ECT Write a few lines summarizing these chapters

I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Right Divider said:
You don't even know the difference between capitalization and ALL CAPS. And you call yourself a "grammar scholar"? :french:


Paul was given the gospel of the grace of God. Therefore, he preached it.

Peter was NOT preaching the gospel of the grace of God at Pentecost, because he had NOT received it.

Your commentaries are polluting your mind.
Click to expand...



Your 2P2P is polluting yours. Peter preached the grace of God in 2:38. Isn't it 'satanic' in your jargon not to agree with such a simple point? And he preached Christ's enthronement on Davids throne, which was actually heaven, in 2:30, bc the Davidic had served its purpose and was done (13:36).

"And great grace was with them all" 4:33. Oh, but 2P2P says they didn't preach it. Right. Yeah. forgot.
 
Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Interplanner said:
Your 2P2P is polluting yours. Peter preached the grace of God in 2:38. Isn't it 'satanic' in your jargon not to agree with such a simple point? And he preached Christ's enthronement on Davids throne, which was actually heaven, in 2:30, bc the Davidic had served its purpose and was done (13:36).
Click to expand...
Peter was NOT preaching the gospel of the grace of God, he had NOT RECEIVED IT.

You are insane from your books about the BOOK.

Interplanner said:
"And great grace was with them all" 4:33. Oh, but 2P2P says they didn't preach it. Right. Yeah. forgot.
Click to expand...
So you're also one of those "dictionary theologians"? That figures.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Right Divider said:
Peter was NOT preaching the gospel of the grace of God, he had NOT RECEIVED IT.

You are insane from your books about the BOOK.


So you're also one of those "dictionary theologians"? That figures.
Click to expand...




Don't worry RD and save yourself: I'm not going to let you or anyone say that Peter came straight from the crucified and risen Christ and did not preach grace to Israel--who had done the crucifying, as he said. That message is the crescendo of grace. You can stop being in denial now, but I doubt that you will.

Have you ever thought of doing the OP? We're merely 200 posts into this and no summaries from the secret knowledge adepts of 2P2P.
 
Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Interplanner said:
Don't worry RD and save yourself: I'm not going to let you or anyone say that Peter came straight from the crucified and risen Christ and did not preach grace to Israel--who had done the crucifying, as he said. That message is the crescendo of grace. You can stop being in denial now, but I doubt that you will.
Click to expand...
God did NOT reveal the gospel of the grace of God immediately after the cross. That just more commentary crap that you need to burn.

The gospel of the grace of God was revealed to Paul first. Peter was still preached what Christ had taught him, the gospel of the kingdom.

Interplanner said:
Have you ever thought of doing the OP? We're merely 200 posts into this and no summaries from the secret knowledge adepts of 2P2P.
Click to expand...
:french:
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Right Divider said:
God did NOT reveal the gospel of the grace of God immediately after the cross. That just more commentary crap that you need to burn.

The gospel of the grace of God was revealed to Paul first. Peter was still preached what Christ had taught him, the gospel of the kingdom.


:french:
Click to expand...



The kingdom whose power he had in 1:8 to proclaim grace to Israel to be forgiven and become its missionaries? that was Christ's kingdom all along. That is what he trained 70 for. That is why Peter says David saw the enthronement coming in the resurrection.

It is one, OT-fulfilling Gospel, not your 2P2P commentary fraud.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Right Divider said:
God did NOT reveal the gospel of the grace of God immediately after the cross. That just more commentary crap that you need to burn.

The gospel of the grace of God was revealed to Paul first. Peter was still preached what Christ had taught him, the gospel of the kingdom.


:french:
Click to expand...



Your summary line sounds fine until you realize:
1, Peter preached the same grace to Israel that Paul needed later.
2, to 'wipe out' sins is not an experiential change. It is a bookkeeping term like crediting, reckoning, transfering, imputing used 100x about justification and righteousness by Paul
3, Acts 2:30-31 and Eph 1:19-21 are totally unified about David's throne, seen by him ahead of time, seeing the resurrection that made Jesus Lord and Messiah
4, 'how then is (Christ)(David's) son?' was the stopper for Judaism. Obviously something very different was on its way, from what they thought.
 
Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Interplanner said:
Your summary line sounds fine until you realize:
1, Peter preached the same grace to Israel that Paul needed later.
Click to expand...
Complete and utter nonsense. PROVE it with the SCRIPTURE.

Interplanner said:
2, to 'wipe out' sins is not an experiential change. It is a bookkeeping term like crediting, reckoning, transfering, imputing used 100x about justification and righteousness by Paul
Click to expand...
No kidding. You're a genious.

Interplanner said:
3, Acts 2:30-31 and Eph 1:19-21 are totally unified about David's throne, seen by him ahead of time, seeing the resurrection that made Jesus Lord and Messiah
Click to expand...
Only in your feeble little mind which rejects 99% of the Bible.

Interplanner said:
4, 'how then is (Christ)(David's) son?' was the stopper for Judaism. Obviously something very different was on its way, from what they thought.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant to the difference between the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of the grace of God.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Right Divider said:
Complete and utter nonsense. PROVE it with the SCRIPTURE.


No kidding. You're a genious.


Only in your feeble little mind which rejects 99% of the Bible.


Irrelevant to the difference between the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of the grace of God.
Click to expand...




when Paul is the chief of sinners and israel is the chief sinner of nations, and the same Gospel saves (justifies) both from that, what do you mean by PROOF? I might as well try to catch oil with two wrenches.

Glad you understand justification; you just don't realize its eschatological power as in Rom 3 and Acts 13; you are in denial of it being the awaited message there.

There is no other reading of Acts 2:30 possible. The chain of custody is finished. What David was talking about was the resurrection. Christ taught that to Peter, clarifying any thought that it was a Davidic monarchy or theocracy again. No land promise etc. Peter preached that and could have skipped that whole topic right? He did not. He specifically closed the loop.

You don't understand or don't want what happened in 'how can he be his son?' It is the end of that succession. That's the problem Judaism did not want to accept, nor do you it seems.
 
Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Interplanner said:
when Paul is the chief of sinners and israel is the chief sinner of nations, and the same Gospel saves (justifies) both from that, what do you mean by PROOF? I might as well try to catch oil with two wrenches.
Click to expand...
Quit making stuff up. You just keep making yourself look dumber and dumber.

Our great "grammar scholar" never uses proper grammar. That's very telling of your character.

Interplanner said:
Glad you understand justification; you just don't realize its eschatological power as in Rom 3 and Acts 13; you are in denial of it being the awaited message there.
Click to expand...
There are many messages in the Bible. God gave one to Paul uniquely.

Interplanner said:
There is no other reading of Acts 2:30 possible. The chain of custody is finished. What David was talking about was the resurrection. Christ taught that to Peter, clarifying any thought that it was a Davidic monarchy or theocracy again. No land promise etc. Peter preached that and could have skipped that whole topic right? He did not. He specifically closed the loop.
Click to expand...
Acts 2 is a continuation of what God had been doing to and through Israel. Your version of it is as fake as your entire fairy story.

Interplanner said:
You don't understand or don't want what happened in 'how can he be his son?' It is the end of that succession. That's the problem Judaism did not want to accept, nor do you it seems.
Click to expand...
:dizzy:
I simply believe everything that God says.
 
Last edited:
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Peter preached grace and forgiveness to Israel for its sin.

that is the same gospel that saved Paul.

You have no answers and are full of favoritism, not realizing that the Gospel results in the opposite view.

Peter should have skpped the topic of David's throne, except that it now supports the Gospel. The enthronement of Christ was the resurrection and David knew that. David did not see another theocracy coming because we know that from Acts 13:36. THAT PURPOSE IS OVER WITH. Get with God's mission which is actually in Acts.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
Peter preached grace and forgiveness to Israel for its sin.

that is the same gospel that saved Paul.

You have no answers and are full of favoritism, not realizing that the Gospel results in the opposite view.

Peter should have skpped the topic of David's throne, except that it now supports the Gospel. The enthronement of Christ was the resurrection and David knew that. David did not see another theocracy coming because we know that from Acts 13:36. THAT PURPOSE IS OVER WITH. Get with God's mission which is actually in Acts.
Click to expand...

:chuckle:

Mass confusion.
Put down the commentaries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top