ECT Power: How Acts 1 answers the kingdom of Israel question

I

Interplanner

Well-known member
When you say something, at least there is an intelligent conversation, but this cartoon stuff communicates that the whole business is ridiculous.

Communication 101: communication is not what you say, it is what people hear.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
Communication 101: communication is not what you say, it is what people hear.
Click to expand...

Communication is a two way street, and as the lighted camel of Gen 24C has taught us, we cannot afford to ignore the depth, the width, the breadth, and height of the paramount issues of the NHNE event and continue seeking the red dirt to find our fulfillment. Agreed?
 
steko

steko

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
SaulToPaul said:
Communication is a two way street, and as the lighted camel of Gen 24C has taught us, we cannot afford to ignore the depth, the width, the breadth, and height of the paramount issues of the NHNE event and continue seeking the red dirt to find our fulfillment. Agreed?
Click to expand...

One mustn't forget that Rebekah had to have glommed on the camel at some point before she lit off the camel.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
This incandescent camel thing has superceded the two children and mothers and cities of Gal 4 for 2P2Pers. Why am I not surprised?

If the NT says something about the OT, count on 2P2P to find something else from the OT to major upon.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
SaulToPaul said:
We simply do not write off promises that are not nullified.
Why do you? It's satanic.
Click to expand...


Because it is ignorant of NT history;
there was plenty of space and time for the NT to say something and it does not;
church leaders never have had a separate interest in the land until the weird cults of the 1800s came along, which was also when Judaism sought the same thing AS JUDAISM NOT AS CHRISTIAN;
because, theologically (if you absorb Hebrews) there simply is no concern or need.

We are not at the stage of needing to 'prove' the bible true. The Bible is trying to prove that Christ justifies people from their sins by his being resurrected.

Your agenda is completely foreign to apostolic thinking and issues.
 
Last edited:
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
Because it is ignorant of NT history;
there was plenty of space and time for the NT to say something and it does not;
church leaders never have had a separate interest in the land until the weird cults of the 1800s came along, which was also when Judaism sought the same thing AS JUDAISM NOT AS CHRISTIAN;
because, theologically (if you absorb Hebrews) there simply is no concern or need.

We are not at the stage of needing to 'prove' the bible true. The Bible is trying to prove that Christ justifies people from their sins by his being resurrection.

Your agenda is completely foreign to apostolic thinking and issues.
Click to expand...

Are arguments from silence valid?
 
N

northwye

New member
"This is why Eph 4 reads that after Christ ascended on high, he gave gifts to men, and those gifts are how the church was to move forward. "

I have never seen a clear statement by followers of dispensationalism into which of the two dispensationalist groups the Jewish Christians - those of the physical bloodline who accepted Christ and were born again to become the first of the elect of the New Covenant in the First Century - were put.

Were the first Christians - all of the physical bloodline - in the early chapters of Acts according to dispensationalism in the ekklesia or in the redeemed Israel of Luke 1: 68? And does the New Testament make a distinction or separation between those of redeemed Israel and the ekklesia?

Paul says in Romans 10: 12, "For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him."

He says in Galatians 3: 28, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

If all who accept Christ, are born again and he is in them are one regardless of their physical bloodline or DNA, then how can there be a separation between Jewish Christians and non-Jewish Christians. There is not a separation. If dispensationalism says there is, it is a lie.

Romans 2: 28-29: "For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
29. But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God."

There is no more a Jew defined by the physical bloodline, but the elect of redeemed Israel of all races are defined by their spiritual state in Jesus Christ.

So, the statement "This is why Eph 4 reads that after Christ ascended on high, he gave gifts to men, and those gifts are how the church was to move forward," might say "This is why Eph 4 reads that after Christ ascended on high, he gave gifts to men, and those gifts are how the MEETING was to move forward." Or, using the definition of churche or chirche at about the time the New Testament was written, it could say "...after Christ ascended on high, he gave gifts to men, and those gifts are how the (house of a PAGAN LORD, THE CIRCLE or the Greek GODDESS CIRCE), was to move forward."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top