ECT The NT theology core
- Thread starter Interplanner
- Start date
- Status
The only commentaries I read are in the Bible, try it sometime. Face it, you've tried your best but you can't put a chink in the armor of D'ism, the armor of God. You toss and turn every night because you can't grasp the truth. You know you're wrong and are too stubborn to accept it.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
We suspected.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Brother steko is all over it. :up:
You can't put the emPHASis on the wrong syLLABle
:thumb: Yes, from the Nile to the Euphrates, which includes Arabia.
"On the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying: 'To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the River Euphrates.'" (Genesis 15:18)
Interplanner
Well-known member
Not only was that taken care of long before, and it is not in the NT. Your fav passage, Heb 8, is actually about Judah and Israel's reunification, not about being in Judea. That may very well be because of the disastrous situation taking shape right while Hebrews was being written, which was mentioned in it. Hebrews is about the peril of 'neglecting the great salvation' offered. That was the atoning work of Jesus Christ, and embracing that before the total destruction of Israel would happen, and indeed, the world.
There simply is no interest in the land as such, nor would there be. It is never mentioned in the plain language passages on the 2nd coming that I have listed 1000x.
Anyone seeking to chat rather than post here is welcome to write me at interplanner122@gmail.com.
Interplanner
Well-known member
I am inspired and compelled by the apostle's teaching. I find it astonishing that you say NOTHING about them yet think D'ism is the 'armor of God.' What a cult.
Give me an example of commentaries in the Bible--that's a great line. My example is the 2500 uses of the OT by the NT. On which D'ism is regularly in conflict, like Chafer said (paraphrase) 'people need D'ism because the Bible is several conflicting messages.'
Anyone seeking to chat rather than post here is welcome to write me at interplanner122@gmail.com.
Interplanner
Well-known member
But in the new age of Messiah, it includes Libya and the islands and distant shores. Because it is the kingdom of God in Christ and his mission!
Anyone seeking to chat rather than post here is welcome to write me at interplanner122@gmail.com.
No, I don't think D'ism is the armor of God, I was just saying that because of the armor reference. You can't prove D'ism wrong, you never could.
Interplanner
Well-known member
No, I merely meant that the 11 may not have grasped all that they were supposed to. This is another reason why their question in Acts 1 is a flop, a new low. And then to show that things were even more irregular, there's Stephen with his amazing sermon and he's not one of the 11.
Anyone seeking to chat rather than post here is welcome to write me at interplanner122@gmail.com.
Interplanner
Well-known member
The doctrine Paul got was not brand new; it was in the scriptures. It was hid to Judaism, but in Christ it was opened up. Probably the best example is Romans with its 72 quotes (there are even more allusions). The two groups of 4 in chs 9 and 15 are the ones that show how much has shifted in his mind compared to the Judaism he grew up in.
Anyone seeking to chat rather than post here is welcome to write me at interplanner122@gmail.com.
Interplanner
Well-known member
What on earth is this England stuff, Jamie?
Anyone seeking to chat rather than post here is welcome to write me at interplanner122@gmail.com.
In the new age of Messiah it includes the entire universe.
"What is man that You are mindful of him, or the son of man that You take care of him?
You have made him a little lower than the angels, you have crowned him with glory and honor,
And set him over the works of Your hands.
You have put all things in subjection under his feet.
For in that He put all in subjection under him, He left nothing that is not put under him." (Hebrews 2:6-8)
He left nothing that is not put under him. Nothing.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Very good. Now, how do we get D'ists to realize that there is not an additional episode of Judaistic things in Judea before all that, when it is not mentioned in the plain language passages on the 2nd coming that I have listed 1000x?
When D'ism started (that's D'ism not a belief that Jews might experience a reviving of faith in the one Gospel), Chafer said that the Bible 'was too confusing for the ordinary Christian and thus the need for them to have D'ism taught.' One of the self-fulfilling predictions of this was the way it shifted everything in Mt24A (up to v29) to...THE FUTURE!!! As soon as you do that and remove it from 1st century Judea, you have a 'Bible with many conflicting messages' and you 'need' another episode of Judaism in Judea. Of course, this is part of believing there are two programs/peoples, which the NT says there is not, and that 2P2P creates a confusing Bible that has to be fixed.
Back to your text: yes, and 'the world to come' is the one the passage found to be the fulfillment, 2:5. There is not a hint of an episode of Judaism and Judea separate from that.
Anyone seeking to chat rather than post here is welcome to write me at interplanner122@gmail.com.
"Chafer said that the Bible 'was too confusing for the ordinary Christian and thus the need for them to have D'ism taught.' One of the self-fulfilling predictions of this was the way it shifted everything in Mt24A (up to v29) to...THE FUTURE!!! As soon as you do that and remove it from 1st century Judea, you have a 'Bible with many conflicting messages' and you 'need' another episode of Judaism in Judea."
Yes. But Matthew 24: 4 to Matthew 24: 14, about deception, false prophets and preaching the Gospel in all the world to all peoples and then the end comes, cannot be limited to the First Century. That would be just as false as preaching that ever thing in Matthew 24: 4 to 24: 14 is to occur in the future. And dispensationalism does tend to say that the apostasy is to happen only when their one man anti-Christ appears which is in the future. The spirit of anti-Christ is ongoing though it can get worse.
