ECT MAD mistake#435: "Acts 1-5 is about Christ and Israel"

[Interplanner]

That was a quote from RD on Sep.7. But he hasn't quite got the idea, since MAD's mental illness is 2P2P.

Acts 1 repeats the frequent Messianic mission objective: 'you are my witnesses.' Not just to Israel and not just about Israel issues. It was to get a message of forgiveness and justification from sins to the whole world.

At least the last I checked, forgiveness was for all people, not just Jews. Taking away sins was for all people, not just Jews. What ever takes away or wipes out sins from them, does so for all mankind.

This is why MADs can't see what Acts 1-5 is about. Scratch: WHO it is about. "Salvation is through the Jews" (Jn 4) yes, but TO whom? To all mankind.

Now, is there an issue particular to Israel right then? You bet. It is the issue of the destruction of the country. Everyone knew time was up. Caiaphas knew and tried to circumvent it from happening--by getting rid of Christ, whom he treated as the 'son of perdition' to be stopped, Jn 12 and 18. Josephus the priest knew that Israel was due for this evil 'son' to arrive and ruin the country in rebellion. The 490 years were up.

There were two directions Israel could go: God's Messianic mission to all nations or to destruction with the Jewish zealots.

So Peter preached: "Save yourself from this wicked generation."

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

In light of Gal 3:17A and Gal 3:17X, these views are spurious at best?

 

[patrick jane]

In light of Gal 3:17A and Gal 3:17X, these views are spurious at best?

I think he thinks Gal3:17Z says that the promise WAS made of no effect, when it's actually the opposite, the covenant cannot be annulled -
In regards to 2P2P it is what it is even as it is, even. It's odd that D'ists know so much

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

I think he thinks Gal3:17Z says that the promise WAS made of no effect, when it's actually the opposite, the covenant cannot be annulled -
In regards to 2P2P it is what it is even as it is, even. It's odd that D'ists know so much

While I agree with your premise, the conclusion is faulty logic based upon the clear rhetoric of Samuel 1J and then furthered by Genesis 24B. The red dirt of Ezekiel 37 can only be understood with spiritual eyes not with the red dragon Revelation eyes of those which say they are Jews but are not. Rev 3D is conclusive.

 

[Interplanner]

this thread is about what is actually in Acts 1-5. Do you have comments about that or just your wasteful foolishness? I know you're drugged but I'm trying to awaken your minds and spirit to Christ instead of 2P2P, which of course you know better than I.

 

[Danoh]

this thread is about what is actually in Acts 1-5. Do you have comments about that or just your wasteful foolishness? I know you're drugged but I'm trying to awaken your minds and spirit to Christ instead of 2P2P, which of course you know better than I.

No; you are merely regurgitating what you have been reading in your endless books "about" for the last forty plus years.

You have yet to post even one passage you then exegeted as a demo of how you extract its intended sense.

All you ever do is assert a thing is so, and then claim it is.

Talk about incompetence..

 

[Interplanner]

No; you are merely regurgitating what you have been reading in your endless books "about" for the last forty plus years.

You have yet to post even one passage you then exegeted as a demo of how you extract its intended sense.

All you ever do is assert a thing is so, and then claim it is.

Talk about incompetence..

This thread was written to help RD, who asked to be shown the cross in preaching in Acts 1-5. I did pretty good but petered out at ch 3. It's in another thread. It went over several verses. Alas the drawback of an i.net forum--things get buried.

'You are my witnesses' was always about the work on the cross, before and after (Jn 13-17). When they preached it, they said so.

I also explained that right at the moment, it did sharpen the decision Israel had to make, thus the warning at the end of 2: 'save yourself from this generation.' Because that theme is in a lot of the Gospels about how portentious that generation was.

So, there was lots of demonstration, and you didn't see it. I didn't know I was in charge of finding things for you to read.

You're actually pretty pissed at the babes thing, because there is unequivocally no combeback. And it's been sitting there the whole historical time.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

This thread was written to help RD, who asked to be shown the cross in preaching in Acts 1-5.

If I am not mistaken the poster who goes by the moniker "Right Divider", which having read his postages is a misnomer, asked to be shown where the cross was preached as GOOD NEWS in Acts 1-5. Having researched your posts in light of Ezekiel 18B and Jeremiah 13D, I am having trouble seeing where you proved him wrong. Please reiterate your views for the readership.

 

[Interplanner]

If I am not mistaken the poster who goes by the moniker "Right Divider", which having read his postages is a misnomer, asked to be shown where the cross was preached as GOOD NEWS in Acts 1-5. Having researched your posts in light of Ezekiel 18B and Jeremiah 13D, I am having trouble seeing where you proved him wrong. Please reiterate your views for the readership.

There is nothing about the cross there that is any different from what is offered to all mankind. Because "if one died for all, all were dead" 2 Cor 5. Everyone in mankind shared in that sin. The only difference would be the mission that Israel was supposed to start at that point; not all nations could do that as well.

There is no offer of a theocracy to Israel there. It is the launch of the mission, as the last words of Christ in the Gospels had said.

 

[Interplanner]

If I am not mistaken the poster who goes by the moniker "Right Divider", which having read his postages is a misnomer, asked to be shown where the cross was preached as GOOD NEWS in Acts 1-5. Having researched your posts in light of Ezekiel 18B and Jeremiah 13D, I am having trouble seeing where you proved him wrong. Please reiterate your views for the readership.

Posts like this prove to me that the obsession with the land promise to David are a madness that blocks the meaning of passages like Acts 1-5. Christ had just finished 40 days of teaching the apostles from the Scriptures, but oh, he forgot the fav 2P2P passages about David's throne. How could this happen?

 

[Danoh]

Posts like this prove to me that the obsession with the land promise to David are a madness that blocks the meaning of passages like Acts 1-5. Christ had just finished 40 days of teaching the apostles from the Scriptures, but oh, he forgot the fav 2P2P passages about David's throne. How could this happen?

Where a poster like STP is concerned, as is made evident by the recurring pattern of his posts - his response to the land issues are in reply to YOUR obssession with those issues.

Otherwise, they don't come up much in his posts.

One more case of YOUR PERSISTENT double-standard in YOUR OBVIOUS failure to heed the following General principle - a principle applicable in ALL ages...

James 1:22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves. 1:23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: 1:24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was. 1:25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

In short, you are being a hypocrite.