SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
:chuckle:
ECT The content of faith, required to be believed, in Mt.-John, prior to the dbr
- Thread starter john w
- Start date
:chuckle:
Interplanner
Well-known member
If you want something relevant, STP, you look at declarations of the NT about the promises as a whole, like Eph 2-3, where you find that the land is totally irrelevant because what the nations are getting along with Jews in the Gospel is the blessing of justification from sin. If there is a reason why the land of Israel matters anymore in that, let me know.
I just sat through an hour of a teacher on Joel 3 and the mental torture of trying to explain why modern Israel is both secular and spiritual at the same time, or why there are spiritual blessings that both modern Israel and Christians have--is beyond comprehension. People keep trying because they think the land matters, and no where does it matter in the NT.
Probably the biggest problem is 'saved' in Rom 11. Even though it means justification from sins, since prob ch 3, the D'ists say all of a sudden in rom 11 it means the geo-political theocracy. Not even Isaiah meant that when he used it! He means that the debt of sin is taken away--like John the Baptist who quoted this too. It is not about a Judaistic theocracy. God does not do theocracies. Not on this side of the NHNE.
I just sat through an hour of a teacher on Joel 3 and the mental torture of trying to explain why modern Israel is both secular and spiritual at the same time, or why there are spiritual blessings that both modern Israel and Christians have--is beyond comprehension. People keep trying because they think the land matters, and no where does it matter in the NT.
Probably the biggest problem is 'saved' in Rom 11. Even though it means justification from sins, since prob ch 3, the D'ists say all of a sudden in rom 11 it means the geo-political theocracy. Not even Isaiah meant that when he used it! He means that the debt of sin is taken away--like John the Baptist who quoted this too. It is not about a Judaistic theocracy. God does not do theocracies. Not on this side of the NHNE.
As usual; you argue against your own perceived strawmen.
Romans 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
Romans 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
There is the "saved" of verse 26.
And I am well aware of what you will now assert about that....
Romans 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
Romans 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
There is the "saved" of verse 26.
And I am well aware of what you will now assert about that....
Interplanner
Well-known member
Sin is sin is sin. If God takes away the sins of the Caledonians, he has taken away the sins of the Jews. When Caledonians believe that, they are grafted. When Jews believe that they are grafted. Because you can't get in without faith in the Gospel.
You have proven nothing about the theocracy. A successful graft is not a theocracy, because Gentiles will be in it and not theocratic. Learn how to think.
I listened to an hour of D'ist drivel last night that the teacher really didn't care about or think about what he was saying. To him the Bible was just a list of things to be placed in the right order instead of the magnificent offer I just mentioned to all mankind. If you want the stinking rubbish of lists and everything in the right order, go ahead. You'll miss the heart, the passion, the beauty.
The beauty is not a Judaistic theocracy and worship system. I don't know how you guys miss the transfer from shadow to reality but you are glorying the 'weak and miserable elements of the world.' The shadow! And you dare to think it is in Romans 11! Fools! Go ahead! Salivate on the shadow!
"If justification by Christ is lost, all doctrine is lost and darkness." --Luther
You have proven nothing about the theocracy. A successful graft is not a theocracy, because Gentiles will be in it and not theocratic. Learn how to think.
I listened to an hour of D'ist drivel last night that the teacher really didn't care about or think about what he was saying. To him the Bible was just a list of things to be placed in the right order instead of the magnificent offer I just mentioned to all mankind. If you want the stinking rubbish of lists and everything in the right order, go ahead. You'll miss the heart, the passion, the beauty.
The beauty is not a Judaistic theocracy and worship system. I don't know how you guys miss the transfer from shadow to reality but you are glorying the 'weak and miserable elements of the world.' The shadow! And you dare to think it is in Romans 11! Fools! Go ahead! Salivate on the shadow!
"If justification by Christ is lost, all doctrine is lost and darkness." --Luther
Interplanner
Well-known member
At the end of the day, I refuse to find the bible as confused and worthless and hodgepodge and untrue about modern Israel as I found in the D'ist who spoke last night on Joel 3. It was entirely bogus, dull, and lifeless.
Not how the apostles sounded!
Not how the apostles sounded!
