SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Still made up.
ECT All the Prophets, Acts 3
- Thread starter Interplanner
- Start date
Still made up.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
When were you EVER under the old covenant given to Israel, mediated by Moses?
Never.
You do not know what you are talking about.
You are perhaps already aware of this, but your post there is actually a valid point about the reality of original sin, and thus, why the need for A Saviour, to begin with.
Though not as the Calvinist view sees that.
Rom. 5:8
Interplanner
Well-known member
No, that is how the remnant doctrine developed in Isaiah, but then it included all those who believe from among the nations. Your theory will survive neither Isaiah nor the NT quotes of Isaiah, which is why you resort to curt monosyllibalism instead of intelligent discussion. The reason Isaiah developes this is because it is trying to say (as Mt 3 showed about Is 9) that there never was a carte-blanche for the race. That is a 2nd program and 2nd people wished for by Israel, but its screws the Gospel, says Paul in Gal 3:17 where he declared war upon it.
None of my past 5 threads use the acronym banished by Sherman.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
The New Covenant is made with those the Bible says that it is.
Interplanner
Well-known member
He can say that, STP, because of the scope of "we" in Gal 3:23, 24, 25, then "you" in 26-29, then "we in 4:2+ but back to "you" in v7.
In v3 you must understand that the old covenant is put in a bucket with all pagan beliefs because it is anti-grace. The 'stoicheia tou kosmou' (the principles of the world) is to pretend to obligate God by human performance, instead of the reverse. It is slavery. In 4:9, the adjectives to this phrase are 'weak and miserable'. (My paper on this topic was published by BAPTIST REFORMATION REVIEW / SEARCHING TOGETHER, ed. J. Zens, in the late 70s.).
Notice that in the Christian faith, the situation is 'now that you are known by God' rather than the human-denominated 'now that you know God.' The latter is fraught with mistakes.
"We" and "you" in these texts is obviously everyone who has faith, which is what makes a seed of Abraham, 2:14, and Rom 9.
There is obviously something redemptive for the whole race and for all those under 'stoicheia' in what took place in Christ. 4:4: "when the time had fully come, God sent his Son..." But it is of no value to those wo think they can perform for God and obligate him to bless them.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
When were you EVER under the old covenant given to Israel, mediated by Moses?
Never.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Who is "we" and "you"? If I'm cut out of that we and you, then I don't get the righteousness of Christ to justify me from my sins, nor do you.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Interplanner
Well-known member
It's right there in the text, brother. The Gentile believers reading Gal 3 and 4 saw that they were under 'the basic principles of the world' too.
That's why you have to answer who is "we" and "you." The old covenant has a representative or vicarious function. All mankind has been under 'the weak and miserable basic principles of the world' awaiting the coming of Christ to gain sonship and freedom.
That's why you have to answer who is "we" and "you." The old covenant has a representative or vicarious function. All mankind has been under 'the weak and miserable basic principles of the world' awaiting the coming of Christ to gain sonship and freedom.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
You are not a Galatian.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Read Acts, take note where the Galatians were found. You were never EVER under the law, Danoh the Great.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
You've never ever been under the law of Moses....ever.
You...have yet to prove your errors about the Galatians...
You don't even see yours is a mix of the Acts 9er with the Acts 28er approach to those issues.
Now watch you misunderstand what I meant by that - given your ever one dimemsional "it means what it says." :chuckle:
Rom. 14:5; 5:6-8.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
When were you, like the Galatians, under the law? Tell us.
Here, an open ended question for ya...
Which of the two basic groups of Galatians depicted in Scripture?
Then again, look at who I am asking - a guy who has actually concluded that the Romans were not in the Body when Paul wrote to them; that the Jews described at the end of Romans 2 are actually the Believers at Rome that Paul wrote Romans 2; that the cutting off of those grafted in, in Romans 11 refers to loss of salvation; that the fullness of the Gentiles referred to in that same chapter took place around the time of Acts 28 or thereabouts, that this; that; the other not held by ANY Major Mid-Acts camp - including those 25 more errors of yours and your odd fringe group that someone else within Mid-Acts in general so clearly proved you are off in...
I'll be surprised if you get this one right and or its significance. :chuckle:
You remain a favorite poster of mine - and I'd still come over and gladly help ya repaint your porch, free of charge, bro - anytime.
But this hybrid business of yours, sorry; I simply cannot subscribe to it as a valid study approach.
Yours in Rom. 5: 6-8 - in each our stead.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
When were you, like the Galatians, under the law? Tell us. Still waiting...