ECT MADists don't follow Paul

[Cross Reference]

I was not speaking hermeneutically about Chambers. He has some good things to say about Christian growth etc. But he is not a lexical, archeological kind of guy. Every word, moment, passage of the Bible has a 'devotional' stone to overturn, in his view.

And he was correct in doing so, because that is what the criptures are about, i.e., they reveal God. God is a Spirit and those that . . . .". ______ Finish the sentence and then ask yourself the question: "How is that performed by the way I am studying the Bible"?

 

[Interplanner]

All this began with me saying that the 'making Christ Messiah' in your life of Chambers clouds what happened to the disciples. What the disciples had to acknowledge was that Messiah was very different from what they thought as raised in Judaism, and (a few verses later) John the Baptist was Elijah and everything about him was fulfilled as written. They now had to realize that there was no Israel-state-theocracy coming. Instead there was a mission due to a Gospel for all mankind.

Chambers is not a background scholar and that kind of information comes first. Once settled, you can go on to applications.

 

[Right Divider]

The apostles decided on 4 things to ask of the Gentile believers. If canceled does not describe the hundreds of other things, what term do you use?

Did it escape your notice that this declaration was ONLY for the Gentiles?

Acts 15:19-20 (KJV)​

(15:19) Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: (15:20) But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and [from] fornication, and [from] things strangled, and [from] blood. ​

Why did James NOT apply this to EVERYONE?

And, while we're at it, why is James the one making the judgment here?

The reign of God has come and will be in the form it is until the day of judgement. There are no upcoming events in Israel and no theocracy. It is not a kingdom in the sense of a state or civil admininstration. When the day of judgement takes place, this world becomes the NHNE of 2 Peter 3.

When did this glorious reign on the earth begin? So you think that God kingdom is only "spiritual" in "this present evil world"? (Gal 1:4)

Of COURSE, it's a kingdom in the governmental respect. Have you never read the Bible?

Isa 9:6-7 (KJV)​

(9:6) For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. (9:7) Of the increase of [his] government and peace [there shall be] no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this. ​

I was not speaking hermeneutically about Chambers. He has some good things to say about Christian growth etc. But he is not a lexical, archeological kind of guy. Every word, moment, passage of the Bible has a 'devotional' stone to overturn, in his view.

I could care less about what Chambers writes. I was specifically denying CR's use on that idea that Jesus was NOT referring to His own resurrection in Mark 9:9. That was just idiotic.

 

[Interplanner]

On the Jew v Gentile use of that Acts 15 letter, the answer would be from Galatians, which is to both, like all of the NT. I don't expect them to move on from the Law very quickly, but there are plenty of NT declarations that it is obsolete.

re the reign
Yep, the reign of God is here even though the world is evil. They over lap. There is no indicator in the NT that it is one or the other. I'm not going to go through Is 9 with a tweezers and extract out one line when the whole thing is true in Christ. There are dozens of lines in Isaiah that sound like a restored state but they aren't. There is no place or need for it.

You may want to read the thread on continuous fulfillment and destruction; twice is quite enough. It gets ridiculous to think that the relation with Israel is going back over all the same ground over and over. That's where the emphatic finality of Rom 11:30 comes in: all that kind of thing is done. God has bound all to wrath and is willing to grant mercy to all. Past tense on the binding and offering mercy.

In addition, Acts 13's sermon declares that the things promised to David have been shifted to Christ, also a line from Isaiah. If Christ showed no interest in a restored Judaistic theocracy, there's the answer.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

On the Jew v Gentile use of that Acts 15 letter, the answer would be from Galatians, which is to both, like all of the NT. I don't expect them to move on from the Law very quickly, but there are plenty of NT declarations that it is obsolete.

re the reign
Yep, the reign of God is here even though the world is evil. They over lap. There is no indicator in the NT that it is one or the other. I'm not going to go through Is 9 with a tweezers and extract out one line when the whole thing is true in Christ. There are dozens of lines in Isaiah that sound like a restored state but they aren't. There is no place or need for it.

You may want to read the thread on continuous fulfillment and destruction; twice is quite enough. It gets ridiculous to think that the relation with Israel is going back over all the same ground over and over. That's where the emphatic finality of Rom 11:30 comes in: all that kind of thing is done. God has bound all to wrath and is willing to grant mercy to all. Past tense on the binding and offering mercy.

In addition, Acts 13's sermon declares that the things promised to David have been shifted to Christ, also a line from Isaiah. If Christ showed no interest in a restored Judaistic theocracy, there's the answer.

It's a waste of breath to attempt to convert these Judaizers to Christian salvation, just as it was in the time of Christ for so many whose eyes are veiled to truth. They will die in their sins, having not heard and believed the Gospel.

 

[Cross Reference]

All this began with me saying that the 'making Christ Messiah' in your life of Chambers clouds what happened to the disciples. What the disciples had to acknowledge was that Messiah was very different from what they thought as raised in Judaism, and (a few verses later) John the Baptist was Elijah and everything about him was fulfilled as written. They now had to realize that there was no Israel-state-theocracy coming. Instead there was a mission due to a Gospel for all mankind.

Chambers is not a background scholar and that kind of information comes first. Once settled, you can go on to applications.

Chambers could buy and sell you re theology. Check it out before you cut him short. Ever read his bio?

 

[Cross Reference]

To everyone on the PUBLIC forum, oh dense one.


Back atcha!

You have more stuff with you than a Christmas turkey. How come you don't want to know the Bible can't be understood except by revelation AKA the Holy Spirit you deny. Can I guess?

 

[Danoh]

You have more stuff with you than a Christmas turkey. How come you don't want to know the Bible can't be understood except by revelation AKA the Holy Spirit you deny. Can I guess?

