Spammed for the 56th time in 5 months.
Wow, Craigie, you just baffle us with your "Have you ever read?...Don't you believe the bible/'Jesus'/Paul" stumpers.
188 "Darby" spam references in 5 weeks.
That's all the punk has.
ECT Studying how the NT uses the OT
- Thread starter Interplanner
- Start date
Spammed for the 56th time in 5 months.
Wow, Craigie, you just baffle us with your "Have you ever read?...Don't you believe the bible/'Jesus'/Paul" stumpers.
188 "Darby" spam references in 5 weeks.
That's all the punk has.
"So, they were saved, but not technically until 70AD."-"expert" stupid Craigie on salvation
heir
TOL Subscriber
I don't believe they were in a "program". I believe the Romans had a faith (Romans 1:1-4 KJV) and yet a need to be established by "some spiritual gift" (Romans 1:11 KJV) that turns out to be Paul's "my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, but now is made manifest,..." (Romans 16:25-27 KJV).
I've told you what I believe the scripture saith about the Romans and am not willing to say more than what the scripture saith and you are never satisfied with my replies.
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4355558&postcount=134
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4355856&postcount=159
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4355865&postcount=163
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4356756&postcount=275
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4356757&postcount=276
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Let us look at this passage again:
"Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more" (Jer.31:31-34).
There was never a time when all those from the house of Israel and the house of Judah had their sins forgiven. And of course you just IGNORED what Peter said one must do to have their sins forgiven:
"To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name [/B]whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins[/B]" (Acts 10:43).
You say that all men have their sins forgiven and it doesn't matter if they believe in Him or not!
You have no respect for the truth revealed in the Scriptures.
heir
TOL Subscriber
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Which one of your two gospels were these Romans saved by before Paul wrote to them?
No it's not.
You claim only the sins of Israelites get atoned in the future. That's not what I claim.
That's correct.
All sins were paid for at the cross.
People receive eternal life by faith.
People go to hell for unbelief.
Sins have nothing to do with it, they were all paid for with the one time sacrifice and shed blood of Christ Jesus.
Do you believe what the Apostle Paul said in the following:
(1 Cor 10:11 KJV) Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.
Why would Paul tell the Corinthians it was the end of the ages, if the end of the ages was 2,000 years and counting away?
You claim Darby followers are lost:
"Not to mention, Darby followers deny that Christ Jesus' one time sacrifice for sin was good enough. They claim people in the future will have to sacrifice animals for sin atonement."-Craigie Tet.
Demonic false accuser.
We've heard your " That's not what I claim...I've never said ...." hundreds of times, habitual liar.
I told you to shut up with your satanic sophistry of "Do you believe what the Apostle Paul/'Jesus'/the bible said in..............?"
We believe all of it punk, but not your satanic interpretation of what Paul/The Lord Jesus Christ/The bible said.
Here is another satanic claim of sohistry, deceit, of yours:
"All Dispensationalists are Darby followers."-Craigie the Clown Tet.
False accuser.
Interplanner
Well-known member
It's true: most of those people who stay in Darby have a hard time with Hebrews, and spend very little time in it.
Yep!
Only the intellectual dishonest could read the book of Hebrews and then claim there is going to be animal sacrifices for sin atonement in the future.
Yet, that's what the Darby followers do.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Perhaps more to the point: there is coming to terms with the earlier assertion in Hebrews that Christ's priesthood credentials are Melchi-Zedekian, not Aaronic. That closes the subject on that.
Your ignorance is revealing itself again.
That's rich, punk-you referring to others as "dishonest," when you admitted, on record, that you're "ministry," is deceit, and sophistry, and spam.
Only a moron, child of the devil, habitual liar, could read the bible, and satanically spam "Darby" 666/765 posts, like you have, and post this:
Like the Lord Jesus Christ's return was invisible, but everyone saw him, but you claim "his return" really means the Roman army, eh, punk? And you lied about that, claiming that you never said it. To wit:
"Tet: "The LORD Jesus Christ returned in the form of a Roman Army." "-STP
"Never said that."-Tet.
Lie-
"Tet is a preterist that believes Christ already returned in 70 AD via the Roman Army."-Tambora, on another TOL thread
"Correct, and thanks for making it clear that it was the Roman army that was His return."-stupid Craigie
"The Roman army destroyed Jerusalem in 70AD. That is what Jesus meant when He said He will return."-Gomer Tet.
Vs.
"Jesus never physically returned, and never will physically return to planet earth after He ascended to Heaven"-Preterist deceiver Tet.
According to this Preterist con job, in this "man made" AD 70-ism "belief system," he returned "un physically," but everyone saw Him, and signs are invisible.
“And that is what happened. The Lord came in a way that everyone could see Him. However, He never touched planet earth, and when this event was over, He then sat on the throne in Heaven NOT on planet earth.”-Tet.
Ascended up physically, never returned physically in AD 70, just as some disembodied spirit, everyone saw Him, even though he did not return physically in AD 70.
Wait....it was the Roman army.
Scam artist.
"I am not here to teach........anyone....I am here to learn."-Craigie Tet.
We know. Sit down, shut up, and learn.
Any more lies you'd like to spam, Craigie?
You claim Darby followers are lost:
"Not to mention, Darby followers deny that Christ Jesus' one time sacrifice for sin was good enough. They claim people in the future will have to sacrifice animals for sin atonement."-Craigie Tet.
Demonic false accuser.
Go ahead, Craigie, as I instructed you, and assert that one can..
deny that Christ Jesus' one time sacrifice for sin was good enough...
...and still be saved.
Go ahead, closet Catholic.
He won't-he's spineless, as the punk is afraid to take me on, one on one, because he knows that I will continue to expose him as a child of the devil, a false accuser, sent by his daddy to bring disunity amongst members of the boc, which excludes him.
The only ignorance comes from Darby followers such as yourself who claim there are going to be animal sacrifices for sin atonement in the future.
(Heb 10:12) But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,
Like I said, only someone who is intellectually dishonest could read the above verse, and then claim there's going to be animal sacrifices for sin atonement in the future.
How much plainer does it have to be for you?