I could have sworn I did not mention a theocracy in my above post.
I subscribe to the teaching, yes; but I did not assert the above is referring to that. For the issue there is salvation.
Try reading what's in front of you, IP, not INTO it..
Interplanner
Well-known member
The tree of faith is the believers. Some are Jews and some are Gentiles. No unbelievers. It exists then and continues on to this day.
Then there is the logical problem of how does 'all' of Israel the ethne get saved at one future moment. No can do. Because some of all of the ethne lived in 300 BC, 300 AD and 1300 AD etc.
The reason for mentioning the theocracy, is that there is no other direction to go for a nation of Israel. It would not be secular. It would not be without the worship system. Thats Judaism. it would be a restored judaistic theocracy. In light of Hebrews, it won't happen. The prophetic vision always was about the church. That's here and now , since the apostles. That's the one program. There is no 2P2P.
'saved' is not theocracy.
Israel is not the ethne.
These are not phantom objections about D'ism; they are its fundamental mistakes.
Then there is the logical problem of how does 'all' of Israel the ethne get saved at one future moment. No can do. Because some of all of the ethne lived in 300 BC, 300 AD and 1300 AD etc.
The reason for mentioning the theocracy, is that there is no other direction to go for a nation of Israel. It would not be secular. It would not be without the worship system. Thats Judaism. it would be a restored judaistic theocracy. In light of Hebrews, it won't happen. The prophetic vision always was about the church. That's here and now , since the apostles. That's the one program. There is no 2P2P.
'saved' is not theocracy.
Israel is not the ethne.
These are not phantom objections about D'ism; they are its fundamental mistakes.
All that time you waste in books has you unable to see that no one is saying that Romans 11's "saved" refers to a theocracy - even though this has been pointed out to you.
Sigh, the illiteracy of books based Bible "literacy..."
Interplanner
Well-known member
OK, fair enough. That is what I hear from YOU. There has to be a restored state. If it is going to follow some of the prophets that way, it is going to have to be a theocracy. No other options exist. It is what ancient wandering and Jerusalem Israel was. Everyone who thinks 'saved' is a restored Israel that I have ever heard is saying this. All the pop teachers keep looking for it, keep looking for the temple and the sacrificial system to operate. When I tell them about Hebrews they act like deer looking at headlights. There must be 50 of these teachers on Christian cable TV. Besides all the websites and people I've heard over 40 years.
Maybe they don't know they are saying it, but I really don't they would find such a restored sacrificial system/theocracy to be a big problem nor would they find it very different from what they think 'eschatology' is about.
There are two reasons that have damaged them, hopefully not permanently: 1, the immediate leap to a distant future when reading Mt 24A.
2, the belief, like you, that Rom 11 is about a future moment instead of an appeal or urging to Israel to be in God's mission or about what they could be if they were in God's mission. Paul was instead using Isaiah historically, and 'Israel' is the tree that has faith. All those in unbelief are lopped.
turbosixx
New member
I would suggest to you that the Jews were looking for the Messiah the son of God. Yes, that's what they needed to believe before his DBR. The Way was being prepared. That's why thousands were not being saved because he hadn't gotten authority as the Christ.
After his DBR.
Matt. 28:18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
Peter preaches this same Acts 13 sermon in Acts 2.
Addressing Israel
Peter: 22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words;
Paul: 16 Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand said, Men of Israel,
Christ descended from David
Peter: 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
Paul: 23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Savior, Jesus:
Christ died
Peter: 23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
Paul: 28 And though they found no cause of death in him, yet desired they Pilate that he should be slain.
David saw decay
Peter: 29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.
Paul: 36 For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption:
Christ did not see decay
Peter: 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
Paul: 37 But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption.
Jesus resurrected
Peter: 32 This Jesus hath God raised up,
Paul: 30 But God raised him from the dead:
The 12 witnessed the resurrection
Peter: 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
Paul: 31 And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people.
Forgiveness of sins through Jesus
Peter: 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Paul: 38 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:
Jesus is Israel’s savior
Peter: 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Paul: 23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Savior, Jesus:
Interplanner
Well-known member
And calls him Christ/Messiah 3 times in the same area.
I sure hope you like crow...
