ECT WAS ISRAEL REALLY SET ASIDE AND WHEN ??

[Right Divider]

So as I was saying D'ism is not literal about 'there is no other Gospel...let him be anathema.' Right, got it. Just as I expected. Literal UNTIL conflict with D'ism and the nation/race.

So you still do not have a Bible?

Why is Peter.... many years after the cross.... preaching a FUTURE salvation?

1Pet 1:5 (AKJV/PCE)​

(1:5) Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.
​

Why was Peter writing to non-gentiles?

1Pet 2:11-12 (AKJV/PCE)​

(2:11) Dearly beloved, I beseech [you] as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul; (2:12) Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by [your] good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation.
​

Start with those and then we can discuss more.

 

[Interplanner]

They thought they were in it, and were looking at reality as though an expectant OT person, which is the case in Judaism.

The stupidity of your position about multiple gospels is that you are choosing to show it on a mistaken grammatical base, just a few verses from the anathema for speaking of other gospels. If you want to be credible, find some other place and don't detonate the grammar while doing so.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

So you still do not have a Bible?

Why is Peter.... many years after the cross.... preaching a FUTURE salvation?

Do you not even know that those to whom Peter addressed his epistles were already redeemed by the blood of the Lord Jesus?

Are you saying that those people were not yet saved?

 

[Right Divider]

Do you not even know that those to whom Peter addressed his epistles were already redeemed by the blood of the Lord Jesus?

Are you saying that those people were not yet saved?

I do understand... and YET he was preaching about a future salvation to HIS audience.

HIS audience were the Israelite's scattered abroad. The ones that were to "have THEIR conversation honest among the GENTILES" [1 Peter 2:12]

 

[Right Divider]

So as I was saying D'ism is not literal about 'there is no other Gospel...let him be anathema.' Right, got it. Just as I expected. Literal UNTIL conflict with D'ism and the nation/race.

The "no other gospel" that Paul was referring to is the ONE that HE GAVE THEM!

http://theologyonline.com/entry.php?3469-Another-gospel-in-Galatians-1

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I do understand... and YET he was preaching about a future salvation to HIS audience.

Yes, the same future salvation of which Paul was preaching to his audience:

"And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed" (Ro.13:11).​

 

[Right Divider]

Yes, the same future salvation of which Paul was preaching to his audience:

"And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed" (Ro.13:11).​

So you simply ignore the context of Peter's letter regarding his audience? Good work.

 

[Interplanner]

Yes, the same future salvation of which Paul was preaching to his audience:

"And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed" (Ro.13:11).​

Because every indication was the world would end right after the DofJ

 

[Jerry Shugart]

So you simply ignore the context of Peter's letter regarding his audience? Good work.

Why did you ignore the verse which I quoted?

According to you even though the Hebrew epistles were written during the present dispensation and they were also received during the present dispensation the teaching found in those epistles is for a future dispensation.

You remain clueless and you don't know how to rightly divide.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Because every indication was the world would end right after the DofJ

Then when did the Jews think that the following prophecy was going to be fulfilled?:

"Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth" (Jer.23:5).​

 

[DAN P]

They thought they were in it, and were looking at reality as though an expectant OT person, which is the case in Judaism.

The stupidity of your position about multiple gospels is that you are choosing to show it on a mistaken grammatical base, just a few verses from the anathema for speaking of other gospels. If you want to be credible, find some other place and don't detonate the grammar while doing so.

Hi IP , then you will be ABLE to say what Gospel was preached from Adam to Moses ??

Lets hear it for Rom 5:14 ??

dan p

 

[Right Divider]

Why did you ignore the verse which I quoted?

According to you even though the Hebrew epistles were written during the present dispensation and they were also received during the present dispensation the teaching found in those epistles is for a future dispensation.

You remain clueless and you don't know how to rightly divide.

A dispensation is NOT a period of time as even you occasionally seem to know.

Peter was writing to Israel, as was James, as was John and the writer of Hebrews.

It is YOU that does NOT know how to rightly divide.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Because every indication was the world would end right after the DofJ

:chuckle:

 

[Interplanner]

:chuckle:

D'ism reads the NT as though it was background-free. In fact, it was primarily about the window of that generation, and yes, the world was going to end with the DofJ and then the NHNE were to come.

There was an allowance for a delay of the NHNE.

Eschatology views stand or fall on whether they separate 1st century Judea material (Mt 24:1-29) from worldwide judgement material (Mt 24:29+), that was originally supposed to happen right after the DofJ, but also could be delayed. It was, 2 Peter 3.

