But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.
Had "the Son of man be come" already?
Oh... that's right.... everything was fulfilled in the resurrection.
Where were the twelve thrones located?
Matt 19:28 (AKJV/PCE)
(19:28) And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
Luke 22:30 (AKJV/PCE)
(22:30) That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
Interplanner
Well-known member
The everything fulfilled in the resurrection was about the overall promise to the fathers.
What is the Son of Man coming? Why are you in such a fit about something that is elusive? There are many good debates about it; I'm never just going to take your dicatation about it like it was as easy as buying stamps at the PO, but that's how you sound.
The record of Acts is that they did get all through Judea and Samaria and then Peter was sent to a Gentile and Philip, and God arrested Paul for service, etc, and it kept growing.
He is not as literal as you think. He said to get to their thrones, they had to suffer. He said he was going to Jerusalem to his exodus. he said knock down this temple and I will rebuild it in 3 days. Get the idea? Stop reading it like it is an assembly manual for a Prius.
Besides he said he would eat/drink with them in the new covenant, and he did, after the resurrection.
heir
TOL Subscriber
:yawn:
heir
TOL Subscriber
A little more knowing no man after the flesh and less about "yourself and your own", "your kind" and "you and yours" would be refreshing!
heir
TOL Subscriber
I'm glad I didn't hold my breath so then that's Mrs. to you and yours.
Not to worry, your heir-ness; one of your pals should be along shortly to lend your same old double-standard it's same old support :chuckle:
Nevertheless, Rom. 5:8.
heir
TOL Subscriber
troublemaker