1 - Romans 1:4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
2 - Romans 1:9 For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that without ceasing I make mention of you always in my prayers;
3 - Romans 5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.
4 - Romans 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
5 - 1 Corinthians 1:9 God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.
6 - 1 Corinthians 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
7 - 2 Corinthians 1:19 For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea.
8 - Galatians 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
9 - Galatians 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
10 - Ephesians 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
Its even in your magic "read a thing ten times to get it" number.
In short, Acts 17: 11, 12.
Try that over merely spouting what ever comes into your mind.
Just goes to show once more, why we so needed Rom. 5: 6-8 - in each our stead.
Good post.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Does the guy know what you do with a lamb in the old covenant? So then, if Christ comes along and is introduced as the lamb of God, does he then know what THAT means?
He will be called Jeshua because he will save his people from their sins.--birth announcement.
'you will give his people the knowledge of salvation /
through the forgiveness of sins.'--another birth announcement
He will be called Jeshua because he will save his people from their sins.--birth announcement.
'you will give his people the knowledge of salvation /
through the forgiveness of sins.'--another birth announcement
Point 1-the lamb was not the sin offering, and the "lamb of God" passages, was not about sin bearing.
Point 2-in Mt.-John, prior to the dbr, that the 12 had no idea of the impending dbr. It was hid from them :
1.The 12 did not know of the impending dbr-it was hid from them-
"For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day. But they understood not that saying, and were afraid to ask him." Mark 9:31-32 KJV
"Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished. For he shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spitted on: And they shall scourge him, and put him to death: and the third day he shall rise again. And they understood none of these things: and this saying was hid from them, neither knew they the things which were spoken." Luke 18:31-34 KJV
"For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead." John 20:9 KJV
2. Peter tried to prevent the Lord Jesus Christ's death, and His death was a key component of 1 Cor. 15:1-4:
"From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee" Mt. 16:21-22 KJV
"And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. And he spake that saying openly. And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him." Mark 8:31-32
John 18:10 KJV Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus.
3. Even after the Lord's death, burial, and resurrection, the 12 intially did not believe it:
"And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted." Mt. 28:17 KJV
"And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country. And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them. Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen." Mark 16:11 KJV
"And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest. It was Mary Magdalene and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles. And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not." Luke 24:9-11 KJV
" And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat?" Luke 24:41 KJV
Nowhere,in Mt.-John, prior to the dbr, was 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV ever preached by anyone as a basis for justification. Chapter and verse prior to the dbr in Mt.-John. You won't find it. It is not there. It was hid from them. They were preaching, at least prior to the dbr in Mt.-John, a "the" gospel, but it was not 1 Cor. 15:1-4-it was "the" gospel of the kingdom, and these are not synonomys terms.
IP: Well, uh, urr, the lamb, you see, everyone knew about it, uh, urr...............
Hi , and a LOT of UNBELIEVING GOING ON HERE , by the apostles !!
You stuck Interplanner with least 12 arrows , here John !!
dan p
Interplanner
Well-known member
It is a perfectly silly post JohnW but at least you kept your manners civil.
Do you know what denial is? Denial is when you know something to be fact and want the opposite to be true.
I'm not sure we even need to bring that up. Every passage you wrote out is saying the opposite of what you claim: each one is saying he explained it. It was in riddle or parable or opaque before that, but it was there. So every account has it out in the open, but being raised in Judaism, they did not want it to happen.
This is merely part of a larger question which I always have trouble getting answers from the club on: what exactly was the friction with Judaism? You can go all the way through to the end of Acts and you will find that there is enough friction that it is a deal breaker, no matter if Paul makes that strategic show of obedience to the Law or not, in ch 22.
Do we consult Paul on this , or will you guys keep reading Chafer, Darby and Ryrie who thought that the Bible does not make sense until they arrived?
I don't stutter when I write. That must be a caricature in your head.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Thick thick irony...
Interplanner
Well-known member
What opposite? It's not there to begin with in the NT. That's the whole point. It is not there in Heb 12:22+ which as you may have noticed (maybe not) is in HEBREWS, which maybe you thought meant the RACE instead of the BELIEVERS FROM PERSIA (OR GAUL).