Interplanner
Well-known member
Is 42. You simply don't know the servant, and why Paul chose the term 'servant' in ch 15 when explaining all this. Your heads are full of 2P2P explanations instead of the apostles.
ECT Things known for ages--Acts 15
- Thread starter Interplanner
- Start date
Interplanner
Well-known member
Of course they are, per 2 Cor 3. They were talking about Christ, not the future of the land. That's what Peter is saying, and why he does not mention the land.
Interplanner
Well-known member
"In Christ" is specifically none of the previous accessory parts of the old covenant, in case that is not clear.
Right Divider
Body part
- God promised to plant them in the land forever.
- You believe that EVERY promise that God gave to Israel must be REPEATED in every verse in the Bible or it's cancelled.
- You are dumb.
Interplanner
Well-known member
There is nothing in the NT where you would most expect it to support your view. Not in Hebrews--if you read the whole thing--and not in 2 Pet 3, and not in Acts. What are talking about, self-appointed dumb-decider?
Right Divider
Body part
No, we have a committee and came to that conclusion.
I guess that you just ignored points 1 & 2.
You're just a blind cancellationist.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Ignored or rejected? I know they don't matter to the NT. Heb 10:1-18. There is nothing that would ground the fulfillment back in the land.
Right Divider
Body part
You superseding cancellationsts are a hoot!
What is the "NT"? Where can I find it in scripture?
Interplanner
Well-known member
Why did you think you would?
There's some 400 years between Malachi and Matthew and so if you want to stretch things and put Malachi in the collection of material known as the NT, go ahead, but it is obtuse.
The new covenant is mentioned in the apostles material and might also be trans the new testament.
With Lk 21 in the picture and the mission to the nations underway, no, there is no place for the land in the things the apostles taught and wrote.
Right Divider
Body part
Where in the world did you get this from? You must be completely insane.
More of your vague opinions and for the TEN BILLIONTH time, without single scriptural reference.
Why don't YOU mention the mention?
And what might "the apostle materials" be? More "other book" learnin'?
Again, the superseding cancellationist takes God's promises away.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Oh, I've listed/discussed the 4 passages many times. Just yesterday. You focus on Heb 8 and for several months now have ignored the others.
I'm using the 'apostle's material' or 'letters' now instead of the NT which you react to like a disease. I'm doing this the same way as mentioning 2P2P instead of D'ism because it is more direct.
Again, if a testament is of force after men are dead, then the vast majority of Matt. thru John is Old Testament ground.
Hebrews 9:17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
Your argument is of no strength...at all.
Right Divider
Body part
I was asking about this nonsense:
Where did you get such a dumb idea?
That's because he is a very poor reader of other's posts - very poor.
Consistently so.
It is par for the course with his kind.
As is ever the same old recurrent pattern with his kind, he has so over relied on so called "Men of Letters," their so called "authority" and their lousy attitudes in their arrogance in their ever endless books "about" that he has ended up taking on and or growing even further entrenched in their same "better than" and "know it all" arrogance.
As the Lord put it - the words of a speaker and or writer are his spirit.
One result of that is that if you spend too much time "in him" - in a writer, together with that aspect of your own spirit that you bring to the table, you take on said writer or speaker's spirit or attitude toward others.
His recurrent pattern reveals he basically skims through other's posts, when he even bothers to bother with them, at all.
I made a comment about Malachi and Matthew.
Ol Sloppy did what he often does - he attributed to another poster.
In this case; he attributed it to you.
If nothing else, the guy is ever amusing.
:chuckle:
You didn't explain why you believe that particular phrase means what you think it means.
And you actually argued our case by showing that the mystery was the where, when and how of the whole thing. Israel didn't expect that which was revealed to Paul.
Interplanner
Well-known member
You have a secret meaning for NT, so I adopted the apostles material to be clear that I was referring to Matt--Rev. Because when I was saying those docs, you said that wasn't the NT.
There are less than 10 references to the new covenant and only 1 hints of something being intra-Israel. Most of the time it is for all mankind who believe and most of the time is is connected to the mission now.
That is why I find you obtuse.
God did not cancel, he fulfilled it in Christ. It is the mission to the nations. That is what the whole vision of isaiah is about, and it is quoted that why by the NT, which is my authority instead of your pronouncements.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Interplanner
Well-known member
All you have to know is that the weight of everything falls on 'in the Gospel'. To show this emphasis, some trans have it first, before the 3 things shared.
Either way, the Gospel is the vehicle through which they are shared.
There is no land restoration.
there is no question that blessings were going to the nations.
The only contest or conflict with Judaism here was whether it would be channeled through the law or the Gospel. Paul says the Gospel and that even though this was embedded in the OT, it could not be seen in Judaism's way of looking ('kata sarka'). Only in Christ is the veil of Judaism removed.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
You really don't expect that they will actually use their brains, do you STP?
If they would actually use their brains then they would see that you are right. According to prophecy the Gentiles were going to be saved through the agency of Israel:
"And I will bring them (Israel), and they shall dwell in the midst of Jerusalem: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God, in truth and in righteousness...And it shall come to pass, that as ye were a curse among the heathen, O house of Judah, and house of Israel; so will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing...In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold out of all languages of the nations, even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you: for we have heard that God is with you" (Zech.8:8,13,23).
It is evident these prophecies are not now being fulfilled. The Apostle Paul states in no uncertain terms that it is through Israel's fall that salvation has come to the Gentiles:
"I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?" (Ro.11:11-12).
Interplanner
Well-known member
Use your brain. Paul said he was saying those things to prod them to be missionaries. It is not a 'prophecy' or a 'prediction'. The 'clinging' to Israel is now in Christ. All the NT throbs with these things being fulfilled in Christ and in his mission.
The concept of being blessed through Israel was fulfilled in the Gospel, in Christ. That is why Rom 15 reads the way it does, and why the 4 quotes are there about the rejoicing Gentiles; Christ has served on behalf of Israel. It never was going to be direct from Israel.
Fall and rise are just referring to (individual) belief. Because none of those who believed 'fell.' This is why Paul is motivated to prod, to urge, his people to be missionaries. Because they have a background and advantage in communicating these things. By ending with the olive tree's various branches, we know that it all depends on faith, NOT ON BEING A CERTAIN TREE PERMANENTLY, because people can change. Otherwise there would be no provoking, urging.
The sooner you show some humility about being the only person to 'use his brain' the better. I wonder where yours is!