ECT What's MAD?

I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Tambora said:
In other words, the promised destruction of Jerusalem had not been fulfilled by ch 13.
Click to expand...


It never was a promise and never was said to be fulfilled by 13. It was a curse and was said to happen when the babies who were nursing at the crucifixion were adults, which is quite a range of time, because serious rebellions were already underway, since Judah the Galilean in 6 AD.

You can waste your time with your posts, or you can read Heb 11-13 10x today. Your call.
 
patrick jane

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
Interplanner said:
It never was a promise and never was said to be fulfilled by 13. It was a curse and was said to happen when the babies who were nursing at the crucifixion were adults, which is quite a range of time, because serious rebellions were already underway, since Judah the Galilean in 6 AD.

You can waste your time with your posts, or you can read Heb 11-13 10x today. Your call.
Click to expand...
Read Genesis 10x today !!!
 
D

Danoh

New member
Interplanner said:
LOL, you can't tell that that is how I see things here? My essay on Acts 13? I'm battling for it each day, and the D'ists here want every single part of the Bible chopped in to compartments that they can.
Click to expand...

As if you and your books based kind have not been chopping the Bible to bits in your decades of inserting all sorts of books based notions of men into the passages.

Books have their value; to a point.

Where some writers actually excell in such things.

And the spiritual things of Scripture is where most fail...miserably.

You are one heck of a consistent proof of this.
 
Tambora

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Danoh said:
As if you and your books based kind have not been chopping the Bible to bits in your decades of inserting all sorts of books based notions of men into the passages.

Books have their value; to a point.

Where some writers actually excell in such things.

And the spiritual things of Scripture is where most fail...miserably.

You are one heck of a consistent proof of this.
Click to expand...
Yeppers.
Specifics trip him up, so he avoids them.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Tambora said:
Yeppers.
Specifics trip him up, so he avoids them.
Click to expand...



Danoh means D'ist books are good to a point. Not others!

The Pharisee dumbing-down of saying things like 'how shall we eat his flesh?' is a specific for you. Enjoy! Ohhh, so sorry, I didn't put the digits!
 
D

Danoh

New member
Interplanner said:
Why don't the D'ists talk about the 2500 passages used by Christ and the apostles, and spend all their time on others?

Why did Paul not speak beyond what 'Moses and the prophets said would happen: that Christ would suffer and be resurrected and preached among the nations'?
Click to expand...

Depends on which Mad you ask that.

Most Mads outside of TOL will assert that way before that point in time in Acts, Israel's promises (plural) had already been put on hold...once more...as Prophesied.

A few will assert no; that Paul was preaching Israel's promises (plural) to them, til the end of Acts 28.

But they are a minority within Mid-Acts; their take being much like yours - books based wisdom - though obviously with a conclusion differing from yours, as yours is books based wisdom based on a whole other set of books entirely.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Danoh said:
Depends on which Mad you ask that.

Most Mads outside of TOL will assert that way before that point in time in Acts, Israel's promises (plural) had already been put on hold...once more...as Prophesied.

A few will assert no; that Paul was preaching Israel's promises (plural) to them, til the end of Acts 28.

But they are a minority within Mid-Acts; their take being much like yours - books based wisdom - though obviously with a conclusion differing from yours, as yours is books based wisdom based on a whole other set of books entirely.
Click to expand...



And neither will say what Acts 13 says?
 
Tambora

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
How many books of the OT were not quoted to in NT?
Does that mean nothing in them are relevant?
 
D

Danoh

New member
Interplanner said:
And neither will say what Acts 13 says?
Click to expand...

Very simple, in light of Romans - and not the other way around - a chapter like Acts 13 is asserting that Israel's Prophesied mission was now on hold...once more.

Because Unbelieving Israel had remained Uncircumcision...spiritually.

There; nice and vague as to what exactly, that is based on - just like your EVERY post :chuckle:
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Danoh said:
Very simple, in light of Romans - and not the other way around - a chapter like Acts 13 is asserting that Israel's Prophesied mission was now on hold...once more.

Because Unbelieving Israel had remained Uncircumcision...spiritually.

There; nice and vague as to what that is based on - just like your EVERY post :chuckle:
Click to expand...



That 'on hold' stuff is BS and just gloms unnaturally on to the Bible. The real ministry, purpose, legacy, objective, destiny of Israel is totally underway. No on hold crap. It is the same in Rom 10-11.
 
D

Danoh

New member
Interplanner said:
That 'on hold' stuff is BS and just gloms unnaturally on to the Bible. The real ministry, purpose, legacy, objective, destiny of Israel is totally underway. No on hold crap. It is the same in Rom 10-11.
Click to expand...

Knucklehead; who said anything about Rom. 10-11, lol
 
Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Interplanner said:
And neither will say what Acts 13 says?
Click to expand...
It really funny how fixated you are on Paul preaching Christ in a synagogue to the "Men of Israel, and ye that fear God" and " Men [and] brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God" (Act 13:16 & 26).

This entire passage simply shows Israel's continued rejection of their Messiah, which is the primary purpose of the book of Acts.

I'm very curious to understand THIS verse in light of the alleged removal of all "ethnic distinctions" at that precise time of the cross as you and many other claim.
Acts 13:46 (AKJV/PCE)
(13:46) Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.
​

WHY was it "necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you"?

Your other compulsive disorder of the book TO THE HEBREWS is also fascinating. Everything in Hebrews and Revelation is completely and totally SATURATED with Israel

Heb 12:25-29 (AKJV/PCE)​
(12:25) See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more [shall not] we [escape], if we turn away from him that [speaketh] from heaven: (12:26) Whose voice then shook the earth: but now he hath promised, saying, Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven. (12:27) And this [word], Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain. (12:28) Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: (12:29) For our God [is] a consuming fire. ​

The WE throughout HEBREWS is the HEBREWS. The WE receiving the kingdom is the HEBREWS (i.e., Israel).

When does Paul NOT call OUR God a "consuming fire"? God is NOT spoken of this way in THIS dispensation of God's GRACE!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top