And - there is a difference between the spirit of anti-Christ which denies that Christ came in the flesh and what the false prophets proclaim, whose teaching is defined in Matthew 24: 5, which, again, comes before Matthew 24: 29. The false prophets teach that there is a Christ who came in the flesh, but they deceive many by the doctrines they teach in his name. Isn't this what the dispensationalists do?
Yes. But Matthew 24: 4 to Matthew 24: 14, about deception, false prophets and preaching the Gospel in all the world to all peoples and then the end comes, cannot be limited to the First Century. That would be just as false as preaching that ever thing in Matthew 24: 4 to 24: 14 is to occur in the future. And dispensationalism does tend to say that the apostasy is to happen only when their one man anti-Christ appears which is in the future. The spirit of anti-Christ is ongoing though it can get worse.
And - there is a difference between the spirit of anti-Christ which denies that Christ came in the flesh and what the false prophets proclaim, whose teaching is defined in Matthew 24: 5, which, again, comes before Matthew 24: 29. The false prophets teach that there is a Christ who came in the flesh, but they deceive many by the doctrines they teach in his name. Isn't this what the dispensationalists do?
"What happened to it -- and to the body of Paul?
The answer to this question is found in a document written by Pope Vitalian to the British King Oswy in 656 A.D. The letter is still in existence.
To the astonishment of many, the letter clearly states that Pope Vitalian permitted the remains of Peter and Paul, along with the remains of the martyrs Lawrence, John, Gregory and Pancras, to be removed from Rome and sent to England where they were reburied in the great church at Canterbury.
The full facts regarding this amazing incident are recorded by the Venerable Bede (673-735 A.D.) in his Ecclesiastical History of the English Nation:
"In the year 656 Pope Vitalian decided the Catholic Church was not interested in the remains of the apostles Peter and Paul. The pope therefore ordered them sent to Oswy, King of Britain. Here is part of his letter to the British king:
"However, we have ordered the blessed gifts of the holy martyrs, that is, the relics of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, and of the holy martyrs Laurentius, John, and Paul, and Gregory, and Pancratius, to be delivered to the bearers of these our letters, to be by them delivered to you" (Bede's Ecclesiastical History, bk. III, ch. 29).
I was personally told by the librarian at Canterbury Cathedral that the church inventories record the arrival of the remains of Peter and Paul to the church's safekeeping shortly after Pope Vitalian sent them to Britain. Unfortunately, though, it is believed the remains were lost, or record of their location lost, in the aftermath of the Cromwellian Rebellion."
http://www.hope-of-israel.org/1stcent.htm
The answer to this question is found in a document written by Pope Vitalian to the British King Oswy in 656 A.D. The letter is still in existence.
To the astonishment of many, the letter clearly states that Pope Vitalian permitted the remains of Peter and Paul, along with the remains of the martyrs Lawrence, John, Gregory and Pancras, to be removed from Rome and sent to England where they were reburied in the great church at Canterbury.
The full facts regarding this amazing incident are recorded by the Venerable Bede (673-735 A.D.) in his Ecclesiastical History of the English Nation:
"In the year 656 Pope Vitalian decided the Catholic Church was not interested in the remains of the apostles Peter and Paul. The pope therefore ordered them sent to Oswy, King of Britain. Here is part of his letter to the British king:
"However, we have ordered the blessed gifts of the holy martyrs, that is, the relics of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, and of the holy martyrs Laurentius, John, and Paul, and Gregory, and Pancratius, to be delivered to the bearers of these our letters, to be by them delivered to you" (Bede's Ecclesiastical History, bk. III, ch. 29).
I was personally told by the librarian at Canterbury Cathedral that the church inventories record the arrival of the remains of Peter and Paul to the church's safekeeping shortly after Pope Vitalian sent them to Britain. Unfortunately, though, it is believed the remains were lost, or record of their location lost, in the aftermath of the Cromwellian Rebellion."
http://www.hope-of-israel.org/1stcent.htm
Last edited:
Interplanner
Well-known member
1, he declared their house desolate
2, they looked and thrilled at the buildings and wondered when such a thing would happen or what he could possibly mean
3, he told them it would hit the fan real soon
Go ahead a draw parallels to other times, but when a leader is asked to speak so directly on what would happen to such a specific thing with such specific questions, please 'stay' there and hear his answers. To me they are missing what he is saying so badly that their questions are nearly giddy; that he can't possibly mean it is going to be the horrifying event he is saying. their golden age expectations are showing, and they thought they were going to have the greatest fun watching it happen. Instead it would be known as the one of the most total desolations of any country in antiquity.
The details are current and Judean. The zealots were like the Taliban about the sabbath. Even Rome nearly imploded. Judaism, all branches--institutional and revolutionary--had way too much invested in what would take place in the land.
What I meant about Chafer and 19th century futurism was the mentality that the FIRST thing we do with this text is believe the apostles had US and OUR TIMES in mind. That is assinine. That is as much a sin as evolution and uniformitarianism, because then the explosive power that God's wrath on the country is no longer the demonstration and precedent for the world that it was intended to be. In fact, that view has nearly made it disappear from history, and a person experiences piles of ridicule when referring to it. People like STP think Cornfeld's archeological study of it are merely jokes and cartoons.
- Status