Why does 2P2P spend all its time on what the disciples were NOT to know?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
the disciples were stopped cold asking about the kingdom for Israel, and told that the power of the kingdom (that was intended) was on its way shortly.

Why does the fraudulent cult 2P2P spend its time on what the disciples were not supposed to know?
 
D

Danoh

New member
Interplanner said:
the disciples were stopped cold asking about the kingdom for Israel, and told that the power of the kingdom (that was intended) was on its way shortly.

Why does the fraudulent cult 2P2P spend its time on what the disciples were not supposed to know?
Click to expand...

Why do you spend so much time harping on a passage of Scripture you clearly know nothing about?

Why, o clueless one..why?
 
Jerry Shugart

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
the disciples were stopped cold asking about the kingdom for Israel, and told that the power of the kingdom (that was intended) was on its way shortly.
Click to expand...

You just make things up out of thin air. He did not tell them that the kingdom was on its way shortly. Instead, we see that the Apostles were with the Lord Jesus for forty days while He tutored them on the things concerning the kingdom. Then after learning about the kingdom from the King Himself they knew that the kingdom would be restored to Israel only they didn't know when it would happen:

"When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?" (Acts 1:6).​

if they were wrong for thinking that the kingdom was going to be restored to Israel He would have corrected them, especially since He was about to send them out to preach the "gospel of the kingdom." But he did no such thing but only told them that they were not to know when it would happen:

"And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power" (Acts 1:7).​

If the kingdom was never going to be restored to Israel then it would make absolutely no sense for the Lord Jesus to say anything about its timing.

But of course you think that you know more about the kingdom than did the Apostles themselves. And if you would have been there you probably would have corrected the Lord for saying anything at all about the time when it was going to happen.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Jerry Shugart said:
You just make things up out of thin air. He did not tell them that the kingdom was on its way shortly. Instead, we see that the Apostles were with the Lord Jesus for forty days while He tutored them on the things concerning the kingdom. Then after learning about the kingdom from the King Himself they knew that the kingdom would be restored to Israel only they didn't know when it would happen:

"When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?" (Acts 1:6).​

if they were wrong for thinking that the kingdom was going to be restored to Israel He would have corrected them, especially since He was about to send them out to preach the "gospel of the kingdom." But he did no such thing but only told them that they were not to know when it would happen:

"And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power" (Acts 1:7).​

If the kingdom was never going to be restored to Israel then it would make absolutely no sense for the Lord Jesus to say anything about its timing.

But of course you think that you know more about the kingdom than did the Apostles themselves. And if you would have been there you probably would have corrected the Lord for saying anything at all about the time when it was going to happen.
Click to expand...




He did not send them out to teach your contrived gospel about a kingdom. You must have missed Lk 24:47.

That being in Luke is the proof that you have a space case treatment of what happened, and that their question about a kingdom for Israel was one last old covenant mistake, which I probably would have made too.

The term 'power' there is an administrative, kingdom-based, operation type of power. It is not an explosion, in a chaotic sense. It is an enforcement, an enactment of overwhelming force, although of course God does not force the 3000 to be Christians; they ask what to do.

1:8-9 is a total rebuke of the last vestige of Judaism in their thinking, and thankfully it seems to be gone for good from that point. Except in you guys.

Do they ask about that kind of thing again? No!

Do they say anything about the destiny or legacy or inheritance of Israel again? Yes--and it is new covenant, Gospel-based, mission-oriented. The resurrection of Christ is the enthronement David foresaw. The promises to David about that were transferred to Christ. God did not lie. The raised-up tent of David was the incoming faith of Gentile believers.

And finally Paul says we only taught what is permitted from the prophets: that Christ would suffer and be resurrected, Acts 26:22. Hey, Jerry, where is the land promise in that list? That is what God said he was permitted to teach.

but you 2P2P masters spend all your time on what they were not permitted to teach.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
He did not send them out to teach your contrived gospel about a kingdom. You must have missed Lk 24:47.

That being in Luke is the proof that you have a space case treatment of what happened, and that their question about a kingdom for Israel was one last old covenant mistake, which I probably would have made too.

The term 'power' there is an administrative, kingdom-based, operation type of power. It is not an explosion, in a chaotic sense. It is an enforcement, an enactment of overwhelming force, although of course God does not force the 3000 to be Christians; they ask what to do.

1:8-9 is a total rebuke of the last vestige of Judaism in their thinking, and thankfully it seems to be gone for good from that point. Except in you guys.

Do they ask about that kind of thing again? No!

Do they say anything about the destiny or legacy or inheritance of Israel again? Yes--and it is new covenant, Gospel-based, mission-oriented. The resurrection of Christ is the enthronement David foresaw. The promises to David about that were transferred to Christ. God did not lie. The raised-up tent of David was the incoming faith of Gentile believers.

And finally Paul says we only taught was is permitted from the prophets: that Christ would suffer and be resurrected. Hey, Jerry, where is the land promise in that list? That is what God said he was permitted to teach.

but you 2P2P masters spend all your time on what they were not permitted to teach.
Click to expand...

Matthew 10:23 (KJV)
 
Jerry Shugart

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
He did not send them out to teach your contrived gospel about a kingdom. You must have missed Lk 24:47.
Click to expand...

So you think that the "gospel of the kingdom" was a contrived gospel despite the fact that the Lord Jesus spoke about it?:

"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come" (Mt.24:14).​

I am amazed that you claim to be an expert on these things despite the fact that your knowledge of the Bible is so limited. Worse than that, you have been able to trick your mind into believing that you know more about the kingdom than did the Apostles who were personally tutored on it by the King, the Lord Jesus.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Jerry Shugart said:
So you think that the "gospel of the kingdom" was a contrived gospel despite the fact that the Lord Jesus spoke about it?:

"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come" (Mt.24:14).​

I am amazed that you claim to be an expert on these things despite the fact that your knowledge of the Bible is so limited. Worse than that, you have been able to trick your mind into believing that you know more about the kingdom than did the Apostles who were personally tutored on it by the King, the Lord Jesus.
Click to expand...




I'm amazed that you quote 2nd hand English for the original. It was not a 'gospel in which the content was the kingdom.' It was a 'great announcement' associated with the reign of Christ; that his reign actually happens and progresses by honoring him for what he did sacrificially--when it is proclaimed. That is why he is enthroned in Acts 2. That is what he expected Israel to honor and to become its messengers, as Ps 68 says: the Lord gave the word, and there was a huge number of preachers.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Here is an illustration I recalled of the disadvantage of the English. Mt 5. Blessed are the pure in heart.

A very well-meaning person thought one day that there might have been a comma in the line. Blessed are the pure, they will see the kingdom in heart.

You will probably be as fuse-blown as RD about toxic in Ps 23, but you can see the point. The Greek has a way of clearing up these things.

There are not 2 gospels in Gal 2, it is folly.
 
Last edited:
D

Danoh

New member
SaulToPaul said:
Is that why there are 813 different translations based on your "the Greek"?
Click to expand...

You missed his point.

He is not always off.

He'd meant that things like case, tense, number, and so on, accomplish the result of allowing one to arrive at the intended sense of any word or phrase as if one had been able to ask the original human writer himself.

This is also why DP harps on the Greek so much, as well.

Though, obviously, case, number, etc., are not all there is to these things.

Still, they do play an important role that results in how even "MADS" end up at a different understanding of some things.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top