Your "what this means to me" is hole-ly alright :chuckle:

 

[Right Divider]

You have more stuff with you than a Christmas turkey. How come you don't want to know the Bible can't be understood except by revelation AKA the Holy Spirit you deny. Can I guess?

You are a liar. I do NOT "deny the Holy Spirit".

Get lost you tired crazy lunatic.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Jesus Christ is the all in all. The Last Adam. The Temple. The Final Sacrifice. The High Priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. The New Covenant. Israel. Everything natural and physical that came first as type for antitype. He's the All in All. The only Theocracy. The only Theonomy.

Anyone who denies any of this, whether for Futurist Eschatological falsehoods OR the horrific Hermeneutics such Eschatology includes, is a Judaizer who denies Christ and the only Gospel for salvation.

 

[patrick jane]

Jesus Christ is the all in all. The Last Adam. The Temple. The Final Sacrifice. The High Priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. The New Covenant. Israel. Everything natural and physical that came first as type for antitype. He's the All in All. The only Theocracy. The only Theonomy.

Anyone who denies any of this, whether for Futurist Eschatological falsehoods OR the horrific Herneneutics such Eschatology includes, is a Judaizer who denies Christ and the only Gospel for salvation.

Yes.


Colossians 1:14-15 KJV - Colossians 1:16 KJV - Colossians 1:17-19 KJV -

 

[Interplanner]

Are HERNENEUTICS those which have herniated?

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Indeed. That bugs me as well.

First, he was writing to the Corinthians who he found in a Jewish synagogue.

It shouldn't bug you.

The folks Paul wrote to were not only made up of folks he met at the synagogue.

He preached quite awhile after separating from the synagogue.

Second, he explained to them that the spirit of the new testament was the righteousness of God.
He ministered it through his gospel.

He was not telling the Corinthians that they're under the letter of the New Covenant.

There is no letter of the new covenant.

The coming of Christ and his preaching was the covenant cut with Abraham.

This is what Paul ministered, in fulfillment of OT prophecy that the children given to Christ by God would do.

Paul going to preach to those who did not seek God, was his fulfilling the word of God, toward the Gentiles that was written beforehand.

That was his dispensation to them.

He also had a dispensation to the Jews, as well as those where Christ was named before.

 

[Cross Reference]

Are HERNENEUTICS those which have herniated?

Is that your best shot??

 

[Cross Reference]

It shouldn't bug you.

The folks Paul wrote to were not only made up of folks he met at the synagogue.

He preached quite awhile after separating from the synagogue.




There is no letter of the new covenant.

The coming of Christ and his preaching was the covenant cut with Abraham.

This is what Paul ministered, in fulfillment of OT prophecy that the children given to Christ by God would do.

Paul going to preach to those who did not seek God, was his fulfilling the word of God, toward the Gentiles that was written beforehand.

That was his dispensation to them.

He also had a dispensation to the Jews, as well as those where Christ was named before.

Consider the unchangeable fact of redemption to be the new covenant because it is the basis for a new way of living life. God supllied the all the elements much as He did when He walked through the separated pieces in the Abrahamic account.

 

[Cross Reference]

Paul going to preach to those who did not seek God, was his fulfilling the word of God, toward the Gentiles that was written beforehand.

That was his dispensation to them.

He also had a dispensation to the Jews, as well as those where Christ was named before

.

What makes you think Paul's preaching could take place with those who didn't want to seek God to know Him rather than to those who were being convicted of sin? Jesus said, "Go and make disciples".

 

[Interplanner]

Is that your best shot??

It was a joke about the spelling of hermeneutics in the post it quoted. I wondered if the writer intended it.

 

[Interplanner]

It shouldn't bug you.

The folks Paul wrote to were not only made up of folks he met at the synagogue.

He preached quite awhile after separating from the synagogue.




There is no letter of the new covenant.

The coming of Christ and his preaching was the covenant cut with Abraham.

This is what Paul ministered, in fulfillment of OT prophecy that the children given to Christ by God would do.

Paul going to preach to those who did not seek God, was his fulfilling the word of God, toward the Gentiles that was written beforehand.

That was his dispensation to them.

He also had a dispensation to the Jews, as well as those where Christ was named before.

He has no tidy pattern of mission work. He preached where he could. Synagogues were sites because they were open to discussion (as opposed to formal services at the temple). In Acts 18:4 there is one where there were plenty of Greeks to speak to as well.

There dispensation of grace that he was handling was not subdivided into one for Jews and one for gentiles, as 1M1S is saying. There is a period where he intended to speak to the nations who had never heard, and not those who had heard through others (Rom 15), as part of the working understanding of Jesus' sayings like in Mt 24, so that the whole world had heard in that generation, which was originally thought to be the world's last. He says this was fulfilled, once in Col 1 and once in I Tim 3.

 

[Cross Reference]

It was a joke about the spelling of hermeneutics in the post it quoted. I wondered if the writer intended it.

I well understand and you conveniently used it as an excuse to avoid a reply. Whethher or not he intended a mis-spelling is also irrelevant. He made his point.

Do you consider yourself a born again Christian? I have a reason for asking that will give an explanation for the why of the spiritual necessity for understnading the "history" of Israel..

 

[Right Divider]

Jesus Christ is the all in all. The Last Adam. The Temple. The Final Sacrifice. The High Priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. The New Covenant. Israel. Everything natural and physical that came first as type for antitype. He's the All in All. The only Theocracy. The only Theonomy.

Anyone who denies any of this, whether for Futurist Eschatological falsehoods OR the horrific Hermeneutics such Eschatology includes, is a Judaizer who denies Christ and the only Gospel for salvation.

Beware everyone; the all knowing - all seeing PPS has spoken!