 

[Interplanner]

Hi IP , then you will be ABLE to say what Gospel was preached from Adam to Moses ??

Lets hear it for Rom 5:14 ??

dan p

Let's hear it FROM Gal 3:8!

 

[JudgeRightly]

Because every indication was the world would end right after the DofJ

Was there any indication that God would not come back right after (within 7years) of Christ's DBR if circumstances changed?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

A dispensation is NOT a period of time as even you occasionally seem to know.

The Hebrew epistles were written during the present dispensation (which is not a period of time but takes place during a period of time) and received by those who lived during the present dispensation.

But people like you insist that the teaching found in those epistles are not for the present dispensation!

If that is true then we would expect that the authors of those epistles would have told those to whom they addressed their epistles that their teaching was not for that dispensation but instead for a future time.

But those epistles will be searched in vain for even a hint that anyone was told that what was being taught in those epistles were for a future time.

How do you explain that?

 

[Right Divider]

The Hebrew epistles were written during the present dispensation (which is not a period of time but takes place during a period of time) and received by those who lived during the present dispensation.

The Hebrew apostles already had a dispensation and that did not change.

Rom 11:27-29 (AKJV/PCE)​

(11:27) For this [is] my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. (11:28) As concerning the gospel, [they are] enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, [they are] beloved for the fathers' sakes. (11:29) For the gifts and calling of God [are] without repentance.

​

But people like you insist that the teaching found in those epistles are not for the present dispensation!

One minute you claim to know that a dispensation is not a period of time and then the next minute you prove that you do not even understand what that means.

If James was writing for the present dispensation, he would not have addressed his book to the TWELVE TRIBES scattered abroad. The SAME group that Peter wrote his first epistle to.

If that is true then we would expect that the authors of those epistles would have told those to whom they addressed their epistles that their teaching was not for that dispensation but instead for a future time.

Bogus logic Jerry.

But those epistles will be searched in vain for even a hint that anyone was told that what was being taught in those epistles were for a future time.

How do you explain that?

Your ignorance.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

The Hebrew apostles already had a dispensation and that did not change.

Of course it changed. Before the Hebrew epistles were written the Jewish believers were baptized into the Body of Christ:

"For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit" (1 Cor.12:13).​

The middle wall of partition between the Jewish believers and the Gentile believers has been broken down and so both the Jewish believers and the Gentile believers are members of the Body:

But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby" "(Eph.2:13-16).​

According to your idea the middle wall of partition continues to separate the Jewish believers from the Gentile believers.

One minute you claim to know that a dispensation is not a period of time and then the next minute you prove that you do not even understand what that means.

If James was writing for the present dispensation, he would not have addressed his book to the TWELVE TRIBES scattered abroad.

Why not? It is obvious that the Jews did not lose their identity after the middle wall of partition was broken down between the two, as witnessed by the fact that Paul called himself a Jew.

Bogus logic Jerry.

Then use your logic and explain why you think that only some of the first century Jewish believers were baptized into the Body of Christ but not all of them since Paul stated that the middle wall of partition has been broken down between the two.

 

[Right Divider]

Of course it changed. Before the Hebrew epistles were written the Jewish believers were baptized into the Body of Christ:

"For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit" (1 Cor.12:13).​

The middle wall of partition between the Jewish believers and the Gentile believers has been broken down and so both the Jewish believers and the Gentile believers are members of the Body:

But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby" "(Eph.2:13-16).​

According to your idea the middle wall of partition continues to separate the Jewish believers from the Gentile believers.

Why not? It is obvious that the Jews did not lose their identity after the middle wall of partition was broken down between the two, as witnessed by the fact that Paul called himself a Jew.

Then use your logic and explain why you think that only some of the first century Jewish believers were baptized into the Body of Christ but not all of them since Paul stated that the middle wall of partition has been broken down between the two.

You're mixing apples and oranges Jerry.

The calling of the twelve was specific to Israel and their calling. That is why the Bible says that their calling did not change.

Rom 11:25-29 (AKJV/PCE)​

(11:25) For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. (11:26) And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: (11:27) For this [is] my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. (11:28) As concerning the gospel, [they are] enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, [they are] beloved for the fathers' sakes. (11:29) For the gifts and calling of God [are] without repentance. ​

Apparently you are still ignorant of this mystery.

What will happen when the "fullness of the Gentiles be come in"?