ECT Hebrews- Problem verses for Interplanner

[Danoh]

IP has ignored the first four verses. Here's a fifth:


Hebrews 9
15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.



When was IP EVER under the first testament?
Give us specifics.

You yourself have often asserted the Gentiles were under the trangressions of said first covenant - when ever you have asserted that correct aspect of your odd, two aspect version of Ephesians 2's far off Gentiles.

As does Paul in Romans 1-3 and again in 1 Tim. 1, etc.

Yeah, I know - "huh?" :chuckle:

 

[Right Divider]

You yourself have often asserted the Gentiles were under the trangressions of said first covenant - when ever you have asserted that correct aspect of your odd, two aspect version of Ephesians 2's far off Gentiles.

As does Paul in Romans 1-3 and again in 1 Tim. 1, etc.

Yeah, I know - "huh?" :chuckle:

Show us the POSTS.

 

[Danoh]

Show us the POSTS.

It continues to be amusing how unaware you and yours are of the box your hybrid views not only ends you up in, but that you remain unaware of, when pointed out to you :chuckle:

And boy do you guys come out of the woodwork when you sense an opportunity for conflict - lol - you did say you have me on ignore.

What characters you guys are

Very well - what is it you and yours assert about those SUPPOSEDLY OTHER Gentiles in Ephesians 2 - for what transgressions were they far off; and where in Scripture are those transgressions described?

 

[Interplanner]

Just keep posting. Your cluelessness shows more and more.

What specifically? He never anchored what he was saying in heb 2:5 about the 'world to come.' That's the topic there.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

You yourself have often asserted the Gentiles were under the trangressions of said first covenant - when ever you have asserted that correct aspect of your odd, two aspect version of Ephesians 2's far off Gentiles.

As does Paul in Romans 1-3 and again in 1 Tim. 1, etc.

Yeah, I know - "huh?" :chuckle:

No one alive today was ever under the old covenant.

 

[Danoh]

No one alive today was ever under the old covenant.

If you mean transgressions the Law points out, I'll have to disagree with you.

The wrath of God is per the righteousness of God against transgressions the Law both revealed.

 

[Right Divider]

It continues to be amusing how unaware you and yours are of the box your hybrid views not only ends you up in, but that you remain unaware of, when pointed out to you :chuckle:

And boy do you guys come out of the woodwork when you sense an opportunity for conflict - lol - you did say you have me on ignore.

What characters you guys are

Very well - what is it you and yours assert about those SUPPOSEDLY OTHER Gentiles in Ephesians 2 - for what transgressions were they far off; and where in Scripture are those transgressions described?

Typical Danoh baloney.... show us the POSTS to confirm your claim or withdraw it.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

If you mean transgressions the Law points out, I'll have to disagree with you.

The wrath of God is per the righteousness of God against transgressions the Law both revealed.

The Law shows everyone a sinner, indeed.
But we were never put under the Law. Ever.

 

[Danoh]

The Law shows everyone a sinner, indeed.
But we were never put under the Law. Ever.

All the lost are under it - 1 Tim. 1.

 

[john w]

All the lost are under it - 1 Tim. 1.

1 Timothy 1:9 KJV Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

Memorize "Knowing this"....."but."

 

[Danoh]

1 Timothy 1:9 KJV Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

Memorize "Knowing this"....."but."

If you say so, Yan Can Cook :chuckle:

Sounds like all the lost to me.

Romans 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

None escape it's condemnation; even those who were under it.

Romans 5:8.

 

[john w]

If you say so, Yan Can Cook :chuckle:

Sounds like all the lost to me.

Romans 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

None escape it's condemnation; even those who were under it.

Romans 5:8.

You missed it, as usual, because, of course, you are always right...

"No one alive today was ever under the old covenant."-STP

You countered with:"If you mean transgressions the Law points out, I'll have to disagree with you."


1 Timothy 1:9 KJV Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

 

[john w]

You missed it, as usual, because, of course, you are always right...

"No one alive today was ever under the old covenant."-STP

You countered with:"If you mean transgressions the Law points out, I'll have to disagree with you."


1 Timothy 1:9 KJV Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

So, either be more clear, in your argument, or hush.

Can you dig it? Good.

 

[Danoh]

You missed it, as usual, because, of course, you are always right...

"No one alive today was ever under the old covenant."-STP

You countered with:"If you mean transgressions the Law points out, I'll have to disagree with you."


1 Timothy 1:9 KJV Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

So 1 Timothy 1 no longer applies to the lost?

Sure, JohnW - welcome back, bro, but nah; you'll have to do better than merely assert a thing is so, where this MAD is concerned :chuckle:

Rom. 5:8.

 

[john w]

So 1 Timothy 1 no longer applies to the lost?

I never argued that, so knock it off.

Sure, JohnW - welcome back, bro, but nah; you'll have to do better than merely assert a thing is so, where this MAD is concerned :chuckle:

Translation: Do not assert, John W., even though I, Danoh, just made an assertion that John W asserts.


Got it. Thanks for checkin' in.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

The Law shows everyone a sinner, indeed.
But we were never put under the Law. Ever.

Were the Israelites, or did they enter into it?

 

[Interplanner]

A Christian can put themselves under the law as soon as they think the whole business is not by grace but by works--human repayment of debt.

There is a pastor in California who has a terrific book on this from a devastating experience. His last name is Milton, I think. He was a pastor about 5 years when he had a longer than usual trip and sat through a sermon on Rom 4 while driving. He was so shocked at the contrast of grace and works by the teacher that he pulled over and prayed for an hour and made a pile of calls to people he had been hounding or pressing or mistreating by relationships on a works basis.

 

[Interplanner]

Problem thoughts for D'ists:
I have used the Foyle analogy lately. Some bright D'ist thought I was "quoting a bible" and guilted me for not using the Bible. The same club feels free to quote gems from Mayberry, or Gilligans' Island, or Gomer Pyle.

It's hard to imagine such foolishness but the point was the rookie deputy was mindless and never asked a decent, necessary question--besides moving evidence too soon.

For STP not to deal properly with Acts 13:32 is to 'move evidence.' Hint: single vs plural is not the issue.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

A Christian can put themselves under the law as soon as they think the whole business is not by grace but by works--human repayment of debt.

There is a pastor in California who has a terrific book on this from a devastating experience. His last name is Milton, I think. He was a pastor about 5 years when he had a longer than usual trip and sat through a sermon on Rom 4 while driving. He was so shocked at the contrast of grace and works by the teacher that he pulled over and prayed for an hour and made a pile of calls to people he had been hounding or pressing or mistreating by relationships on a works basis.

You made this up.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

IP still has not addressed any of the 5 sets of passages quoted.

He has rambled on about Foyle and Milton, anything but scripture.